HUMAN GRAMMARS CLASIFICATIONChomsky 1957
Finite State Grammars
Phrase Structure Grammars
Transformational Grammars
THEMAN
MEN
COMES
COME
SentenceNPVPTN
Verb
NP + VPT + NPVerb + NPtheman, ball, etc.hit, took, etc.
T
Sentence
NP VP
N Verb NP
T Nthe man hit
the ball
Transformational Rule: Put the WH-word at the begining of the sentence
The man hit the ball What did the man hit __ ?
PREVIOUS WORKS ON ARTIFICIAL LANGUAGES
Moro et al 2001 Tettamanti et al 2002 Musso et al 2003 Friederici et al 2006
The weakest rule system capable to generate infinite sets of sequences.
PSG can create complex hierarchical structures and long distance dependencies.
Two grammars were created to compare local probabilities (FSG) and hierarchical structures (PSG)
Moro et al 2001 Friederici et al 2006
FOP: activation for both grammars
BROCA: Activation only for PSG
PROCESAMIENTO DE ORDEN DE PALABRAS
Kepa Erdozia – Itziar Laka
Master de Lingüística 2009-2010
www.elebilab.com
www.ehu.es/HEB/KEPA/english_erdozia.htm
Orden de Palabrasa. PP-S-IO-O-V
Free Word Ordera. PP S IO O V[Afaldu ondoren] [Mikelek] [Elenari] [gerriko berria] [oparitu dio]
Free Word Ordera. PP S IO O V[Afaldu ondoren] [Mikelek] [Elenari] [gerriko berria] [oparitu dio][After dinner-PP] [Mikel-S] [Elena-IO] [the new belt-O] [given has-V]‘After dinner, Mikel has given the new belt to Elena’
5 constituent sentence; P5 = 120 sentences.
Nearly, all constituent permutation are grammatical in Basque
d. IO V O PP S[Elenari] [oparitu dio] [gerriko berria] [afaldu ondoren] [Mikelek]
e. ...
c. S O PP V IO[Mikelek] [gerriko berria] [afaldu ondoren] [oparitu dio] [Elenari]
b. O PP IO S V[Gerriko berria] [afaldu ondoren] [Elenari] [Mikelek] [oparitu dio]
a. PP S IO O V[Afaldu ondoren] [Mikelek] [Elenari] [gerriko berria] [oparitu dio][After dinner-PP] [Mikel-S] [Elena-IO] [the new belt-O] [given has-V]‘After dinner, Mikel has given the new belt to Elena’
Free Word Order
Investigaciones sobre el orden de palabra en vasco
Gramática GenerativaSOV (De Rijk 1969, Eguzkitza 1986, Ortiz de Urbina 1989, Laka 1990, Artiagoitia 1995, Fernandez 1998, A. Elordieta 2001, Arregi 2001 among others …)
SVO (Ormazabal et al 1994, G. Elordieta 1997, Haddican 2004)
Propuestas informacionales y estadísticas
Psicolingüística Experimental: adquisición
De Rijk 1969, Osa 1990, Hidalgo 1994, Aldezabal et al 2003
Bronckart & Idiazabal 1982
Participantes: 7 Grupos de diferente edad
Objetivo: analizar la adquisición de los diferentes órdenes de palabras del euskera
Group 2: 4-5 years
Group 3: 5-6 years
Group 4: 6-7 years
Group 5: 7-8 years
Group 6: 10-11 yearsGroup 7: adults
Group 1: 3-4 years
Tarea: Representar con juguetes las oraciones escuchadas
Psycholinguistics: Bronckart & Idiazabal 1982
Psycholinguistics: Bronckart & Idiazabal 1982
Zakurrak neska bota duNeska zakurrak bota du
Zakurrak bota du neskaNeska bota du zakurrak
4-5 y.o. 5-6 y.o. 6-7 y.o. 7-8 y.o. 10-11 y.o. adults3-4 y.o.
15 114 3
19 113 7
18 2 20 011 9 11 9
19 1 20 011 9 18 2 20 0
20 0
15 111 7
19 115 5
17 3 20 015 5 16 4
20 0 20 014 6 20 0 19 1
20 0
Las oraciones que comienzan con Sujeto se comprenden bien
Las oraciones que comienzan con Objeto se comprenden mal hasta los 8 años
Parece que los más jovencitos comprenden el primer constituyente como sujeto y el segundo como objeto
INTERNAL SUMMARY 1
GENERATIVE GRAMMARMost linguists:
Basic word order Canonical word order
SOV SOVAntisymmetrists: SVO SOV
FUNCTIONALISTS: SOV
STATISTIC RESEARCH:De RijkHidalgoAldezabal et al
PSYCHOLINGUISTICS (ACQUISTION):
SOV
SOV
SOV/SVO
SVO
Previous Research on Word Order in Basque
Most frequent word order
Earliest acquired word order
Quote:
“Just as the theory of grammar has as its goals an account of Universal Grammar and parameters of language variation, the theory of sentence
processing has as its goal the characterization of the universal parser, the human sentence processing mechanism” Sekerina 2003: 302
Técnicas Psicolingüísticas en Sintaxis
Los participantes realizan el experimento a su marcha.
