Morphological Complexity Outside of Universal Grammar

There are many logical possibilities for marking morphological features. However only some of them are attested in languages of the world, and out of them some are more frequent than others. For example, it has been observed (Sapir 1921; Greenberg 1957; Hawkins & Gilligan 1988) that inflectional morphology tends to overwhelmingly involve suffixation rather than prefixation. This paper proposes an explanation for this asymmetry in terms of acquisition complexity. The complexity measure is based on the Levenshtein edit distance, modified to reflect human memory limitations and the fact that language occurs in time. This measure produces some interesting predictions: for example, it predicts correctly the prefix-suffix asymmetry and shows mirror image morphology to be virtually impossible

Basics of Language for Language Learners

Second editionTools and Strategies for Language Learning -- Sounding Like a Native Speaker -- Thinking Like a Native Speaker -- Acting Like a Native SpeakerItem not openly available

The Radical Unacceptability Hypothesis: Accounting for Unacceptability without Universal Constraints

The Radical Unacceptability Hypothesis (RUH) has been proposed as a way of explaining the unacceptability of extraction from islands and frozen structures. This hypothesis explicitly assumes a distinction between unacceptability due to violations of local well-formedness conditions—conditions on constituency, constituent order, and morphological form—and unacceptability due to extra-grammatical factors. We explore the RUH with respect to classical islands, and extend it to a broader range of phenomena, including freezing, A′ chain interactions, zero-relative clauses, topic islands, weak crossover, extraction from subjects and parasitic gaps, and sensitivity to information structure. The picture that emerges is consistent with the RUH, and suggests more generally that the unacceptability of extraction from otherwise well-formed configurations reflects non-syntactic factors, not principles of grammar.Peer Reviewe

Effects of Processing on the Acceptability of 'frozen' extraposed constituents.

In syntactic theory, `freezing' refers to the idea that a constituent extraposed to a non-canonical position is resistant to extraction of any of its subconstituents (What did Terry see a movie yesterday about ?). The unacceptability of such examples, compared to minimally different sentences without extraposition, has been claimed to be a result of a grammatical constraint on dependency formation, e.g. Ross' (1967) Frozen Structure Constraint. Here, we argue that the gradient pattern of acceptability associated with such examples is better explained in terms of processing complexity. Experimental evidence from a controlled acceptability task shows that the total penalty for extraction from extraposed constituents is predictable from the summed acceptability penalties independently linked to extraction and extraposition. As prior research links both of these displacement phenomena to increased processing costs, we conclude that a grammar of unbounded dependencies in English does not require a `freezing' constraint for the explanation of these cases

Apparent filler–gap mismatches in Welsh

AbstractFiller–gap dependencies involving a clause-initial filler constituent of some kind followed by a matching gap are an important feature of human languages. There are also certain cases where what looks like a filler differs in some way from the following gap. In the case of Welsh there is a mismatch between apparent filler and gap in some nominal cleft sentences. It can be argued, however, that the initial constituent is not a filler but one term of a hidden identity predication. There are various other complexities in this area. There is one word, the identity copula, which only allows a complement that is a gap. There are two cases where a deletion process conceals the identity of the initial constituent in a cleft sentence, making a Progressive Phrase look like a Verb Phrase and a Predicative Phrase look like an Adjective Phrase or a Noun Phrase. Finally, there are three cases where a verb with a gap as a dependent has a special form, two cases involving the predicational copula and one involving all transitive verbs. Thus, a number of mechanisms are required to deal with the full set of facts.</jats:p

The source ambiguity problem: Distinguishing the effects of grammar and processing on acceptability judgments

Judgments of linguistic unacceptability may theoretically arise from either grammatical deviance or significant processing difficulty. Acceptability data are thus naturally ambiguous in theories that explicitly distinguish formal and functional constraints. Here, we consider this source ambiguity problem in the context of Superiority effects: the dispreference for ordering a wh-phrase in front of a syntactically “superior” wh-phrase in multiple wh-questions, e.g., What did who buy? More specifically, we consider the acceptability contrast between such examples and so-called D-linked examples, e.g., Which toys did which parents buy? Evidence from acceptability and self-paced reading experiments demonstrates that (i) judgments and processing times for Superiority violations vary in parallel, as determined by the kind of wh-phrases they contain, (ii) judgments increase with exposure, while processing times decrease, (iii) reading times are highly predictive of acceptability judgments for the same items, and (iv) the effects of the complexity of the wh-phrases combine in both acceptability judgments and reading times. This evidence supports the conclusion that D-linking effects are likely reducible to independently motivated cognitive mechanisms whose effects emerge in a wide range of sentence contexts. This in turn suggests that Superiority effects, in general, may owe their character to differential processing difficulty