Verbal cluster order and processing complexity

Abstract 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 — 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 associations with factors indicating a higher or lower processing complexity of the verb and its context, we find evidence for the hypothesis that the word order where the main verb comes last is easier to process.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[14]  W.J.M. Haeseryn.  Algemene Nederlandse spraakkunst , 1997 .

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

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

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

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

[19]  Mark Steedman,et al.  On not being led up the garden path : The use of context by the psychological syntax processor , 1985 .

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

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

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

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

[24]  R. Larson.  On the double object construction , 1988 .

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

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

[27]  Gosse Bouma,et al.  2 The Use of Om as Optional Complementizer , 2013 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[35]  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 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[50]  Laurence B Leonard,et al.  The use of definite and indefinite articles by children with specific language impairment , 2011, International journal of speech-language pathology.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[64]  J. Hajic.  Applying automatically parsed corpora to the study of language variation , 2014 .

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

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

[67]  Gertjan van Noord.  Huge Parsed Corpora in LASSY , 2008 .

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

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

[70]  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 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[93]  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.

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