Para moverse de un elemento a otro, los participantes tienen que presionar la barra espaciadora, una presión por cada elemento. Así, los participantes deciden el tiempo que necesitan para leer cada elemento de la oración, y por lo tanto, deciden el tiempo que necesitan para comprender la oración entera.
SELF PACED READING MOVING WINDOW
Experimentos Psicolingüísticos en Euskera: Método
La tarea de comprensión nos permite asegurar que los participantes han entendido las oraciones que han leído. La tarea consiste en una pregunta si-o-no después de cada oración.
COMPREHENSION TASK
***** ***** ***** *****
Emakumeak ***** ***** ***** (The woman)
***** gizona ***** *****(the man)
***** ****** ikusi ***** (seen)
***** ****** ***** du(has)
Egia al da emakume batek gizon bat ikusi duela?
(Is it true that a woman has seen a man?)
SOV-OSV
Objetivo: Determinar si el orden de palabras OSV tiene un mayor coste de procesamiento que el orden SOV:
(a) Tiempos de lectura más largos
(b) Problemas de comprensión
23 participantes (13 w y 10 m) Edad desde 18 hasta 36 (media 25; SD ± 5).
Participantes
Materiales32 oraciones en SOV y 32 oraciones en OSV.
2 listas: 16 SOV y 16 OSV oraciones
32 fillers (las mismas para las dos listas).
emakume-ak gizon-a ikus-i du
woman-the/Subj. man-the/Obj. seen has
‘the woman has seen the man’
gizon-a emakume-ak ikus-i du
man-the/Obj. woman-the/Subj. seen has
‘the woman has seen the man’
Sujeto
Objeto
Verb Aux
Sujeto
Objeto
Verb Aux
Materials
Registro
Registro
The EXPE6 (Pallier et al. 1997) recorded the reaction times and the answers of the participants:
(i) tiempo de lectura de cada palabra de la oración(ii) tiempo para la tarea de comprensión (leer y responder la pregunta)(iii) si la respuesta es correcta o no.
ExpectativasSi las oraciones con orden de palabras derivadas OSV
(i) requieren más tiempo de lectura(ii) requieren más tiempo de comprensión(iii) inducen más errores en la tarea de comprensión.
SOV vs. OSV: ResultadosMean Reading Times of Sentences: Global Score
•SOV se proesa más rápido que el orden OSV
Reading time of two word orders
35003600370038003900400041004200
SOV OSV
Sentence Type
Tim
e (m
s)
p<0.005
Reaction Times of Comprehension Task
2300235024002450250025502600265027002750
SOV OSV
Senteces Type
Tim
es (m
s) p<0.002
Reaction Times in the Comprehension Task
Las preguntas sobre OSV requieren más tiempo
SOV vs. OSV: Results
El orden OSV provoca más errores que el orden SOV
Errors in the Comprehension Task
Comprehension Task: Errors
0%2%4%6%8%
10%12%14%16%
SOV OSV
Sentence Type
Perc
enta
ge
p<0.001
SOV vs. OSV: Results
Mean reading times Word by Word
Las formas no-marcadas se procesan más rápido que las marcadas
OSV requiere un reanálisis de la structura sintáctica en la posición de sujeto
Reading Times Word by Word
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
DP DP Vb Aux
Sentence Element
Tim
e (m
s)
sovosv
p<0.05
p<0.01
p<0.05p<0.05
SOV vs. OSV: Results
To seek the brain responses to different word orders
Experiment 4: ERP evidences
Goal:
4 conditions
Materials
Canonical SOV conditionNon Canonical OSV conditionUnambiguous
Temporally Ambiguous Canonical SOV conditionNon Canonical OSV condition
Subject Verb auxObject
Subject Verb auxObject
‘the wolf has eaten the sheep’
otso-ak
wolf-the/Subj
Ardi-a
Sheep-the/Obj
jan
eaten
du
has
‘the wolves have eaten the sheep(pl)’
Otso-ek
Wolves/the/Subj
ardi-ak
sheep-the/Obj
jan
eaten
dituzte
have
Experiment 4: Non Ambiguous
SOV temporally ambiguous
OSV temporally ambiguous
‘the wolf has eaten the sheep(pl)’
Otso-ak
Wolf-X
ardi-ak
sheep-X
‘the wolf has eaten the sheep(pl)’
otso-ak
wolf-X
Ardi-ak
Sheep-X
jan
eaten
ditu
has
jan
eaten
ditu
has
Experiment 4: Ambiguous
1 question after each block of 8 sentences was presented.
