Hostname: page-component-68c7f8b79f-fc4h8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-01-01T04:04:27.445Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Active Dependency Formation in Islands: How Grammatical Resumption Affects Sentence Processing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Maayan Keshev  and
Aya Meltzer-Asscher
Maayan Keshev*
Affiliation:
Tel-Aviv University
Aya Meltzer-Asscher*
Affiliation:
Tel-Aviv University
*
[maayankeshev@mail.tau.ac.il], [amletzer@post.tau.ac.il]
[maayankeshev@mail.tau.ac.il], [amletzer@post.tau.ac.il]
Get access

Abstract

Previous studies concluded that despite the parser's eagerness to resolve filler-gap dependencies, in island configurations it prefers to posit late grammatical gaps over early ungrammatical ones. This study investigates the possibility of resolving filler-gap dependencies inside Hebrew islands. We investigated the acceptability of resumptive pronouns (RPs) in two islands and the sensitivity of on-line dependency formation to the status of those RPs. Results revealed a filled-gap effect inside the island that allows RPs but not inside the one that prohibits them. This suggests that active dependency formation can proceed inside islands, and that when processing dependencies with islands, the Hebrew parser prefers an early RP over a later gap.

Keywords

filler-gap dependenciesself-paced readingHebrewislandsresumptive pronounsfilled-gap effectsentence processing

