Article published In: Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 7:5 (2017) ► pp.554–582
Antecedent contained deletions in native and non-native sentence processing
Published online: 24 June 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.15006.box
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.15006.box
Abstract
We report the results from an eye-movement monitoring study investigating native (L1) and non-native (L2) speakers’ real-time processing of antecedent-contained deletion (ACD), a type of verb phrase ellipsis in which the ellipsis gap forms part of its own antecedent. The resulting interpretation problem is traditionally thought to be solved by quantifier raising, a covert scope-shifting operation that serves to remove the gap from within its antecedent. Our L2 group comprised advanced, native German-speaking L2 learners of English. The analysis of the eye-movement data showed that both L1 and L2 English speakers tried to recover the missing verb phrase after encountering the gap. Only the native speakers showed evidence of ellipsis resolution being affected by quantification, however. No effects of quantification following gap detection were found in the L2 group, by contrast, indicating that recovery of the elided material was accomplished independently from the object’s quantificational status in this group.
Article outline
- 1.Background
- 1.1Formal and processing approaches to ACD
- 1.2VPE and ACD in language acquisition
- 2.The current study
- 3.Participants
- 4.Materials
- 5.Predictions
- 6.Procedures
- 7.Results
- 8.Discussion
- 9.Antecedent recovery effects
- 10.Effects of quantification
- 11.L1/L2 differences in ACD processing
- 12.Concluding remarks
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (59)
Arregui, A., Clifton, C., Frazier, L., & Moulton, K. (2006). Processing elided verb phrases with flawed antecedents: The recycling hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 551, 232–246.
Breakstone, M.Y., Cremers, A., Fox, D., & Hackl, M. (2011). On the analysis of scope ambiguities in comparative constructions: Converging evidence from real-time sentence processing and offline data. In N. Ashton, A. Chereches, & D. Lutz (Eds.), Proceedings of SALT 211 (pp. 712–731). Cornell University Department of Linguistics.
Carminati, M., Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (2002). Bound variables and c-command. Journal of Semantics, 191, 1–34.
Chung, E.S. (2013). Sources of difficulty in L2 scope judgments. Second Language Research, 291, 285–310.
Clahsen, H. & Felser, C. (2006). How native-like is non-native language processing? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 101, (121), 564–570.
Cormack, A. (1984). VP anaphora: variables and scope. In F. Landman & F. Veltman (Eds.), Varieties of formal semantics (pp. 81–102). Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
Dallas, A. & Kaan, E. (2008). Second language processing of filler-gap dependencies by late learners. Language and Linguistics Compass, 21.
Dalrymple, M., Shieber, S., & Pereira, F. (1991). Ellipsis and higher order unification. Linguistics and Philosophy, 141, 399–452.
Dekydtspotter, L., & Miller, A.K. (2013). Inhibitive and facilitative priming induced by traces in the processing of wh-dependencies in a second language. Second Language Research, 291, 345–372.
Duffield, N., & Matsuo, A. (2009). Native-speakers’ vs. L2 learners sensitivity to parallelism in VP-Ellipsis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 311, 1–31.
Duffield, N., Matsuo, A., & Roberts, L. (2009). Factoring out the parallelism effect in VP-ellipsis: English vs. Dutch contrasts. Second Language Research, 251, 427–467.
Felser, C. (2015). Native vs. non-native processing of discontinuous dependencies. Second Language, 141.
Felser, C., & Cunnings, I. (2012). Processing reflexives in English as a second language: The role of structural and discourse-level constraints. Applied Psycholinguistics, 331, 571–603.
Felser, C., & Roberts, L. (2007). Processing wh-dependencies in a second language: A cross-modal priming study. Second Language Research, 231, 9–36.
Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (2000). On bound variable interpretations: The LF-only hypothesis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 291, 125–140.
