Cover not available

Article published In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First Articles

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

Cognitive motivations behind absent agents in passive sentences across Chinese and English

 | Shanghai Normal University
 | Beijing Language and Culture University
 | Fudan University
Published online: 18 August 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00224.xie
Abstract
Passive sentences featuring absent agents are prevalent in both Chinese and English, yet the cognitive motivations behind these agents have not received sufficient attention. To fill the gap, the current study investigates the differences in comprehension difficulty metrics between passive sentences with and without agents in both languages. Using mixed-effects logistic regression and conditional inference tree models, we find that in Chinese passives, the inaccessibility of subjects and the low predictability of subject dependencies pose comprehension difficulty. Consequently, agents are absent to alleviate the difficulty by reducing the memory burden of subject dependencies. In English passives, the inaccessibility of subjects and the heavy memory load of subject dependencies cause comprehension difficulty. Therefore, agents are absent to mitigate this difficulty by eliminating the memory burden of processing the dependencies between verbs and agents. In conclusion, overall efficient comprehension drives the absence of agents in passive sentences across both Chinese and English.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background and hypotheses
    • 2.1Memory-based theories
    • 2.2Expectation-based theories
    • 2.3Accessibility-based theories
    • 2.4Research questions and hypotheses
  • 3.Data and methodology
    • 3.1Data
    • 3.2Annotation
    • 3.3Statistical modelling
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Cognitive motivations in Chinese bei-passive sentences
      • 4.1.1Fixed and random effects
      • 4.1.2Interactions
    • 4.2Cognitive motivations in English be-passive sentences
      • 4.2.1Fixed and random effects
      • 4.2.2Interactions
    • 4.3Comparison of cognitive motivations across languages
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (59)
References
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D. M., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed effect models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bock, J. K., & Warren, R. K. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 211, 47–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boston, M. F., Hale, J. T., Vasishth, S., & Kliegl, R. (2011). Parallelism and syntactic processes in reading difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(3), 301–349. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, J., Cueni, A., Nikitina, T., & Baayen, R. H. (2007). Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Bouma, I. Kramer & J. Zwarts (Eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation (pp. 69–94). Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, P. (2004). Identifiability and definiteness in Chinese. Linguistics, 42(6), 1129–1184. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Church, K., & Hanks, P. (1990). Word association norms, mutual information, and lexicography. Computational Linguistics, 16(1), 22–29.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clifton, C. (2013). Situational context affects definiteness preferences: Accommodation of presuppositions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(2), 487–501. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dai, Z. Y., Liu, H. T., & Yan, J. W. (2023). Revisiting English written VP-ellipsis and VP-substitution: A dependency-based analysis. Linguistics Vanguard, 9(1), 13–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fang, Y. J., & Liang, M. C. (2019). Kebi yujing xia guanxi daici qushe de duoyinsu fenxi [A comparable context-based multifactorial analysis of relativizer omission by Chinese EFL learners and native speakers of English]. Waiyu Jiaoxue yu Yanjiu [Foreign Language Teaching and Research], 51(3), 435–446.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fang, Y., & Liu, H. T. (2022). Locality effects and predictability in sentence construction: An investigation of ba sentences and SVO sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 50(1), 103–139. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garretson, G. (2004). Coding practices used in the project optimal typology of determiner phrases [Unpublished manuscript]. Boston: Boston University. [URL]
Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In A. P. Marantz, Y. Miyashita & W. O’Neil (Eds.), Image, language, brain: Papers from the first mind articulation project symposium (pp. 95–126). Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gildea, D., & Jaeger, T. F. (2015). Human languages order information efficiently. arXiv preprint arXiv: 1510.02823. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1990). Syntax: A functional-typological Introduction, Vol. 2. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2013). Statistics for linguistics with R: A practical introduction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Ellis, N. C. (2015). Statistical measures for usage-based linguistics. Language Learning, 65(S1), 228–255. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guan, S. M. (2022). “Bei”zi Goushi NP2 Yinxian de Duoyinsu Yanjiu — Kua Bianti de Shijiao [A multifactorial analysis of NP2 occurrence in Chinese Bei construction: A cross-variety perspective] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Shanghai: Shanghai International Studies University.
Hahn, M., & Xu, Y. (2022). Crosslinguistic word order variation reflects evolutionary pressures of dependency and information locality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(24), e2122604119. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, L. R. (1984). Toward a new taxonomy for pragmatic inference: Q-based and R-based implicature. In D. Schiffrin (Ed.), Meaning, form, and use in context: Linguistic applications (pp. 11–42). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaeger, T. F., & Tily, H. (2011). On language ‘utility’: Processing complexity and communicative efficiency. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(3), 323–335. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keenan, E. L., & Dryer, M. S. (1985). Passive in the world’s languages. In S. Timothy (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. 1: Clause structure (pp. 243–281). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, A., Rychly, P., Smrz, P., & Tugwell, D. (2008). The Sketch Engine. In T. Fontenelle (Ed.), Practical lexicography: A reader (pp. 297–306). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leding, J. K. (2018). The animacy advantage in memory: Manipulations of levels of processing and survival processing. The American Journal of Psychology, 131(3), 273–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levy, R. (2008). Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106(3), 1126–1177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, J. R. (2010). Hanyu beidongju de dianxing xingshi jiqi lilun yiyi [Typical forms of Chinese passive sentences and their theoretical significance]. Dongfang Yuyanxue [Journal of East Linguistics], (01), 70–82.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, S. (1994). Xiandai Hanyu “Bei”ziju Yanjiu [The study of bei sentences in Mandarin Chinese]. Beijing: Beijing University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Y. (2024). Cognitive and sociolectal constraints on the theme-recipient alternation: evidence from Mandarin. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Advance online publication. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, H. T. (2008). Dependency distance as a metric of language comprehension difficulty. Journal of Cognitive Science, 9(2), 159–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, H. T., Xu, C. S., & Liang, J. Y. (2016). Dependency length minimization: Puzzles and promises. Glottometrics, 331, 35–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, J. L., & Liu, H. T. (2021). A quantitative investigation of the ellipsis of English relativizers. Linguistics Vanguard, 7(1), 20210020. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Manning, C. D., Surdeanu, M., Bauer, J., Finkel, J., Bethard, S., & McClosky, D. (2014). The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit. In K. Bontcheva & J. B. Zhu (Eds.), Proceedings of 52nd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: System demonstrations (pp. 55–60). Baltimore: Association for Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martinet, A. (1955). Economie des changements phonétiques. Traité de phonologie diachronique. [The Economy of Phonetic Changes; Treatise of Diachronic Phonology]. Francke: Berne.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauner, G., & Koenig, J-P. (1999). Lexical encoding of event participant information. Brain and Language, 68(1–2), 178–184. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). Linguistic vs. conceptual sources of implicit agents in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 43(1), 110–134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mauner, G., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Carlson, G. N. (1995). Implicit arguments in sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(3), 357–382. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mo, H. X. (2002). “Bei”ziju zhong “bei”zi binyu youwu de zhiyue tiaojian [The restriction condition of the object of bei has or not in Chinese bei-construction]. Hangzhou Shifan Xueyuan Xuebao (Shehui Kexue Ban) [Journal of Hangzhou Normal University (Humanities and Social Sciences)], (2), 98–102.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Niu, R. C., & Liu, H. T. (2022). Effects of syntactic distance and word order on language processing: An investigation based on a psycholinguistic treebank of English. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 511, 1043–1062. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2023). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.3.2) [Computer software]. Vienna: Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Rajkumar, R., Van Schijndel, M., White, M., & Schuler, W. (2016). Investigating locality effects and surprisal in written English syntactic choice phenomena. Cognition, 1551, 204–232. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Santazilia, E. (2022). Animacy and inflectional morphology across languages. Netherlands: Brill. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sharma, K., Futrell, R., & Husain, S. (2020). What determines the order of verbal dependents in Hindi? Effects of efficiency in comprehension and production. In E. Chersoni, N. Hollenstein, C. Jacobs, Y. Oseki, L. Prévot & E. Santus (Eds.), Proceedings of the workshop on cognitive modeling and computational linguistics (pp. 1–10). Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shibatani, M. (1985). Passives and related constructions: A prototype analysis. Language, 61(4), 821–848. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Song, W. H., Luo, Z. J., & Yu, J. C. (2007). Xiandai hanyu beidongju shishi yinxian de jiliang fenxi [A quantitative analysis of the occurrence ratio of agent in contemporary Chinese passive constructions]. Zhongguo Yuwen [Studies of the Chinese Language], (02), 113–124+191.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomson, A. J., & Martinet, A. V. (1986). A practical English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tsao, F-F. (1996). On verb classification in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 24(1), 138–191.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, S. J., Denis, D., Liversedge, S. P., & Staub, A. (2018). The word frequency effect during sentence reading: A linear or nonlinear effect of log frequency? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(1), 46–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xiao, R., McEnery, T., & Qian, Y. (2006). Passive constructions in English and Chinese: A corpus-based contrastive study. Languages in Contrast, 6(1), 109–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xie, Y. H., Niu, R. C., & Liu, H. T. (2023). Contrasting the Chinese bei-passive and the English be-passive through dependency distance. In C. Huang, Y. Harada, J-B. Kim, S. Chen, Y-Y Hsu, E. Chersoni, A. Pranav, W. H. Zeng, B. Peng, Y. Li & J. Li (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th Pacific Asia conference on language, information and computation (pp. 406–415). Hong Kong: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2024). A corpus-based study on semantic and cognitive features of bei sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. Advance online publication. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xu, J. J. (2014). “ToRCH2009 xiandai hanyu yuliaoku” jiancheng [Construction of “ToRCH2009 Modern Chinese corpus”]. Yuliaoku Yuyanxue [Corpus Linguistics], 1(1), 103–104.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Xu, X. L., & Xu, J. J. (2021). Yiyan yinghan pingxing yuliaoku de chuangjian [Yiyan English-Chinese Parallel Corpus]. Yuliaoku Yuyanxue [Corpus Linguistics], 8(1), 149–151.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhan, W. D., Guo, R., Chang, B. B., Chen, Y. R., & Chen, L. (2019). Beijing daxue CCL yuliaoku de yanzhi [The development of the Peking University CCL Corpus]. Yuliaoku Yuyanxue [Corpus Linguistics], 6(1), 71–86.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhu, D. X. (1982). Yufa Jiangyi [Lectures on Grammar]. Beijing: The Commercial press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort: An introduction to human ecology. Cambridge: Addison-Wesley Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue