Ir para o menu de navegação principal Ir para o conteúdo principal Ir para o rodapé

n. 38 (2021)
Publicação contínua

Linguagem y comunicação

Clausulas relativas com antecedente duplo nominal em espanhol: uma jornada experimental

https://doi.org/10.19053/0121053X.n38.2021.13367

Publicado 2021-10-21

  • Noelia Ayelén Stetie

Noelia Ayelén Stetie
CONICET/UBA

Resumo

Uma suposição recorrente em psicolinguística é que certos princípios
universais da economia computacional guiam as decisões estruturais feitas durante o processamento de frases. O primeiro estudo conduzido em espanhol sobre decisões de apego (Cuetos & Mitchell, 1988) questionou a existência desses princípios ao apresentar evidências de que os falantes de espanhol preferem usar uma estratégia
de fechamento antecipado ou de alto apego para resolver a interpretação de sentenças com clausulas relativas com antecedente duplo nominal. Desde então, várias investigações vêm apresentando evidências nem sempre consistentes. Este artigo apresenta uma revisão exaustiva e crítica dos estudos sobre o espanhol, examinando
as várias metodologias utilizadas e a influência de diferentes fatores no processamento sintático. Da mesma forma, as implicações desses achados para os modelos de processamento de sentenças são analisadas e a possibilidade de considerar princípios
universais é debatida.

Palavras-chave

compreensão da linguagem, processamento sintático, orações relativas

PDF (Español)

