On Directionality of Phrase Structure Building

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Cristiano Chesi (1)
  
  1. IUSS - Institute for Advanced Study of Pavia ; Piazza Vittoria 15 ; I-27100 ; Pavia ; Italy
  
• 刊名：Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：February 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：44
• 期：1
• 页码：65-89
• 全文大小：744 KB
• 参考文献：1. Abelson, H., & Sussman, J. (1996). / Structure and interpretation of computer programs pp. 261鈥?64. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  2. Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2013). Intervention in grammar and processing. In I. Caponigro & C. Cecchetto (Eds.), / From grammar to meaning: The spontaneous logicality of language (pp. 293鈥?11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), / Cognition and the development of language (pp. 279鈥?62). New York, NY: Wiley.
  4. Bianchi, V. (2009). A note on backward anaphora. / Rivista di Grammatica Generativa, / 34, 3鈥?4.
  5. Bianchi, V., & Chesi, C. (2006). Phases, left branch islands, and computational islands. / University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, / 12(1), 15鈥?8.
  6. Bianchi, V., & Chesi, C. (2010). Reversing the perspective on Quantifier Raising. / Rivista di Grammatica Generativa, / 35, 3鈥?8.
  7. Bianchi, V., & Chesi, C. (2012). Subject islands and the Subject Criterion. In V. Bianchi & C. Chesi (Eds.), / Enjoy Linguistics! Papers offered to Luigi Rizzi on the occasion of his 60th birthday (pp. 25鈥?3). Siena: CISCL Press.
  8. Boeckx, C. (2003). / Islands and chains: Resumption as stranding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. i.org/10.1075/la.63" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  9. Cecchetto, C., & Donati, C. (2010). On labeling: Principle C and head movement. / Syntax, / 13(3), 241鈥?78. i.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2010.00140.x" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  10. Chesi, C. (2004). / Phases and cartography in linguistic computation: Toward a cognitively motivated computational model of linguistic competence. PhD thesis, Universit脿 di Siena.
  11. Chesi, C. (2007). An introduction to phase-based minimalist grammars: Why move is top-down from left-to-right. / Studies in Linguistics, / 1, 49鈥?0.
  12. Chesi, C. (2012). / Competence and computation: Toward a processing friendly minimalist grammar. Padova: Unipress.
  13. Chesi, C. (2013). Do the 鈥榬ight鈥?thing. / Studies in Linguistics, / 6, 131鈥?64.
  14. Choi, Y., Yoon, J. (2006). Argument cluster coordination and constituency test (non)-conflicts. In / Paper presented at NELS 37. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  15. Chomsky, N. (1973). Conditions on transformations. In S. Anderson & P. Kiparsky (Eds.), / A festschrift for Morris Halle (pp. 232鈥?86). New York: Holt Rinehart, & Winston.
  16. Chomsky, N. (1981). / Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
  17. Chomsky, N. (1986). / Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  18. Chomsky, N. (1995). / The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  19. Chomsky, N. (1998). / Minimalist inquiries: The framework (No. 15). MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, MIT, Department of Linguistics.
  20. Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), / Ken Hale : A life in language (pp. 1鈥?2). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  21. Chomsky, N. (2008). On phases. In R. Freidin, C. P. Otero, & M.-L. Zubizarreta (Eds.), / Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  22. Chomsky, N. (2013). Problems of projection. / Lingua, 130, 33鈥?9.
  23. Cinque, G. (1999). / Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  24. Collins, C. (1997). / Local economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  25. Collins, C. (2002). Eliminating labels. In S. D. Epstein & T. D. Seely (Eds.), / Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  26. Culicover, P. W., & Postal, P. M. (2001). / Parasitic gaps. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  27. De Vincenzi, M. (1991). / Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian: The minimal chain principle. Berlin: Springer. i.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3184-1" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  28. De Vincenzi, M., Arduino, L., Ciccarelli, L., Job, R. (1999). Parsing strategies in children comprehension of interrogative sentences. In / Proceeding of ECCS 鈥?9. Siena.
  29. Engdahl, E. (1983). Parasitic gaps. / Linguistics and Philosophy, / 6, 5鈥?4. i.org/10.1007/BF00868088" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  30. Felser, C. (2004). Wh-copying, phases and successive cyclicity. / Lingua, / 114(5), 543鈥?74. i.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00054-8" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  31. Fodor, J. D. (1978). Parsing strategies and constraints on transformations. / Linguistic Inquiry, / 9, 427鈥?73.
  32. Fox, D., & Pesetsky, D. (2005). Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. In / Object shift (Ed.) By Katalin E. Kiss, special issue. / Theoretical Linguistics, / 31(1鈥?), 1鈥?6.
  33. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C, Jr. (1989). Successive cyclicity in the grammar and the parser. / Language and Cognitive Processes, / 4(2), 93鈥?26. i.org/10.1080/01690968908406359" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  34. Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. / Cognition, / 6, 291鈥?25. i.org/10.1016/0010-0277(78)90002-1" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  35. Frazier, L. (1978). / On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. PhD Thesis, University of Connecticut.
  36. Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. / Lingua, / 119, 67鈥?8. i.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.09.002" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  37. Gibson, E., & Pearlmutter, N. J. (2000). Distinguishing serial and parallel parsing. / Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, / 29(2), 231鈥?40. i.org/10.1023/A:1005153330168" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  38. Gordon, P., Hendrick, R., & Johnson, M. (2004). Effects of noun phrase type on sentence complexity. / Journal of Memory and Language, / 51, 97鈥?14. i.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.02.003" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  39. Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Levine, W. H. (2002). Memory-load interference in syntactic processing. / Psychological Science, / 13(5), 425鈥?30. i.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00475" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  40. Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Johnson, M. (2001). Memory interference during language processing. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, / 27, 1411鈥?423.
  41. Grimshaw, J. (1991). Extended projection. In P. Coopmans, M. Everaert, & J. Grimshaw (Eds.), / Lexical specification and insertion (pp. 115鈥?34). The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
  42. Hofmeister, P., & Sag, I. A. (2010). Cognitive constraints and island effects. / Language, / 86(2), 366鈥?15. i.org/10.1353/lan.0.0223" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  43. Hopcroft, J. E., Motwani, R., & Ullman, J. D. (2001). / Introduction to automata theory, languages, and computation (2nd ed.). Reading: Addison-Wesley.
