Investigating Variation in Island Effects: A Case Study of Norwegian Wh-Extraction.

IF 0.8 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Natural Language & Linguistic Theory Pub Date : 2018-08-01 Epub Date: 2017-11-27 DOI:10.1007/s11049-017-9390-z
Dave Kush, Terje Lohndal, Jon Sprouse
{"title":"Investigating Variation in Island Effects: A Case Study of Norwegian Wh-Extraction.","authors":"Dave Kush,&nbsp;Terje Lohndal,&nbsp;Jon Sprouse","doi":"10.1007/s11049-017-9390-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We present a series of large-scale formal acceptability judgment studies that explored Norwegian island phenomena in order to follow up on previous observations that speakers of Mainland Scandinavian languages like Norwegian accept violations of certain island constraints that are unacceptable in most languages cross-linguistically. We tested the acceptability of wh-extraction from five island types: whether-, complex NP, subject, adjunct, and relative clause (RC) islands. We found clear evidence of subject and adjunct island effects on wh-extraction. We failed to find evidence that Norwegians accept wh-extraction out of complex NPs and RCs. Our participants judged wh-extraction from complex NPs and RCs to be just as unacceptable as subject and adjunct island violations. The pattern of effects in Norwegian paralleled island effects that recent experimental work has documented in other languages like English and Italian (Sprouse et al. 2012; Sprouse et al. 2016). Norwegian judgments consistently differed from prior findings for one island type: <i>whether</i>-islands. Our results reveal that Norwegians exhibit significant inter-individual variation in their sensitivity to whether-island effects, with many participants exhibiting no sensitivity to whether-island violations whatsoever. We discuss the implications of our findings for universalist approaches to island constraints. We also suggest ways of reconciling our results with previous observations, and offer a systematic experimental framework in which future research can investigate factors that govern apparent island insensitivity.</p>","PeriodicalId":18975,"journal":{"name":"Natural Language & Linguistic Theory","volume":"36 3","pages":"743-779"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11049-017-9390-z","citationCount":"50","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Natural Language & Linguistic Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-017-9390-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/11/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 50

Abstract

We present a series of large-scale formal acceptability judgment studies that explored Norwegian island phenomena in order to follow up on previous observations that speakers of Mainland Scandinavian languages like Norwegian accept violations of certain island constraints that are unacceptable in most languages cross-linguistically. We tested the acceptability of wh-extraction from five island types: whether-, complex NP, subject, adjunct, and relative clause (RC) islands. We found clear evidence of subject and adjunct island effects on wh-extraction. We failed to find evidence that Norwegians accept wh-extraction out of complex NPs and RCs. Our participants judged wh-extraction from complex NPs and RCs to be just as unacceptable as subject and adjunct island violations. The pattern of effects in Norwegian paralleled island effects that recent experimental work has documented in other languages like English and Italian (Sprouse et al. 2012; Sprouse et al. 2016). Norwegian judgments consistently differed from prior findings for one island type: whether-islands. Our results reveal that Norwegians exhibit significant inter-individual variation in their sensitivity to whether-island effects, with many participants exhibiting no sensitivity to whether-island violations whatsoever. We discuss the implications of our findings for universalist approaches to island constraints. We also suggest ways of reconciling our results with previous observations, and offer a systematic experimental framework in which future research can investigate factors that govern apparent island insensitivity.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
研究岛屿效应的变异:以挪威的wh提取为例。
我们提出了一系列大规模的形式可接受性判断研究,探索了挪威岛屿现象,以跟进之前的观察,即斯堪的纳维亚大陆语言(如挪威语)的使用者接受违反某些岛屿约束的行为,而这些行为在大多数语言中是跨语言不可接受的。我们从五种岛类型中测试了wh-提取的可接受性:是否-岛、复杂NP岛、主语岛、副语岛和关系从句岛(RC)。我们发现了明确的证据表明,受试者和辅助岛效应对who提取。我们没有找到证据表明挪威人接受从复杂的NPs和rc中提取whi -extraction。我们的参与者判断,从复杂的NPs和rc中提取who与主体和附属岛屿违规一样不可接受。挪威的效应模式与最近的实验工作在英语和意大利语等其他语言中记录的岛屿效应相似(Sprouse et al. 2012;Sprouse et al. 2016)。挪威人对一种岛屿类型的判断始终与先前的发现不同:是否是岛屿。我们的研究结果表明,挪威人对是否岛效应的敏感性表现出显著的个体间差异,许多参与者对是否岛违规行为没有任何敏感性。我们讨论了我们的发现对岛屿约束的普遍主义方法的影响。我们还提出了将我们的结果与以前的观察结果相协调的方法,并提供了一个系统的实验框架,在这个框架中,未来的研究可以调查影响明显岛屿不敏感的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Natural Language & Linguistic Theory provides a forum for the discussion of theoretical research that pays close attention to natural language data, offering a channel of communication between researchers of a variety of points of view. The journal actively seeks to bridge the gap between descriptive work and work of a highly theoretical, less empirically oriented nature. In attempting to strike this balance, the journal presents work that makes complex language data accessible to those unfamiliar with the language area being studied and work that makes complex theoretical positions more accessible to those working outside the theoretical framework under review. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory features: generative studies on the syntax, semantics, phonology, morphology, and other aspects of natural language; surveys of recent theoretical developments that facilitate accessibility for a graduate student readership; reactions/replies to recent papers book reviews of important linguistics titles; special topic issues.         Springer fully understands that access to your work is important to you and to the sponsors of your research. We are listed as a green publisher in the SHERPA/RoMEO database, as we allow self-archiving, but most importantly we are fully transparent about your rights. Read more about author''s rights on: http://www.springer.com/gp/open-access/authors-rights
期刊最新文献
Complementizer agreement is clitic doubling Split coordination with adjectives in Italian Anticausatives in transitive guise Head movement from non-complements: Evidence from Aleut Voice in Turkish: Re-thinking u-syncretism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1