Cross-linguistic structural priming in bilinguals: priming of the subject-to-object raising construction between English and Korean

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-62
Author(s):  
YOONSANG SONG ◽  
YOUNGAH DO
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Target Population ◽  
Structural Priming ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Korean And English ◽  
The Subject

A cross-linguistic structural priming experiment explores the issue of whether parallel syntactic constructions of the two languages in bilinguals share a representation when the surface word orders of the constructions differ. The target population was early balanced bilinguals of Korean and English; the tested constructions were structures relevant to the subject-to-object raising (STOR) operation, which until this study have not been used for structural priming research in cross-linguistic contexts (e.g., STOR: Mary believes Jerry to be trustworthy; non-STOR: Mary believes that Jerry is trustworthy). These syntactic structures exist in both English and Korean, but with different surface word orders. The results show that cross-linguistic priming of the STOR construction occurred, suggesting that parallel syntactic constructions of the languages in bilinguals can share a representation independent of surface word order.

scholarly journals Cleft as a Marker of a Thetic Sentence: Evidence from Irish and Russian

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 51-63
Author(s):  
Maria Shkapa ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Initial Position ◽  
Normal Position ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Sentence Construction ◽  
Pragmatic Function ◽  
Celtic Languages ◽  
Verbal Statement ◽  
The Subject

P. Mac Cana in his paper on Celtic word order notes that modern Celtic languages preserving VSO have a special construction where “the emphasis expressed by the abnormal word-order applies to the whole verbal statement and not merely, or especially, to the subject or object which takes the initial position” (Mac Cana 1973: 102). He gives examples from Welsh and Irish: ‘Faoi Dhia, goidé tháinig ort?’ ars an t-athair. by God what.it happened to.you said the father “In God's name, what happened to you?” asked the father. ‘Micheál Rua a bhuail mé,’ ars an mac. Micheál Rua rel hit me said the son “Micheál Rua gave me a beating,” said the son. In recent literature sentences of this kind acquired the name thetic. Thetic (Sentence Focus) construction is a “sentence construction formally marked as expressing a pragmatically structured proposition in which both the subject and the predicate are in focus; the focus domain is the sentence, minus any topical non-subject arguments” (Lambrecht 1997: 190). Cleft construction “designed” for focussing one XP of a clause is used in the sentence above to mark the whole clause as focussed. The effect is achieved by extracting the usual topic of a sentence – its subject – from its normal position and thus ascribing to it and to the whole clause a new pragmatic function. Such usage of cleft is by no means universal (e.g. it is not possible in English) but meets a parallel in Russian eto-cleft which has the same two meanings – focussing an XP and forming a thetic sentence. These two usages are generally regarded as two different constructions having different syntactic structures (see [Kimmelmann 2007] and literature cited there). However, existence of a typological parallel enables us to view it as a case of pragmatic homonymy.

Is word-order similarity necessary for cross-linguistic structural priming?

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 375-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baoguo Chen ◽  
Yuefang Jia ◽  
Zhu Wang ◽  
Susan Dunlap ◽  
Jeong-Ah Shin
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Structural Priming ◽  
Stage Model ◽  
Syntactic Priming ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Chinese And English

This article presents two experiments employing two structural priming paradigms that investigated whether cross-linguistic syntactic priming occurred in Chinese and English passive sentences that differ in word order (production-to-production priming in Experiment 1 and comprehension-to-production priming in Experiment 2). Results revealed that cross-linguistic syntactic priming occurred in Chinese and English passive sentences, regardless of production of primes or comprehension of primes and language direction (L1–L2 or L2–L1). Our findings indicate that word-order similarity between languages is not necessary for cross-linguistic structural priming, supporting the view of a two-stage model of language production.

On the Subject of Negative Auxiliary Inversion

2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frances Blanchette ◽  
Chris Collins
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Negative Polarity ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Left Periphery ◽  
Negative Concord ◽  
Double Negation ◽  
Polarity Items ◽  
West Texas ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Scope Freezing

AbstractThis article presents a novel analysis ofNegative Auxiliary Inversion(NAI) constructions such asdidn't many people eat, in which a negated auxiliary appears in pre-subject position. NAI, found in varieties including Appalachian, African American, and West Texas English, has a word order identical to a yes/no question, but is pronounced and interpreted as a declarative. We propose that NAI subjects are negative DPs, and that the negation raises from the subject DP to adjoin to Fin (a functional head in the left periphery). Three properties of NAI motivate this analysis: (i) scope freezing effects, (ii) the various possible and impossible NAI subject types, and (iii) the incompatibility of NAI constructions with true Double-Negation interpretations. Implications for theories of Negative Concord, Negative Polarity Items, and the representation of negation are discussed.

scholarly journals The role of case marking and word order in cross-linguistic structural priming in late L2 acquisition

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merel Muylle ◽  
Bernolet Sarah ◽  
Robert Hartsuiker
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Language Variation ◽  
Structural Priming ◽  
Artificial Language ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Learning Paradigm ◽  
Natural Languages ◽  
Case Marking

Several studies found cross-linguistic structural priming with various language combinations. Here, we investigated the role of two important domains of language variation: case marking and word order. We varied these features in an artificial language (AL) learning paradigm, using three different AL versions in a between-subjects design. Priming was assessed between Dutch (no case marking, SVO word order) and a) a baseline version with SVO word order, b) a case marking version, and c) a version with SOV word order. Similar within- language and cross-linguistic priming was found in all versions for transitive sentences, indicating that cross-linguistic structural priming was not hindered. In contrast, for ditransitive sentences we found similar within-language priming for all versions, but no cross-linguistic priming. The finding that cross-linguistic priming is possible between languages that vary in morphological marking or word order, is compatible with studies showing cross-linguistic priming between natural languages that differ on these dimensions.

scholarly journals COMMUNICATIVE INTENTION AS A FACTOR OF WORD ORDER IN THE UTTERANCE

2021 ◽  
pp. 46-51
Author(s):  
О.Ю. Дементьева ◽  
Ю. Мао
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Communicative Intention ◽  
The Russian Language

В статье обсуждаются вопросы о порядке слов в русском языке: что подразумевается под порядком слов, в чем его особенности, какие факторы на него влияют. Рассматривается понятие коммуникативной установки говорящего, а также взаимодействие коммуникативной, семантической и синтаксической структур предложения-высказывания. The article deals with the word order in the Russian language: what is meant by the word order, what are its features. what factors determine the word order. The concept of the communicative intention is considered, as well as the interaction of the communicative, semantic and syntactic structures of the utterance.

Khalkha Mongolian

2020 ◽  
pp. 334-349
Author(s):  
Jan-Olof Svantesson
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Central Place ◽  
Vowel Harmony ◽  
Inflectional Morphology ◽  
Writing System ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Word Structure ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Verb Forms ◽  
Segmental Phonology

This chapter gives an introduction to the basic structures of Khalkha Mongolian, most of which are similar to those of Mongolian proper in general. Segmental phonology (vowels and consonants) and word structure are analyzed. Major changes from earlier stages of the language are described briefly, as is the writing system, based on the Cyrillic alphabet. Vowel harmony, based on pharyngeality (ATR) and rounding, has several interesting properties, including the opacity of high rounded vowels to rounding harmony. There is a rich derivational and inflectional morphology based on suffixes. Basic syntactic structures, including word order and case marking of arguments in simple and complex clauses, are described, as are the functions of different verb forms (finite verbs, converbs, and participles). The description emphasizes the central place of Mongolian proper in the typology of the Transeurasian languages.

Objects in the German prefield

2020 ◽  
pp. 15-39
Author(s):  
Markus Bader
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Initial Position ◽  
Experimental Investigations ◽  
Demonstrative Pronoun ◽  
New Findings ◽  
The Subject ◽  
New Speakers ◽  
Referential Form ◽  
Free Word

From the perspective of language production, this chapter discusses the question of whether to move the subject or the object to the clause-initial position in a German Verb Second clause. A review of experimental investigations of language production shows that speakers of German tend to order arguments in such a way that the most accessible argument comes first, with accessibility defined in terms like animacy (‘animate before inanimate’) and discourse status (e.g. ‘given before new’). Speakers of German thus obey the same ordering principles that have been found to be at work in English and other languages. Despite the relative free word order of German, speakers rarely produce sentences with object-before-subject word order in experimental investigations. Instead, they behave like speakers of English and mostly use passivization in order to bring the underlying object argument in front of the underlying subject argument when the object is more accessible than the subject. Corpus data, however, show that object-initial clauses are not so infrequent after all. The second part of the chapter, therefore, discusses new findings concerning the discourse conditions that favour the production of object-initial clauses. These findings indicate, among other things, that the clausal position of an object is affected not only by its referent’s discourse status but also by its referential form. Objects occur in clause-initial position most frequently when referring to a given referent in the form of a demonstrative pronoun or NP.

