Keywords
Turkish
syntax-discourse interface
real-time processing
interpretation
How to Cite
Abstract
This study investigates the interpretative and processing mechanisms of null and overt subject pronouns at the syntax-discourse interface among native Turkish speakers. The research focuses on whether challenges in L2 acquisition of subject pronoun distribution are also observed in the properties of native grammars, guided by the Interface Hypothesis (IH) and the Pragmatic Principles Violation Hypothesis (PPVH). Results from the acceptability judgement task indicate that native Turkish speakers do not uniformly interpret null and overt subjects; overt subjects are often pragmatically overused in contexts requiring topic continuity. However, the findings from the self-paced reading task showed no significant processing differences between felicitous and infelicitous uses of subject pronouns, suggesting that native speakers might not actively penalize grammatical infelicities during real-time processing. These results suggest that issues traditionally associated with L2 acquisition might also be intrinsic to native language behavior. The study calls for further cross-linguistic research to determine if these findings are specific to TurkThis study investigates the interpretative and processing mechanisms of null and overt subject pronouns at the syntax-discourse interface among native Turkish speakers. The research focuses on whether challenges in L2 acquisition of subject pronoun distribution are also observed in the properties of native grammars, guided by the Interface Hypothesis (IH) and the Pragmatic Principles Violation Hypothesis (PPVH). Results from the acceptability judgement task indicate that native Turkish speakers do not uniformly interpret null and overt subjects; overt subjects are often pragmatically overused in contexts requiring topic continuity. However, the findings from the self-paced reading task showed no significant processing differences between felicitous and infelicitous uses of subject pronouns, suggesting that native speakers might not actively penalize grammatical infelicities during real-time processing. These results suggest that issues traditionally associated with L2 acquisition might also be intrinsic to native language behavior. The study calls for further cross-linguistic research to determine if these findings are specific to Turkish or part of a broader pattern in null subject languages.sh or part of a broader pattern in null subject languages.
References
Alonso-Ovalle, L., Fernández-Solera, S., Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (2002). Null vs. overt pronouns and the topic-focus articulation in Spanish. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 14, 151-170.
Azar, Z., & Özyürek, A. (2015). Discourse management: Reference tracking in speech and gesture in Turkish narratives. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 222-240. https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.4.2.06aza
Çeltek, A. (2020). The acquisition of discourse-pragmatic rules for null and overt first-person subjects by Greek learners of Turkish. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(2), 711-728. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.759278
Çınar, O. (2022). Acquisition of subjects in second language Turkish at the syntax-discourse interface. Paradigma Akademi.
Çınar, O. (2023). The interpretation of overt subject pronominals in Turkish. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 34(2), 165-200. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1292056
Chemla, E., Cummins, C., & Singh, R. (2017). Training and timing local scalar enrichments under global pragmatic pressures. Journal of Semantics, 34(1), 107-126. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffw006ff. ffhal- 02474175f
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding: The pisa lectures. Foris Publications.
Dillon, B., Clifton Jr, C., & Frazier, L. (2014). Pushed aside: Parentheticals, memory and processing. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(4), 483-498. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.866684
Drummond, A. (2013). Ibex Farm. Available at: https://farm.pcibex.net/
Enç, M. (1986). Topic switching and pronominal subjects in Turkish. In D. I. Slobin & K. Zimmer (Eds.), Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 195-208). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Engelhardt, P.E., Bailey, K.G.D., & Ferreira, F. (2006). Do speakers and listeners observe the Gricean Maxim of Quantity? Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 554–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.009
Enochson, K., & Culbertson, J. (2015). Collecting psycholinguistic response time data using Amazon Mechanical Turk. PloS One, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116946
Erguvanlı-Taylan, E. (1986). Pronominal versus zero representation of anaphora in Turkish. In D. I. Slobin & K. Zimmer (Eds.), Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 209-231). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gibson, E., Piantadosi, S., & Fedorenko, K. (2011). Using Mechanical Turk to obtain and analyze English acceptability judgments. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(8), 509-524. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2011.00295.x
Gračanin-Yüksek, M., Lago, S., Şafak, D. F., Demir, O., & Kırkıcı, B. (2020). The interpretation of syntactically unconstrained anaphors in Turkish heritage speakers. Second Language Research, 36(4), 475-501. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319841403
Gürel, A. (2006). L2 acquisition of pragmatic and syntactic constraints in the use of overt and null subject pronouns. In R. Slabakova, P. Prévost and S. Montrul (Eds), Inquiries in Linguistic Development (pp. 259-282). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.133.15gur
Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jegerski, J., VanPatten, B., & Keating, G. D. (2011). Cross-linguistic variation and the acquisition of pronominal reference in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research, 27(4), 481-507. https://doi.org/10.1177/02676583114060
Judy, T. (2015). Knowledge and processing of subject-related discourse properties in L2 near-native speakers of Spanish, L1 Farsi. In T. Judy & S. Perpiñán (Eds.), The acquisition of Spanish in understudied language pairings (pp. 169-200). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.3.07jud
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 228–238. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-3445.111.2.228
Keating, G. D., VanPatten, B., & Jegerski, J. (2011). Who was walking on the beach?: Anaphora resolution in Spanish heritage speakers and adult second language learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33(2), 193-221. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263110000748
Lozano, C. (2016). Pragmatic principles in anaphora resolution at the syntax- discourse interface: advanced English learners of Spanish in the CEDEL2 corpus. In M. Alonso Ramos (Ed.), Spanish learner corpus research: Current trends and future perspectives (pp. 235–265). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.78.09loz
Lozano, C. (2018). The development of anaphora resolution at the syntax-discourse interface: Pronominal subjects in Greek learners of Spanish. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 47(2), 411-430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-017-9541-8
Margaza, P., & Gavarró, A. (2020). Null/overt subject alternations in L2 Spanish and L2 Greek. Glossa: a Journal of General Linguistics, 5(1): 55, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.969
Özsoy, A. S. (1987). The null subject parameter and Turkish. In H.E. Boeschoten & L.T. Verhoeven (Eds.), Studies on modern Turkish. Proceedings of the third conference on Turkish linguistics (pp. 82-90). Tilburg University Press.
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22, 339–368. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr271oa
Sorace, A., & Serratrice, L. (2009). Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: Beyond structural overlap. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 195-210. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069093398
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor
Sprouse, R. A. (2011). The Interface Hypothesis and Full Transfer/Full Access/Full Parse: A brief comparison. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1(1), 97-100. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.1.16spr
Tsimpli, L., & Sorace, A. (2006). Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax-semantics and syntax- discourse phenomena. In 30th annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 653-664). Cascadilla Press.
Turan, Ü. D. (1995). Null vs. Overt Subjects in Turkish Discourse: A Centering Analysis. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
Wagers, M. W., & Phillips, C. (2014). Going the distance: Memory and control processes in active dependency construction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(7), 1274-1304. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.858363
White, L. (2011). Second language acquisition at the interfaces. Lingua, 121, 577-590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.05.005
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi