scholarly journals Why should syntactic islands exist?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eran Asoulin
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Islands

Limits on semantic prediction in the processing of extraction from adjunct clauses

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dustin Alfonso Chacón
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Main Clause ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Maze Task ◽  
Serial Search ◽  
Conceptual Semantic ◽  
Syntactic Islands ◽  
Acceptability Judgment

Processing filler-gap dependencies (‘extraction’) depends on complex top-down predictions. This is observed in comprehenders’ ability to avoid resolving filler-gap dependencies in syntactic island contexts, and in the immediate sensitivity to the plausibility of the resulting interpretation. How complex can these predictions be? In this paper, we examine the processing of extraction from adjunct clauses. Adjunct clauses are argued to be syntactic islands, however, extraction is permitted if the adjunct clause and main clause satisfy specific compositional and conceptual semantic criteria. In an acceptability judgment task, we found that this generalization is robust. Additionally, our results show that this is a property specific to adjunct clauses by comparing adjunct clauses to conjunct VPs, which are similarly argued to permit extraction depending on semantic factors. However, in an A-Maze task, we found no evidence that this knowledge is deployed in real-time sentence processing. Instead, we found that comprehenders attempted to resolve a filler-gap dependency in an adjunct clause regardless of its island status. We propose that this is because deploying this linguistic constraint depends on a second-order serial search over event schemata, which is likely costly and time-consuming. Thus, comprehenders opt for a riskier strategy and attempt resolution into adjunct clauses categorically.

Syntactic islands by Cedric Boeckx

Language ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 90 (1) ◽  
pp. 287-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis Ott
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Islands

Neg-raising

2020 ◽  
pp. 198-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurence R. Horn
Keyword(s):  
Negative Polarity ◽  
Strong Tendency ◽  
Negative Polarity Items ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Polarity Items ◽  
Main Verb ◽  
Syntactic Islands ◽  
Excluded Middle ◽  
Grammatical Theories

Neg-raising is “the strong tendency in many languages to attract to the main verb a negative which should logically belong to the dependent nexus [=clause]”: a speaker uttering I don’t believe that p is typically taken to have conveyed ‘I believe that not-p’. Such lower-clause understandings of higher-clause negations are possible across certain predicates (believe, think, want) but not others (realize, regret, deny) in English and other languages. Grammatical theories of Neg-raising posit a movement rule based on evidence from the interaction of higher negation with strict negative polarity items, negative inversion, negative parentheticals, and syntactic islands. Semantic and pragmatic approaches cite the relation of Neg-raising to other processes involving contrary negation in contradictory form, the availability of excluded middle presuppositions (I believe that p v I believe that not-p), the Neg-first conspiracy, and the role of politeness or euphemism in motivating Neg-raising.

The processing of syntactic islands – An fMRI study

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ken Ramshøj Christensen ◽  
Johannes Kizach ◽  
Anne Mette Nyvad
Keyword(s):  
Fmri Study ◽  
Syntactic Islands

Anomaly detection in the processing of complex syntax by early L2 learners

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 371-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Stepanov ◽  
Sara Andreetta ◽  
Penka Stateva ◽  
Adam Zawiszewski ◽  
Itziar Laka
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Early Age ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Complex Syntax ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Syntactic Dependencies ◽  
Syntactic Islands ◽  
L1 And L2

This study investigates the processing of long-distance syntactic dependencies by native speakers of Slovenian (L1) who are advanced learners of Italian as a second language (L2), compared with monolingual Italian speakers. Using a self-paced reading task, we compare sensitivity of the early-acquired L2 learners to syntactic anomalies in their L2 in two empirical domains: (1) syntactic islands, for which the learners’ L1 and L2 grammars provide a converging characterization, and (2) verb–clitic constructions, for which the respective L1 and L2 grammatical descriptions diverge. We find that although our L2 learners show native-like processing patterns in the former, converging, grammatical domain, they may nevertheless perform non-native-like with respect to syntactic phenomena in which the L1 and L2 grammars do not align, despite the early age of L2 acquisition. Implications for theories of L2 acquisition and endstate are discussed.

scholarly journals Topic extraction from adverbial clauses

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Carlos Rubio Alcalá
Keyword(s):  
Topic Extraction ◽  
Left Dislocation ◽  
Clitic Left Dislocation ◽  
Adverbial Clauses ◽  
Adverbial Clause ◽  
Syntactic Islands

This paper offers new data to support findings about Topic extraction from adverbial clauses. Since such clauses are strong islands, they should not allow extraction of any kind, but we show here that if the appropriate conditions are met, Topics of the CLLD kind in Romance can move out of them. We propose that two conditions must be met for such movement to be possible: the first is that the adverbial clause must have undergone topicalisation in the first place; the second is that the adverbial clause is inherently topical from a semantic viewpoint. Contrast with other language families (Germanic, Quechua and Japanese) is provided and the semantic implications of the proposal are briefly discussed.Keywords: topicalisation; Clitic Left Dislocation; syntactic islands; adverbial clausesEste artículo ofrece nuevos datos sobre la extracción de Tópicos desde oraciones subordinadas adverbiales. Dado que dichas oraciones son islas fuertes, no deberían permitir extracción de ningún tipo, pero mostramos que si se dan las condiciones apropiadas, los Tópicos del tipo CLLD en lenguas románicas pueden desplazarse fuera de ellas. Proponemos que se deben cumplir dos condiciones para que ese movimiento sea posible: la primera es que la propia subordinada adverbial se haya topicalizado en primer lugar; la segunda es que la subordinada adverbial sea inherentemente un Tópico desde el punto de vista semántico. Proporcionamos también algunos contrastes con otras familias lingüísticas (germánica, quechua y japonés) y se discuten brevemente las implicaciones semánticas de la propuesta.Palabras clave: topicalización; dislocación a la izquierda con clítico; islas sintácticas; oraciones adverbiales

Against Tanglewood by Focus Movement: A Reply to Erlewine and Kotek 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 579-596
Author(s):  
Itai Bassi ◽  
Nicholas Longenbaugh
Keyword(s):  
Central Point ◽  
Movement Theory ◽  
Focus Movement ◽  
Syntactic Islands

We reply to Erlewine and Kotek’s (2018) claim that the phenomenon of covariation under focus ( Tanglewood sentences; Kratzer 1991 ) is subject to syntactic islands and that it should therefore be handled by a focus movement theory (contra Kratzer’s view). We present novel data that are at odds with Erlewine and Kotek’s conclusions and demonstrate the necessity of an island-insensitive mechanism to capture focus covariation. We revisit Erlewine and Kotek’s main arguments against such a system and show that they are systematically confounded. Moreover, removing the confounds cancels the force of the arguments, corroborating the central point of this article.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document