  44. Huang, C. T. J. (1982). / Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD thesis. MIT.
  45. Huck, G., & Na, Y. (1990). Extraposition and focus. / Language, / 66, 51鈥?7. i.org/10.1353/lan.1990.0023" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  46. Joshi, A. K. (1985). / Tree adjoining grammars: How much context-sensitivity is required to provide reasonable structural descriptions? pp. 206鈥?50. University of Pennsylvania, Moore School of Electrical Engineering, Department of Computer and Information Science.
  47. Kayne, R. (1983). / Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris.
  48. Kayne, R. (1994). / The antisimmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  49. Kempson, R., Meyer-Viol, W., & Gabbay, D. (2001). / Dynamic syntax: The flow of language understanding. Oxford: Blackwell.
  50. Ko, H. (2005). Syntax of why-in-situ: Merge into [Spec, CP] in the overt syntax. / Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, / 23(4), 867鈥?16. i.org/10.1007/s11049-004-5923-3" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  51. Larson, R. (1988). On the double object construction. / Linguistic Inquiry, / 19, 335鈥?91.
  52. Lasnik, H., & Saito, M. (1992). / Move alpha: Conditions on its application and output. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  53. Levine R., & Sag I. A. (2003). Some empirical issues in the grammar of extraction. In S. M眉ller (eds.), / Proceedings of the HPSG03 Conference. Michigan State University, East Lansing. CSLI Publications. Life in Language (pp. 1鈥?2). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  54. Lewis, R. L. (2000). Falsifying serial and parallel parsing models: Empirical conundrums and an overlooked paradigm. / Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, / 29(2), 241鈥?48. i.org/10.1023/A:1005105414238" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  55. McCloskey, J. (2002). Resumption, successive cyclicity, and the locality of operations. In Samuel Epstein & Daniel T. Seely (Eds.), / Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program (pp. 184鈥?26). New York: Blackwell. i.org/10.1002/9780470755662.ch9" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  56. McElree, B., & Griffith, T. (1998). Structural and lexical constraints on filling gaps during sentence processing: A time-course analysis. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, / 24, 432鈥?60.
  57. McElree, B., Foraker, S., & Dyer, L. (2003). Memory structures that subserve sentence comprehension. / Journal of Memory and Language, / 48(1), 67鈥?1. i.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00515-6" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  58. McKinnon, R., & Osterhout, L. (1996). Event-related potentials and sentence processing: Evidence for the status of constraints on movement phenomena. / Language and Cognitive Processes, / 11, 495鈥?23. i.org/10.1080/016909696387132" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  59. Moro, A. (2000). / Dynamic antisymmetry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  60. Nunes, J., & Uriagereka, J. (2000). Cyclicity and extraction domains. / Syntax, / 3, 20鈥?3. i.org/10.1111/1467-9612.00023" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  61. Pesetsky, D., & Torrego, E. (2001). T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), / Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 355鈥?26). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  62. Phillips, C. (1996). / Order and structure. PhD thesis, MIT.
  63. Phillips, C. (2003). Linear order and constituency. / Linguistic Inquiry, / 34(1), 37鈥?0. i.org/10.1162/002438903763255922" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  64. Phillips, C. (2006). The real-time status of Island phenomena. / Language, / 82, 795鈥?23. i.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0217" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  65. Phillips, C. (2013). On the nature of island constraints. I: Language processing and reductionist accounts. In J. Sprouse & N. Hornstein (Eds.), / Experimental syntax and island effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  66. Pollard, C., & Sag, I. (1994). / Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Stanford: CSLI.
  67. Rizzi, L. (1990). / Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  68. Rizzi, L. (2001). On the position 鈥渋nt(errogative)鈥?in the left periphery of the clause. In G. Cinque & G. Salvi (Eds.), / Current studies in Italian syntax. Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi (pp. 287鈥?96). Amsterdam: Elsevier North-Holland.
  69. Rizzi, L. (2006). On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. In L. Cheng & N. Corver (Eds.), / Wh-movement: Moving on (pp. 97鈥?34). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  70. Ross, J. R. (1967). / Constraints on variables in syntax. PhD Thesis. MIT.
  71. Sauerland, U. (2004). The interpretation of traces. / Natural Language Semantics, / 12, 63鈥?27. i.org/10.1023/B:NALS.0000011201.91994.4f" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  72. Shlonsky, U. (1992). Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. / Linguistic Inquiry, / 23(3), 443鈥?68.
  73. Sprouse, J., Wagers, M., & Phillips, C. (2012). A test of the relation between working memory capacity and syntactic island effects. / Language, / 88(1), 82鈥?23. i.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0004" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  74. Stabler, E. (1997). Derivational minimalism. In Retor茅 (Ed.), / Logical aspects of computational Linguistics. Berlin: Springer.
  75. Stepanov, A. (2007). The end of CED? Minimalism and extraction domains. / Syntax, / 10, 80鈥?26. i.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2007.00094.x" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  76. Tavakolian, S. L. (1981). The conjoined-clause analysis of relative clauses. In S. L. Tavakolian (Ed.), / Language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 167鈥?87). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  77. Uriagereka, J. (1999). Multiple spell-out. In S. D. Epstein & N. Hornstein (Eds.), / Working minimalism (pp. 251鈥?82). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  78. Van Dyke, J. A., & McElree, B. (2006). Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension. / Journal of Memory and Language, / 55(2), 157鈥?66. i.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.03.007" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  79. Wanner, E., & Maratsos, M. (1978). An ATN approach to comprehension. In M. Halle, J. Bresnan, & G. A. Miller (Eds.), / Linguistic theory and psychological reality, chapter 3 (pp. 119鈥?61). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  80. Warren, T., & Gibson, E. (2005). Effects of NP type in reading cleft sentences in English. / Language and Cognitive Processes, / 20, 751鈥?67. i.org/10.1080/01690960500051055" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  81. Warren, T., & Gibson, E. (2002). The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. / Cognition, / 85, 79鈥?12. i.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00087-2" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  82. Weinberg, A. (2001). A minimalist theory of human sentence processing. In Epstein & N. Hornstein (Eds.), / Working minimalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  
• 刊物主题：Psychology, general; Cognitive Psychology; Psycholinguistics;
• 出版者：Springer US
• ISSN：1573-6555

文摘

Minimalism in grammatical theorizing (Chomsky in The minimalist program. MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995) led to simpler linguistic devices and a better focalization of the core properties of the structure building engine: a lexicon and a free (recursive) phrase formation operation, dubbed Merge, are the basic components that serve in building syntactic structures. Here I suggest that by looking at the elementary restrictions that apply to Merge (i.e., selection and licensing of functional features), we could conclude that a re-orientation of the syntactic derivation (from bottom-up/right-left to top-down/left-right) is necessary to make the theory simpler, especially for long-distance (filler-gap) dependencies, and is also empirically more adequate. If the structure building operations would assemble lexical items in the order they are pronounced (Phillips in Order and structure. PhD thesis, MIT, 1996; Chesi in Phases and cartography in linguistic computation: Toward a cognitively motivated computational model of linguistic competence. PhD thesis, Universit脿 di Siena, 2004; Chesi in Competence and computation: Toward a processing friendly minimalist grammar. Unipress, Padova, 2012), on-line performance data could better fit the grammatical model, without resorting to external 鈥減erformance factors.鈥?The phase-based, top-down (and, as a consequence, left-right) Minimalist Grammar here discussed goes in this direction, ultimately showing how strong Islands (Huang in Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD thesis, MIT, 1982) and intervention effects (Gordon et al. in J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 27:1411鈥?423, 2001, Gordon et al. in J Mem Lang 51:97鈥?14, 2004) could be better explained in structural terms assuming this unconventional derivational direction.