UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Verbal cluster order and processing complexity

We examine a case of word order variation where speakers choose between two near-synonymous constructions partly on the basis of the processing complexity of the construction and its context. When producing two-verb clusters in Dutch, a speaker can choose between two word orders. Previous corpus studies have shown that a wide range of factors are associated with this word order variation. We conducted a large-scale corpus study in order to discover what these factors have in common. The underlying generalization appears to be processing complexity: we show that a variety of factors that are related to verbal cluster word order, can also be related to the processing complexity of the cluster ’ s context. This implies that one of the word orders might be easier to process d when processing load is high, speakers will go for the easier option. Therefore, we also investigate which of the two word orders might be easier to process. By testing for as- sociations with factors indicating a higher or lower processing complexity of the verb and its context, we fi nd evidence for the hypothesis that the word order where the main verb comes last is easier to process.

[1]  Sjef Barbiers,et al.  Merging verb cluster variation , 2018, Romance Parsed Corpora.

[2]  Fred Weerman,et al.  Synchronic variation and diachronic change in Dutch two-verb clusters , 2017 .

[3]  Judith Rispens,et al.  What makes syntactic processing of subject–verb agreement complex? The effects of distance and additional agreement features , 2017 .

[4]  Eric Hoekstra,et al.  Three-Verb Clusters in Interference Frisian: A Stochastic Model over Sequential Syntactic Input , 2016, Language and speech.

[5]  Fred Weerman,et al.  Cracking the cluster: The acquisition of verb raising in Dutch , 2016 .

[6]  Jelke Bloem,et al.  Lexical preferences in Dutch verbal cluster ordering , 2016 .

[7]  Frank Rösler,et al.  Take a stand on understanding: electrophysiological evidence for stem access in German complex verbs , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[8]  Gert De Sutter,et al.  Reassessing the effect of the complexity principle on PP Placement in Dutch , 2015 .

[9]  Xiaoqing Li,et al.  A review on the cognitive function of information structure during language comprehension , 2014, Cognitive Neurodynamics.

[10]  Fred Weerman,et al.  Applying automatically parsed corpora to the study of language variation , 2014, COLING.

[11]  John A. Hawkins,et al.  Cross-Linguistic Variation and Efficiency , 2014 .

[12]  Jeannette Schaeffer,et al.  Article choice in children with High Functioning Autism (HFA) and in children with Specific Language Impairment (SLI) , 2014 .

[13]  Peter Baumann,et al.  Dependencies and Hierarchical Structure in Sentence Processing , 2014, CogSci.

[14]  Frank Keller,et al.  Expectation and Locality Effects in German Verb-final Structures. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.

[15]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  How language production shapes language form and comprehension , 2012, Front. Psychol..

[16]  Jan Odijk,et al.  Identification and Lexical Representation of Multiword Expressions , 2013, Essential Speech and Language Technology for Dutch.

[17]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  How hierarchical is language use? , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[18]  Maryia Fedzechkina,et al.  Language learners restructure their input to facilitate efficient communication , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  Pienie Zwitserlood,et al.  Sharing morphemes without sharing meaning: production and comprehension of German verbs in the context of morphological relatives. , 2011, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[20]  C. Westbury,et al.  Processing Advantages of Lexical Bundles: Evidence from Self-Paced Reading and Sentence Recall Tasks. , 2011 .

[21]  T Florian Jaeger,et al.  On language 'utility': processing complexity and communicative efficiency. , 2011, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[22]  Heike Wiese,et al.  Expecting the Unexpected: Exceptions in Grammar , 2011 .

[23]  T. Florian Jaeger,et al.  Redundancy and reduction: Speakers manage syntactic information density , 2010, Cognitive Psychology.

[24]  Guglielmo Cinque,et al.  The Syntax of Adjectives: A Comparative Study , 2010 .

