Cover not available

Article published In: Linguistic Perspectives on Morphological Processing
Edited by Harald Clahsen, Vera Heyer and Jana Reifegerste
[The Mental Lexicon 11:2] 2016
► pp. 242–276

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

Agreement attraction in Serbian

Decomposing markedness

 | BCBL – Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, San Sebastián, Spain
 | Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for Science, Bilbao, Spain
 | BCBL – Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, San Sebastián, Spain
Published online: 28 July 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.11.2.04ris
Asymmetric number attraction effects have been typically explained via a privative markedness account: plural nouns are more marked than singular ones and thus stronger attractors. However, this account does not explain results from tripartite systems, in which a third number value is available, like paucal. Here we tested whether attraction effects can be driven by specific markedness sub-components, such as frequency/naturalness of use, using Serbian, in which participles can agree with masculine subjects in singular, plural and paucal. We first conducted a naturalness judgment task, finding the following naturalness/frequency pattern: singular,plural<paucal. In a subsequent forced-choice task, we presented participants with preambles containing a singular, a plural or a paucal headnoun (the castle[Sg] /two castles[Pauc] /the castles[Pl]) modified by singular/plural/paucal attractors (with the window[Sg] /with two windows[Pauc] /with the windows[Pl]). Three options were provided to complete the sentence (resembles[Sg] /resemble[Pauc] /resemble[Pl] gothic architecture).Both accuracy and reaction times (RTs) were collected. Accuracy data reflected the naturalness/frequency pattern, with paucal being the strongest attractor, and plural and singular attracting equally. However, reaction times showed a difference between singular and plural, suggesting co-influence of both frequency/naturalness and morphological markedness. We emphasize the necessity of re-defining markedness and testing attraction through different markedness sub-components (i.e. frequency/naturalness) to explain attraction cross-linguistically.
References (40)
Badecker, W., & Kuminiak, F. (2007). Morphology, agreement and working memory retrieval in sentence production: Evidence from gender and case in Slovak. Journal of Memory and Language, 561, 65–85. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Badecker, W., & Lewis, R. (2007). A new theory and computational model of working memory in sentence production: Agreement errors as failures of cue-based retrieval. In 20th Annual CUNY Sentence Processing Conference. San Diego, La Jolla, CA: University of California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barr, D.J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H.J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 681, 255–278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2013). Linear mixed-effect models using Eigen and S4. R package version: 1.0-5. <[URL]>.
Belić, B. (2008). Minor paucal in Serbian. In G. Zybatow, L. Szucsich, U. Junghanns, & R. Meyer (Eds.), Formal description of Slavic Languages: The Fifth Conference, Leipzig 2003 (pp. 258–269). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bock, K., & Eberhard, K.M. (1993). Meaning, sound and syntax in English number agreement. Language and Cognitive Processes, 81, 57–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bock, K., & Miller, C.A. (1991). Broken agreement. Cognitive Psychology, 231, 45–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. (2001). Explaining morphosyntactic competition. Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory, 111–44.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Browne, W. (1993). 7 Serbo-Croat. The Slavonic Languages, 306–387.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corbett, G.G. (1983). Hierarchies, targets and controllers: Agreement patterns in slavic.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2000). Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eberhard, K.M. (1997). The marked effect of number on subject–verb agreement. Journal of Memory and Language, 361, 147–164. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Franck, J., Cronel-Ohayon, S., Chillier, L., Frauenfelder, U.H., Hamann, C., Rizzi, L., & Zesiger, P. (2004). Normal and pathological development of subject–verb agreement in speech production: A study on French children. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 171, 147–180. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Franck, J., Vigliocco, G., & Nicol, J. (2002). Subject-verb agreement errors in French and English: The role of syntactic hierarchy. Language and Cognitive Processes, 171, 371–404. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Franks, S. (1994). Parametric properties of numeral phrases in Slavic. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 121, 597–674. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Greenberg, J.H. (1966). Language universals: With special reference to feature hierarchies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harrison, A.J. (2009). Production of subject-verb agreement in Slovene and English (Doctoral dissertation). The University of EdinburghGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hartsuiker, R.J., Antón-Méndez, I., & van Zee, M. (2001). Object attraction in subject-verb agreement construction. Journal of Memory and Language, 451, 546‑572. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hartsuiker, R.J., Schriefers, H.J., Bock, K., & Kikstra, G.M. (2003). Morphophonological influences on the construction of subject-verb agreement. Memory & Cognition, 311, 1316–1326. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (2006). Against markedness (and what to replace it with). Journal of linguistics, 421, 25–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Häussler, J. (2009). The emergence of attraction errors during sentence comprehension (Doctoral dissertation).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Humphreys, K.R., & Bock, K. (2005). Notional number agreement in English. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 121, 689–695. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kager, R., Qiuwu (马秋武)· Ma, & Jialing (王嘉龄)· Wang. (1999). Optimality theory (Vol. 21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klajn, I. (2005). Gramatika srpskog jezika. Beograd: Zavod za udžbenike i nastavna sredstva.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levelt, W.J. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 141, 41–104. London: Croom Helm. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mancini, S., Molinaro, N., Rizzi, L., & Carreiras, M. (2011). When persons disagree: an ERP study of Unagreement in Spanish. Psychophysiology, 481, 1361–1371. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McCarthy, J.J. (2011). Doing optimality theory: Applying theory to data.John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Molinaro, N., Carreiras, C., & Duñabeitia, J.A. (2012). Semantic combinatorial processing of non-anomalous expressions. Neuroimage, 591, 3488–3501. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Molinaro, N., Vespignani, F., Canal, P., Fonda, S., & Cacciari, C. (2008). Cloze-probability does not only affect N400 amplitude: The case of complex prepositions. Psychophysiology, 451, 1008–1012. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perez, A., Molinaro, N., Mancini, S., Barraza, P., & Carreiras, M. (2012). Oscillatory dynamics related to the Unagreement pattern in Spanish. Neuropsychologia, 501, 2584–2597. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Šarić, A. (2014). Numeral induced agreement mismatches in Serbo-Croatian (Unpublished master dissertation). Utrecht University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Staub, A. (2009). On the interpretation of the number attraction effect: Response time evidence. Journal of Memory and Language, 601, 308–327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Team, R.C. (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 20121.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tucker, M.A., Idrissi, A., & Almeida, D. (2015). Representing number in the real-time processing of agreement: self-paced reading evidence from Arabic. Frontiers in Psychology, 61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vigliocco, G., Butterworth, B., & Semenza, C. (1995). Constructing subject-verb agreement in speech: the role of semantic and morphological factors. Journal of Memory and Language, 341, 186‑215. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vigliocco, G., Butterworth, B., & Garrett, M.F. (1996a). Subject-verb agreement in Spanish and English: Differences in the role of conceptual constraints. Cognition, 611, 261–298. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vigliocco, G., Hartsuiker, R.J., Jarema, G., & Kolk, H.H.J. (1996b). One or more labels on the bottles? Notional concord in Dutch and French. Language and Cognitive Processes, 111, 407–442. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wagers, M.W., Lau, E.F., & Phillips, C. (2009). Agreement attraction in comprehension: Representations and processes. Journal of Memory and Language, 611, 206–237. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wechsler, S., & Zlatić, L. (2003). The many faces of agreement. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zlatić, L. (1997). The structure of the Serbian noun phrase (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by eight other publications

Bleotu, Adina Camelia & Brian Dillon
2024. Romanian (subject-like) DPs attract more than bare nouns: Evidence from speeded continuations. Journal of Memory and Language 134 ► pp. 104445 ff. DOI logo
Türk, Utku & Pavel Logačev
2024. Agreement attraction in Turkish: the case of genitive attractors. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 39:4 ► pp. 448 ff. DOI logo
Willer-Gold, Jana
2024. Agreement. In The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics, ► pp. 263 ff. DOI logo
Tucker, Matthew A., Ali Idrissi & Diogo Almeida
2021. Attraction Effects for Verbal Gender and Number Are Similar but Not Identical: Self-Paced Reading Evidence From Modern Standard Arabic. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Reifegerste, Jana, Rebecca Jarvis & Claudia Felser
2020. Effects of chronological age on native and nonnative sentence processing: Evidence from subject-verb agreement in German. Journal of Memory and Language 111 ► pp. 104083 ff. DOI logo
Driemel, Imke & Jelena Stojković
2019. How to agree with a QNP. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4:1 DOI logo
Hammerly, Christopher, Adrian Staub & Brian Dillon
2019. The grammaticality asymmetry in agreement attraction reflects response bias: Experimental and modeling evidence. Cognitive Psychology 110 ► pp. 70 ff. DOI logo
Lago, Sol, Martina Gračanin-Yuksek, Duygu Fatma Şafak, Orhan Demir, Bilal Kırkıcı & Claudia Felser
2019.  Straight from the horse’s mouth . Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9:3 ► pp. 398 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue