Share This Article:

Functionally Incremental Sentence Processing and Reanalysis Difficulty in Head-Final Agglutinative Language

Abstract Full-Text HTML XML Download Download as PDF (Size:3347KB) PP. 21-41
DOI: 10.4236/ojml.2015.51003    2,693 Downloads   3,133 Views  

ABSTRACT

This paper quantitatively expresses the degrees of processing difficulties caused by syntactically different reanalyses in Japanese sentences by questionnaire and self-paced reading experiments with non-syntactic factors strictly controlled. We propose the functionally incremental processing for Japanese sentences and we demonstrate that our hypothesis is effective to explain the degree of the processing difficulty in various sentence types. The peculiarity of Japanese processing and the relevance of our results to the human sentence processing model are discussed.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Tokimoto, S. and Uetsuki, M. (2015) Functionally Incremental Sentence Processing and Reanalysis Difficulty in Head-Final Agglutinative Language. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 5, 21-41. doi: 10.4236/ojml.2015.51003.

References

[1] Abney, S. P. (1989). A Computational Model of Human Parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 129-144.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01069051
[2] Amano, N., & Kondo, T. (1999). NTT Database Series: Nihongo-No goitokusei (Lexical Properties of Japanese). Tokyo: Sanseidoo.
[3] Aoshima, S., Phillips, C., & Weinberg, A. (2004). Processing Filler-Gap Dependencies in a Head-Final Language. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 23-54.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.03.001
[4] Bever, T. G. (1970). The Cognitive Basis for Linguistic Structures. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language (pp. 279-362). New York: John Wiley.
[5] Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
[6] Chomsky, N. (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[7] Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[8] Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: An Interactive Graphic System for Designing and Controlling Experiments in the Psychology Laboratory Using Macintosh Computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 257-271.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03204507
[9] Fodor, J. D., & Ferreira, F. (Eds.) (1998). Re-analysis in Sentence Processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[10] Fodor, J. D., & Inoue, A. (1998). Attach Anyway. In J. D. Fodor, & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Reanalysis in Sentence Processing (pp. 101-141). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[11] Frazier, L., & Clifton Jr., C. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
[12] Frazier, L., & Clifton Jr., C. (1998). Sentence Reanalysis, and Visibility. In J. D. Fodor, & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Reanalysis in Sentence Processing (pp. 143-176). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[13] Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and Correcting Errors during Sentence Comprehension: Eye Movements in the Analysis of Structurally Ambiguous Sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178-210.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1
[14] Gibson, E. (1991). A Computational Theory of Human Linguistic Processing: Memory Limitations and Processing Breakdown. Doctoral Dissertation, Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University.
[15] Gorrell, P. (1995). Syntax and Parsing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627682
[16] Gunji, T. (1987). Japanese Phrase Structure Grammar. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
[17] Gunji, T. (1994). Shizengengo (Natural Langauge). Tokyo: Nihon-Hyooronsha.
[18] Gunji, T. (1995). An Overview of JPSG: A Constraint-Based Grammar for Japanese. In R. Mazuka, & N. Nagai (Eds.), Japanese Sentence Processing (pp. 105-133). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[19] Gunji, T., & Hashida, K. (Eds.) (1998). Topics in Constraint-Based Grammar of Japanese. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[20] Hirose, Y. (2002). Resolution of Reanalysis Ambiguity in Japanese Relative Clauses: Early Use of Thematic Compatibility Information and Incremental Processing. In M. Nakayama (Ed.), Sentence Processing in East Asian Languages (pp. 31-52). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
[21] Hirose, Y. (2003). Recycling Prosodic Boundaries. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 167-195.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022448308035
[22] Hirose, Y., & Inoue, A. (1998). Ambiguity of Reanalysis in Parsing Complex Sentences in Japanese. In D. Hillert (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective (Vol. 31, pp. 71-93). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
[23] Kamide, Y., Altmann, G. T. M., & Haywood, S. L. (2003). The Time-Course of Prediction in Incremental Sentence Processing: Evidence from Anticipatory Eye Movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 133-156.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00023-8
[24] Kamide, Y., & Mitchell, D. C. (1999). Incremental Pre-Head Attachment in Japanese Parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 631-662.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/016909699386211
[25] Lewis, R. L. (1998). Reanalysis and Limited Repair Parsing: Learning off the Garden Path. In J. D. Fodor, & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Reanalysis in Sentence Processing (pp. 247-285). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[26] Mazuka, R., & Itoh, K. (1995). Can Japanese Speakers Be Led Down the Garden Path? In R. Mazuka, & N. Nagai (Eds.), Japanese Sentence Processing (pp. 295-329). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[27] Mazuka, R., Itoh, K., & Kondo, T. (2002). Costs of Scrambling in Japanese Sentence Processing. In M. Nakayama (Ed.), Sentence Processing in East Asian Languages (pp. 131-166). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
[28] Miyamoto, E. T. (2002). Case Markers as Clause Boundary Inducers in Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 307-347.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1019540324040
[29] Miyamoto, E. T., Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N. J., Aikawa, T., & Miyagawa, S. (1999). A U-Shaped Relative Clause Attachment Preference in Japanese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 663-686.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/016909699386220
[30] Pollard, C., & Sag, I. A. (1994). Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
[31] Pritchett, B. L. (1988). Garden Path Phenomena and the Grammatical Basis of Language Processing. Language, 64, 539-576.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/414532
[32] Pritchett, B. L. (1992). Grammatical Competence and Parsing Performance. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
[33] Sturt, P., & Crocker, M. W. (1996). Monotonic Syntactic Processing: A Cross-Linguistic Study of Attachment and Reanalysis. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 449-494.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/016909696387123
[34] Sturt, P., Pickering, M. J., & Crocker, M. W. (1999). Structural Change and Reanalysis Difficulty in Language Comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 136-150.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.2606
[35] Tamaoka, K., Sakai, H., Kawahara, J., & Miyaoka, Y. (2003). The Effects of Phrase-Length Order and Scrambling in the Processing of Visually Presented Japanese Sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 431-454.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1024851729985
[36] Tokimoto, S. (2005). Disambiguation of Homonyms in Real-Time Japanese Sentence Processing: Case-Markings and Thematic Constraint. Language and Speech, 48, 65-87.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00238309050480010401
[37] Weinberg, A. (1993). Parameters in the Theory of Sentence Processing: Minimal Commitment Theory Goes East. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 339-364.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01068016
[38] Yamashita, H. (2000). Structural Computation and the Role of Morphological Markings in the Processing of Japanese. Language and Speech, 43, 429-455.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00238309000430040501

  
comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2019 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.