Read e-book Long-Distance Dependencies (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Long-Distance Dependencies (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Long-Distance Dependencies (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics) book. Happy reading Long-Distance Dependencies (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Long-Distance Dependencies (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Long-Distance Dependencies (Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics) Pocket Guide.
Your Answer
Contents:
  1. Reward Yourself
  2. Alumni and their Dissertations
  3. Other Subject Areas
  4. Long-Distance Dependencies - CRC Press Book

If you are a seller for this product, would you like to suggest updates through seller support? This book investigates the theory of locality within the framework of minimalism, with a special focus on restructuring and other related phenomena that exhibit an apparent violation of the strictly local conditions. Read more Read less. Read more. Chance to win daily prizes. Get ready for Prime Day with the Amazon App. No purchase necessary. Get started. No customer reviews.

Share your thoughts with other customers. Write a customer review. Amazon Giveaway allows you to run promotional giveaways in order to create buzz, reward your audience, and attract new followers and customers. Learn more about Amazon Giveaway. All results from both Events 1 and 2 are summarized in Table 7 below. The two GAP-completion -related double subtractions yielded interesting results. We predicted that if all Event 2 subtractions are targeting the same process, subtracting one from the other should result in no difference. As Table 8 see also Figure 4 shows, the activation pattern observed for these single and corresponding double subtractions is almost identical.

We reason that if the previous two double subtractions are reflecting GAP-completion their results should converge with this one which isolates GAP-completion from GAP-search. And that is what we find. These results are summarized in Table 9. Finally, the conjunction analysis confirms these findings by showing again not only the primary and association visual cortex and connected posterior cortex, but crucially, BA 6 as a main area of overlap.

These results are summarized in Table 10 and shown in Figure 5. Table 8. Significant differential volumes by region for all GAP-completion Event 2 double subtractions. Figure 4. Preferential positive activation for GAP-completion Event 2 double subtractions. Table 9. Summary of cortical recruitment for all GAP-completion Event 2 double subtractions. Table Figure 5. Preferential activations for the conjunction of GAP-completion subtractions. The violation is caused by an expected GAP that already appears filled.

This contrast was not part of the main question the study seeks to address, but in light of the other results, it reveals a very interesting pattern which we believe is connectable to our main question. Instead, it recruits the right hemisphere BAs 45 and 46 and bilateral prefrontal cortex BAs 9 and This pattern is interesting because it reflects cortical recruitment beyond the traditional language areas, suggesting that its impact is outside language composition strictly speaking. Consequently, the reviewer suggests, these could be an indication that the parser most likely has simply halted the comprehension process.

We agree with the reviewer that to the extent that we do not fully know the impact of ungrammaticality in the process of comprehension, the possibility remains that faced with ungrammaticality, the comprehension system stops tracking linguistic composition altogether, thus allowing the mind to direct thought away from the utterance in question.

On our analysis, the violation in Condition C is caused by the inability of the parser to integrate the composed meanings of the embedded and matrix clauses. These clauses are each independently syntactically and semantically well-formed yet cannot be linked with each other. The ill-formedness is caused by the requirement that GAP-completion apply at a point in the sentence where it is not allowed to. GAP-completion is the process where the referent associated with the antecedent finds an interpretation as a participant in the semantic representation associated with the embedded clause, thus linking the proposition denoted by the embedded clause with that of the matrix clause.

In the ungrammatical utterance, The politician who the journalist's claim about the government report had bothered the people is calling a press conference, GAP-completion cannot take place because the GAP is already occupied by another NP the people. Consequently, not only is the antecedent the politician left without a necessary interpretation within the embedded clause, but a new and unexpected semantic interpretation involving the participant the people has been introduced, which is locally plausible but cannot be connected with the meaning of the matrix clause.

These two locally coherent segments matrix clause: the politician is calling a press conference and embedded clause: the journalist's claim about the government report had bothered the people result in compositionally conflicting linguistic representations, which in turn yield a meaning incoherence for the sentence as a whole i. The meaning of the embedded clause containing the new participant can no longer be incorporated into the meaning of the matrix clause containing the antecedent.

This incoherence cannot be resolved not because there is no one plausible interpretation to be obtained, but because there is one too many plausible interpretations. This would suggest in turn that the thrust of the violation lies on higher level meaning-based structure, even though the violation itself is triggered by a local syntactico-semantic misstep If this were the case, it would make the non-linguistic regions in question relevant for language comprehension processes involving contextualization or integration of composed meaning.

