Subjecthood &LinguisticEncoding:Real-timeProductionofwh-QuestionsinEnglishandMandarin
MonicaDo {[email protected]}😺 Elsi Kaiser{[email protected]}😺 Pengchen Zhao{[email protected]}DepartmentofLinguistics,UniversityofSouthernCalifornia
• Languageproductionismulti-stage&incremental[1]
• Thelinearizationproblem:Howdoeslinguisticencodingstartgoingfromunorderedconceptstosequentiallyproducedutterances?• FunctionalProcessing(Label-then-Linearize):Lexicalrepresentationsdirectlyassignedtosubjectrole;subjectplacedsentence-initially[3]
• PositionalProcessing(Linearize-then-Label): Lexicalrepresentationsassignedtofirstlinearslotinsentence;incidentally,becomessubject[2]
• Howdoweteasetheseapartifsubjectsarethefirstelementsinsentences?• ActivevsPassives:Subjecthood,notsemanticAgenthood,drivesencoding,butsubjectstilllinearly-initialinactivesandpassives[4]
• Freewordorder(Russian,Finnish)[5]orVerb-initial(Tzeltal,Tagalog)[6]• But,resultscomplicatedbydiscourseand/ormorphologicalfactors
1.Introduction
2.CurrentStudyResearchQuestion:Islinguisticencodingdrivenbyfunctional
orpositionalprocessing?Investigate:Emergenceofsyntacticstructureeffects
(functionalprocessing)relativetolinearwordordereffects(positionalprocessing)duringlinguisticencoding.
Weuseobjectwh-questions:Thesubjectinthesestructuresisnotlinearlyinitial.
March15-17,2018・31stAnnualCUNYConferenceonHumanSentence Processing・UC Davis
ReferencesREFERENCES:[1] Levelt,W.(1989).Speaking:Fromintentiontoarticulation. Bock,K.andLevelt,W.(1994)“GrammaticalEncoding.”HandbookofPsycholinguistics.[2] Gleitman,L.etal.(2007).Onthegive- and-takebetweeneventapprehensionandutteranceformulation.JML.;Brown-Schmidt,S.andKonopka,A.(2008)Littlehousesandcasaspequenas:MessageformulationandsyntacticforminunscriptedspeechwithspeakersofEnglishandSpanish.Cognition.[3-4] Griffin,Z.M.andBock,K.(2000).Whattheeyessayaboutspeaking.Psychol.Sci. [5]Myachykov,A.etal.(2011)Visualattentionandstructuralchoiceinsentenceproductionacrosslanguages.LangLinguistCompass. [6] Norcliffe,E.,etal.(2015).Wordorderaffectsthetimecourse ofsentenceformulationinTzeltal.LangCogn Neurosci.[7] Prat-Sala,M.andBranigan,H.P.(2000)DiscourseConstraintsonSyntacticProcessinginLanguageProduction:ACross-linguisticStudyinEnglishandSpanish.JML;Ganuschak,L.etal.(2014).Whattheeyessayaboutplanningoffocusedreferentsduringsentenceformulation:across-linguisticinvestigation.Front.Psychol.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:[1] StudentOpportunitiesforAcademicResearch(USC),PatriceZhao[2] RussellEndowedFellowship(USC),MonicaDo
3.Experiment Design• Participantsfirst sawsentencetypecue,then sawimage;producedthecuedsentencetype
Statement(S) ObjectWh-Question(Q)Thenursestickledthechefs.Whichchefsdidthenursestickle?
