1 |
Do null subjects (mis-)trigger pro-drop grammars?
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Native speakers of English regularly hear sentences without overt subjects. Nevertheless, they maintain a [−pro] grammar that requires sentences to have an overt subject. It is proposed that listeners of English recognize that speakers reduce predictable material and thus attribute null subjects to this process, rather than changing their grammars to a [+pro] setting. Mack et al. (2012) showed that sentences with noise covering the subject are analyzed as having null subjects more often with a first person pronoun and with a present tense – properties correlated with more predictable referents -- compared to a third person pronoun and past tense. However, those results might in principle have been due to reporting null subjects for verbs that often occur with null subjects. An experiment is reported here in which comparable results are found for sentences containing nonsense verbs. Participants preferred a null subject more often for first person present tense sentences than for third person past tense sentences. The results are as expected if participants are responding to predictability, the likelihood of reduction, rather than to lexical statistics. The results are argued to be important in removing a class of mis-triggering examples from the language acquisition problem.
|
|
Keyword:
Article
|
|
URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25086703 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4583368/ https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9312-8
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
2 |
Without his shirt off he saved the child from almost drowning: interpreting an uncertain input
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
Partition if You Must: Evidence for a No Extra Times Principle
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
5 |
Discourse Integration Guided by the ‘Question under Discussion’
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
Interpreting Conjoined Noun Phrases and Conjoined Clauses: Collective vs. Distributive Preferences
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
9 |
How prosody constrains comprehension: A limited effect of prosodic packaging
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
10 |
Information structure expectations in sentence comprehension
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
11 |
The role of pragmatic principles in resolving attachment ambiguities: Evidence from eye movements
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
12 |
Processing Elided Verb Phrases with Flawed Antecedents: the Recycling Hypothesis
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
13 |
Heavy NP shift is the parser’s last resort: Evidence from eye movements ⋆
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
15 |
Interface problems: Structural constraints on interpretation?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|