Specifically relevant to the DNM is the work on fMRI patterns relating the DMN to social cognition processes, in particular those connecting middle frontal cortex with theory of mind processes see Mars et al. For a more general discussion about brain patterns and violations, see Embick et al. Past neuroimaging work has shown that even though long-distance dependencies seem to recruit the workings of the LIF cortex, they also recruit the workings of the LPST cortex and surrounding areas e. At the same time, whereas Wernicke's patients with damage involving the left posterior temporal cortex, including parts of the angular and supramarginal gyri show across-the-board impaired sentence comprehension including constructions containing dependencies, they are indistinguishable from matching controls in their ability to exhibit the gap-filling effect, thus indicating that whatever their linguistic impairment, it does not seem to involve GAP-search or GAP-completion per se.

Indeed, Wernicke's performance has been seen to reflect the capacity to implement the basic syntactic mechanics of the dependency, but showing, offline, an inability to put this knowledge to use, presumably due to an inability to properly access the necessary lexico-semantic information that makes the dependency meaningful e. By contrast, Broca's patients, while unable to properly implement these dependencies e. So whereas the neuroimaging evidence tells us the brain regions that could be potentially participating in the implementation of the dependencies, the lesion-based evidence tells us of the possibility of an asymmetry in their participation.

The analysis of LDDs that we present here provides the basis for a potential reconciliation of these two sets of seemingly conflicting observations by invoking organizing principles that could give rise to such an asymmetry. In the remainder of this section we discuss the specific activation patterns observed in connection to the hypothesized functional distinctions. The hypothesis that LIF cortex is sensitive to GAP-search independently of the internal articulation of the dependency direct vs. To the extent that GAP-search was reliably associated the LIF cortex it was only in connection to the direct condition single and double subtractions.

Within this pattern of activation two connected regions were involved: region 1 included BAs 45, 44, 47, bordering with the left insula and left temporal pole anterior BAs 22 and A second associated region connecting primary and associate visual cortex and BA7 and BA31 were also preferentially recruited.

Those results further indicate that this cortical recruitment may at least be partly distinct from the cortical recruitment of GAP-completion. So, in light of the ambiguous statistical results, we offer an interpretation constrained by previous neuroimaging and lesion-based observations. We propose here that these two sets of results indicate there may not be a categorical distinction between the cortical regions engaged in GAP-search direct vs.

These findings would thus represent independent neurological support for the existence of an active-filler Clifton and Frazier, ; Frazier and Clifton, ; Fodor, that, crucially, is sensitive to the details of the linguistic context of the relative pronoun independently of the length of the dependency Phillips et al. Indeed, we take this pattern to reflect not necessarily a difference in search but a difference in quality of the search: when the parser is forced to use memory resources outside of the implementation of any specific linguistic mechanism -the delay caused by the parser's recognition that the expected GAP is not to be found in the current local constituent- those resources are recruited from cortical regions, most relevant BA 6 SMA , which have been previously identified as participatory for language composition.

The combined GAP-search pattern of results direct plus indirect would thus be reflecting the workings of two functional foci of the same linguistic network. Support for this view is the observation that the LIF cortex and SMA have been traditionally connected, particularly in the focal-lesion literature e.

This would mean in turn that the LIF cortex is sensitive to the expedient resolution of the dependency, which will only happen when such resolution is allowed by the local linguistic context. If it is not, then the preferential activation shifts or reduces to pre-SMA—all, however, within the same pathway.

In this view then, the monitoring action would presumably rely on the workings of the pre-SMA and in the situation where the GAP-search could not take place, due to the island, it would act on the LIF cortex to suppress or hold search activity. We agree that this possibility, though outside the scope of the present data, is interesting and consistent with all other roles independently attributed to the SMA e. Moreover, it brings the debate not only to a discussion of networks but to the possible distinguishable roles that their individual components may play during real-time cognitive processing.

Regarding GAP-completion , our findings from the simple subtractions show that this mechanism recruits the workings of a contiguous cortical region within the left fronto-parietal lobes and non-overlapping with those associated with direct GAP-search connecting supplementary motor area, precuneus, and portions of the left angular and supramarginal gyri and peristriate BA This observation is further supported by all relevant double subtraction and conjunction analyses. Most critically, they have been associated with lexically-driven composition, such as that involving subcategorization Shetreet et al.

