Cover not available

In:Topics in Theoretical Asian Linguistics: Studies in honor of John B. Whitman
Edited by Kunio Nishiyama, Hideki Kishimoto and Edith Aldridge
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 250] 2018
► pp. 253–284

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 12
Parsing Chinese relative clauses with structural and non-structural cues

 | Rochester Institute of Technology
 | University of Georgia
Published online: 12 December 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.250.13che
This paper presents a word-by-word computational model of incremental processing difficulty in human sentence comprehension. In particular, it discusses the processing of Chinese relative clauses guided by both structural preferences and frequencies of non-structural features like animacy. The information-theoretic metric Entropy Reduction (Hale, 2003, 2006) mirrors the disambiguation effort which readers spend on each word and links theories of parsing to observed measurements in reading experiments, including the so-called animacy effect in psycholinguistic studies (Wu, Kaiser & Anderson 2012).
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Uncertainty reduction in sentence processing
  • 3.Chinese relative clauses
    • 3.1Ambiguities in Chinese relative clauses
    • 3.2Experimental studies of Chinese RC processing
    • 3.3The role of animacy in Chinese RC processing
  • 4.Predicting the processing difficulty of Chinese RCs
    • 4.1Chinese grammars
    • 4.2Counting constructions in the Chinese treebank
    • 4.3Modeling results: The animacy effect in Chinese RC processing
    • 4.4Discussions
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (74)
References
Aoun, J., & Li, A. Y. -H. 2003. Essays on the representational and derivational nature of grammar: The diversity of wh-constructions. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bar-Hillel, Y., Perles, M., & Shamir, E. 1964. On formal properties of simple phrase structure grammars. In Language and Information: Selected Essays on their Theory and Application, Y. Bar-Hillel (ed.), Ch. 9, 116–150. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blachman, N. 1968. The amount of information that y gives about X. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory IT-14(1): 27–31.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boston, M., Hale, J., Vasishth, S., & Reinhold Kliegl. 2011. Parallel processing and sentence comprehension difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes 26(3): 301–349.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carreiras, M., Duñabeitia, J., Vergara, M. De La Cruz-Pavía, I. & Laka, I. (2010). Subject relative clauses are not universally easier to process: Evidence from Basque. Cognition, 115(1), 79–92.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, B., Ning, A., Bi, H., & Dunlap, S. (2008). Chinese subject-relative clauses are more difficult to process than the object-relative clauses. Acta Psychologica 129(1): 61–65.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Z. (2014). Animacy in sentence processing across languages: An information-theoretic prospective. PhD dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Z, & Hale, J. Submitted. Structural and non-structural uncertainties in expectation-based sentence comprehension.
Chen, Z., Grove, K., & Hale, J. 2012. Structural expectations in Chinese relative clause comprehension. In Proceedings of the 29th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL-29), J. Choi, E. A. Hogue, J. Punske, D. Tat, J. Schertz, & A. Trueman (eds.), 29–37. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Z., Jäger, L., & Hale, J. 2012. Uncertainty reduction as a predictor of reading difficulty in Chinese relative clauses. In Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Chinese Languages and Linguistics (IsCLL-13) Y. -O. Biq & L. Chen (eds.), 245–261. Taipei, Taiwan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cheng, L. L. -S., & Sybesma, R. 2005. A Chinese relative. In Organizing Grammar: Studies in Honor of Henk van Riemsdijk, H. C. Broekhuis, N. Huybregts, R. Kleinhenz, U. Kleinhenz & J. Koster (eds.), 69–76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chi, Z. 1999. Statistical properties of probabilistic context-free grammars. Computational Linguistics 25(1): 131–160Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clifton, C., Juhasz, B., Ashby, J., Traxler, M. J., Mohamed, M. T., Williams, R. S., & Rayner, K. 2003. The use of thematic role information in parsing: Syntactic processing autonomy revisited. Journal of Memory and Language 49: 317–334.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clemens, L., Coon, J., Pedro, P., Morgan, A., Polinsky, M., Tandet, G. & Wagers, M. 2015. Ergativity and the complexity of extraction: A view from Mayan. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33(2): 417–467.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. 2003. Typology and Universals. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Demberg, V. 2010. Broad-coverage Model of Prediction in Human Sentence Processing. PhD Dissertation, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Demberg, V. & Keller, F. 2008. Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity. Cognition 109(2): 193–210.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