Design
Experiment 4: Method
4 lists: material were divided in 4 lists in order to avoid sentence repetition across conditions (like in behavioral expes)
30 blocks: Each lists contained 30 blocks of 8 sentences (2 per condition). Sentences into blocks and blocks were mixed randomly every experimental session
Experimental sentences were automatically presented word by word in the middle of the screen (words 300 ms; intervals 200 ms)
At the end of each sentence participants were asked to blink, and a green dash informed that a new sentence was going to start
240 sentences per condition were created (Total = 960 sentences)
*ardiak
*ardiakGorbeia
*ardiakGorbeiamendiko
*ardiakGorbeiamendikolarretan
*ardiakGorbeiamendikolarretanotsoak
jan
ditu
Free Blink
*
Experiment 4: MethodMETHOD
Participants26 neurologically healthy and right handed native speakers of Basque.
24 participants, mean age 26 (SD ± 4.7) years; 8 males and 18 females
Note: The ERP experiment was administered in Barcelona. All participants had moved to Barcelona because for studying or working so, at that time they used more Spanish or Catalan more often.
The bilingual Basque-Spanish questionnaire.7-point scale were 1 = Basque only; 7 = Spanish only 2.52 SD = ± 0.9].
In Basque/Spanish: comprehension 4/4, reading 4/3.96, speaking 3.62/3.83, writing 3.49/3.65. 4 = perfect; 3 = good; 2 = sufficient; 1 = meagre
16 subjects preferred Basque, one Spanish and 7 subjects both languages.
Experiment 4: Analysis
Parasagital
Temporal
Midline
Anovas were established in three regions:
Factors were:
Sentence type (four conditions)
Hemisphere of electrodes
Anterior/Posterior positions
Experiment 4: Results
Behavioral Results
The behavioral data showed that participants performed well in the experiment. In the comprehension task they performed correctly in 91% of trials (SD = ± 7.8)
LAN 375-425 ms
Experiment 4: Results
OTSOEK ardiak jan dituzteARDIA otsoak jan du
SOVOSV
COMPARING UNAMBIGUOUS SENTENCES
N400 / LAN
Experiment 4: ResultsCOMPARING UNAMBIGUOUS SENTENCES
Otsoek ARDIAK jan dituzteArdia OTSOAK jan du
SOVOSV
Left Anterior Negativity
Experiment 4: ResultsCOMPARING UNAMBIGUOUS SENTENCES
P600
Otsoek ardiak JAN dituzteArdia otsoak JAN du
SOVOSV
Experiment 4: ResultsCOMPARING AMBIGUOUS CHAINS
ARDIAK otsoak jan dituOTSOAK ardiak jan ditu
NothingSENTENCE FIRST POSITION
AMB-SOVAMB-OSV
SENTENCE SECOND POSITIONAMB-SOVAMB-OSV
Ardiak OTSOAK jan dituOtsoak ARDIAK jan ditu
Experiment 4: ResultsCOMPARING AMBIGUOUS CHAINS
Frontal Negativity
Otsoak ardiak JAN DITUArdiak otsoak JAN DITU
AMB-SOVAMB-OSV
Experiment 4: ResultsCOMPARING UNAMBIGUOUS SENTENCES AND AMBIGUOUS CHAINS
ARDIAK otsoak jan ditu [AMB]ARDIA otsoak jan du [OSV]
Left Anterior Negativity
-a vs –ek and –ak = LAN
Experiment 4: ResultsCOMPARING UNAMBIGUOUS SENTENCES AND AMBIGUOUS CHAINS
SOV vs AMB-SOV
SOV vs AMB-OSV
Posterior positivity (P600)
Frontal Negativity
The differences observed in the comparison of the canonical non-ambiguous condition and both ambiguous conditions leads us to conclude that ambiguous chains are processed as canonical SOV sentences except when there is a disambiguating element which generates a revision of the syntactic structure
Verb Position
ERP RESULTS SUMMARY
a) LAN/N400 component in object first position.b) LAN-like component in subject second position.c) P600 component in verb position of OSV condition.
d) Nothing in ambiguously marked constituent positions.e) Frontal Negativity in verb and auxiliary position due to world knowledge disambiguated and syntactic reanalysis required condition
ERP EXPERIMENT SUGGESTS THAT THE CANONICAL WORD ORDER IS SOV IN BASQUE.
UNAMBIGUOUS CONDITIONS
TEMPORALY AMBIGUOUS CONDITIONS