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 93 , Issue 3 , September 2017 , pp. 549 - 568
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alexopoulou, Theodora, and Keller, Frank. 2007. Locality, cyclicity, and resumption: At the interface between the grammar and the human sentence processor. Language 83. 110–60. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2007.0001.10.1353/lan.2007.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altmann, Gerry T. M. 1999. Thematic role assignment in context. Journal of Memory and Language 41. 124–45. DOI: 10.1006/jmla.1999.2640.10.1006/jmla.1999.2640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aoshima, Sachiko, Phillips, Colin; and Weinberg, Amy. 2004. Processing filler-gap dependencies in a head-final language. Journal of Memory and Language 51. 23–54. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.03.001.10.1016/j.jml.2004.03.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ariel, Mira. 1999. Cognitive universals and linguistic conventions: The case of resumptive pronouns. Studies in Language 23. 217–69. DOI: 10.1075/sl.23.2.02ari.10.1075/sl.23.2.02ariCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, Dale J., Levy, Roger, Scheepers, Christoph; and Tily, Harry J.. 2013. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68. 255–78. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001.10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, Douglas, Mächler, Martin, Bolker, Ben; and Walker, Steve. 2014. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Online: http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.5823.10.18637/jss.v067.i01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beltrama, Andrea. 2013. These are the pronouns that we use them but we don't like them. Chicago: University of Chicago, ms. Online: http://home.uchicago.edu/~andremormora/Beltrama%20Michicagoan%202013.pdf.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1984. Restrictive relatives in modern Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2. 219–60. DOI: 10.1007/BF00133282.10.1007/BF00133282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdages, Johanne S. 1992. Parsing complex NPs in French. In Goodluck & Roche- mont, 61–87.Google Scholar
Chao, Wynn, and Sells, Peter. 1983. On the interpretation of resumptive pronouns. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 13. 47–61.Google Scholar
Crain, Stephen, and Fodor, Janet Dean. 1985. How can grammars help parsers? Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives, ed. by Dowty, David R., Karttunen, Lauri, and Zwicky, Arnold M., 94–127. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511597855.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 1992. Resumptive pronouns in islands. In Goodluck & Rochemont, 89–108.Google Scholar
Farby, Shira, Danon, Gabi, Walters, Joel; and Ben-Shachar, Michal. 2010. The acceptability of resumptive pronouns in Hebrew. Proceedings of the Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics (IATL) 26. Online: http://linguistics.huji.ac.il/IATL/26/Farby_et_al.pdf.Google Scholar
Frazier, Lyn. 1987. Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5. 519–59. DOI: 10.1007/BF00138988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn, and Charles Clifton, Jr. 1989. Successive cyclicity in the grammar and the parser. Language and Cognitive Processes 4. 93–126. DOI: 10.1080/01690968908406359.10.1080/01690968908406359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn, and Flores d’Arcais, Giovanni B.. 1989. Filler driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language 28. 331–44. DOI: 10.1016/0749-596X(89)90037-5.10.1016/0749-596X(89)90037-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garnsey, Susan M., Tanenhaus, Michael K.; and Chapman, Robert M.. 1989. Evoked potentials and the study of sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 18. 51–60. DOI: 10.1007/BF01069046.10.1007/BF01069046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodluck, Helen, and Rochemont, Michael (eds.) 1992. Island constraints: Theory, acquisition, and processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-017-1980-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, Peter C., Hendrick, Randall; and Johnson, Marcus. 2001. Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 27. 1411–23. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.27.6.1411.Google ScholarPubMed
Han, Chung-Hye, Elouazizi, Noureddine, Galeano, Christina, Görgülü, Emrah, Hedberg, Nancy, Hinnell, Jennifer, Jeffrey, Meghan, Kim, Kyeong-min; and Kirby, Susannah. 2012. Processing strategies and resumptive pronouns in English. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) 30. 153–61. Online: http://www.lingref.com/cpp/wccfl/30/paper2813.pdf.Google Scholar
Hofmeister, Philip, and Norcliffe, Elisabeth. 2013. Does resumption facilitate sentence comprehension? The core and the periphery: Data-driven perspectives on syntax inspired by Ivan A. Sag, ed. by Hofmeister, Philip and Norcliffe, Elisabeth, 225–46. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Hofmeister, Philip, and Sag, Ivan A.. 2010. Cognitive constraints and island effects. Language 86. 366–415. DOI: 10.1353/lan.0.0223.10.1353/lan.0.0223CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keffala, Bethany. 2013. Resumption and gaps in English relative clauses: Relative acceptability creates an illusion of ‘saving’. Berkeley Linguistics Society 37. 140–54. DOI: 10.3765/bls.v37i1.846.Google Scholar
Kluender, Robert. 1998. On the distinction between strong and weak islands: A processing perspective. Syntax and semantics, vol. 29: The limits of syntax, ed. by cover, Peter Culi- and McNally, Louise, 241–80. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kluender, Robert, and Kutas, Marta. 1993. Subjacency as a processing phenomenon. Language and Cognitive Processes 8. 573–633. DOI: 10.1080/01690969308407588.10.1080/01690969308407588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landau, Idan. 2006. Chain resolution in Hebrew V (P)-fronting. Syntax 9. 32–66. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9612.2006.00084.x.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2006.00084.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Ming-Wei. 2004. Another look at the role of empty categories in sentence processing (and grammar). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 33. 51–73. DOI: 10.1023/B:JOPR.0000010514.50468.30.10.1023/B:JOPR.0000010514.50468.30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, Richard L., Vasishth, Shravan; and Van Dyke, Julie A.. 2006. Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10. 447–54. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, Shevaun, and Phillips, Colin. 2015. Aligning grammatical theories and language processing models. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 44. 27–46. DOI: 10.1007/s10936-014-9329-z.10.1007/s10936-014-9329-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Love, Tracy, and Swinney, David. 1996. Coreference processing and levels of analysis in object-relative constructions: Demonstration of antecedent reactivation with the crossmodal priming paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 25. 5–24. DOI: 10.1007/BF01708418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, Dana, and Cowart, Wayne. 1999. Experimental evidence for a minimalist account of English resumptive pronouns. Cognition 70.B15-B24. DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00006-2.10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00006-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McElree, Brian, and Griffith, Teresa. 1998. Structural and lexical constraints on filling gaps during sentence comprehension: A time-course analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 24. 432–60. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.24.2.432.Google Scholar
Meltzer-Asscher, Aya, Fadlon, Julie, Goldstein, Kayla; and Holan, Ariel. 2015. Direct object resumption in Hebrew: How modality of presentation and relative clause position affect acceptability. Lingua 166. 65–79. DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.011.10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakano, Yoko, Felser, Claudia; and Clahsen, Harald. 2002. Antecedent priming at trace positions in Japanese long-distance scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 31. 531–71. DOI: 10.1023/A:1021260920232.10.1023/A:1021260920232CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Omaki, Akira, Lau, Ellen, White, Imogen Davidson, Dakan, Myles Louis, Apple, Aaron; and Phillips, Colin. 2015. Hyper-active gap filling. Frontiers in Psychology 6:384. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Omaki, Akira, and Nakao, Chizuru. 2010. Does English resumption really help to repair island violations? Snippets 21. 11–12. Online: http://www.ledonline.it/snippets/allegati/snippets21004.pdf.Google Scholar
Omaki, Akira, and Schulz, Barbara. 2011. Filler-gap dependencies and island constraints in second-language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 33. 563–88. DOI: 10.1017/S0272263111000313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omaki, Akira, White, Imogen Davidson, Goro, Takuya, Lidz, Jeffrey; and Phillips, Colin. 2014. No fear of commitment: Children's incremental interpretation in English and Japanese wh-questions. Language Learning and Development 10. 206–33. DOI: 10.1080/15475441.2013.844048.10.1080/15475441.2013.844048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, Colin. 2006. The real-time status of island phenomena. Language 82. 795–823. DOI: 10.1353/lan.2006.0217.10.1353/lan.2006.0217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, Colin. 2013. Some arguments and nonarguments for reductionist accounts of syntactic phenomena. Language and Cognitive Processes 28. 156–87. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2010.530960.10.1080/01690965.2010.530960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, Colin, Kazanina, Nina; and Abada, Shani H.. 2005. ERP effects of the processing of syntactic long-distance dependencies. Cognitive Brain Research 22.40728. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.09.012.10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.09.012CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pickering, Martin J., Barton, Stephen; and Shillcock, Richard. 1994. Unbounded dependencies, island constraints, and processing complexity. Perspectives on sentence processing, ed. by Clifton, Charles Jr., Frazier, Lyn, and Rayner, Keith, 199–224. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pickering, Martin J., and Traxler, Matthew J.. 2001. Strategies for processing unbounded dependencies: Lexical information and verb-argument assignment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 27. 1401–10. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.27.6.1401.Google ScholarPubMed
Polinsky, Maria, Clemens, Lauren Eby, Morgan, Adam Milton, Xiang, Ming; and Heesrand, Dustin. 2013. Resumption in English. Experimental syntax and island effects, ed. by Sprouse, Jon and Hornstein, Norbert, 341–59. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pritchett, Bradley L. 1992. Parsing with grammar: Islands, heads, and garden paths. In Goodluck & Rochemont, 321–50.Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2015. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Online: https://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Rohde, Doug. 2003. Linger: A flexible platform for language processing experiments. Online: http://tedlab.mit.edu/~dr/Linger/.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Schütze, Carson T., and Sprouse, Jon. 2014. Judgment data. Research methods in linguistics, ed. by Podesva, Robert J. and Sharma, Devyani, 27–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sells, Peter. 1984. Syntax and semantics of resumptive pronouns. Amherst: University of Massachusetts dissertation.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 1992. Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry 23. 443–68. Online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178780.Google Scholar
Stowe, Laurie A. 1986. Parsing WH-constructions: Evidence for on-line gap location. Language and Cognitive Processes 1. 227–45. DOI: 10.1080/01690968608407062.10.1080/01690968608407062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sussman, Rachel Shirley, and Sedivy, Julie. 2003. The time-course of processing syntactic dependencies: Evidence from eye movements. Language and Cognitive Processes 18. 143–63. DOI: 10.1080/01690960143000498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traxler, Matthew J., and Pickering, Martin J.. 1996. Plausibility and the processing of unbounded dependencies: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language 35. 454–75. DOI: 10.1006/jmla.1996.0025.10.1006/jmla.1996.0025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagers, Matthew W., and Phillips, Colin. 2009. Multiple dependencies and the role of the grammar in real-time comprehension. Journal of Linguistics 45. 395–433. DOI: 10.1017/S0022226709005726.10.1017/S0022226709005726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagers, Matthew W., and Phillips, Colin. 2014. Going the distance: Memory and control processes in active dependency construction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 67. 1274–1304. DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2013.858363.10.1080/17470218.2013.858363CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wanner, Eric, and Maratsos, Michael. 1978. An ATN approach to comprehension. Linguistic theory and psychological reality, ed. by Halle, Morris, Bresnan, Joan, and Miller, George A., 119–61. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Weinberg, Amy. 1993. Parameters in the theory of sentence processing: Minimal commitment theory goes east. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 22. 339–64. DOI: 10.1007/BF01068016.10.1007/BF01068016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshida, Masaya. 2006. Constraints and mechanisms in long-distance dependency formation. College Park: University of Maryland dissertation.Google Scholar
Yoshida, Masaya, Kazanina, Nina, Pablos, Leticia; and Sturt, Patrick. 2014. On the origin of islands. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience 29. 761–70. DOI: 10.1080/01690965.2013.788196.10.1080/01690965.2013.788196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaenen, Annie, Engdahl, Elisabet; and Maling, Joan M.. 1981. Resumptive pronouns can be syntactically bound. Linguistic Inquiry 12. 679–82. Online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178253.Google Scholar