Eye-Tracking analysis of the processing of Turkish complex sentences with Wh phrases

Bu çalışmada, ne-öbeği bulunan Türkçe karmaşık tümcelerin işlemlenmesi göz-izleme yöntemiyle incelenmiştir. Türkçe’deki işlemleme stratejileri, altmış katılımcıya uygulanan ve iki aşamada gerçekleştirilen iki deneyle analiz edilmiştir. 1. deney ne-katılanı olan ‘kim-E’ ile uygulanırken, 2. deney ne-eklentisi olan ‘ne zaman’ ile uygulanmıştır. Çalışma, Türkçe işleyicinin uzun-mesafeli bağ barındıran tümceleri işlerken, ‘garden-path’ modelinin önemli ilkelerinden biri olan öncül bir sözdizimsel analiz mi yaptığını, ya da Türkçe’nin baş-son yapısına bağlı olarak eylem tarafından sağlanan anlambilimsel ve sözdizimsel bilginin birlikte işlendiği ve yardımcı eylemin türü dolayısıyla etkilenen bir işlemleme mi yaptığını ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmanın bir diğer amacı da, bir ne-öbeğinin temel pozisyonuyla çalkalandığı pozisyon ve mantıksal formdaki (LF) pozisyonu arasındaki çizgisel ya da yapısal mesafenin işlemlemeye etkisini saptamaktır. Ne-öbeği içeren Türkçe karmaşık tümce yapısındaki uzun mesafeli bağıntıların (yer tutucu – boşluk) işlemlenmesinde çizgisel mesafenin mi, yoksa yapısal mesafenin mi etkin rol oynadığı araştırılmıştır. Türkçe işleyicinin tümcenin ilk okuması sırasında, tümcelerin yardımcı eylem bölgesi üzerinde kaydedilen ‘ilk sabitleme süreleri’nin incelenmesiyle, öncül bir sözdizimsel yapı oluşturmadığı fakat eylem kaynaklı bilgiyi paralel bir biçimde kullandığı bulunmuştur. Ayrıca, tümcelerin sonundan ne- öbeği bölgesine yapılan ‘geriye dönük göz hareketleri’nin analizi yoluyla, çizgisel mesafenin yapısal mesafeye üstün gelerek uzun mesafeli yertutucu – boşluk bağıntısının işlemlenmesi sırasında ana belirleyici olduğu gözlenmiştir.

Ne-sözcüğü içeren Türkçe karmaşık tümcelerin işlemlenmesinin göz-izleme yöntemiyle incelenmesi

This study analyses the processing of complex sentences with displaced wh-phrases in Turkish via the application of eye-tracking. The first experiment is conducted with wh-argument ‘kim- E’ (to whom), while the second experiment is conducted with wh-argument ‘when’ (ne zaman). The study aimed at pointing out whether the Turkish processor makes an initial syntactic analysis during reading sentences with long-distance dependencies, which is one of the major tenets of garden – path “model of sentence processing, or makes use of the semantic and syntactic information provided by the verb simultaneously due to the head final structure of Turkish being affected with the type of the embedded verb. Also, the study aimed at figuring out the effect of the linear and structural distance between the default position of a wh-phrase and its scrambled position, and also the LF (logical form) position in processing. Whether linear distance or structural distance is effective in processing long distance dependencies (filler – gap) formed in complex sentences with displaced wh-phrases in Turkish is sought. It has been found that the Turkish processor does not build an initial syntactic structure during the first pass reading of the sentence, which is majorly interpreted through the ‘first fixation recordings’ on embedded verb regions of the sentences, and thus, makes use of the verbal information in a parallel fashion. Also, the linear distance seems to be a major determinant during processing prevailing the structural distance in forming long distance filler gap dependency, which is also understood by the ‘regressive saccadic patterns’ made from the end of the sentences to the wh-phrase region.