[25]  Geert Booij,et al.  Construction Morphology , 2010, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[26]  Jacqueline van Kampen,et al.  Typological guidance in the acquisition of V2 Dutch , 2010 .

[27]  J. de Caluwe,et al.  Voor Magda: artikelen voor Magda Devos bij haar afscheid van de Universiteit Gent , 2010 .

[28]  Edith A. Moravcsik.  Conflict resolution in syntactic theory , 2010 .

[29]  H. J. Bennis,et al.  De plaats van het werkwoord in zuid en noord , 2010 .

[30]  A. Goldberg,et al.  Construction grammar. , 2010, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[31]  Harald Baayen,et al.  Suffix Ordering and Morphological Processing , 2009 .

[32]  Andreas Dufter,et al.  Towards a multivariate model of grammar: The case of word order variation in Dutch clause final verb clusters , 2009 .

[33]  Andreas Dufter,et al.  Describing and modeling variation in grammar , 2009 .

[34]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Producing Less Preferred Structures: More Gestures, Less Fluency , 2009 .

[35]  J.P.A. Stroop,et al.  Twee- en meerledige werkwoordsgroepen in gesproken Nederlands , 2009 .

[36]  David I. Beaver,et al.  Lexical Variation in Relativizer Frequency , 2009 .

[37]  M. Pickering,et al.  Structural priming: a critical review. , 2008, Psychological bulletin.

[38]  Kathy Conklin,et al.  Formulaic Sequences: Are They Processed More Quickly than Nonformulaic Language by Native and Nonnative Speakers? , 2008 .

[39]  R. Levy.  Expectation-based syntactic comprehension , 2008, Cognition.

[40]  Evie Coussé,et al.  Motivaties voor volgordevariatie : een diachrone studie van werkwoordvolgorde in het Nederlands , 2008 .

[41]  Dirk Speelman,et al.  Prosodic and syntactic-pragmatic mechanisms of grammatical variation: The impact of a postverbal constituent on the word order in Dutch clause final verb clusters , 2008 .

[42]  Evie Coussé,et al.  Variabele werkwoordsvolgorde in de Nederlandse werkwoordelijke eindgroep: een taalgebruiksgebaseerd perspectief op de synchronie en diachronie van de zgn. rode en groene woordvolgorde , 2008 .

[43]  Arianus Pieter Versloot,et al.  Mechanisms of Language Change: Vowel Reduction in 15th Century West Frisian , 2008 .

[44]  David Embick,et al.  Variation and Morphosyntactic Theory: Competition Fractionated , 2008, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[45]  Susi Wurmbrand,et al.  Verb Clusters, Verb Raising, and Restructuring , 2007 .

[46]  Gert De Sutter,et al.  Naar een corpusgebaseerde, cognitief-functionele verklaring van de woordvolgordevariatie in tweeledige werkwoordelijke eindgroepen , 2007 .

[47]  Mona Arfs,et al.  Rood of groen? De interne woordvolgorde in tweeledige werkwoordelijke eindgroepen met een voltooid deelwoord en een hulpwerkwoord in bijzinnen , 2007 .

[48]  Dirk Geeraerts,et al.  Luisteren schrijvers naar hun innerlijke stem? De invloed van ritmische factoren op de woordvolgorde in geschreven werkwoordelijke eindgroepen , 2007 .

[49]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Predicting the dative alternation , 2007 .

[50]  Roger Levy,et al.  Speakers optimize information density through syntactic reduction , 2006, NIPS.

[51]  Ingrid Van Canegem-Ardijns.  The extraposition of prepositional objects of adjectives in Dutch , 2006 .

[52]  Bert Cappelle,et al.  Particle placement and the case for "allostructions" , 2006 .

[53]  Gert De Sutter,et al.  Rood, groen, corpus! Een taalgebruiksgebaseerde analyse van woordvolgordevariatie in tweeledige werkwoordelijke eindgroepen , 2005 .

