...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of memory and language >Do classifiers make the syntactic count/mass distinction? Insights from ERPs in classifier processing in Japanese
【24h】

Do classifiers make the syntactic count/mass distinction? Insights from ERPs in classifier processing in Japanese

机译:分类器是否进行句法计数/质量区分?来自ERP的日语分类处理见解

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

It has long been assumed that classifier languages lack syntactic distinctions of objects and substances (i.e., count/mass distinction; Allan, 1977; Chierchia, 1998; Krifka, 1995; Lucy, 1992; Quine, 1969). Several linguists, however, claimed that classifier languages also make the syntactic count/mass distinction through the selective use of count classifiers (i.e., sortal classifiers) and mass classifiers (e.g., Cheng & Sybesma, 1998, 1999). The present study examined whether Japanese speakers make a syntactic count/mass distinction using the classifier system. The electroencephalogram (EEG) was recorded while Japanese speakers read word pairs (Experiment 1) or sentences (Experiment 2) in which noun-classifier agreement relations were manipulated. We examined event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by the within-count/mass-category violation (e.g., an object name accompanied by a classifier for other objects) and the across-count/mass-category violation (e.g., an object name accompanied by a classifier for substances). In both experiments, the violation of the noun-classifier agreements elicited the N400, regardless of whether the noun-classifier disagreement was made within or across the ontological object/substance boundary. The across-count/mass-category violation did not recruit a syntactic process in the brain, suggesting that the Japanese classifier system does not highlight the distinction between objects and substances. The results also indicated that the processing of Japanese numeral classifiers is primarily semantic-based. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
机译:长期以来一直认为分类器语言缺乏对象和物质的句法区分(即计数/质量区分; Allan,1977; Chierchia,1998; Krifka,1995; Lucy,1992; Quine,1969)。但是,一些语言学家声称,分类器语言还通过选择性地使用计数分类器(即分类分类器)和整体分类器(例如Cheng&Sybesma,1998,1999)来对句法计数/质量进行区分。本研究研究了日语使用者是否使用分类器系统进行句法计数/质量区分。脑电图(EEG)被记录下来,而日语使用者朗读单词对(实验1)或句子(实验2),其中操纵了名词-分类器的同意关系。我们研究了计数内/质量类别违例(例如,带有其他对象分类器的对象名称)和跨计数/质量类别违例(例如,对象名称)引起的事件相关电位(ERP)附有物质分类器)。在两个实验中,违反名词分类器协议都会引发N400,无论名词分类器是否在本体对象/物质边界之内或之间存在分歧。跨计数/质量类别违规并没有在大脑中招募句法处理过程,这表明日本分类器系统没有突出对象与物质之间的区别。结果还表明,日语数字分类器的处理主要基于语义。 (C)2015 Elsevier Inc.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号