An ERP Study of Causative Cleft Construction in Japanese: Evidence for the Preference of Shorter Linear Distance in Sentence Comprehension

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Masataka Yano ; Tsutomu Sakamoto
• 关键词：Japanese ; Sentence comprehension ; Causative cleft construction ; Gap ; filler dependency ; Event ; related brain potentials (ERPs)
• 刊名：Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：April 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：45
• 期：2
• 页码：407-421
• 全文大小：1,632 KB
• 参考文献：Cohen, L., & Mehler, J. (1996). Click monitoring revisited: An on-line study of sentence comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 24(1), 94–102.CrossRef PubMed
  Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47(2), 164–203.CrossRef PubMed
  Ford, M. (1983). A method for obtaining measures of local parsing complexity throughout sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(2), 203–218.CrossRef
  Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68(1), 1–76.CrossRef PubMed
  Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In A. Marantz, Y. Miyashita, & W. O’Neil (Eds.), Image, language, brain (pp. 95–126). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Johnson, M. (2001). Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(6), 1411–1423.PubMed
  Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, M. (1959). On methods in the analyses of profile data. Psychometrika, 24, 95–112.CrossRef
  Hiraiwa, K., & Ishihara, S. (2012). Syntactic metamorphosis: Clefts, slicing, and in-situ focus in Japanese. Syntax, 15(2), 142–180.CrossRef
  Ishizuka, T., Nakatani, K., & Gibson, E. (2006). Processing Japanese relative clause in context. Paper Presented at the 19th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, CUNY.
  Jasper, H. H. (1958). The ten twenty electrode system of the international federation. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 10, 371–375.
  Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. (2000). The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(2), 159–201.CrossRef
  Kahraman, B., Sato, A., Ono, H., & Sakai, H. (2011a). Incremental processing of gap-filler dependencies: Evidence from the processing of subject and object clefts in Japanese. The Proceeding of the Twelfth Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics, pp. 113–147.
  Kahraman, B., Sato, A., Ono, H., & Sakai, H. (2011b). Why object clefts are easier to process than subject clefts in Japanese: Frequency or expectation? Technical Report of IECIE, 111(170), 67–72.
  King, J. W., & Just, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(5), 580–602.CrossRef
  King, J., & Kutas, M. (1995). Who did what and when? Using word- and clause-level ERPs to monitor working memory usage in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 78(3), 376–395.CrossRef
  Kwon, N., Kluender, R., Kutas, M., & Polinsky, M. (2013). Subject/object processing asymmetries in Korean relative clauses: Evidence from ERP data. Language, 89(3), 537–585.CrossRef PubMed PubMedCentral
  Matzke, M., Mai, H., Nager, W., Rüsseler, J., & Münte, T. (2002). The costs of freedom: An ERP study of non-canonical sentences. Clinical Neurophysiology, 113(6), 844–852.CrossRef PubMed
  Mecklinger, A., Schriefers, H., Steinhauer, K., & Friederici, D. (1995). Processing relative clauses varying on syntactic and semantic dimensions: An analysis with event-related potentials. Memory and Cognition, 23(4), 477–494.CrossRef PubMed
  Miyamoto, E. T., & Nakamura, M. (2003). Subject/object asymmetries in the processing of relative clauses in Japanese. In G. Garding & M. Tsujimura (Eds.), Proceedings of 22nd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistic (pp. 342–355). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
  Nakatani, K. (2009). Is the nesting effect caused by structural complexity or structural frequency? A case study of Japanese NPI processing. Poster Presented at the 22nd Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, 192, University of California, Davis.
  Nakatani, K., & Gibson, E. (2010). An on-line study of Japanese nesting complexity. Cognitive Science, 34, 94–112.CrossRef PubMed
  Nunez, P. L. (1991). The linked-reference issue in EEG and ERP recording: Comments on the paper by Miller, Lutzenberger and Elbert. Journal of Psychophysiology, 5, 279–280.
  Oldfield, R. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113.CrossRef PubMed
  Ono, H., & Ikemoto, Y. (2013). Binding and dependency length in gapless relative clauses. Technical Report of IECIE, 113(174), 87–92.
  Ono, H., & Nakatani, K. (2010). Integration of Wh-phrases and predicates in Japanese sentence processing. Technical Report of IECIE, 110(163), 99–104.
  Ono, H., & Nakatani, K. (2013). Integration costs in the processing of Japanese wh-interrogative sentences. Tokyo: Studies in Language Sciences, Kurosio Publishers.
  O’Grady, W. (1997). Syntactic development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef
  Phillips, C., Kazanina, N., & Abda, S. H. (2005). ERP effects of the processing of syntactic long-distance dependencies. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(3), 407–428.CrossRef PubMed
  Rösler, F., Pechmann, T., Streb, J., Röder, B., & Hennighausen, E. (1998). Parsing of sentences in a language with varying word order: Word-by-word variations of processing demands are revealed by event-related brain potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 38(2), 150–176.CrossRef
  Sato, A., Kahraman, B., Ono, H., & Sakai, H. (2007). Universals and specificities in relative clause processing: A view from Japanese causative relative clauses. Technical Report of IEICE, 107(138), 51–56.
  Schlesewsky, M., Bornkessel, I., & Frisch, S. (2003). The neurophysiological basis of word order variations in German. Brain and Language, 86(1), 116–128.CrossRef PubMed
  Tamaoka, K., Sakai, H., Kawahara, J., Miyaoka, Y., Lim, H., & Koizumi, M. (2005). Priority information used for the processing of Japanese sentences: Thematic roles, case-particles or grammatical functions? Journal of Psycholinguistics Research, 34(3), 281–331.CrossRef
  Ueno, M., & Garnsey, S. M. (2008). An ERP study of the processing of subject and object relative clauses in Japanese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(5), 646–688.CrossRef
  Vasishth, S., & Lewis, R. (2006). Argument-head distance and processing complexity: Explaining both locality and anti-locality effects. Language, 82(4), 767–794.CrossRef
  Yano, M., Tateyama, Y., & Sakamoto, T. (2014). Processing of Japanese cleft constructions in context: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, doi:10.​1007/​s10936-014-9294-6 .
  
• 作者单位：Masataka Yano (1) (2)
  Tsutomu Sakamoto (1)
  
  1. Graduate School of Humanities, Kyushu University, 6-19-1, Hakozaki, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, Japan
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Tokyo, Japan
  
• 刊物主题：Psychology, general; Cognitive Psychology; Psycholinguistics;
• 出版者：Springer US
• ISSN：1573-6555

文摘

This study examined the processing of two types of Japanese causative cleft constructions (subject-gap vs. object-gap) by conducting an event-related brain potential experiment to clarify the processing mechanism of long-distance dependencies. The results demonstrated that the subject-gap constructions elicited larger P600 effects than the object-gap constructions. Based on these findings, we argue that the linear distance rather than the structural distance between the extracted argument (filler) and its original gap position is a crucial factor for determining processing costs of gap-filler dependency in Japanese causative cleft constructions. This argument indicates that (at least) some types of long-distance dependencies are sensitive to linear distance.