Processing ambiguous Spanish se in a minimal chain

The recovery of pieces of information that are not linguistically expressed is a constant feature of the process of language comprehension. In the processing literature, such missing information is generally referred to as “gaps”. Usually, one resolves gaps by finding “fillers” in either the sentence or the context. For instance, in Peter seemed to be upset, Peter is really the subject of being upset but appears as surface subject of seems. Sometimes constituents move, leaving gaps behind. Various Romance languages such as Spanish or Italian have a grammatical particle se/si, which, as it is extremely ambiguous, licenses different sorts of gaps. In Spanish, se can encode at least reflexive, impersonal, and passive meanings. In an eye-tracking experiment we contrast reflexive structures containing postverbal subjects with impersonal structures with no subjects (GAP se vendó apresuradamente el corredor/“the runner bandaged himself hurriedly” vs. GAP se vendó apresuradamente al corridor/“(someone) bandaged the runner hurriedly”). In a second manipulation we contrast the presence of an extra argument with se-passives (GAP se vendó el tobillo el corredor/“the runner bandaged his ankle” vs. GAP se vendó el tobillo al corridor/“the runner's ankle was bandaged”). Our comparisons involve contrasting standard transitive structures with nonstandard word order (postverbal subject and a preverbal subject gap) against inherently complex and less habitual structures such as impersonals (with no subject) or se-passives (with subjects in canonical object position). We evaluate the minimal chain principle (de Vincenzi, 1991 De Vincenzi, M. 1991. Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian, Dordrecht, , The Netherlands: Kluwer. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]), according to which displacement is costly because it entails complex (derivational) “chains” that must be undone before phrasal packaging can commence. We show the minimal chain principle to be essentially correct when contrasting more complex but more frequent structures with less complex but less frequent structures. A noteworthy feature of this research is that the gaps appear before the fillers in the structures that we analyse.     

Pronominal Resolution and Gap Filling in Agrammatic Aphasia: Evidence from Eye Movements

This paper reports the results of three studies examining comprehension and real-time processing of pronominal (Experiment 1) and Wh-movement (Experiments 2 and 3) structures in agrammatic and unimpaired speakers using eyetracking. We asked the following questions: (a) Is off-line comprehension of these constructions impaired in agrammatic listeners?, (b) Do agrammatic, like unimpaired, listeners show eye movement patterns indicative of automatic pronominal reference resolution and/or gap-filling?, and (c) Do eyetracking patterns differ when sentences are correctly versus incorrectly interpreted, or do automatic processes prevail in spite of comprehension failure? Results showed that off-line comprehension of both pronoun and Wh-movement structures was impaired in our agrammatic cohort. However, the aphasic participants showed visual evidence of real-time reference resolution as they processed binding structures, including both pronouns and reflexives, as did our unimpaired control participants. Similarly, both the patients and the control participants showed patterns consistent with successful gap filling during processing of Wh-movement structures. For neither pronominal nor movement structures did we find evidence of delayed processing. Notably, these patterns were found for the aphasic participants even when they incorrectly interpreted target sentences, with the exception of object relative constructions. For incorrectly interpreted sentences, we found end of sentence lexical competition effects. These findings indicate that aberrant lexical integration, rather than representational deficits or generally slowed processing, may underlie agrammatic aphasic listener’s comprehension failure.     

Reference assignment: using language breakdown to choose between theoretical approaches

We report results of an experimental study with Dutch agrammatic aphasics that investigated their ability to interpret pronominal elements in transitive clauses and Exceptional Case Marking constructions (ECM). Using the obtained experimental results as a tool, we distinguish between three competing linguistic theories that aim at determining principles responsible for pronoun distribution: Government and Binding (Chomsky, 1981), Reflexivity (Reinhart & Reuland, 1993), and Primitives of Binding (Reuland, 2001). The obtained results are inconsistent with Government and Binding, but consistent with the latter two theories. We further show that the Primitives of Binding framework most naturally explains our results. Our proposal is based on the different performance demonstrated by patients in transitive clauses and ECM constructions, in combination with the often-made claim in the literature regarding the limitation of processing resources in this population (e.g., Haarmann and Kolk, 1991, Haarmann and Kolk, 1994 and Zurif et al., 1993, among others).     

Assignment of reference to reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases: evidence from eye movements

Most structural Binding Theories predict a complementary distribution between reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases containing possessors (e.g. "Ken's picture of himself/him"). In two head-mounted eye-tracking experiments, listeners frequently violated Binding Theory predictions for reflexives, often interpreting the reflexives as taking an antecedent outside of the binding domain, and violating complementarity assumptions. Moreover, the pattern and timing of the eye movements showed Binding Theory violations for reflexives during the earliest moments of reference resolution. The results demonstrate that either binding constraints must be reformulated to decouple pronouns and reflexives or all reflexives in picture noun phrases must be treated as logophors, and thus exempt from structural Binding Theory.     

Processing reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrase

Binding theory (e.g., Chomsky, 1981) has played a central role in both syntactic theory and models of language processing. Its constraints are designed to predict that the referential domains of pronouns and reflexives are nonoverlapping, that is, are complementary; these constraints are also thought to play a role in online reference resolution. The predictions of binding theory and its role in sentence processing were tested in four experiments that monitored participants' eye movements as they followed spoken instructions to have a doll touch a picture belonging to another doll. The instructions used pronouns and reflexives embedded in picture noun phrases (PNPs) containing possessor phrases (e.g., Pick up Ken. Have Ken touch Harry's picture of himself). Although the interpretations assigned to pronouns were generally consistent with binding theory, reflexives were frequently assigned interpretations that violated binding theory. In addition, the timing and pattern of eye movements were inconsistent with models of language processing that assume that binding theory acts as an early filter to restrict the referential domain. The interpretations assigned to reflexives in PNPs with possessors suggest that they are binding-theory-exempt logophors, a conclusion that unifies the treatment of reflexives in PNPs.