Incremental Processing of Gap-filler Dependencies: Evidence from the Processing of Subject and Object Clefts in Japanese Barış KAHRAMAN (1), Atsushi SATO (1), (2), Hajime ONO (3) , & Hiromu SAKAI (1) (1)Hiroshima University; (2)Japan Society for the Promotion of Science; (3) Kinki University Correspondence: [email protected] (Barış Kahraman)

INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND

PREVIOUS STUDIES  In head-final languages the processing asymmetry of SR and OR was observed at different positions: SUPPORTS Korean: RC-verb & filler (Kwon, 2008) INCREMENTALITY Turkish: RC-verb (Kahraman et al, 2010)

FILLER-GAP DEPENDENCIES The teacher who i [the student saw GAP

FILLER

SEARCH

i]

was young.

GAP

 Filler-gap dependencies are processed incrementally: When the filler precedes the gap, the parser posits a gap as soon as the filler is encountered and starts a search for that gap (e.g. Aoshima et al, 2004; Stowe 1986)

GAP-FILLER DEPENDENCIES  A dependency in which the gap precedes the filler such as relative clauses (RCs) in head final languages (Kwon, 2008). [Gakusei-ga senseii –wa wakakatta. i mita] [Student-NOM

i

GAP

saw]

 Japanese RCs are structurally ambiguous between a matrix clause and a subordinate clause at RC-verb. ⇒  Since the Japanese parser cannot determine whether a filler will appear, it might have not established a gap-filler dependency until the filler appears.  What if the parser predicts the upcoming filler earlier?

PRESENT STUDY  Japanese clefts provide a good test case to examine the incremenatlity of gap-filler dependency formation.

teacheri –TOP young.

[Gakusei-ga/o

FILLER SEARCH

DOES NOT SUPPORT INCREMENTALITY

Japanese: Filler (e.g. Ishizuka, 2005)

?

FILLER

 Are the gap-filler dependencies also processed incrementally? Does the parser posit a filler when it identifies the gap, and start to construct a dependency prior to the filler’s appearance?

mita-no-wa]

suugaku-no senseii –da.

[Student-NOM/ACC saw-COMP-TOP] math-GEN teacheri –COP `It was the math teacher who / the student saw / saw the student.`

 Unlike RCs, no-wa (cleft-marker) is attached to the verb. ⇒Structural ambiguity is resolved at the embedded verb and existence of an upcoming filler is signaled. PREDICTION: If the Japanese parser immediately posits a filler and  It is assumed that the processing asymmetry between subject and starts a search for it from the verb position, the processing asymmetry object relative clauses (SR / OR) reflects the relative ease / difficulty between subject and object clefts (SC / OC) would be observed at the of establishing a filler-gap dependency (e.g. Gibson, 1998; O’Grady, verb (Kahraman et al, 2010; Kwon, 2008). 1997).  AIM: In order to test our prediction, we conducted a self-paced  It is conceivable that the observed position of the processing reading experiment, and examined whether the parser starts to asymmetry indicates that the formation process of a gap-filler construct a gap-filler dependency before the filler appears. dependency has taken place at that position.

EXPERIMENTS EXPERIMENT 1

EXPERIMENT 2

Aim: Using SRs and ORs, to examine the reliability of test items. Participants: 36 native speakers of Japanese at Hiroshima University. Materials: 30 set of SRs & ORs + 66 fillers

Aim: To test whether there is a processing asymmetry between SCs and OCs. If so, where is the processing asymmetry observed? Participants: 26 native speakers of Japanese at Hiroshima University. Materials: 30 set of SCs & OCs + 80 fillers

SR: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kyonen sobo-o inaka-de kaihooshita tooi shinseki-wa jiko-de nakunatta Last year grandma-ACC village-LOC nursed distant relative accident-in died ‘The distant relative who nursed the grandma last year at village died in an accident.’

SC: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kyonen sobo-o inaka-de kaihooshita-nowa tooi shinseki-da-to haha-ga itta. Last year grandma-ACC village-LOC nursed-NOWA distant relative-COP-that mom-NOM said My mother said that it was the distant relative who nursed the grandma last year at village.