To the extent that this network is seen to be involved in a mechanism such as GAP-completion , a mechanism that brings together syntactic, lexico-semantic, and discourse composition, it tells us that this cortical region is at least partly recruited during unification of interpretation. And this would also be consistent with a version of the Memory, Unification and Control model e.

It is in this way that the LPST cortex is connected to LDD implementation: as a potential participating region in a larger network that supports real-time lexically-driven language composition which, by definition, also supports GAP-completion.

Reward Yourself

One additional advantage of the connection between GAP-completion with the dorsal pathway is that it affords a possible explanation for the long-standing observation regarding Conduction aphasia comprehension first reported in Caramazza and Zurif Specifically, Caramazza and Zurif report that patients with Conduction aphasia a syndrome associated with damage to the arcuate fasciculus exhibit chance performance in the comprehension of semantically reversible object relative-clauses.

Such a pattern is indistinguishable from that shown for Broca's comprehension but claimed to emerge from different causes. Caramazza and Zurif further note that, like Broca's, the pattern shown by Conduction patients contrasts sharply with that exhibited by Wernicke's patients, who show performance that is not attributable to any one linguistic or processing factor.

Here we reason that if GAP-completion is dependent on the workings of the dorsal pathway, presumably connected to the arcuate fasciculus, it explains why Conduction patients would be impaired in the interpretation of semantically reversible relative clauses, despite being able to carry out GAP-search In sum, we take the overall pattern accrued for all three Event 2, related double subtraction and conjunction contrasts to reflect components of this dorsal pathway, with BA 6 as a crucial area.

This interpretation captures the normal-like performance by Wernicke's in online gap-filling constructions and suggests in turn that the LPST cortex activation from the imaging literature may not have been in connection to GAP-search proper. In light of these findings, we are now able to address the questions posed in the introduction. Answer: The patterns we report show minimal overlap in recruitment.

However, to the extent that at least the lower SMA has been considered to be part of Broca's area, they are expected to functionally overlap. Our conjecture regarding the two areas [viable resolution LIF cortex vs. In line with the lesion-based literature, we conclude that LDD processing defined in terms of GAP-search and GAP-completion does not directly involve the preferential workings of Wernicke's area, but relies on areas that are functionally related to Wernicke's area. Finally, if the effects reported reflect GAP-search , why are they observed mainly in the context of object -relative GAPs?

But this only happens when GAP-search is being carried out over viable structure. So, it is as if the function of the LIF cortex is to monitor or keep track of the ability of the structure being composed to provide a GAP slot. In terms of our analysis, that amounts to keeping track of whether the selectional requirements of the RELPRO are being satisfied. From this perspective, then, the fact that this is observed mainly in object-GAP constructions is not a consequence of the grammatical feature per se , but of the fact that in these constructions, it takes longer for the RELPRO to be resolved as compared with subject-gap constructions, thus increasing the probability that the effect will be observed.

As a separate observation, our results also show that processing of memory-taxing sentential constructions A and B appear to systematically recruit the workings of the visual cortex primary and association areas see Santi et al. We interpret this pattern separately for two reasons: 1 these areas are not traditionally associated with linguistic processing proper, and 2 this preferential activation was observed both during direct GAP-search and GAP-completion , suggesting that the areas in question are not showing sensitivity to a specific linguistic process.

In light of this, we connect these findings to independent observations regarding the visual system and linguistic load, particularly in relation to pupillometry measures see Piquado et al. Accordingly, we take the visual cortex activation pattern to reflect the increased attention i. In this respect we note that the visual cortex activation was not observed during indirect GAP-search further supporting the possibility that during the building of structure that is non-viable for a GAP, no search is actually taking place.

And this would make this segment of comprehension less cognitively taxing. In this section, we connect our results to larger neurocognitive architecture models. The first general observation is that whereas no one model accounts for the findings, each provides an insight into the larger pattern that the findings reflect. This gives us, then, the opportunity to focus on the common ground that each provides. This is what guides our discussion. We start with Lau et al. In this model, the LIF cortex is connected to lexical retrieval.

So, what is required in this model is a more precise treatment of the connection of lexical-retrieval to GAP-search in particular The second model we consider is Friederici , which proposes that language composition, understood as the process of building a semantic representation through syntactic structure, recruits the workings of the LIF cortex. To the extent that GAP-search has been isolated from syntactic structure building through the subtraction process, the model predicts the LIF cortex will not be involved in this process, a prediction that is not supported by the evidence.