Interrogative structures in Croatian Sign Language: Polar and content questions

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 151-167
Author(s):  
Ninoslava Šarac Kuhn ◽  
Ronnie B. Wilbur
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Word Order ◽  
General Question ◽  
Deaf Students ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Eyes Closed ◽  
Peak Intensity ◽  
The 19Th Century ◽  
Chin Down

In this study, we investigate the interrogative structures in Croatian Sign Language (HZJ) with respect to the word order, manual question words, and nonmanual markers and their scope. Both polar and content questions mainly use specific nonmanual markers to indicate interrogative function. Polar questions use chin down and content questions use chin up as their prominent nonmanual markers. In addition to these markers, brows up occurs in both constructions leading to the suggestion that brows up may be a general question marker in HZJ. Brows down can also occur, particularly in content questions. Other nonmanual markers that appear in polar questions are head forward, and eyes wide open and those in content questions are head forward, headshake, shoulders up, and eyes closed.Both interrogative constructions use manual question words. Polar questions can use an optional manual sign je-li that was probably introduced to HZJ through Signed Croatian. je-li is not connected to the peak intensity of the nonmanual markers and we consider it to be an adjunct to the question structure. Content words are used in most HZJ content interrogatives. Question words can be represented by specific signs or can be formed by the content sign ‘5’ (i.e. handshape 5 or b-th moving side-to-side). This ‘5’ sign is further specified by mouthing the particular question word from spoken Croatian. Content words can appear in sentence initial, sentence final or both positions. In content questions, question words bear the highest peak of nonmanual intensity, thus we consider them to be operating as operators.Recent research shows that HZJ shares some features with Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) because in the 19th century, Croatian deaf students attended Vienna’s Institute for the Deaf (Schalber this volume; Šarac 2003; Šarac et al in press). Upon finishing their education, they would return back to Croatia. Similarities between HZJ and ÖGS are found in their interrogative nonmanual markings but not in their syntactic structures. This can be seen by the fact that these two sign languages do not have the same canonical word order.

scholarly journals Universals of word order reflect optimization of grammars for efficient communication

2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (5) ◽  
pp. 2347-2353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hahn ◽  
Dan Jurafsky ◽  
Richard Futrell
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Network Models ◽  
Neural Network Models ◽  
Information Theoretic ◽  
Large Scale Data ◽  
Efficient Communication ◽  
Universal Properties ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Scale Data

The universal properties of human languages have been the subject of intense study across the language sciences. We report computational and corpus evidence for the hypothesis that a prominent subset of these universal properties—those related to word order—result from a process of optimization for efficient communication among humans, trading off the need to reduce complexity with the need to reduce ambiguity. We formalize these two pressures with information-theoretic and neural-network models of complexity and ambiguity and simulate grammars with optimized word-order parameters on large-scale data from 51 languages. Evolution of grammars toward efficiency results in word-order patterns that predict a large subset of the major word-order correlations across languages.

Subject expression and discourse embeddedness in Emirati Arabic

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Owens ◽  
Robin Dodsworth ◽  
Mary Kohn
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Relevant Parameter ◽  
Null Subjects ◽  
Single Episode ◽  
Discourse Coherence ◽  
Complementary Approach ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Subject Expression ◽  
The One

AbstractSince Prince (1981) and Givón (1983), studies on discourse reference have explained the grammatical realization of referents in terms of general concepts such as “assumed familiarity” or “discourse coherence.” In this paper, we develop a complementary approach based on a detailed statistical tracking of subjects in Emirati Arabic, from which two major categories of subject expression emerge. On the one hand, null subjects are opposed to overt ones; on the other, subject-verb (SV) is opposed to verb-subject (VS). Although null subjects strongly correlate with coreferentiality with the subject of the previous clause, they can also index more distant referents within a single episode. With respect to SV vs. VS, morpholexical classes are found to be biased toward one or the other: nouns are typically VS, pronouns SV. We conclude that the null subject variant is the norm in Emirati Arabic, and when an overt subject is appropriate, lexical identity biases the subject into SV or VS order, generating word order as a discourse-relevant parameter. Overall, our approach attempts to understand Arabic discourse from a microlevel perspective.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document