{"title":"Linguistics in the Netherlands 2021","authors":"","doi":"10.1075/avt.38","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.38","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47698085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Foreword","authors":"Mark Dingemanse, E. van Lier, J. Vogels","doi":"10.1075/avt.00046.for","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00046.for","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44217653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In an online production experiment, we investigated the effect of sentence position on the preference for either a nominative or object form of an object pronoun restricted by a relative clause in Dutch. Results show a significant preference for the nominative form of the restricted object pronoun in sentence-initial position as it was chosen in 95% of the cases. In the original object position this percentage is only 20%. The preference for a nominative pronominal object is considered a grammatical norm violation. We account for this in terms of a combination of two factors. First, the presence of the relative clause makes the object ‘long’. Second, the sentence-initial position is a syntactic position that is relatively far removed from the original object position. We argue that when a long object is topicalized, there are too many intervening elements between the pronoun and the verb of which it is the complement. If the distance between the pronominal object and the verb has become too long, the object case fades from the working memory. This then results in the appearance of nominative case as the default case for topicalized object pronominal relative clauses in Dutch.
{"title":"Strange nominative case in topicalized object pronominal relative clauses","authors":"Michelle Suijkerbuijk, T. Redl, Helen de Hoop","doi":"10.1075/avt.00051.sui","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00051.sui","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In an online production experiment, we investigated the effect of sentence position on the preference for either a\u0000 nominative or object form of an object pronoun restricted by a relative clause in Dutch. Results show a significant preference for\u0000 the nominative form of the restricted object pronoun in sentence-initial position as it was chosen in 95% of the cases. In the\u0000 original object position this percentage is only 20%. The preference for a nominative pronominal object is considered a\u0000 grammatical norm violation. We account for this in terms of a combination of two factors. First, the presence of the relative\u0000 clause makes the object ‘long’. Second, the sentence-initial position is a syntactic position that is relatively far removed from\u0000 the original object position. We argue that when a long object is topicalized, there are too many intervening elements between the\u0000 pronoun and the verb of which it is the complement. If the distance between the pronominal object and the verb has become too\u0000 long, the object case fades from the working memory. This then results in the appearance of nominative case as the default case\u0000 for topicalized object pronominal relative clauses in Dutch.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45249877","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Exposure to English is more extensive in today’s society than to French. In this study we investigated crosslinguistic influences from Dutch and/or English to language performances in French as a foreign language, while controlling for language proficiency in French, English and Dutch, and exposure to English. We tested Dutch learners of French (n = 65) with respect to the acceptability of reduced relative clauses and attachment preferences in full relative clauses. The results showed crosslinguistic influence in the acceptability task and the preference task from English and Dutch respectively. Furthermore, language proficiency in English seems to affect attachment preferences in French. We concluded that these findings support the Linguistic Proximity Model (Westergaard et al. 2017) and that French in Dutch secondary education might be a third language, instead of a second language.
在当今社会，接触英语比接触法语更为广泛。在这项研究中，我们调查了荷兰语和/或英语对法语作为外语的语言表现的跨语言影响，同时控制了法语、英语和荷兰语的语言熟练程度以及英语的暴露程度。我们测试了荷兰法语学习者(n = 65)对缩略关系从句的可接受性和对完整关系从句的依恋偏好。结果表明，在英语和荷兰语的可接受性任务和偏好任务中存在跨语言影响。此外，英语的语言熟练程度似乎会影响法语的依恋偏好。我们的结论是，这些发现支持语言接近模型(Westergaard et al. 2017)，荷兰中学教育中的法语可能是第三语言，而不是第二语言。
{"title":"French as a foreign language in the Netherlands","authors":"Evi van Tessel, M. Bril","doi":"10.1075/avt.00056.tes","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00056.tes","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Exposure to English is more extensive in today’s society than to French. In this study we investigated crosslinguistic influences from Dutch and/or English to language performances in French as a foreign language, while controlling for language proficiency in French, English and Dutch, and exposure to English.\u0000We tested Dutch learners of French (n = 65) with respect to the acceptability of reduced relative clauses and attachment preferences in full relative clauses. The results showed crosslinguistic influence in the acceptability task and the preference task from English and Dutch respectively. Furthermore, language proficiency in English seems to affect attachment preferences in French. We concluded that these findings support the Linguistic Proximity Model (Westergaard et al. 2017) and that French in Dutch secondary education might be a third language, instead of a second language.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44349727","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Dutch, posture verbs like liggen ‘lie’ and staan ‘stand’ are obligatorily used in locative constructions with inanimate subjects, classifying the spatial Figure-Ground relation. Prima facie, in this use, posture verbs seem more like functional elements than like lexical verbs. This paper investigates processing of Dutch posture verbs in a reference resolution task in the visual world paradigm, to get more clarity on the nature of these verbs. We know that lexical verbs like rinkelen ‘ring’ cause anticipatory looks towards a matching target referent like telefoon ‘telephone’; and that they suppress looks to a phonological competitor like telescoop ‘telescope’. The functional property of grammatical gender on determiners (de vs. het) is less robust in directing looks. When it comes to anticipating the target referent, and suppressing looks to a phonological competitor, do posture verbs pattern with lexical verbs, or with functional elements like grammatical gender?
