Arslan, Seçkin

Bastiaanse, Roelien

Nickels, Lyndsey

Popov, Srdan

Tokac, Suzan Dilara

English

University of Groningen

   University of GroningenProcessing of Turkish evidential markersTokac, Suzan Dilara; Popov, Srdan; Arslan, Seçkin; Nickels, Lyndsey; Bastiaanse, RoelienIMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.Publication date:2019Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research databaseCitation for published version (APA):Tokac, S. D., Popov, S., Arslan, S., Nickels, L., & Bastiaanse, R. (2019). Processing of Turkish evidentialmarkers: Evidence from ERP studies. Abstract from Linguistic Society of New Zealand Conference(LingSoc), New Zealand.CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.Download date: 26-12-2020Processing	of	Turkish	evidential	markers:	Evidence	from	ERP	studies Suzan	Dilara	Tokaç	1,	2,3,	Srđan	Popov	2,	Seçkin	Arslan	4,	Lyndsey	Nickels	1,3	&	Roelien	Bastiaanse	2,5  1International	Doctorate	for	Experimental	Approaches	to	Language	and	Brain	(IDEALAB),	Universities	of	Potsdam	(DE),	Groningen	(NL),	Newcastle	(UK),	Trento	(IT)	and	Macquarie	University,	Sydney	(AU)	&	2Center	for	Language	and	Cognition	Groningen	(CLCG),	University	of	Groningen	3Department	of	Cognitive	Science,	Macquarie	University 4	Universite	Côte	d’Azur,	CNRS,	France	5National	Research	University	Higher	School	of	Economics,	Russian	Federation  Evidentials	 specify	 information	 sources	 [1].	 Turkish	 marks	 two	 obligatory	 evidential	forms	affixed	to	verbs	when	referring	to	the	past:	the	direct	evidential	(-DI)	is	used	when	the	event	being	expressed	was	witnessed	by	the	speaker	whereas	the	indirect	evidential	(–mIş)	is	appropriate	when	the	event	was	reported	to	or	inferred	by	the	speaker.	 Evidentiality	 in	Turkish	has	processing	asymmetries	–	the	direct	evidential	 is	acquired	earlier	 than	 the	 indirect	 in	 children	 [e.g.	 2],	 but	 direct	 evidentials	 are	 more	 severely	impaired	in	aphasia	[3].	To	unveil	the	cognitive	underpinnings	of	these	asymmetries,	we	examined	 the	 moment-by-moment	 electrophysiological	 event-related	 brain	 potentials	(ERPs)	that	occur	during	evidentiality	processing	in	unimpaired	adult	Turkish	speakers.	 25	Turkish	native	 speakers	 (14	 females;	Mage=24years)	 silently	 read	Turkish	 sentences	presented	with	or	without	mismatches	of	the	information	source	and	evidentiality	marker	(e.g.	I	saw	her	while	chopping,	she	*chopped	(INDIRECT)	onions	in	the	kitchen).	In	a	second	condition,	 participants	 read	 sentences	 with	 time	 reference	 violations	 (but	 without	evidential	 biases,	 e.g.	 Tomorrow	 Sedat	 *washed	 the	 car).	 We	 found	 no	 significant	differences	in	ERPs	between	sentences	that	matched	or	mismatched	for	evidentiality.	In	contrast,	 for	 time	 reference,	 significant	 P600	 effects	 (peaking	 around	 800ms)	 were	elicited	on	the	critical	verb	depending	on	whether	the	verb	violated	the	time	frame	of	the	temporal	adverb	preceding	it.	We	suggest	that	time	reference	violations	are	perceived	as	unacceptable	 (ungrammatical)	 thus	 leading	 to	 pronounced	 ERP	 patterns.	 In	 contrast,	pragmatically	 infelicitous	 evidentiality	 mismatches	 evoke	 significant	 behavioural	differences	in	the	absence	of	any	discernible	ERP	differences.	 References	[1]	Aikhenvald,	A.	Y.	(2004).	Evidentiality.	Oxford:	Oxford	University	Press. [2]	Ozturk,	O.,	&	Papafragou,	A.	(2016).	The	acquisition	of	evidentiality	and	source	monitoring.	Language	Learning	and	Development,	12(2),	199-230. [3]	Arslan,	S.,	Aksu-Koç,	A.,	Maviş,	I.,	&Bastiaanse,	R.	(2014).	Finite	verb	inflections	for	evidential	categories	and	source	identification	in	Turkish	agrammatic	Broca’s	aphasia.	Journal	of	Pragmatics,	70,	165-181. [4]	Arslan,	S.,	de	Kok,	D.,	&	Bastiaanse,	R.	(2017).	Processing	grammatical	evidentiality	and	time	reference	in	Turkish	heritage	and	monolingual	speakers.	Bilingualism:	Language	and	Cognition,	20(3),	457-472. 	

Processing of Turkish evidential markers:Evidence from ERP studies

https://pure.rug.nl/ws/files/122507198/Tokac_NZLINGSOC_2019.pdf

Processing of Turkish evidential markers:Evidence from ERP studies

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Groningen