We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Chapter 6 reports on an ERP experiment with a picture–sentence matching task, in which a picture was presented before the corresponding sentence. The target sentences used in this experiment were the same as those used in the experiment reported in Chapter 5, i.e., transitive sentences with thematically reversible agents and patients, arranged into four word orders: VOS, VSO, SVO, and OVS. The results of this experiment also demonstrated that SVO elicited a P600 compared to VOS, and that VSO elicited a similar posterior positivity, relative to VOS. The results of the two ERP experiments combined clearly indicate that VOS is the syntactically simplest and easiest-to-process word order of the grammatically possible ones in Kaqchikel, which is in line with our previous findings, described in Chapters 3 and 4. In short, Chapters 3 to 6 present data showing that a VOS preference was observed in Kaqchikel sentence comprehension, which provides empirical support for the IGV.
Chapter 5 investigates the time course of the processing of Kaqchikel sentences with alternative word orders. A sentence–picture matching task was employed in an experiment measuring event-related potentials (ERPs). In this experiment, a Kaqchikel sentence was presented aurally through a headset; afterwards, a picture was presented in the center of a screen, either matching the event described by the preceding sentence or not. Upon seeing the picture, the participants were asked to judge whether the picture was congruent with the sentence. The target sentences used in this experiment were all transitive, with thematically reversible agents and patients, arranged into four word orders: VOS, VSO, SVO, and OVS. A late positive ERP component called P600 was used to examine processing loads, as P600 has been found to be elicited by sentences with a filler-gap dependency, reflecting an increased syntactic processing cost. The results of the two experiments demonstrated that SVO elicited a greater positivity (P600) than VOS, and that VSO elicited a similar posterior positivity, relative to VOS. This range of properties follows naturally from the combination of the IGV and the syntactic structures of Kaqchikel transitive sentences given in Chapter 2.
Syntactic theory of Chomskyan orientation has recognized that syntactic dependencies can span only a limited portion of structure, and that apparent long-distance dependencies typically consist of a succession of local dependencies. This property of syntactic dependencies is called locality. This chapter focuses on the locality of filler-gap dependencies, quintessentially represented by the wh movement, and sketch a historical perspective on its development. The theory of barriers marks the first significant development in generativist theorizing about locality in syntax since the introduction of the Subjacency Condition. The binding-based filler-gap dependencies across islands never exhibit island effects. Relativized Minimality provides an immediate syntactic account of a variety of well-known locality effects. There are a number of empirical observations that can be taken to provide evidence for the size and location of locality domains. Syntactic operations, most prominently movement, must not be too local. This has come to be known as anti-locality.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.