Nino Grillo

Canonicity effects as grammatical phenomena

The existence of a split in agrammatic Brocas aphasics’ comprehension of semantically reversible sentences with canonical vs. non-canonical word order have been explored in deep in the last decades. In this paper we present and discuss a new approach to canonicity effects that derives the asymmetry in a principled way from the Relativized Minimality approach to locality in syntax. The approach takes both processing and representational considerations into account thus avoiding problems, such as variation and complexity, encountered in non-integrated accounts. New data from a series of tests on both comprehension and production with an agrammatic Brocas aphasic patient are presented and discussed in light of the new proposal. Reduction of these asymmetries to a special case of the more general theory of locality allows generalizations to be made, which might be extended over different populations.

A novel argument for the Universality of Parsing principles

Previous work on Relative Clause attachment has overlooked a crucial grammatical distinction across both the languages and structures tested: the selective availability of Pseudo Relatives. We reconsider the literature in light of this observation and argue that, all else being equal, local attachment is found with genuine Relative Clauses and that non-local attachment emerges when their surface identical imposters, Pseudo Relatives, are available. Hence, apparent cross-linguistic variation in parsing preferences is reducible to grammatical factors. The results from two novel experiments in Italian are presented in support of these conclusions.

Highs and Lows in English Attachment

Grillo and Costa (2014) claim that Relative-Clause attachment ambiguity resolution is largely dependent on whether or not a Pseudo-Relative interpretation is available. Data from Italian, and other languages allowing Pseudo-Relatives, support this hypothesis. Pseudo-Relative availability, however, covaries with the semantics of the main predicate (e.g., perceptual vs. stative). Experiment 1 assesses whether this predicate distinction alone can account for prior attachment results by testing it with a language that disallows Pseudo-Relatives (i.e. English). Low Attachment was found independent of Predicate-Type. Predicate-Type did however have a minor modulatory role. Experiment 2 shows that English, traditionally classified as a Low Attachment language, can demonstrate High Attachment with sentences globally ambiguous between a Small-Clause and a reduced Relative-Clause interpretation. These results support a grammatical account of previous effects and provide novel evidence for the parsers preference of a Small-Clause over a Restrictive interpretation, crosslinguistically.

Processing relative clauses across comprehension and production: similarities and differences

ABSTRACT We compare the processing of relative clauses in comprehension (self-paced reading) and production (planned production). We manipulated the locality of two syntactic dependencies: filler-gap (subject vs object gap) and subject–verb (centre-embedded vs right-branched). The non-local filler-gap dependency resulted in a longer embedded predicate duration, across domains, consistent with memory-based accounts. For the non-local subject–verb dependency, we observe longer reading times at the main verb, but in production a greater likelihood and duration of a pause preceding the main verb. We argue that this result stems from the cost of computing the restriction, which manifests as a prosodic break. In the context of the subject–verb dependency manipulation, we also revisit the source of interpretation break-down in multiple centre-embedding. Generally, our findings imply that memory-based accounts are adequate for filler-gap, but not subject–verb, dependencies and production studies can aid in understanding complexity effects.