Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Person Features and Lexical Restrictions in Italian Clefts.
Front Psychol 2019; 10:2105FP

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the results of two experiments, one off-line (acceptability judgment) and the other on-line (eye-tracking), targeting Object Cleft (OC) constructions. In both experiments, we used the same materials presenting a manipulation on person features: second person plural pronouns and plural definite determiners alternate in introducing a full NP ("it was [DP1 the/you [NP bankers]]i that [DP2 the/you [NP lawyers]] have avoided _i at the party") in a language, Italian, with overt person (and number) subject-verb agreement. As results, we first observed that the advantage of the bare pronominal forms reported in previous experiments (Gordon et al., 2001; Warren and Gibson, 2005, a.o.) is lost when the full NP (the "lexical restriction" in Belletti and Rizzi, 2013) is present. Second, an advantage for the mismatch condition, Art 1 -Pro 2, in which the focalized subject is introduced by the determiner and the OC subject by the pronoun, as opposed to the matching Pro 1 -Pro 2 condition, is observed, both off-line (higher acceptability and accuracy in answering comprehension questions after eyetracking) and on-line (e.g., smaller number of regressions from the subject region); third, we found a relevant difference between acceptability and accuracy in comprehension questions: despite similar numerical patterns in both off-line measures, the difference across conditions in accuracy is mostly not significant, while it is significant in acceptability. Moreover, while the matching condition Pro 1 -Pro 2 is perceived as nearly ungrammatical (far below the mean acceptability across-conditions), the accuracy in comprehension is still high (close to 80%). To account for these facts, we compare different formal competence and processing models that predict difficulties in OC constructions: similarity-based (Gordon et al., 2001, a.o.), memory load (Gibson, 1998), and intervention-based (Friedmann et al., 2009) accounts are compared to processing oriented ACT-R-based predictions (Lewis and Vasishth, 2005) and to top-down Minimalist derivations (Chesi, 2015). We conclude that most of these approaches fail in making predictions able to reconcile the competence and the performance perspective in a coherent way to the exception of the top-down model that is able to predict correctly both the on-line and the off-line main effects obtained.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Research Center for Neurocognition, Epistemology and Theoretical Syntax (NETS), School of Advanced Studies, Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori (IUSS), Pavia, Italy.Research Center for Neurocognition, Epistemology and Theoretical Syntax (NETS), School of Advanced Studies, Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori (IUSS), Pavia, Italy.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

31616337

Citation

Chesi, Cristiano, and Paolo Canal. "Person Features and Lexical Restrictions in Italian Clefts." Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 10, 2019, p. 2105.
Chesi C, Canal P. Person Features and Lexical Restrictions in Italian Clefts. Front Psychol. 2019;10:2105.
Chesi, C., & Canal, P. (2019). Person Features and Lexical Restrictions in Italian Clefts. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, p. 2105. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02105.
Chesi C, Canal P. Person Features and Lexical Restrictions in Italian Clefts. Front Psychol. 2019;10:2105. PubMed PMID: 31616337.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Person Features and Lexical Restrictions in Italian Clefts. AU - Chesi,Cristiano, AU - Canal,Paolo, Y1 - 2019/09/20/ PY - 2018/12/09/received PY - 2019/08/30/accepted PY - 2019/10/17/entrez PY - 2019/10/17/pubmed PY - 2019/10/17/medline KW - complexity KW - cue-based retrieval KW - intervention KW - memory load KW - object cleft KW - pronominal determiners KW - similarity KW - top-down derivation SP - 2105 EP - 2105 JF - Frontiers in psychology JO - Front Psychol VL - 10 N2 - In this paper, we discuss the results of two experiments, one off-line (acceptability judgment) and the other on-line (eye-tracking), targeting Object Cleft (OC) constructions. In both experiments, we used the same materials presenting a manipulation on person features: second person plural pronouns and plural definite determiners alternate in introducing a full NP ("it was [DP1 the/you [NP bankers]]i that [DP2 the/you [NP lawyers]] have avoided _i at the party") in a language, Italian, with overt person (and number) subject-verb agreement. As results, we first observed that the advantage of the bare pronominal forms reported in previous experiments (Gordon et al., 2001; Warren and Gibson, 2005, a.o.) is lost when the full NP (the "lexical restriction" in Belletti and Rizzi, 2013) is present. Second, an advantage for the mismatch condition, Art 1 -Pro 2, in which the focalized subject is introduced by the determiner and the OC subject by the pronoun, as opposed to the matching Pro 1 -Pro 2 condition, is observed, both off-line (higher acceptability and accuracy in answering comprehension questions after eyetracking) and on-line (e.g., smaller number of regressions from the subject region); third, we found a relevant difference between acceptability and accuracy in comprehension questions: despite similar numerical patterns in both off-line measures, the difference across conditions in accuracy is mostly not significant, while it is significant in acceptability. Moreover, while the matching condition Pro 1 -Pro 2 is perceived as nearly ungrammatical (far below the mean acceptability across-conditions), the accuracy in comprehension is still high (close to 80%). To account for these facts, we compare different formal competence and processing models that predict difficulties in OC constructions: similarity-based (Gordon et al., 2001, a.o.), memory load (Gibson, 1998), and intervention-based (Friedmann et al., 2009) accounts are compared to processing oriented ACT-R-based predictions (Lewis and Vasishth, 2005) and to top-down Minimalist derivations (Chesi, 2015). We conclude that most of these approaches fail in making predictions able to reconcile the competence and the performance perspective in a coherent way to the exception of the top-down model that is able to predict correctly both the on-line and the off-line main effects obtained. SN - 1664-1078 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/31616337/Person_Features_and_Lexical_Restrictions_in_Italian_Clefts L2 - https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02105 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -
Unbound Prime app for iOS iPhone iPadUnbound PubMed app for AndroidAlso Available:
Unbound MEDLINE
Unbound PubMed app for Windows