Syntax and processing in Seediq: a behavioral study

Syntactic properties such as word orders are a major factor determining the difficulty of a sentence. In SO-type languages where the subject (S) precedes the object (O) in canonical word order, there is clear evidence that the SO word order is preferred over the OS word order. We investigate to what extent this SO bias is maintained even in typologically diverse languages like Truku, an Austronesian language, in which the Verb-Object-Subject (VOS) word order is canonical and a syntactically basic structure, and SVO is the derived word order and a syntactically more complex structure. It is important to investigate word order preferences in Truku because such inquiries allow us to determine to what extent these widely observed processing preferences are grounded in properties of the linguistic system and/or somewhat more general human cognitive properties. The syntactic complexity account predicts that, in Truku, the derived SVO word order should be more costly, while the saliency account predicts that the word orders in which an agent precedes a theme is preferred. Our auditory comprehension experiment showed that the OS word order was preferred by native speakers of Truku. This indicates that the often-observed SO preference is not a universal feature of language. Furthermore, the lack of a clear indication of the agent-before-theme preference suggests a correlation between the voice property of a given language and the importance of the saliency factor.

[1]  David Caplan,et al.  Task-dependent and task-independent neurovascular responses to syntactic processing , 2008, Cortex.

[2]  David Kemmerer,et al.  The Cross-Linguistic Prevalence of SOV and SVO Word Orders Reflects the Sequential and Hierarchical Representation of Action in Broca's Area , 2012, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[3]  M. Saito,et al.  Order in Phrase Structure and Movement , 1998, Linguistic Inquiry.

[4]  Masatoshi Koizumi,et al.  Effect of Animacy on Word Order Processing in Kaqchikel Maya , 2013 .

[5]  Edward Gibson,et al.  Consequences of the Serial Nature of Linguistic Input for Sentenial Complexity , 2005, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  Arthur Holmer Seediq – antisymmetry and final particles in a Formosan VOS language , 2005 .

[7]  Beatrice Primus,et al.  Cases and thematic roles : ergative, accusative and active , 1999 .

[8]  Per B. Brockhoff,et al.  lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models , 2017 .

[9]  J. Trueswell,et al.  The role of discourse context in the processing of a flexible word-order language , 2004, Cognition.

[10]  Markus Bader,et al.  Subject-Object Ambiguities in German Embedded Clauses: An Across-the-Board Comparison , 1999 .

[11]  J. Henderson,et al.  Effects of lexical frequency and syntactic complexity in spoken-language comprehension: Evidence from the auditory moving-window technique. , 1996 .

[12]  J. K. Bock,et al.  Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation , 1985, Cognition.

[13]  C. Fiebach,et al.  Separating syntactic memory costs and syntactic integration costs during parsing: the processing of German WH-questions , 2002 .

[14]  T. Jaeger,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[15]  Masatoshi Koizumi,et al.  On the (non)universality of the preference for subject-object word order in sentence comprehension: A sentence-processing study in Kaqchikel Maya , 2014 .

[16]  Heeju Hwang,et al.  The role of thematic role accessibility in production: evidence from Korean , 2017 .

[17]  Douglas Roland,et al.  Frequency of Basic English Grammatical Structures: A Corpus Analysis. , 2007, Journal of memory and language.

[18]  T. Florian Jaeger,et al.  The Cross-linguistic Study of Sentence Production , 2009, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[19]  Irina A. Sekerina Scrambling and Processing: Dependencies, Complexity, and Constraints , 2008 .

[20]  Hiromu Sakai,et al.  The Effects of Phrase-Length Order and Scrambling in the Processing of Visually Presented Japanese Sentences , 2003, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[21]  Sebastian Sauppe Verbal Semantics Drives Early Anticipatory Eye Movements during the Comprehension of Verb-Initial Sentences , 2016, Front. Psychol..

[22]  Matthias Schlesewsky,et al.  The Subject Preference in the Processing of Locally Ambiguous WH-Questions in German , 2000 .

[23]  Shigeru Sato,et al.  Scrambling effects on the processing of Japanese sentences: An fMRI study , 2009, Journal of Neurolinguistics.

[24]  C. Felser,et al.  Antecedent Priming at Trace Positions in Japanese Long-Distance Scrambling , 2002, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[25]  Daichi Yasunaga,et al.  Is the subject-before-object preference universal? An event-related potential study in the Kaqchikel Mayan language , 2015 .

[26]  Sonja Riesberg,et al.  Symmetrical Voice and Linking in Western Austronesian Languages , 2014 .

[27]  Masatoshi Koizumi,et al.  Greater Left Inferior Frontal Activation for SVO than VOS during Sentence Comprehension in Kaqchikel , 2016, Front. Psychol..

[28]  M. Kutas,et al.  Not so secret agents: Event-related potentials to semantic roles in visual event comprehension , 2017, Brain and Cognition.

[29]  E. Gibson The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. , 2000 .

[30]  L. Rizzi The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery , 1997 .

[31]  Kate Stewart,et al.  Starting points , 2020, SIGP.

[32]  Judith Aissen Topic and focus in Mayan , 1992 .

[33]  N. C. England Changes in Basic Word Order in Mayan Languages , 1991, International Journal of American Linguistics.

[34]  Colin Phillips,et al.  Relating structure and time in linguistics and psycholinguistics , 2007 .

[35]  Beatrice Primus,et al.  Cases and thematic roles , 1999 .

[36]  M. Pickering,et al.  Conceptual influences on word order and voice in sentence production: Evidence from Japanese , 2011 .

[37]  A. Rodríguez-Fornells,et al.  Syntactic complexity and ambiguity resolution in a free word order language: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidences from Basque , 2009, Brain and Language.

[38]  Masataka Yano,et al.  Processing of non-canonical word orders in (in)felicitous contexts: evidence from event-related brain potentials , 2018, Language, Cognition and Neuroscience.

[39]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Toward a Cognitive Psychology of Syntax: Information Processing Contributions to Sentence Formulation , 1982 .

[40]  Holly P. Branigan,et al.  Contributions of animacy to grammatical function assignment and word order during production , 2008 .

[41]  A. Weinberg,et al.  Processing filler-gap dependencies in a head-final language , 2004 .

[42]  D. Bates,et al.  Parsimonious Mixed Models , 2015, 1506.04967.

[43]  Maria Polinsky,et al.  Subject preference and ergativity , 2012 .

[44]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[45]  Neil Cohn,et al.  Prediction, events, and the advantage of Agents: The processing of semantic roles in visual narrative , 2013, Cognitive Psychology.

[46]  Rutz'ib'axik ri Kaqchikel , 1994 .

[47]  Angela D. Friederici,et al.  Grammar overrides frequency: evidence from the online processing of flexible word order , 2002, Cognition.

[48]  Masataka Yano,et al.  Syntax and processing in Seediq: an event-related potential study , 2019, Journal of East Asian Linguistics.

[49]  Agnieszka E. Konopka,et al.  Dependencies First: Eye Tracking Evidence from Sentence Production in Tagalog , 2013, CogSci.

[50]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[51]  C. Phillips,et al.  ERP effects of the processing of syntactic long-distance dependencies. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[52]  D. Barr,et al.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.

[53]  E. Aldridge Ergativity and word order in Austronesian languages , 2004 .

[54]  Dominique Sportiche A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure , 1988 .

[55]  T. Jaeger,et al.  Cross-linguistic psycholinguistics and its critical role in theory development: early beginnings and recent advances , 2015 .

[56]  H. Mai,et al.  The costs of freedom: an ERP – study of non-canonical sentences , 2002, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[57]  Takahiro Soshi,et al.  A Topographical Study on the Event-related Potential Correlates of Scrambled Word Order in Japanese Complex Sentences , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[58]  M. H. Kelly,et al.  Word and World Order: Semantic, Phonological, and Metrical Determinants of Serial Position , 1993, Cognitive Psychology.