{"title":"Are Dutch posture verbs lexical or functional elements?","authors":"I. Mulders","doi":"10.1075/avt.00049.mul","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00049.mul","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In Dutch, posture verbs like liggen ‘lie’ and staan ‘stand’ are obligatorily\u0000 used in locative constructions with inanimate subjects, classifying the spatial Figure-Ground relation. Prima facie, in this use,\u0000 posture verbs seem more like functional elements than like lexical verbs.\u0000 This paper investigates processing of Dutch posture verbs in a reference resolution task in the visual world\u0000 paradigm, to get more clarity on the nature of these verbs. We know that lexical verbs like rinkelen ‘ring’ cause\u0000 anticipatory looks towards a matching target referent like telefoon ‘telephone’; and that they suppress looks to\u0000 a phonological competitor like telescoop ‘telescope’. The functional property of grammatical gender on\u0000 determiners (de vs. het) is less robust in directing looks. When it comes to anticipating the\u0000 target referent, and suppressing looks to a phonological competitor, do posture verbs pattern with lexical verbs, or with\u0000 functional elements like grammatical gender?","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46211436","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper investigates adverbial superlative expressions in Dutch that have a temporal interpretation, i.e. that contain the forms eerst ‘first’, laatst ‘latest’, and vroegst ‘earliest’. I focus on possessive superlatives and superlatives embedded under the preposition voor. Although both constructions contain bare superlatives and are interpreted temporally, they represent semantically and pragmatically different readings, and attach to the sentence in structurally different ways. I present a semantic analysis of both types of superlatives, and I show what this entails for how time adverbials interact with superlatives.
{"title":"Temporal adverbial superlatives in Dutch","authors":"J. Tellings","doi":"10.1075/avt.00052.tel","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00052.tel","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper investigates adverbial superlative expressions in Dutch that have a temporal interpretation, i.e. that\u0000 contain the forms eerst ‘first’, laatst ‘latest’, and vroegst ‘earliest’. I\u0000 focus on possessive superlatives and superlatives embedded under the preposition voor. Although both\u0000 constructions contain bare superlatives and are interpreted temporally, they represent semantically and pragmatically different\u0000 readings, and attach to the sentence in structurally different ways. I present a semantic analysis of both types of superlatives,\u0000 and I show what this entails for how time adverbials interact with superlatives.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48968249","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
An ongoing debate in the interpretation of referring expressions concerns the degree to which listeners make use of perspective information during referential processing. We aim to contribute to this debate by considering perspective shifting in narrative discourse. In a web-based mouse-tracking experiment in Dutch, we investigated whether listeners automatically shift to a narrative character’s perspective when resolving ambiguous referring expressions, and whether different linguistic perspective-shifting devices affect how and when listeners switch to another perspective. We compared perspective-neutral, direct, and free indirect discourse, manipulating which objects are visible to the character. Our results do not show a clear effect of the perspective shifting devices on participants’ eventual choice of referent, but our online mouse-tracking data reveal processing differences that suggest that listeners are indeed sensitive to the conventional markers of perspective shift associated with direct and (to a lesser degree) free indirect discourse.
{"title":"Taking the perspective of narrative characters","authors":"J. Vogels, S. Bimpikou, Owen Kapelle, E. Maier","doi":"10.1075/avt.00054.vog","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00054.vog","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 An ongoing debate in the interpretation of referring expressions concerns the degree to which listeners make use\u0000 of perspective information during referential processing. We aim to contribute to this debate by considering perspective shifting\u0000 in narrative discourse. In a web-based mouse-tracking experiment in Dutch, we investigated whether listeners automatically shift\u0000 to a narrative character’s perspective when resolving ambiguous referring expressions, and whether different linguistic\u0000 perspective-shifting devices affect how and when listeners switch to another perspective. We compared perspective-neutral, direct,\u0000 and free indirect discourse, manipulating which objects are visible to the character. Our results do not show a clear effect of the\u0000 perspective shifting devices on participants’ eventual choice of referent, but our online mouse-tracking data reveal processing\u0000 differences that suggest that listeners are indeed sensitive to the conventional markers of perspective shift associated with\u0000 direct and (to a lesser degree) free indirect discourse.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47755577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Unlike its English counterpart between, the Biblical Hebrew (BH) preposition bên does not allow a conjoined object (between A and B), but it uses additional prepositions in two typologically unusual patterns: bên A wə-bên B ‘between A and-between B’ and bên A lə-B ‘between A to-B’. This article shows that these two patterns, and their equivalence with the English one, can be accounted for semantically, on the basis of the underlying filter behaviour of the ‘betweenness’ meaning.