• Verbsindicatedbyinstruments(e.g.feather),instrumentlocationindicatedsubjectcharacter
• Toencourageobjectwh-questions,examples/practiceincludedonlyobjectwh-questions;participantstoldtoaskabout‘whotheactionishappeningto’
• VisualWorldEye-trackingParadigm:Measuredproportionoffixationstosubject,object and verb,&Sub-Obj DifferenceScores;33targetitems• KeytimewindowforLinguisticEncoding:400-800ms
4.Hypotheses&Predictions
• Beforelinguisticencoding(0-400ms),speakers(n=30)looktoverb firsttodetermineSubj/Obj• Duringlinguisticencoding(400-800ms),differencesbetweenDecl &Objectwh-Quesemerge• Subj-Obj differencescoresindeclarativeslarger thaninobjectwh-questions(|z|=2.67)
• KeyPattern:Speakerslooktothesubject beforeobject indecl &ques(~400ms),butconsidertheobjectmoreinquesthanindecl• Decl:Rapidriseinlookstosubjectonly~400ms• Ques: Riseinlookstosubject&object~400ms
• Linguisticencodingmaybeprimarily– butnotexclusively– drivenbyfunctionalprocesses• Speakersjugglefunctionalandpositionaldemandsatthesametime: Lookstosubjectandobjectriseinparallelinobjectwh-questions
• Subjecthood assignmentisprivileged:Lookstosubjectemergefirstandproportionoflookstosubjectgreaterthanproportionoflookstoobject
5.Exp 1.English:Subjecthood vsLinearWordOrder
6.Exp 2.Mandarin:WordOrdervsInformationFocus
• After windowofinterest, fixationsreflectlinearwordorder,asexpected
Decla
rativ
esQ
uest
ions
0 200 400 600 800 1000
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Time(ms) from Image Onset
Prop
ortio
n of
Fixa
tions
Subj
Obj
Shaded areas indicate 95% confidence interval
Decla
rativ
esQ
uest
ions
0 200 400 600 800 1000
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Time(ms) from Image Onset
Prop
ortio
n of
Fixa
tions
Region Subj Obj VerbFig1:Eye-MovementsImmediatelyAfter ImageOnset
Shaded areas indicate 95% confidence interval
Decla
rativ
esQ
uest
ions
0 200 400 600 800 1000
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Time(ms) from Image Onset
Prop
ortio
n of
Fixa
tions
Region Subj Obj VerbFig3:Eye-MovementsImmediatelyAfterImageOnset
7.Discussion&Conclusion• Firstlookatreal-timeproductionofquestions• DifferencesbetweendeclarativesandquestionsemergeduringLinguisticEncoding• Nodifferencesemergebeforeencoding(e.g.MessageFormulation)• Towhatextentdoespropositionalcontentofmessagesindeclarativesvsquestionsdiffer?
• Encodingismulti-factorial:Takesintoconsiderationcompetingstructuralandpositionaldemandssimultaneously• Linguisticencodingcanstartwithsyntacticrolesevenwhenitconflictswithlinearwordorder
• Openquestion:Whydon’tweseeinformationfocuseffectsduringproductionplanning?• Informationfocus(e.g.frompriordiscoursecontext)canaffectconceptualaccessibility[7]• Focusalsoaffectsspeakers’choiceofstructure(e.g.freewordorderlanguages,It-clefts,etc.),suggestsroleforfocusinpositionalprocessing
• BUT,MandarinquestionshavestrictSVOorder:Effectofinformationfocusmayberestricted
• ResearchQuestions:Wh-wordsareinformationallyfocusedelements.TowhatextentdidinformationfocusdrivelookstotheobjectinExp 1?
• Exp 2conductedinMandarinChinese(Subject-Verb-Object)• Mandarinwh-questionsanddeclarativeshavethesamelinearwordorderDeclarative: ObjectWh-Question:护士们 枪毙了 厨师。 护士们 枪毙了 哪个厨师?Thenurses shot thechefs. Thenurses shotwhichchefs?
• Eye-movementsdifferencescannot beduetosurfacewordorder
(1)MessageFormulation:Speakerspulltogetherunordered,pre-linguisticconceptstheyintendtocommunicate
(2)LinguisticEncoding:Pre-linguisticconceptsassignedtolexicalrepresentationsandgrammaticallyencoded
(3)PhonologicalEncoding&(4)Articulation:Soundunitsassembled&SpeechBegins
PositionalProcessing:Lexicalrepresentationsassignedposition/orderinthesentence
FunctionalProcessing:Lexicalrepresentationsassignedsyntacticrole(e.g.subject,object)
DeclarativesThenursestickledthechefs.
Objectwh-questionsWhichchefsdidthenurses tickle?
Functionally-driven:Encodingdrivenby
subjecthoodSubject Subject
Positionally-driven:Encodingdrivenbylinear
word orderSubject Object
Decla
rativ
esQ
uest
ions
−1600−1400−1200−1000 −800 −600 −400 −200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Time(ms) Aligned To Speech Onset
Prop
ortio
n of
Fixa
tions
SpeechOnset
Decla
rativ
esQ
uest
ions
−1600−1400−1200−1000 −800 −600 −400 −200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8
Time(ms) Aligned to Speech Onset
Prop
ortio
n of
Loo
ksSpeechOnset
Fig2:Eye-MovementsAfter Encoding
Fig4:Eye-MovementsAfter Encoding
• After windowofinterest, fixationsreflectlinearwordorder,asexpected
• Beforelinguisticencoding(0-400ms),speakers(n=35)looktoverb firsttodetermineSubj/Obj• Duringlinguisticencoding(400-800ms),wedonotdetecteye-movementdifferencesbetweenDecl &Objectwh-Ques(|z|s <1.4)
• KeyPattern:Speakersfixatesubjectinbothdecl &ques;donotconsiderobjectineither• Decl andquesdonotdiffer 200-1000msafterimageonset• Subj-Obj differencescoresdonotdiffer
• Exp 1resultsnotconfoundedbyfocus: Noevidenceinformationfocusaffectseye-movements
Subj
Obj