Referências

  • Acuña-Farina, C., Fraga, I., García-Orza, J. & Piñeiro-Barreiro, A. (2009). Animacy in the Adjunction of Spanish RCs to Complex NPs. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21(8), 1137-1165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440802622824
  • Aguilar, M., Ferré, P., Gavilán, J. M., Hinojosa, J. A. & Demestre, J. (2021). The Actress Was on the Balcony, After All: Eye-Tracking Locality and PR-Availability Effects in Spanish. Cognition, 211, 104624. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104624
  • Aguilar, M. & Grillo, N. (2021). Spanish Is not Different: On the Universality of Minimal Structure and Locality Principles. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 6(1), 89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1251
  • Alonso-Pascua, B. (2020). New Evidence on the Pseudorelative-First Hypothesis: Spanish Attachment Preferences Revisited. Topics in Linguistics, 21(1), 15- 44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2020-0002
  • Arancibia-Gutiérrez, B., Bizama-Muñoz, M. & Sáez-Carrillo, K. (2015). Preferencias de adjunción sintáctica de cláusulas de relativo en escolares. Estudios Filológicos, (55), 7-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0071-17132015000100001
  • Bezerra, G. B. (2019). The Influence of Referentiality, Definiteness, and “Preposition+Determiner” Contraction on Relative Clause Processing. Diacrítica, 33(2),116-140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21814/diacritica.419
  • Bock, K. & Miller, C. A. (1991). Broken Agreement. Cognitive Psychology, 23(1), 45- 93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(91)90003-7
  • Branco-Moreno, D. (2014). The Influence of Pseudo-Relatives on Attachment Preferences in Spanish. (Tesis inédita de Maestría). CUNY, New York, USA.
  • Carreiras, M. (1992). Estrategias de análisis sintáctico en el procesamiento de frases: cierre temprano versus cierre tardío. Cognitiva, 4(1), 3-27.
  • Carreiras, M. & Clifton, C. (1993). Relative Clause Interpretation Preferences in Spanish and English. Language and Speech, 36(4), 353-372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099303600401
  • Carreiras, M. & Clifton, C. (1999). Another Word on Parsing Relative Clauses: Eyetracking Evidence from Spanish and English. Memory & Cognition, 27(5), 826-833. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198535
  • Carreiras, M., Salillas, E. & Barber, H. (2004). Event-Related Potentials Elicited During Parsing of Ambiguous Relative Clauses in Spanish. Cognitive Brain Research, 20(1), 98-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.01.009
  • Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Foris.
  • Cuetos, F. & Mitchell, D. C. (1988). Cross-Linguistic Differences in Parsing: Restrictions on the Use of the Late Closure Strategy in Spanish. Cognition, 30(1), 73-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90004-2
  • Cuetos, F., Mitchell, D. C. & Corley, M. M. (1996). Parsing in Different Languages. In M. Carreiras, N. Sebastián-Gallés & J. García-Albea (eds.). Language Processing in Spanish (pp. 145-187). Psychology Press.
  • De Baecke, C., Brysbaert, M. & Desmet, T. (2000, Sept.). The Importance of Structural and Non-
  • Structural Variables in Modifier Attachment: A Corpus Study in Dutch. In Poster presented at AMLaP. Leiden, Holland.
  • Deevy, P. L. (2000). Agreement checking in comprehension: Evidence from relative clauses. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(1), 69-79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005124523808
  • De La Cruz-Pavía, I. (2010). The Influence of Prosody in the Processing of Ambiguous Rcs: A Study with Spanish Monolinguals and Basque-Spanish Bilinguals from the Basque Country. Interlingüística, 20, 1-12.
  • De La Cruz-Pavía, I. & Elordieta, G. (2015). Prosodic Phrasing of Relative Clauses with Two Possible Antecedents in Spanish: A Comparison of Spanish Native Speakers and L1 Basque Bilingual Speakers. Folia Linguistica, 49(1), 185-204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2015-0006
  • De Vincenzi, M. & Job, R. (1993). Some Observations on the Universality of the Late- Closure Strategy. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(2), 189-206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067830
  • Dussias, P. & Sagarra, N. (2007). The Effect of Exposure on Syntactic Parsing in Spanish–English Bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 101-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002847
  • Fernández, E. (2003). Bilingual Sentence Processing. John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.29
  • Fernández, E. (2005). The Prosody Produced by Spanish-English Bilinguals: A Preliminary Investigation and Implications for Sentence Processing. Revista da ABRALIN, 4(1), 109-141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5380/rabl.v4i1/2.52655
  • Fodor, J. D. (2002). Prosodic Disambiguation in Silent Reading. North East Linguistics Society, 32, 113-132.
  • Frazier, L. & Clifton, C. (1996). Construal. MIT Press.
  • Frazier, L. & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The Sausage Machine: A New Two-Stage Parsing Model. Cognition, 6(4), 291-325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(78)90002-1
  • Frazier, L. & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and Correcting Errors During Sentence Comprehension: Eye Movements in the Analysis of Structurally Ambiguous Sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 178-210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1
  • Fromont, L. A., Soto-Faraco, S. & Biau, E. (2017). Searching High and Low: Prosodic Breaks Disambiguate Relative Clauses. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00096
  • García-Orza, J., Fraga, I., Teijido, M. & Acuña, J. C. (2000, Sept.). High Attachment Preferences in Galician Relative Clauses: Preliminary Data. In Poster Presented at AMLaP. Leiden, Holland.
  • Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N., Canseco-González, E. & Hickok, G. (1996). Recency Preference in the Human Sentence Processing Mechanism. Cognition, 59(1), 23-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(95)00687-7
  • Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N. J. & Torrens, V. (1999). Recency and Lexical Preferences in DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211554
  • Spanish. Memory & Cognition, 27(4), 603-611.
  • Gilboy, E., Sopena, J. M., Clifton, C. & Frazier, L. (1995). Argument Structure and Preferences in the Processing of Spanish and English Complex NPs. Cognition, 54, 131-167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)00636-Y
  • Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and Semantics. Speech Acts (pp. 41-58). Academic Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003
  • Grillo, N. & Costa, J. (2014). A Novel Argument for the Universality of Parsing Principles. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.05.019
  • Cognition, 133(1), 156-187.
  • Hemforth, B., Fernández, S., Clifton, C., Frazier, L., Konieczny, L. & Walter, M. (2015).Relative Clause Attachment in German, English, Spanish and French: Effects of Position and Length. Lingua, 166, 43-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.08.010
  • Igoa, J. M., Carreiras, M. & Meseguer, E. (1998). A Study on Late Closure in Spanish: Principle-Grounded vs. Frequency-Based Accounts of Attachment Preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 51(3), 561- 592. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/713755775
  • Jegerski, J., Keating, G. D. & VanPatten, B. (2014). On-line Relative Clause Attachment Strategy in Heritage Speakers of Spanish. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20(3), 254-268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006914552288
  • Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E. & Holcomb, P. (2000). The P600 As an Index of Syntactic
  • Integration Difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(2), 159-201.
  • Karimi, H. & Ferreira, F. (2015). Good-Enough Linguistic Representations and Online Cognitive Equilibrium in Language Processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(5), 1013-1040. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1053951
  • MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J. & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The Lexical Nature of Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution. Psychological Review, 101(4), 676. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.676
  • Maia, M., Fernández, E. M., Costa, A. & Lourenço-Gomes, M. D. C. (2007). Early and Late Preferences in Relative Clause Attachment in Spanish and Portuguese.Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 5/6, 227-250. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/jpl.151
  • Maia, M. & Maia, J. (2005). A compreensão de orações relativas por falantes monolíngües e bilíngües de português e de inglês. En M. Maia & I. Finger (org). Processamento da linguagem (pp. 163-178). Educat.
  • McRae, K. & Matsuki, K. (2013). Constraint-Based Models of Sentence Processing. InR. Van Gompel (ed.) Sentence Processing (pp. 51-77). Psychology Press. Mitchell, D. C. & Cuetos, F. (1991). The Origins of Parsing Strategies. Current Issues in Natural Language Processing, 1-12.
  • Mitchell, D. C., Cuetos, F., Corley, M. M. & Brysbaert, M. (1995). Exposure-Based Models of Human Parsing: Evidence for the Use of Coarse-Grained (Nonlexical) Statistical Records. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24(6), 469-488. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02143162
  • Miyamoto, E. T. (1999). Relative Clause Processing in Brazilian Portuguese and Japanese. (Tesis inédita de Doctorado). MIT, Cambridge, Estados Unidos. Moulton, K. & Grillo, A. (2014). Pseudo Relatives: Big but Transparent. In 45th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society. York.
  • Osterhout, L. & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-Related Brain Potentials Elicited by Syntactic Anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31(6), 785-806. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(92)90039-Z
  • Piñeiro-Barreiro, A. (2006). Estrategias de adjunción ante cláusulas de relativo en castellano: el papel de las variables léxicas en medidas on-line y de corpus. (Tesina inédita de Licenciatura). Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, España.
  • Piñeiro-Barreiro, A. (2011). El papel de las variables léxico-semánticas en la desambiguación de cláusulas de relativo con doble antecedente: animacidad, valencia afectiva y activación emocional. (Tesis inédita de Doctorado) Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, España.
  • Rohde, H., Levy, R. & Kehler, A. (2011). Anticipating Explanations in Relative Clause Processing. Cognition, 118(3), 339-358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.016
  • Ribeiro, A. J. (2005). Late closure em parsing no português do Brasil. En M. Maia & I. Finger (org). Processamento da linguagem (pp. 51-70). Educat.
  • Sánchez, M. E., Jaichenco, V. & Sevilla, Y. (2018). El procesamiento del género y el número en la producción de la concordancia del español. Interdisciplinaria, 35(2), 459-475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16888/interd.2018.35.2.13
  • Sekerina, I. A., Fernández, E. M. & Petrova, K. A. (2004). Relative Clause Attachment in Bulgarian. In The Proceedings of the 12th Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics. The Ottawa Meeting (pp. 375-394).
  • Soares, A. P., Oliveira, H., Comesaña, M. & Demestre, J. (2014). Resolução de ambiguidades sintácticas em orações relativas com duplo antecedente: O papel do número. Em Poster presentado en el Noveno Encontro da Associação Portuguesa de Psicologia Experimental (APPE), Covilhã, University of Beira Interior, Portugal.
  • Stetie, N. A. (2021). Modelos de procesamiento sintáctico y sus implicaciones para el estudio del lenguaje. Revista de Estudos da Linguagem, 29(3), 2117-2162 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17851/2237-2083.29.3.2117-1262
  • Swets, B., Desmet, T., Hambrick, D. Z. & Ferreira, F. (2007). The Role of Working Memory in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution: A Psychometric Approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(1), 64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.1.64
  • Teira, C. & Igoa, J. M. (2007). Relaciones entre la prosodia y la sintaxis en el procesamiento de oraciones. Anuario de Psicología, 38(1), 45-69.
  • Tena-Dávalos, J. & Pérez-Álvarez, B. E. (2017). Estrategias de interpretación de oraciones relativas con doble antecedente en español. Nueva Revista de Filología Hispánica, 65(1), 3-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24201/nrfh.v65i1.2827
  • Townsend, D. J. & Bever, T. G. (2001). Sentence Comprehension: The Integration of Habits and Rules. MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6184.001.0001
  • Vergara, D. & Socarrás, G. (2021). Auditory Processing of Gender Agreement across Relative Clauses by Spanish Heritage Speakers. Languages, 6(1), 8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/languages6010008
  • Wagers, M. W., Lau, E. F. & Phillips, C. (2009). Agreement Attraction in Comprehension:
  • Representations and Processes. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(2), 206-237.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Artigos Semelhantes

<< < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 > >> 

Você também pode iniciar uma pesquisa avançada por similaridade para este artigo.