Gibson, E., Jacobson, P., Graff, P., Mahowald, K., Fedorenko, E., & Piantadosi, S.T. (2014). A pragmatic account of complexity in definite Antecedent-Contained-Deletion relative clauses. Journal of Semantics. Published online,
Hackl, M., Koster-Hale, J., & Varvoutis, J. (2012). Quantification and ACD: evidence from real-time sentence processing. Journal of Semantics, 291, 145–206.
Hardt, D. (1993). VP ellipsis and contextual interpretation. Technical Reports (CIS). Paper 417. [URL].
Hopp, H. (2009). The syntax-discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 121, 463–483.
Hornstein, N. (1994). An argument for minimalism: The case of antecedent-contained deletion. Linguistic Inquiry, 251, 455–480.
Ionin, T., Luchkina, T., & Stoops, A. (2014). Quantifier scope and scrambling in the second language acquisition of Russian. In U. Minai et al. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 5th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition–North America (pp. 169–180). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Jacobson, P. (1998). Direct compositionality and variable-free semantics: The case of antecedent contained deletion. In K. Johnson (Ed.), Topics in ellipsis (pp. 30–68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 871, 329–354.
Kennedy, C. (1997). Antecedent contained deletion and the syntax of quantification. Linguistic Inquiry, 281, 662–688.
Kiguchi, H., & Thornton, R. (2004). Binding principles and ACD constructions in child grammars. Syntax, 71, 234–271.
Lobeck, A. (1995). Ellipsis: Functional Heads, Licensing and Identification. New York: Oxford University Press.
Marinis, T., Roberts, L., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2005). Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 271, 53–78.
Marsden, H. (2004). Quantifier scope in non-native Japanese: A comparative interlanguage study of Chinese, English, and Korean-speaking learners. PhD dissertation, University of Durham.
Martin, A.E., & McElree, B. (2008). A content-addressable pointer mechanism underlies comprehension of verb-phrase ellipsis. Journal of Memory and Language, 581, 879–906.
Merchant, J. (2001). The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Murphy, G.L. (1985). Processes of understanding anaphora. Journal of Memory and Language, 241, 290–303.
Patterson, C., Trompelt, H., & Felser, C. (2014). The online application of binding condition B in native and non-native pronoun resolution. Frontiers in Psychology, 5: 147. .
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye-movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 1241, 372–422.
Roberts, L., Gullberg, M., & Indefrey, P. (2008). Online pronoun resolution in L2 discourse: L1 influence and general learner effects. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 301, 333–357.
Rosales Sequeiros, X. (2004). Interpretation of reflexive anaphora in L2 VP-ellipsis: Relevance Theory and paradigms of explanation. Second Language Research 201, 256–280.
Ross, J.R. (1969). Guess who? In R.I. Binnick, A. Davidson, G.M. Green & J.L. Morgan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society (pp. 252–286). Chicago, IL: CLS.
Shapiro, L.P., & Hestvik, A. (1995). On-line comprehension of VP-ellipsis: Syntactic reconstruction and semantic influence. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 241, 517–532.
Shapiro, L.P., Hestvik, A., Lesan, L., & Garcia, A.R. (2003). Charting the time-course of sentence processing: Reconstructing missing arguments in VP-ellipsis constructions. Journal of Memory and Language, 491, 1–19.
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 11, 1–33.
Sugawara, A., Kotek, H., Hackl, M., & Wexler, K. (2013). Long vs. short QR: Evidence from the acquisition of ACD. Proceedings of Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD) 371. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
(2011). The locality of QR: Evidence from children’s interpretations of antecedent contained deletion. Linguistic Inquiry, 421, 305–337.
Szabolcsi, A. (2014). Quantification and ACD: What is the evidence from real-time processing evidence for? A reply to Hackl et al. (2012). Journal of Semantics, 311, 135–145.
Tanenhaus, M., & Carlson, G.N. (1990). Comprehension of deep and surface verb phrase anaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 51, 257–280.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Drummer, Janna-Deborah & Claudia Felser
Felser, Claudia & Janna-Deborah Drummer
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