Friederici's model predicts no direct GAP-search in connection to the LIF cortex, because according to this model BAs 44 and 45 in particular are responsible for all syntactic structure building. Our results do not contradict this, but do point to the fact that BAs 44 and 45 must be additionally characterized as having specific compositional sensitivity, beyond generalized structure building. Finally, and as mentioned in the discussion, a most relevant aspect of Friederici's model which also incorporates important insights from Hickok and Poeppel, , involves the dorsal pathway, specifically, Pathway I also discussed in Friederici, and which connects the STG and BA 6 through the arcuate fasciculus.

It is this pathway, we propose, that is responsible for compositional processes such as those represented by GAP-completion. To our knowledge, this is the only model that explicitly assumes lexically-driven processing and grammatical systems, a feature that our processing analysis of LDDs also assumes. The model also capitalizes on the notion of unification, which provides a processing-friendly approach to composition. Whereas our data do not speak to the functional articulation within the LIF cortex, they do reveal that both subregions can at least work in tandem, as in the case of the activation for direct GAP-search.

This is a reasonable interpretation, given that direct GAP-search involves both semantic and syntactic computations. Under MUC, these two regions could be involved in the same larger processing network, and the SMA activation observed could be part of the dynamics of the network triggered in turn by the linguistic properties of the sentence. In this interpretation, LDDs allow us to localize not two regions, but a network with two foci reflected in these two mechanisms. Since our data cannot speak directly to this point, this proposal remains to be supported.

To conclude, the results presented here suggest a resolution of the imaging vs. The results capture the inherent asymmetry between GAP-search and GAP-completion and explain why damage to the LIF cortex would dramatically impact the ability of the comprehension system to complete the dependency, even if the cortical regions involved in GAP-completion remained intact. By the same token, to the extent that the evidence presented here does not involve the left posterior superior temporal cortex at least directly, the results tell us why Wernicke's patients should not have issues in searching for and completing the GAP.

Such a situation would lead to across-the board comprehension problems in these patients, a prediction that evidence from offline comprehension of these patients in contrast to Broca's patients consistently supports. MP is responsible for the conception of the work and participated in each aspect of the project including experimental design, data acquisition and analysis, and drafting of the work. EF is responsible for stimuli generation and norming, subject recruitment, data acquisition, data analysis planning e.

Alumni and their Dissertations

CL carried out all the data analysis and participated in the final approval of the version to be published. RC participated in the experimental design, data analysis and interpretation, drafting of the work, and in the final approval of the version to be published. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The reviewer WM and handling Editor declared their shared affiliation, and the handling Editor states that the process nevertheless met the standards of a fair and objective review.

We thank Jeetu Bhawnani and Hedy Sarofin for programming and technical support through the data acquisition stage. Finally, we are grateful to Edgar Zurif for much discussion on the gap-filling effect and the neurocognition of language composition; discussion that has directly impacted the approach taken here. All errors remain our own. These are fundamental and widely accepted properties of the language system. The description presented here is therefore compatible with any representational analysis of relative pronouns that incorporates these two properties see Culicover and Jackendoff, , for extensive discussion of the syntax-semantics interactions in LDDs and the assumptions that lead the various approaches in question to favor one specific implementation over another.

Fiebach et al. Similarly, the results published in Makuuchi et al. Whereas they do report LIF cortex activation in connection to comprehension of double-center embedded clauses vs. Whereas this approach makes sense given their specific interest in the internal articulation of the LIF cortex and not on localizing LDDs components, it prevents us from concluding whether the association they found targeted specifically the LIF cortex.

Language and the Mind Revisited - The Biolinguistic Turn with Noam Chomsky

An alternative interpretation to these findings could be that the reported LIF cortex effect results instead from the composition of a more complex meaning structure associated with a semantically more informative embedded subject. In this scenario, preferential activation of the LIF cortex emerges not from greater LDD distance, but from the semantic demands of processing an incrementally more elaborate embedded subject in composition with the embedded transitive verb and its complement.

Indeed, this kind of effect is connectable to a similar LIF cortex recruitment found by Husband et al. In addition to the NP category, they introduce CP as potential intervening category. The novel comparison here is the joint results involving the CP condition which, as the authors point out, suggest that the syntactic category of the intervening material is not relevant to GAP-search , a conclusion that contrasts with previous findings regarding Broca's poor performance in CP production, and fMRI results showing CP processing in connection to the LIF cortex Shetreet et al.

