TRA CỨU
Tác giả CN Chaves, Rui P.
Nhan đề Frequency effects in Subject Islands / Rui P. Chaves.
Thông tin xuất bản 2019.
Mô tả vật lý p. 475-521
Tóm tắt This work provides evidence that Subject Island violation effects vanish if subject-embedded gaps are made as frequent and pragmatically felicitous as non-island counterpart controls. We argue that Subject Island effects are caused by the fact that subject-embedded gaps are pragmatically unusual – as the informational focus does not usually correspond to a dependant of the subject phrase – and therefore are highly contrary to comprehenders’ expectations about the distribution of filler–gap dependencies (Chaves 2013, Hofmeister, Casasanto & Sag 2013). This not only explains why sentences with subject-embedded gaps often become more acceptable ‘parasitically’, in the presence of a second gap outside the island, but also explains why some Subject Island violations fail to exhibit any amelioration with repetition (Sprouse 2009, Crawford 2011, Goodall 2011); some ameliorate marginally (Snyder 2000, 2017) or moderately (Hiramatsu 2000, Clausen 2011, Chaves & Dery 2014), and others become fully acceptable, as in our case. This conclusion extends to self-paced reading Subject Island studies (Stowe 1986, Kurtzman & Crawford 1991, Pickering, Barton & Shillcock 1994, Phillips 2006), which sometimes find evidence of gap filling and sometimes do not.
Đề mục chủ đề Nghiên cứu ngôn ngữ--Tiếng Anh--Ngữ pháp
Thuật ngữ không kiểm soát Subject
Thuật ngữ không kiểm soát Ngữ pháp
Thuật ngữ không kiểm soát Tiếng Anh
Thuật ngữ không kiểm soát Subject Islands
Thuật ngữ không kiểm soát Frequency effects
Nguồn trích Journal of Linguistics- Vol. 55, Issue 3/2019
000 00000nab a2200000 a 4500
00158413
0022
004E7E969A2-7305-4D46-9016-AF3B4512537B
005202004131528
008160304s2019 vm| vie
0091 0
022|a08683409
039|a20200413152805|btult|c20200403084314|dthuvt|y20200403084256|zthuvt
0410 |aenk
044|aeng
1001 |aChaves, Rui P.
24510|aFrequency effects in Subject Islands / |cRui P. Chaves.
260|c2019.
300|ap. 475-521
520|aThis work provides evidence that Subject Island violation effects vanish if subject-embedded gaps are made as frequent and pragmatically felicitous as non-island counterpart controls. We argue that Subject Island effects are caused by the fact that subject-embedded gaps are pragmatically unusual – as the informational focus does not usually correspond to a dependant of the subject phrase – and therefore are highly contrary to comprehenders’ expectations about the distribution of filler–gap dependencies (Chaves 2013, Hofmeister, Casasanto & Sag 2013). This not only explains why sentences with subject-embedded gaps often become more acceptable ‘parasitically’, in the presence of a second gap outside the island, but also explains why some Subject Island violations fail to exhibit any amelioration with repetition (Sprouse 2009, Crawford 2011, Goodall 2011); some ameliorate marginally (Snyder 2000, 2017) or moderately (Hiramatsu 2000, Clausen 2011, Chaves & Dery 2014), and others become fully acceptable, as in our case. This conclusion extends to self-paced reading Subject Island studies (Stowe 1986, Kurtzman & Crawford 1991, Pickering, Barton & Shillcock 1994, Phillips 2006), which sometimes find evidence of gap filling and sometimes do not.
65017|aNghiên cứu ngôn ngữ|xTiếng Anh|xNgữ pháp
6530 |aSubject
6530 |aNgữ pháp
6530 |aTiếng Anh
6530 |aSubject Islands
6530 |aFrequency effects
773|tJournal of Linguistics|gVol. 55, Issue 3/2019
890|a0|b0|c0|d0

Không có liên kết tài liệu số nào