2018
DOI: 10.5334/gjgl.313
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lexical case marking affects the processing of animacy in simple verbs, but not particle verbs: Evidence from event-related potentials

Abstract: In case-marking languages like German, nonstandard nominative-dative verbs lead to enhanced processing costs. So far, it is unclear if these case-marking effects reflect the special syntax or semantics of nominative-dative verbs. We present the results of two ERP experiments aimed to disentangle semantic and syntactic contributions to lexical case-marking by manipulating object animacy and case-marking for two verb types: simple verbs (nonstandard syntax and semantics for nominative-dative verbs) and particle … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 73 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the processing of sentences, the animacy of arguments is the central semantic cue for argument role assignment (e.g., MacDonald et al, 1994 ; Trueswell et al, 1994 ; Weckerly and Kutas, 1999 ; Frisch and Schlesewsky, 2001 ; Kuperberg, 2007 ; Branigan et al, 2008 ; Bornkessel-Schlesewsky et al, 2011 ; Paczynski and Kuperberg, 2011 ; Czypionka, 2014 ), interacting with the processing of number agreement (Bamyacı et al, 2014 ) and case marking (Verhoeven, 2014 ; Czypionka and Eulitz, 2018 ). The prominent role of argument animacy in sentence processing is reflected in its central role in models of sentence processing, where it is associated with the assignment of thematic roles (see, among others, Levelt, 1993 ; Bornkessel-Schlesewsky and Schlesewsky, 2006 , 2009 , 2013 ; Hagoort, 2007 , 2016 ; Kuperberg, 2007 for different approaches to sentence comprehension and production).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the processing of sentences, the animacy of arguments is the central semantic cue for argument role assignment (e.g., MacDonald et al, 1994 ; Trueswell et al, 1994 ; Weckerly and Kutas, 1999 ; Frisch and Schlesewsky, 2001 ; Kuperberg, 2007 ; Branigan et al, 2008 ; Bornkessel-Schlesewsky et al, 2011 ; Paczynski and Kuperberg, 2011 ; Czypionka, 2014 ), interacting with the processing of number agreement (Bamyacı et al, 2014 ) and case marking (Verhoeven, 2014 ; Czypionka and Eulitz, 2018 ). The prominent role of argument animacy in sentence processing is reflected in its central role in models of sentence processing, where it is associated with the assignment of thematic roles (see, among others, Levelt, 1993 ; Bornkessel-Schlesewsky and Schlesewsky, 2006 , 2009 , 2013 ; Hagoort, 2007 , 2016 ; Kuperberg, 2007 for different approaches to sentence comprehension and production).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%