On the nature of the plurality inferencePenka Stateva
, Sara Andreetta
, Artur Stepanov
, unpublished invited conference lecture
Found in: ključnih besedah
Summary of found: ... Plural, implicature, presupposition, sentence-picture verification task, pragmatics...
Keywords: Plural, implicature, presupposition, sentence-picture verification task, pragmatics
Published: 07.02.2018; Views: 2531; Downloads: 0
Fulltext (71,77 KB)
Ezikov transfer v oblastta na pragmatikataPenka Stateva
, 2021, invited lecture at foreign university
Abstract: n this talk I will present work in progress that aims to explore a previously uncharted area of multilingual language acquisition, which concerns negative linguistic transfer in the domain of pragmatics. The research is part of a larger program in experimental pragmatics which aims to identify points of cross-linguistic diversion that affect meaning. We investigate the impact of language variation on bilingual acquisition of grammatical number in pairs of languages like Lebanese Arabic and French, and Slovenian-Italian, in which the interpretation of plural morphology within each pair is different depending on whether the number paradigm also includes dual number or not.
Found in: ključnih besedah
Summary of found: ...and Slovenian-Italian, in which the interpretation of plural morphology within each pair is different depending...
Keywords: negative transfer, plural interpretation, anti-duality, pragmatic enrichment
Published: 29.01.2021; Views: 1400; Downloads: 0
Fulltext (126,18 KB)
Investigation of Slovenian copular agreementRok Žaucer
, Franc Marušič
, 2021, published scientific conference contribution
Abstract: This paper reports on a detailed investigation of agreement inside simple predicative sentences. In this type of sentence, both noun phrases are in the nominative, so in principle
either one can trigger agreement on the copular verb. We examine various types of copular
contructions and show that regardless of the type of predicative sentence, when a plural
is combined with a singular, it is always the plural that agrees. Similarly, when a dual is
combined with a singular, the dual wins out. But when we combine a dual and a plural, the
copula can agree with either of the two noun phrases, with a preference for the noun phrase
following the copula. We discuss the relevance of these findings for recent literature on
Found in: ključnih besedah
Summary of found: ...the type of predicative sentence, when a plural
is combined with a singular, it is always...
Keywords: agreement, copula, number, singular, dual, plural, Slovenian
Published: 31.01.2022; Views: 548; Downloads: 0
Fulltext (334,34 KB)
Feature assignment errors in the Bulgarian quantified noun phraseJulie Franck
, Penka Stateva
, Arthur Stepanov
, Danil Khristov
, 2022, published scientific conference contribution abstract
Abstract: Subject-verb agreement attraction errors occur in sentence production and comprehension when there is an intervening noun (called attractor) whose number feature does not match that of the subject (Bock and Miller 1991). In this case the verb agrees incorrectly with the intervening noun instead of the subject. These agreement attraction errors were shown to be sensitive to syntactic structure (Vigliocco & Nicol 1998). Franck, Lassi, Frauenfelder & Rizzi (2006) showed that linear precedence had a smaller effect on agreement attraction errors compared to cases where this precedence was combined with the effect of c-command. The question that we investigated is to what extent the process of feature assignment may also be subject to attraction errors similarly to agreement. Both agreement and feature assignment involve features of one syntactic head being dependent on another syntactic head. Whereas agreement is a two-way process of feature matching where the same features appear on both heads (e.g., in subject-verb agreement a subject and verb share the same person and number features), feature assignment is a one-way process where one head assigns the features to the other (e.g., a transitive verb assigns accusative case to its direct object with the case features being present only on the latter). Bulgarian cardinal numerals require a special morphological count form when the noun to which they refer is masculine and non-human, e.g. tri kon-ʲa /three horse-count/'three horses' vs. (tezi) kon-e/horses. Adjectives modifying the noun are always in a plural form regardless of whether the modified noun is in a count or plural form, cf. tri dobr-i kon-ʲa /three good-pl. horse-count. Bulgarian speakers are noted to make production errors sometimes substituting the count form with plural, cf. #tri dobr-i kon-e in spontaneous speech. We performed three production experiments looking at the effect of syntactic structure and linear distance in predicting attraction errors in the Bulgarian quantified noun phrase (QP).
In Experiment 1 we asked whether linear distance between a numeral and a final masculine non-human noun affects the possibility to produce a plural error on the target noun, similarly to the case of subject-verb agreement errors (cf. Vigliocco & Nicol 1998). The target noun phrase consisted of a numeral and an adjectival phrase with a plural adjective and a final target masculine non-human noun. Three conditions manipulated the adjectival phrase with a progressively more complex structure that intervened between the numeral and the noun:
(1) tri 1. obiʧani / 2. obiʧani ot ʒenata / 3. obiʧani ot mnogo dobrata ʒena [konʲ-?]
three loved-pl. loved-pl. by the-woman loved-pl. by very kind woman horse-?
