14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The wrong horse was bet on: the effects of argument structure versus argument adjacency on the processing of idiomatic sentences

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Psycholinguistic research remains puzzled about the circumstances under which syntactically transformed idioms keep their figurative meaning. There is an abundance of linguistic and psycholinguistic studies that have examined which factors may determine why some idioms are more syntactically fixed than others, including transparency, compositionality, and syntactic frozenness; however, they have returned inconclusive, sometimes even conflicting, results. This is the first study to examine argument structure (i.e., the number of arguments a verb takes) and argument adjacency (i.e., the position of the critical arguments relative to the verb) and their effects on the processing of idiomatic and literal sentences in German. Our results suggest that neither the traditional models of idiom processing (according to which idioms are stored as fixed entries) nor more recent hybrid theories (which concede some compositional handling in addition to a fixed entry) adequately account for the effects of argument structure or argument adjacency. Therefore, this study challenges existing models of idiom processing.

          Methods

          In two sentence-completion experiments, participants listened to idiomatic and literal sentences in both active and passive voice without the sentence-final verb. They indicated which of three visually-presented verbs best completed the sentence. We manipulated the factor argument structure within experiments and argument adjacency across experiments. In Experiment 1, passivized three-argument sentences had the critical argument adjacent to the verb while two-argument sentences had the critical argument non-adjacent to the verb, and vice versa in Experiment 2.

          Results

          In both experiments, voice interacted with argument structure. Active sentences—both literal and idiomatic—showed equivalent processing of two- and three-argument sentences. However, passive sentences returned contrasting effects. In Experiment 1, three-argument sentences were processed faster than two-argument sentences and vice versa in Experiment 2. This pattern corresponds to faster processing when critical arguments are adjacent than non-adjacent.

          Discussion

          The results point to the dominant role of argument adjacency over the number of arguments in the processing of syntactically transformed sentences. Regarding idiom processing, we conclude that the adjacency of the verb to its critical arguments determines whether passivized idioms keep their figurative meaning and present the implications of this finding for relevant models of idiom processing.

          Related collections

          Most cited references62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Rules and representations

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Technical note: an R package for fitting generalized linear mixed models in animal breeding.

              Mixed models have been used extensively in quantitative genetics to study continuous and discrete traits. A standard quantitative genetic model proposes that the effects of levels of some random factor (e.g., sire) are correlated accordingly with their relationships. For this reason, routines for mixed models available in standard packages cannot be used for genetic analysis. The pedigreemm package of R was developed as an extension of the lme4 package, and allows mixed models with correlated random effects to be fitted for Gaussian, binary, and count responses. Following the method of Harville and Callanan (1989), a correlation between levels of the grouping factor (e.g., sire) is induced by post-multiplying the incidence matrix of the levels of this random factor by the Cholesky factor of the corresponding (co)variance matrix (e.g., the numerator relationship matrix between sires). Estimation methods available in pedigreemm include approximations to maximum likelihood and REML. This note describes the classes of models that can be fitted using pedigreemm and presents examples that illustrate its use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                04 May 2023
                2023
                : 14
                : 1123917
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Institute of German Studies, University of Münster , Münster, Germany
                [2] 2Department of Psychology, University of Konstanz , Konstanz, Germany
                [3] 3Department of Linguistics, University of Vienna , Vienna, Austria
                Author notes

                Edited by: Rebecca Carroll, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany

                Reviewed by: Ankelien Schippers, University of Oldenburg, Germany; Prakash Mondal, Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, India

                *Correspondence: Laura Reimer, laura.reimer@ 123456uni-muenster.de
                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1123917
                10194116
                7f4fcfbb-cea9-4e49-9ff4-c2d814f47e40
                Copyright © 2023 Reimer and Smolka.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 14 December 2022
                : 31 March 2023
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 8, Equations: 0, References: 62, Pages: 19, Words: 15760
                Funding
                This study was supported by the Volkswagen Foundation, Grant FP 561/11, which was awarded to ES.
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                Language Sciences

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                idiomatic sentences,figurative meaning,syntactic processing,passive voice,argument structure,number of arguments,adjacency

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content104

                Most referenced authors376