The effects of restrictiveness on relative clause processing in Farsi

被引:0
作者
Seifi, Pouran [1 ,3 ]
Loerts, Hanneke [1 ]
Mak, Pim [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Groningen, Fac Arts, Appl Linguist, NL-9712 EK Groningen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Utrecht, Trans 10, NL-3512 JK Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] UiT Arctic Univ Norway, Dept Language & Culture, SVHUM A2011 UiT Campus Tromso, N-9019 Tromso, Norway
关键词
Farsi relative clauses; Restrictive; Non-restrictive; Sentence processing; First language; Eye-movements; Frequency distribution; WORKING-MEMORY; EYE-TRACKING; COMPREHENSION; SUBJECT; INTERFERENCE; DIFFICULTY; ANIMACY; ERP;
D O I
10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104299
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
With an eye-tracking experiment, we investigated the processing of Farsi object and subject relative clauses. Since restrictive relative clauses in Farsi are marked and distinguished clearly by the enclitic particle (sic) /-i/ attached to the head noun, we also compared the processing of restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses. Seifi (2021) conducted a corpus analysis that showed that object relative clauses are in general less frequent than subject relative clauses. However, while non-restrictive relative clauses are predominantly subject relative clauses, restrictive relative clauses are more balanced in the corpus. In an eye-tracking experiment, Farsi speakers processed restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses differently. In non-restrictive relative clauses, the effect is similar to that found in most other languages: a clear processing delay in object relative clauses, compared to subject relative clauses. This effect was visible both at the relative clause verb and at the end of the matrix sentence. In restrictive relative clauses, on the other hand, the picture is different: Just as for the non-restrictive relative clauses object relative clauses had long reading times in the relative clause, but at the end of the sentence a reverse effect was found. Thus, the processing data reflected the pattern found in the corpus. We discuss these findings in terms of the distinct functions of restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 58 条
[21]   Consequences of the serial nature of linguistic input for sentenial complexity [J].
Grodner, D ;
Gibson, E .
COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 2005, 29 (02) :261-290
[22]   EYE FIXATION PATTERNS DURING THE READING OF RELATIVE-CLAUSE SENTENCES [J].
HOLMES, VM ;
OREGAN, JK .
JOURNAL OF VERBAL LEARNING AND VERBAL BEHAVIOR, 1981, 20 (04) :417-430
[23]   Processing relative clauses in Chinese [J].
Hsiao, F ;
Gibson, E .
COGNITION, 2003, 90 (01) :3-27
[24]  
Karimi S, Persian or Farsi?
[25]  
KEENAN EL, 1977, LINGUIST INQ, V8, P63
[26]   INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN SYNTACTIC PROCESSING - THE ROLE OF WORKING MEMORY [J].
KING, J ;
JUST, MA .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 1991, 30 (05) :580-602
[27]   WHO DID WHAT AND WHEN - USING WORD-LEVEL AND CLAUSE-LEVEL ERPS TO MONITOR WORKING-MEMORY USAGE IN READING [J].
KING, JW ;
KUTAS, M .
JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, 1995, 7 (03) :376-395
[28]  
Kukurt D., 2004, Master's thesis, P15
[29]  
Kwon N., 2008, Processing of syntactic and anaphoric gap-filler dependencies in Korean: Evidence from self-paced reading time, ERP and eye-tracking experiments
[30]  
Kwon N., 2006, Subject preference in Korean