‘three loved horses / three horses loved by the woman / three horses loved by the very kind woman’
The number of plural forms was kept constant (=1) across conditions. Under the Linear Distance Hypothesis we expected more errors in Condition 2 relative to Condition 1 and more errors in the Condition 3 relative to the other two conditions. Participants: 21 native Bulgarian speakers (18 females; mean age 47.76, SD= 9.63), of whom 15 had no previous linguistic background, participated in the experiment. Procedure: participants listened to a sentence preamble in which the subject QP had the sentence-final position (viz. Locative phrase-main verb-subject QP). Within the QP, the target noun was omitted. Instead, a lemma (the noun in singular form) was provided on the computer screen. Participants had to complete the QP by typing in the target noun form for the sentence they heard. Results and discussion: A chi-square test showed a significant difference across conditions χ2(2)=10.678, p=0.0048. A post hoc analysis revealed a significant difference between the number of count and plural forms in the Condition 1 vs the Condition 3 condition. There was also a marginal difference between the number of plural and count forms in Condition 2 vs Condition 3. In general, the increase of linear distance resulted in a higher number of plural form errors.
In Experiment 2 we asked whether structural distance between a numeral and a final masculine non-human noun affects the possibility to produce a plural error on the target noun, similarly to the case of subject-verb agreement errors (cf. Vigliocco & Nicol 1998). The target noun phrase consisted of a numeral, one or two adjectival phrases with a plural adjective and a final target masculine non-human noun. There were two conditions in the experiment. Two conditions manipulated a target adjective which was placed in a different syntactic position. In Condition 1 there was only one adjectival phrase (AP) with a modifier that contained a noun modified by a target adjective. In Condition 2 there were two separate adjectival phrases (AP) between the noun and the numeral, the
first one having a modifier that contained a noun, whereas the second adjectival was the target adjective.
(2) tri oboʒavani ot 1. malkite posetiteli / 2. posetitelite malki [lebed-?]
three. adored-pl. by the-little-pl. visitors-pl. the-visitors-pl. little swan-?
'three swans adored by the little visitors / three little swans adored by the visitors'
The number of plural forms and the linear distance were constant across conditions. Under the Structural Distance Hypothesis we expected more errors in Condition 2 relative to Condition 1 due to the higher number of intervening c-commanding adjectival nodes. Participants: 27 participants (23 females; mean age 46.48, SD=11.1), of whom 16 had no linguistic background, participated in the experiment. Procedure: The same as in Experiment 1. Results and Discussion: A chi-square test revealed no significant difference across the two conditions χ2(1)=0.41011, p= 0.5219.
In Experiment 3 we asked whether the presence of an intervening numeral and its linear distance to the target noun affects the possibility to produce a count error on the final noun in a plural context. The target noun phrase consisted of an adjective, a noun modifier consisting of a numeral and a noun. A masculine non-human target noun followed the noun modifier. Three conditions manipulated the number of adjectives (zero, one, or two) that intervened between the numeral and the noun within the modifier phrase:
(3) posadenite meʒdu tri 1.kɤʃti / 2. niski kɤʃti / 3. niski dɤrveni kɤʃti [dɤb-?]
the-planted-pl. between three houses-pl. low-pl. houses-pl low-pl. wooden houses-pl. oak-?
'the oaks planted between three houses / the oaks planted between three low houses / the oaks planted between three low wooden houses /'
The increase of adjectives across conditions creates a bias towards the use of a non-count form. We expected participants to produce errors across conditions due to the presence of a numeral. However, the amount of errors should decrease across conditions with the increase of the number of intervening adjectives. Participants: 29 native Bulgarian speakers (23 females; mean age 34.76, SD= 14.34), of which 17 had no linguistic background, participated in the experiment Procedure: The same as in experiment 1 and 2. Results and Discussion: the overall percentage of count form errors was smaller compared to the plural errors in Experiment 1. A chi-square test in the first experiment showed a significant difference across the conditions χ2(2)=7.0812, p=0.029. A post hoc found a significant difference between the number of count and plural forms in the Condition 1 vs the Condition 3 condition as well as Condition 2 vs Condition 3. The condition with two adjectives seemed to have less count errors than any of the other two conditions with less adjectives.
Conclusion: The experiments indicate that in the context of the Bulgarian quantified noun phrase linear distance is more relevant for error production than the syntactic structure. Participants seem more likely to produce plural form errors in a context which requires a count form than the other way round (a count error in a plural context). This suggests that feature assignment in the Bulgarian quantified noun phrase is a different process from subject-verb agreement. In agreement attraction, errors are sensitive to syntactic as well as to linear intervention. On the other hand, errors in feature assignment in the Bulgarian quantified noun phrase are more sensitive to linear intervention than to syntactic intervention. This is compatible with a working memory account such as in Badecker & Kuminiak (2007) where the feature assigner currently held in the working memory becomes less accessible the more distant it is to the target noun, whereas an intervener closer to the target is more readily accessible.
Found in: ključnih besedah
Summary of found: ...modifying the noun are always in a plural form regardless of whether the modified noun...
Keywords: feature assignment, agreement, attraction, errors, linear distance, structural distance, plural forms, count forms
Published: 17.08.2022; Views: 0; Downloads: 0
Fulltext (0,00 KB)