[54]  Susi Wurmbrand,et al.  West Germanic verb clusters: The empirical domain , 2004 .

[55]  N. Schmitt.  Formulaic Sequences: Acquisition, Processing and Use , 2004 .

[56]  G. Underwood,et al.  The eyes have it: An eye-movement study into the processing of formulaic sequences , 2004 .

[57]  Kyle Johnson,et al.  Double Objects Again , 2004, Linguistic Inquiry.

[58]  Stefan Müller,et al.  Syntax or morphology: German particle verbs revisited , 2002 .

[59]  Geert Booij,et al.  Separate complex verbs in Dutch: a case of periphrastic word formation , 2002 .

[60]  John Hale,et al.  A Probabilistic Earley Parser as a Psycholinguistic Model , 2001, NAACL.

[61]  Stefan Th. Gries,et al.  A Multifactorial Analysis of Syntactic Variation: Particle Movement Revisited , 2001, J. Quant. Linguistics.

[62]  Shalom Zuckerman,et al.  The acquisition of "optional" movement , 2001 .

[63]  Sidney J. Segalowitz,et al.  Lexical Access of Function versus Content Words , 2000, Brain and Language.

[64]  Peter Ford Dominey,et al.  ERP analysis of cognitive sequencing: a left anterior negativity related to structural transformation processing , 2000, Neuroreport.

[65]  R. Hartsuiker,et al.  Word order priming in written and spoken sentence production , 2000, Cognition.

[66]  Zenzi M. Griffin,et al.  The persistence of structural priming: transient activation or implicit learning? , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[67]  G. Cinque.  Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective , 1999 .

[68]  E. Gibson.  Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies , 1998, Cognition.

[69]  R. Hartsuiker,et al.  Syntactic Persistence in Dutch , 1998, Language and speech.

[70]  H. Behrens,et al.  How difficult are complex verbs? Evidence from German, Dutch and English , 1998 .

[71]  C.J.W. Zwart,et al.  Verb Clusters in Continental West Germanic Dialects , 1996 .

[72]  Carson T. Schütze,et al.  The relationship between the frequency and the processing complexity of linguistic structure , 1996, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[73]  Yukio Oba,et al.  ON THE DOUBLE OBJECT CONSTRUCTION , 1993 .

[74]  A. Goldberg.  The inherent semantics of argument structure: The case of the English ditransitive construction , 1992 .

[75]  Hans Broekhuis,et al.  Woordvolgorde in de werkwoordelijke eindreeks , 1989 .

[76]  G. Geerts.  Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunst , 1987 .

[77]  William D. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Crossed and nested dependencies in German and Dutch , 1986 .

[78]  J. K. Bock.  Syntactic persistence in language production , 1986, Cognitive Psychology.

[79]  H. V. Riemsdijk,et al.  Verb Projection Raising, Scope, and the Typology of Rules Affecting Verbs , 1986 .

[80]  Jerold A. Edmondson,et al.  The Verbal Complex in Continental West Germanic , 1983 .

[81]  Irene Heim,et al.  The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases : a dissertation , 1982 .

[82]  Mark Steedman,et al.  The use of context by the psychological parser , 1981 .

[83]  John Haiman,et al.  THE ICONICITY OF GRAMMAR: ISOMORPHISM AND MOTIVATION , 1980 .

[84]  D. Bradley,et al.  Computational distinctions of vocabulary type , 1978 .

[85]  Richard Thomas Oehrle,et al.  The grammatical status of the English dative alternation , 1976 .

[86]  A. Evers.  The transformational cycle in Dutch and German , 1975 .

[87]  G. A. Miller,et al.  Finitary models of language users , 1963 .

[88]  Victor H. Yngve,et al.  A model and an hypothesis for language structure , 1960 .

[89]  A. Pauwels,et al.  De plaats van hulpwerkwoord verleden deelwoord en infinitief in de Nederlandse bijzin , 1953 .