den Dikken, M. & Singhapreecha, P. 2004. Complex noun phrases and linkers. Syntax 7(1): 1–54.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frank, S. (2013) Uncertainty reduction as a measure of cognitive load in sentence comprehension. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5, 475–494.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gennari, S. P. & MacDonald, M. C. 2008. Semantic indeterminacy in object relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language 58(2): 161–187.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibson, E. 1998. Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68: 1–76.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2000. Dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In Image, Language, Brain: Papers from the First Mind Articulation Project Symposium, A. Marantz, Y. Miyashita & W. O’Neil (eds.). Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibson, E. & Wu, H. -H. I. 2013. Processing Chinese relative clauses in context. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(1–2): 125–155.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, T. (ed.). 1983. Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study [Typological Studies in Language 3]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hale, J. (2001). A probabilistic Earley parser as a psycholinguistic model. In Proceedings of the Second Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Language Technologies, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, June 1–7, 2007. Stroudsburg PA: ACL.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2003. The information conveyed by words in sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32(2): 101–123.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. Uncertainty about the rest of the sentence. Cognitive Science 30(4): 643–672.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2016. Information-theoretical Complexity Metrics. Language and Linguistics Compass 10(9): 397–412.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hsiao, F. & Gibson, E. 2003. Processing relative clauses in Chinese. Cognition 90: 3–27.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hsiao, Y., Li, J. & MacDonald, M. 2014. Ambiguity affects Mandarin relative clause processing. Presented at The 27th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbus, OH, March 13–15.
Hsiao, Y. & MacDonald, M. C. 2013. Experience and generalization in a connectionist model of Mandarin Chinese relative clause processing. Frontiers in Psychology 4(767).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, C. -T. J. 1989. Pro-drop in Chinese: A generalized control approach. In The Null Subject Parameter, O. Jaeggli & K. Safir (eds.), 185–214. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huang, C. -T. J, Li, A. Y. -H. & Li, Y. 2009. The Syntax of Chinese. Cambridge: CUP .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunter, T., & Dyer, C. 2013. Distributions on minimalist grammar derivations. In Proceedings of the 13th Meeting on the Mathematics of Language, A. Kornai & M. Kuhlmann (eds.).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jäger, L., Chen, Z., Li, Q., Lin, C. -J. C. & Vasishth, S. 2015. The subject relative advantage in Chinese: Evidence for expectation-based processing. Journal of Memory and Language 79–80: 97–120.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M. 1998. PCFG models of linguistic tree representations. Computational Linguistics 24: 613–632.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jurafsky, D. 1996. A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive Science 20: 137–194.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jurafsky, D. & Martin, J. 2008. Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and Speech Recognition, 2d edn. New York NY: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Just, M. A. & Carpenter, P. A. 1992. A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review 99: 122–149.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kayne, R. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kwon, N., Kluender, R., Kutas, M., & Polinsky, M. 2013. Subject/object processing asymmetries in Korean relative clauses: Evidence from ERP data. Language 89: 537–585.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kwon, N., Lee, Y., Gordon, P. C., Kluender, R., & Polinsky, M. 2010. Cognitive and linguistic factors affecting subject/object asymmetry: An eye-tracking study of pre-nominal relative clauses in Korean. Language 86(3): 546–582.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kwon, N., Polinsky, M. & Kluender, R. 2006. Subject preference in Korean. In Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL-25), D. Baumer, D. Montero & M. Scanlon (eds.), 1–14. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levy, R. 2008. Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition 106: 1126–1177.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, C. -J. C. 2008. The processing foundation of head-final relative clauses. Language and Linguistics 9(4): 813–839.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2014. Effect of thematic order on the comprehension of Chinese relative clauses. Lingua 140: 180–206.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, C. -J. C. & Bever, T. 2006. Subject preference in the processing of relative clauses in Chinese. In Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, D. Baumer, D. Montero & M. Scanlon (eds.), 254–260. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, C. -J. C., & Bever, T. 2011. Garden path and the comprehension of head-final relative clauses. In Processing and Producing Head-final Structures, Y. Hiroko, Y. Hirose & J. L. Packard (eds.), 277–297. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, Y. & Garnsey, S. 2011. Animacy and the resolution of temporary ambiguity in relative clause comprehension in Mandarin. In Processing and Producing Head-final Structures, Y. Hiroko, Y. Hirose & J. L. Packard (eds.), 241–276. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linzen, T. & Jaeger, F. 2016. Uncertainty and expectation in sentence processing: Evidence from subcategorization distributions. Cognitive Science 40(6): 1382–1411.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lowder, M. W., Choi, W., Ferreira, F. & Henderson, J. M. (2018) Lexical predictability during natural reading: Effects of surprisal and entropy reduction. Cognitive science, 42: 1166–1183.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mak, W., Vonk, W. & Schriefers, H. 2002. The influence of animacy on relative clauserProcessing. Journal of Memory and Language 47(1): 50–68.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mak, W., Vonk, W., & Schriefers, H. 2006. Animacy in processing relative clauses: The hikers that rocks crush. Journal of Memory and Language 54: 466–490.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mazuka, R. & Itoh, K. 1995. Can Japanese speakers be led down the garden path? In Japanese Sentence Processing, R. Mazuka & N. Nagai (eds.), 295–329. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miyamoto, E. & Nakamura, M. 2003. Subject/object asymmetries in the processing of relative clauses in Japanese. In The 22nd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL-22), G. Garding & M. Tsujimura (eds.), 342–355. Somerville MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nederhof, M. & Satta, G. 2008. Computing partition functions of PCFGs. Research on Language and Computation 6(2): 139–162.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ou, T. -S. 2007. Suo relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese. Language and Linguistics 8(4): 913–937.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pu, M. -M. (2007). The distribution of relative clauses in Chinese discourse. Discourse Processes 43(1): 25–53.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Qiao, X., Shen, L. & Forster, K. 2012. Relative clause processing in Mandarin: Evidence from the maze task. Language and Cognitive Processes 27(4): 611–630.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reali, F. & Christiansen, M. H. 2007. Processing of relative clauses is made easier by frequency of occurrence. Journal of Memory and Language 53: 1–23.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stabler, E. 1997 Derivational minimalism. In Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics, C. Retoré (ed.), 68–95. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Staub, A. 2010. Eye movements and processing difficulty in object relative clauses. Cognition 116(1): 71–86.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Su, Y., Lee, S., & Chung, Y. 2007. Asyntactic thematic role assignment by Mandarin aphasics: A test of the Trace-Deletion Hypothesis and the Double Dependency Hypothesis. Brain and Language 101(1): 1–18.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traxler, M., Morris, R. & Seely, R. 2002. Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 47(1): 69–90.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Traxler, M., Williams, R., Blozis, S. & Morris, R. 2005. Working memory, animacy, and verb class in the processing of relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language 53: 204–224.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ueno, M. & Garnsey, S. M. 2008. An ERP study of the processing of subject and object relative clauses in Japanese. Language and Cognitive Processes 23(5): 646–688.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vasishth, S., Chen, Z., Li, Q. & Guo, G. -L. 2013. Processing Chinese relative clauses: Evidence for the subject-relative advantage. PLoS One 8(10)(e77006).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, F. 2009. Factors Affecting Relative Clause Processing in Mandarin: Corpus and Behavioral Evidence. Phd dissertation, University of Southern California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, F., Kaiser, E. & Andersen, E. 2011. Subject preference, head animacy and lexical cues: A corpus study of relative clauses in Chinese. In Processing and Producing Head-final Structures, Y. Hiroko, Y. Hirose & J. L. Packard (eds.), 173–193. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2012. Animacy effects in Chinese relative clause processing. Language and Cognitive Processes 27(10): 1489–1524.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xu, Y. 2014. Evidence of the accessibility hierarchy in relative clauses in Chinese as a second language. Language and Linguistics 15(3): 435–464.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xue, N., Jiang, Z., Zhong, X., Palmer, M., Xia, F., Chiou, F., & Chang, M. (2010). Chinese Treebank 7.0. Philadelphia PA: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yun, J, Chen, Z., Hunter, T., Whitman, J. & Hale, J. 2015. Uncertainty in processing relative clauses across East Asian languages. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 24(2): 113–148.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yun, J., Whitman, J., & Hale, J. T. 2010. Subject-object asymmetries in Korean sentence comprehension. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. S. Ohlsson & R. Catrambone (eds.).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue