Processing relative clauses in Chinese

This paper reports results from a self-paced reading study in Chinese that demonstrates that object-extracted relative clause structures are less complex than corresponding subject-extracted structures. These results contrast with results from processing other Subject-Verb-Object languages like English, in which object-extracted structures are more complex than subject-extracted structures. A key word-order difference between Chinese and other Subject-Verb-Object languages is that Chinese relative clauses precede their head nouns. Because of this word order difference, the results follow from a resource-based theory of sentence complexity, according to which there is a storage cost associated with predicting syntactic heads in order to form a grammatical sentence. The results are also consistent with a theory according to which people have less difficulty processing embedded clauses whose word order matches the word order in main clauses. Some corpus analyses of Chinese texts provide results that constrain the classes of possible frequency-based theories. Critically, these results demonstrate that there is nothing intrinsically easy about extracting from subject position: depending on the word order in the main clause and in a relative clause, extraction from object position can be easier to process in some circumstances.

[1]  Marcel Adam Just,et al.  Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension , 1982 .

[2]  S. Soan,et al.  Speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) , 2004 .

[3]  J. S. Evans,et al.  Understanding sentences with relative clauses , 1976, Memory & cognition.

[4]  John C. Trueswell,et al.  Chapter 7 – Sentence Comprehension , 1995 .

[5]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Parsing in a Dynamical System: An Attractor-based Account of the Interaction of Lexical and Structural Constraints in Sentence Processing , 1997 .

[6]  David R. Dowty Thematic proto-roles and argument selection , 1991 .

[7]  Edward Gibson,et al.  A computational theory of human linguistic processing: memory limitations and processing breakdown , 1991 .

[8]  H E Wanner,et al.  An ATN approach to comprehension , 1978 .

[9]  J. Woolley,et al.  Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[10]  Nick Chater,et al.  Toward a connectionist model of recursion in human linguistic performance , 1999, Cogn. Sci..

[11]  George A. Miller,et al.  Introduction to the Formal Analysis of Natural Languages , 1968 .

[12]  N J Pearlmutter,et al.  Recency in verb phrase attachment. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  B. MacWhinney,et al.  STARTING POINTS , 1977 .

[14]  Y. Miyashita,et al.  Image, language, brain , 2000 .

[15]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Reassessing Working Memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996) , 2002 .

[16]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  Basic Syntactic Processes , 1982 .

[17]  E. Gibson,et al.  Disambiguation preferences and corpus frequencies in noun phrase conjunction , 2003 .

[18]  John Hale,et al.  The Information Conveyed by Words in Sentences , 2003, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[19]  N. Pearlmutter,et al.  Constraints on sentence comprehension , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[20]  Fernanda Ferreira,et al.  Reanalysis in sentence processing , 1998 .

[21]  Eugene Galanter,et al.  Handbook of mathematical psychology: I. , 1963 .

[22]  Charles N. Li,et al.  Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar , 1989 .

[23]  V. M. Holmes,et al.  Eye fixation patterns during the reading of relative-clause sentences. , 1981 .

[24]  Vered Argaman,et al.  Against Repair-Based Reanalysis in Sentence Comprehension , 2003, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[25]  EmbeddingsRichard L. LewisDepartment A Theory of Grammatical But Unacceptable , 1996 .

[26]  J. Hayes Cognition and the development of language , 1970 .

[27]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Reassessing working memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter and Waters and Caplan , 2002 .

[28]  Susan M. Garnsey,et al.  Semantic Influences On Parsing: Use of Thematic Role Information in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution , 1994 .

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

[30]  Yuanjian He An introduction to government-binding theory in Chinese syntax , 1996 .

[31]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  The processing of restrictive relative clauses in Hungarian , 1988, Cognition.

[32]  G. Waters,et al.  Working memory and written sentence comprehension , 1987 .

[33]  A. Woodward Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor's reach , 1998, Cognition.

[34]  G. Miller,et al.  Linguistic theory and psychological reality , 1982 .

[35]  C. Clifton,et al.  The independence of syntactic processing , 1986 .

[36]  Richard S. Kayne The Antisymmetry of Syntax , 1994 .

[37]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Exposure-based models of human parsing: Evidence for the use of coarse-grained (nonlexical) statistical records , 1995 .

[38]  M. Just,et al.  Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory , 1991 .

[39]  Marily Ford,et al.  A method for obtaining measures of local parsing complexity throughout sentences , 1983 .

[40]  Thesis Proposal,et al.  A Connectionist Model of Sentence Comprehension and Production , 1999 .

[41]  Universal grammar : 15 essays , 1987 .

[42]  Carson T. Schütze,et al.  Disambiguation Preferences in Noun Phrase Conjunction Do Not Mirror Corpus Frequency , 1999 .

[43]  M. Pickering,et al.  Structural change and reanalysis difficulty in language comprehension , 1999 .

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

[45]  Richard L. Lewis Interference in short-term memory: The magical number two (or three) in sentence processing , 1996, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[46]  Franny Pai-Fang Hsiao,et al.  The syntax and processing of relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese , 2003 .

[47]  K. Rayner,et al.  The psychology of reading , 1989 .

[48]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  The emergence of language. , 1999 .

[49]  Tessa C. Warren,et al.  The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity , 2002, Cognition.

[50]  David C. Plaut,et al.  A connectionist model of sentence comprehension and production , 2002 .

[51]  A. Andrews,et al.  Relative Clauses , 2019, The Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek.