The syntax-first model and the parallel/interactive models make different predictions regarding whether syntactic category processing has a temporal and functional primacy over semantic processing. To further resolve this issue, an event-related potential experiment was conducted on 24 Chinese speakers reading Chinese passive sentences with the passive marker BEI (NP1 + BEI + NP2 + Verb). This construction was selected because it is the most-commonly used Chinese passive and very much resembles German passives, upon which the syntax-first hypothesis was primarily based. We manipulated semantic consistency (consistent vs. inconsistent) and syntactic category (noun vs. verb) of the critical verb, yielding four conditions: CORRECT (correct sentences), SEMANTIC (semantic anomaly), SYNTACTIC (syntactic category anomaly), and COMBINED (combined anomalies). Results showed both N400 and P600 effects for sentences with semantic anomaly, with syntactic category anomaly, or with combined anomalies. Converging with recent findings of Chinese ERP studies on various constructions, our study provides further evidence that syntactic category processing does not precede semantic processing in reading Chinese.
展开▼
机译:语法优先模型和并行/交互模型对句法类别处理相对于语义处理是否具有时间和功能优先性做出了不同的预测。为了进一步解决这个问题,我们对24位讲汉语的被动说话者BEI(NP1 + BEI + NP2 +动词)的汉语被动句子进行了与事件相关的潜在实验。选择该构造是因为它是最常用的中文被动语,并且非常类似于德国被动语,而语法优先假设是该被动语的主要依据。我们操纵了关键动词的语义一致性(一致与不一致)和句法类别(名词与动词),产生了四个条件:正确(正确的句子),语义(语义异常),句法(句法类别异常)和组合(合并异常)。结果显示,对于具有语义异常,句法类别异常或组合异常的句子,N400和P600均有效。结合汉语ERP研究在各种结构上的最新发现,我们的研究提供了进一步的证据,表明句法类别处理在阅读汉语中没有先于语义处理。
展开▼