In:Typical and Impaired Processing in Morphosyntax
Edited by Vincent Torrens
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 64] 2020
► pp. 91–116
Gone with a trace?
Reactivation at PRO positions
Published online: 21 October 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.64.05lar
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.64.05lar
PRO is a theoretically attractive empty category proposed to fill the subject position in non-finite clauses. This chapter is concerned with the empirical evidence for PRO. We investigate reactivation patterns in Control sentences in Norwegian with data from two reaction time experiments. We use a picture recognition task to measure the time and position of PRO antecedent reactivation during sentence processing. The data analysis explores a baseline that has the ability to separate syntactic priming (correct PRO antecedent reactivation) and repetition priming. We find a significant effect of position and an effect of syntactic priming for Subject Control using mixed effects models. We discuss possible theoretical implications and necessary future research.
Keywords: control, PRO, coreference, trace, reactivation, priming, Norwegian, sentence processing
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Control sentences
- 1.1.1Subject Control
- 1.1.2Object Control
- 1.2Raising sentences
- 1.2.1Subject-to-Subject raising
- 1.2.2Subject-to-Object raising
- 1.3Our objective
- 1.1Control sentences
- 2.The current study
- 2.1Objective and hypothesis: Pilot experiment
- 2.1.1Rationale
- 2.1.2Participants
- 2.1.3Materials
- 2.1.4Procedure
- 2.1.5Results
- 2.1.6Summary pilot study
- 2.2Objective and hypotheses: Main experiment
- 2.2.1Rationale
- 2.2.2Participants
- 2.2.3Materials
- 2.2.4Procedure
- 2.2.5Results
- 2.1Objective and hypothesis: Pilot experiment
- 3.Discussion
- 3.1Pilot experiment
- 3.2Main Experiment
- 3.2.1Subject Control
- 3.2.2Object Control
- 3.2.3Interpretation Subject Control and Object Control
- 4.Conclusions
Acknowledgement References Appendix
References (35)
Boeckx, C., Hornstein, N., & Nunes, J. (2010). Control as movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chomsky, N. (1982). Some concepts and consequences of the theory of government and binding. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
(1993). Lectures on government and binding: The Pisa lectures. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. (Original work published 1981).
Chomsky, N., & Lasnik, H. (1993). The theory of principles and parameters. In J. Jacobs, A. von Stechow, W. Sternefeld & T. Vennemann (Eds.), Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research (Vol. 1, pp. 506–569). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Dixon, R. M. W., & Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Eds.). (2000). Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Faarlund, J. T. (2007). Parameterization and change in non-finite complementation. Diachronica, 24(1), 57–80.
Faarlund, J. T., Lie, S., & Vannebo, K. I. (1997). Norsk referansegrammatikk (Norwegian reference grammar). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Hestvik, A., Nordby, H., & Karlsen, G. (2005). Antecedent reactivation by surface and deep anaphora in Norwegian. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 46(3), 229–38.
Hestvik, A., Schwartz, R. G., & Tornyova, L. (2010). Relative clause gap-filling in children with Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39(5), 443–456.
Hornstein, N., & Nunes, J. (2014). Minimalism and Control. In A. Carnie, D. Siddiqi, & Y. Sato (Eds.), Routledge handbook of syntax (pp. 239–263). Abingdon: Routledge.
Janke, V. (2003). A PRO-less theory of Control. In A. Neeleman & R. Vermeulen (Eds.), University College London Working Papers in Linguistics (UCLWPL) (Vol. 15, pp. 213–242). London: UCL.
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2016). lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0-32.
Larsen, T. N. (2017).
Control and raising: Gone with(out) a trace?
(Unpublished MA thesis). The University of Bergen.
Lødrup, H. (2008). Raising to object in Norwegian and the derived object constraint. Studia Linguistica, 62(2), 155–181.
Manzini, M. R., & Roussou, A. (2000). A minimalist theory of A-movement and control. Lingua, 110(6), 409–447.
Neeleman, A., & van de Koot, H. (2002). The configurational matrix. Linguistic Inquiry, 33(4), 529–574.
Nicol, J. (1988).
Coreference processing during sentence comprehension
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). MIT.
Nicol, J., & Osterhout, L. (1988). Reactivating antecedents of empty categories during parsing (Unpublished manuscript). University of Arizona, Tucson.
Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18(1), 5–19.
Postal, P. (1974). On raising: One rule of English grammar and its theoretical implications. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Radford, A. (2004). Minimalist syntax: Exploring the structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rosenbaum, P. (1967). The grammar of English predicate complement constructions. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Schumacher, P. B., Dangl, M., & Uzun, E. (2016). Thematic role as prominence cue during pronoun resolution in German. In A. Holler & K. Suckow (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on anaphora resolution (pp. 121–147). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Walenski, M. (2002).
Relating parsers and grammars: On the structure and real-time comprehension of English infinitival complements
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, San Diego.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 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.