{"title":"‘Between’ constructions in Biblical Hebrew","authors":"J. Zwarts","doi":"10.1075/avt.00055.zwa","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00055.zwa","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Unlike its English counterpart between, the Biblical Hebrew (BH) preposition bên does not allow a conjoined object (between A and B), but it uses additional prepositions in two typologically unusual patterns: bên A wə-bên B ‘between A and-between B’ and bên A lə-B ‘between A to-B’. This article shows that these two patterns, and their equivalence with the English one, can be accounted for semantically, on the basis of the underlying filter behaviour of the ‘betweenness’ meaning.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44295687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study reports on an investigation of the productivity of the Dutch diminutive paradigm, which gives rise to five suffixal allomorphs, against the background of Yang’s (2016) Tolerance Principle. It shows how, by studying the frequency of the allomorphs and the environments in which they occur, we can use the Tolerance Principle to determine if a productive rule system can be found for the Dutch diminutives. In doing so, we also describe how we collected the necessary data by setting up a corpus study on Dutch diminutives, including a specific one with data from child directed speech.
{"title":"The productivity of Dutch diminutives","authors":"Rosita van Tuijl, P. Coopmans","doi":"10.1075/avt.00053.tui","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00053.tui","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This study reports on an investigation of the productivity of the Dutch diminutive paradigm, which gives rise to\u0000 five suffixal allomorphs, against the background of Yang’s (2016) Tolerance Principle.\u0000 It shows how, by studying the frequency of the allomorphs and the environments in which they occur, we can use the Tolerance\u0000 Principle to determine if a productive rule system can be found for the Dutch diminutives. In doing so, we also describe how we\u0000 collected the necessary data by setting up a corpus study on Dutch diminutives, including a specific one with data from child\u0000 directed speech.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49149345","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Maud Beljon, Dennis Joosen, O. Koeneman, Bram Ploum, Noëlle Sommer, Peter de Swart, Veerle Wilms
Acceptability judgements of syntactic island violations are often claimed to improve by either increasing the complexity of the wh-filler phrase or integrating the violating sentence into a discourse. In two acceptability judgement tasks, we looked at wh-island violations in Dutch by varying the complexity of the filler phrase and by presenting the sentences either in isolation or with a preceding discourse. We found that neither variable had a significant effect in isolation, but that only in their combination a significant effect was observed. The same effect showed up in non-island conditions, however. This is in contrast to findings in the literature on English and French and suggests that the complexity effect in Dutch is not syntactic. We therefore conclude that wh-islands are strong islands in Dutch (Broekhuis & Corver 2015) and show that the contrast with English and French can be made to follow from featural Relativized Minimality (Rizzi 2017), taking into account the verb second property of Dutch.
{"title":"The effect of filler complexity and context on the acceptability of wh-island violations in\u0000 Dutch","authors":"Maud Beljon, Dennis Joosen, O. Koeneman, Bram Ploum, Noëlle Sommer, Peter de Swart, Veerle Wilms","doi":"10.1075/avt.00047.bel","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00047.bel","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Acceptability judgements of syntactic island violations are often claimed to improve by either increasing the\u0000 complexity of the wh-filler phrase or integrating the violating sentence into a discourse. In two acceptability\u0000 judgement tasks, we looked at wh-island violations in Dutch by varying the complexity of the filler phrase and by\u0000 presenting the sentences either in isolation or with a preceding discourse. We found that neither variable had a significant\u0000 effect in isolation, but that only in their combination a significant effect was observed. The same effect showed up in non-island\u0000 conditions, however. This is in contrast to findings in the literature on English and French and suggests that the complexity\u0000 effect in Dutch is not syntactic. We therefore conclude that wh-islands are strong islands in Dutch (Broekhuis & Corver 2015) and show that the contrast with English and French can be\u0000 made to follow from featural Relativized Minimality (Rizzi 2017), taking into account\u0000 the verb second property of Dutch.","PeriodicalId":35138,"journal":{"name":"Linguistics in the Netherlands","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45838694","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：