OC: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 OR: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Kyonen sobo-ga inaka-de kaihooshita tooi shinseki-wa jiko-de nakunatta Kyonen sobo-ga inaka-de kaihooshita-nowa tooi shinseki-da-to haha-ga itta. Last year grandma-NOM village-LOC nursed distant relative accident-in died ‘The distant relative who the grandma nursed last year at village died in an accident.’

Predictions: If there is no problem with items, SRs should be read faster than ORs at the head-noun (e.g. Ishizuka, 2005; Miyamoto & Nakamura, 2003; Ueno & Garnsey, 2008).

Last year grandma-NOM village-LOC nursed-NOWA distant relative-COP-that mom-NOM said My mother said that it was the distant relative who the grandma nursed last year at village.

Predictions: If the parser starts to construct a gap-filler dependency before the filler, (1) processing asymmetry would be observed at the Verb, and (2) SCs would be read faster than OCs (Gordon et al, 2001).

RESULTS R T (m s ) 750

RESULTS

[F1 (1,35) = 4.85, p < .05; F2 (1,29) = 3.84, p = .06]

9 0 0

650

*

600 500 450 r e g io n 1

[F1 (1,25) = 9.76, p < .01; F2 (1,29) = 5.12, p < .05]

1 0 0 0

700

550

R T （ ｍ ｓ） 1 1 0 0

8 0 0 7 0 0

SR OR 2

6 0 0

O C :

5 0 0 3

4 RC -v erb

5

6 f ille r

7

8

 The head-noun of SRs was read faster than that of ORs.  We replicated the previous studies in Japanese (e.g. Ishizuka, 2005)  Our test items are reliable.

r e g io n

**

S C :

1

2

3

4 ve rb

5

6 f ille r

7

8

 Participants read OCs faster than SCs.  The processing asymmetry was observed at the embedded verb.

GENERAL DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS  Processing ease of RCs and clefts cannot be explained by the same structural factors (i.e. Structural distance)  RCs and clefts were processed differently in Japanese.  Why does the processing ease of RCs and clefts differ in Japanese? 1) PROCESSING ASYMMETRY POSITION: Although the processing POSSIBLE FACTORS: ease of RCs and clefts were different, the processing asymmetry 1) Discourse function of RCs (topic) and clefts (focus) might be related reflects the formation ease of gap-filler dependencies. to their processing ease (Roland, 2009). RCs: At the head-noun (filler) ⇒ 2) Frequency of SRs vs. ORs & SCs vs. OCs might be different (Reali & Christiansen, 2007)  Gap-filler dependency formation was established at the filler 3) Prediction for the upcoming structures at the embedded verb might Clefts: At the embedded verb ⇒ be different between RCs and Clefts (Hale, 2006; Levy, 2008).  Gap-filler dependency formation was established at the verb.  In the future studies, we will attempt to explain possible factors.  The cleft marker has an impact on the processing of gap-filler dependency CONCLUSIONS  In clefts, the gap-filler dependency is processed incrementally.  In addition to the filler-gap dependencies, the gap-filler 2) PROCESSING EASE of RCs & CLEFTS: dependencies are also processed incrementally (e.g. Aoshima et al., RCs ⇒ SRs < ORs 2004; Stowe 1986).  Consistent with previous studies in Japanese and other languages  The use of cleft-marker would be an important source for the Clefts ⇒ OCs < SCs incremental processing of gap-filler dependencies (Kahraman et al.,  Inconsistent with previous studies in English (e.g. Gordon et al., 2001). 2010)

GENERAL DISCUSSION

TCPTCP-2011 March 1111-12 KEIO UNIVERSITY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: This research was supported by (1)Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) “Neurocognitive basis for language learning through the processing of input and output (PI: Hiromu Sakai, #20320060) ” by JSPS; (2) Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) (PI: Kentaro Nakatani, #21320083) by JSPS; (3) Grant-in Aid for Young Scientists from the MEXT (PI: Hajime Ono, # 21720152).