As in the case of Santi and Grodzinsky , we believe that their results warrant consideration of an alternative interpretation: the possibility that the increased cost contributed by the CP distance be due instead to the possible garden-path created by the absence of complementizer in the lower CP. When an NP is suggested due to the absence of the complementizer , the CP possibility is discarded.

By contrast, the term indirect GAP-search is meant to refer to the perspective of the processor left-to-right incremental composition. For the processor, what matters regarding any type of island is whether upon encountering a given constituent, it can hypothesize that the GAP is to be found within that constituent. It is this situation that gives rise to the indirectness we refer to: the GAP is incoming, but not in the minimal constituent under construction.

Other Subject Areas

We infer that this preferential activation includes any process involved in the interpretation of the GAP that survives the violation which, by our analysis, includes the interpretation of the GAP by means of the dependency formation. Indeed, we take this to be the substance of the residual of the subtraction. This contrasts with the violation condition, where the GAP position has been independently filled thus preventing dependency from being completed. The assumption is that the parser will attempt to build an interpretation even in the face of partial incoherence in the input as is the case in condition C.

Yet as a reviewer correctly points out this assumption is not necessarily settled in the literature. Even though the nature of the composition that each carries is presumably different, we have no reason to expect that each will recruit visibly distinct cortical regions as a result. So, even though GAP-search is triggered at event 0, it will not be visible until the embedded clause is beginning to be built.

This is precisely what the event 1 contrast is intended to reveal. But in the semantic model presented in Lau et al. Alexander, M. Broca's area aphasias: aphasia after lesions including the frontal operculum. Neurology 40, — Amunts, K. Analysis of neural mechanisms underlying verbal fluency in cytoarchitectonically defined stereotaxic space: the roles of Brodmann areas 44 and Neuroimage 22, 42— Avrutin, S. Development of the Syntax-Discourse Interface , Vol.

Long-Distance Dependencies - CRC Press Book

Grodzinsky and L. Amunts Norwell: Oxford University Press , — CrossRef Full Text. Ben-Shachar, M. The neural reality of syntactic transformations: evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Neural correlates of syntactic movement: converging evidence from two fMRI experiments. NeuroImage 21, — Benson, F. Heilman and E. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. Prominence vs. Brain Lang. Bresnan, J. Legendre, S. Vikner, and J. Grimshaw Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.


  • Prime Time. Mis mejores años (Spanish Edition)?
  • The Legacy Series (Box Set Books 1, 2, 3 and 4)!
  • SPIRITUAL ECONOMICS (THE QUEST FOR THE NINE VEILS Book 1)?
  • Planet Young.
  • Naked Before the World?
  • The Hour of the Dragon.

Burkhardt, P. The role of the anterior left hemisphere in real-time sentence comprehension: evidence from split intransitivity. Caramazza, A. Dissociation of algorithmic and heuristic processes in language comprehension: evidence from aphasia. Chomsky, N. Aspects of a Theory of Syntax. Google Scholar. Clifton, C. Carlson and M. Tanenhaus Dordrecht: Kluwer , — Crain, S.

1. Introduction

Dowty, L. Karttunen, and A. Zwicky Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 24— Cooke, A. Neural basis for sentence comprehension: grammatical and short-term memory components. Brain Mapp. Costello, A. Dynamic aphasia: the selective impairment of verbal planning. Cortex 25, — Culicover, P. Simpler Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Devlin, J. Semantic processing in the left inferior prefrontal cortex: a combined functional magnetic resonance imaging and transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Amazon Drive Cloud storage from Amazon. Alexa Actionable Analytics for the Web. Sell on Amazon Start a Selling Account. AmazonGlobal Ship Orders Internationally. Amazon Inspire Digital Educational Resources. Amazon Rapids Fun stories for kids on the go.


  • Join Kobo & start eReading today.
  • Dependency Structures and Lexicalized Grammars;
  • Main navigation?
  • OSU Dissertations in Linguistics.
  • Working memory differences in long-distance dependency resolution.
  • Sunspear.

ComiXology Thousands of Digital Comics. DPReview Digital Photography. East Dane Designer Men's Fashion. Shopbop Designer Fashion Brands. Deals and Shenanigans. Ring Smart Home Security Systems.