PDF

___

Akar, D. (1990). Wh-questions in Turkish. M.A. Thesis. Boğaziçi University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Akar, D. (2000). Wh-questions in Turkish. Rona, B. (Ed.), in Current Issues in Turkish Linguistics volume II (pp.67 – 74). Ankara: Hitit Publications.
Aoshima, S., Phillips, C., and Weinberg, A. (2004). Processing filler-gap dependencies in a head-final language. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 23 – 54.
Arslan, C. (1999). Approaches to Wh-Structures in Turkish, M.A. Thesis. Boğaziçi University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Crocker, M.W. (1999). Mechanisms for sentence processing. S. Garrod and M. Pickering (Eds.), in Language Processing (pp.191 – 223). Psychology Press Ltd. Publishers, UK.
De Vincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fodor, J. D. (1978). Parsing strategies and constraints on transformations. Linguistic Inquiry, 9 (3), 427 – 473.
Frazier, L., and Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, v.14, 178 – 210.
Frazier, L. (1984). Modularity and the representational hypothesis. Proceedings of NELS 15 (pp.131 – 144). Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Frazier, L. (1987). Syntactic processing: evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory, 5, 519 – 560.
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005). Eye-movement recording as a tool for studying syntactic processing in a second language: a review of methodologies and experimental findings. Second Language Research, 21 (2), 175 – 198.
Garrod, S. (2006). Psycholinguistic Research Methods. Keith Brown (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd Edition (251 – 257). Elsevier.
Görgülü, E. (2006). Variable wh-words in Turkish. MA Thesis, Boğaziçi University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Haegeman, L. (1992). Introduction to government and binding theory. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Harley, T. (2005). The psychology of language. Hove; New York: Psychology Press. Hawkins, J. A. (1999). Processing complexity and filler-gap dependencies across grammars. Language, 75, (2), 244 – 285.
İşsever, S. (2003). Information structure in Turkish: the word order-prosody interface. Lingua, 113, 1025-1053.
İşsever, S. (2009). A syntactic account of wh-in-situ in Turkish. S. Ay, Ö. Aydın, İ. Ergenç, S. Gökmen, S. İşsever, and D. Peçenek (Eds.). in Essays on Turkish Linguistics: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Turkish linguistics. (pp.103 – 112). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
Just, M. A., and Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading from eye movements to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329 – 354.
Kaan, E. (1997). Processing subject-object ambiguities in Dutch. PhD dissertation, University of Groningen, Netherlands.
Kornfilt, J. (1996). On some infinitival wh-constructions in Turkish. Dilbilim Araştırmaları, 192-215.
Kornfilt, J. (2003). Scrambling, subscrambling, and case in Turkish. S. Karimi (Ed.). in Word Order and Scrambling (pp.125 – 155). Blackwell Publishing.
Kural, M. (1992). Properties of Scrambling in Turkish. Ms. Thesis. UCLA, USA.
Meseguer, E., Carreiras, M., and Clifton, C. Jr. (2002). Overt reanalysis strategies and eye movements during the reading of mild garden path sentences. Memory and Cognition, 30 (4), 551 – 561.
Mitchell, D. C., Shen, X., Green, M. J., and Hodgson, T. L. (2008). Accounting for regressive eye-movements in models of sentence processing: A reappraisal of the selective reanalysis hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language. 59, 266 – 293.
Miyamoto, E.T., and Takahashi, S. (2002). The processing of wh-phrases in Japanese, Scientific Approaches to Language, 1, 133-172.
Miyamoto, E.T., and Takahashi, S. (2004). Filler-gap dependencies in the processing of scrambling in Japanese. Language and Linguistics, 5 (1), 153-166.
Ng, S. (2008). An active gap strategy in the processing of filler-gap dependencies in Chinese. K.M. Chan and H. Kang (Eds.). Proceedings of the 20th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-20) 2, 943 – 957. Columbus, Ohio.
Özsoy, S. (1996). A’ dependencies in Turkish. B. Rona (Ed.). Current Issues in Turkish Linguistics, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, 15 – 17 August, 1990, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1, (pp.139-158). Hitit Yayınevi, Ankara.
Özsoy, S. (2009). Turkish as a (non)-wh-in-situ language. E. A. Csato, G. Ims, J. Parslow, F. Thiesen, E. Türker (Eds.). In Turcological Letters to Bernt Brendemoen (pp.221 – 232). Oslo: Novus Forlag.
Pickering, M.J., and R.P.G. van Gompel (2006). Syntactic Parsing. M. J. Traxler and M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.). in Handbook of Psycholinguistics: 2nd Edition. (pp.455 – 503). Elsevier.
Rado, J. (1999). Some effects of discourse salience on gap filling. Poster presented at the 12th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, 18 – 20 March, 1999, CUNY Graduate Center, New York, NY.
Rayner, K., Carlson, M., and Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye-movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 358 – 374.
Rayner, K., and Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Rayner, K., and Pollatsek, A. (2006). Eye movement control in reading. M. J. Traxler and M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.). Handbook of Psycholinguistics, 2nd Edition (pp.613 – 657). Elsevier.
Schlesewsky, M., Fanselow, G., Kliegl, R., and Krems, J. (2000). The subject preference in the processing of locally ambiguous wh-questions in German. B. Hemforth, and L. Konieczny (Eds.). In German Sentence Processing (pp. 65 – 93). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Sekerina, I. A. (2003). Scrambling and processing: Dependencies, complexity and constraints. S. Karimi (Ed.). In Word order and scrambling. (pp.310 – 324). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
Stowe, L. A. (1986). Parsing wh-constructions: evidence for on-line gap location. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1 (3), 227 – 245.
Trueswell, J., Tanenhaus, M., and Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19 (3), 528 – 553.
Ueno, M., and Kluender, R. (2003). On the processing of Japanese wh-questions: Relating grammar and brain. G.Garding and M. Tsujimura (Eds.). In Proceedings of the 22nd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. (pp.491 – 504). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Uzun, N.E. (2000). Ana çizgileriyle evrensel dilbilgisi ve Türkçe. İstanbul: Multilingual.
Van Gompel, R. P. G. (2006). Sentence Processing. K. Brown. (Ed.). In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd Edition (pp.251 – 255). Elsevier.