Abstract
The scrambling complexity hypothesis based on working memory or locality accounts as well as syntactic accounts have proposed that processing a scrambled structure is difficult. However, the locus of this difficulty in sentence processing remains debatable. Several studies on multiple languages have explored the effect of scrambling on sentence processing and not all languages have shown an advantage for the canonical word order. Using a self-paced reading paradigm, we studied the effect of scrambling on semantic anomaly detection in Hindi sentence comprehension employing three word order types. Reading times on critical verbs, judgment latency, and error rates showed significant effect of word order type. The results further revealed significant interactions between word order and anomaly type. The patterns of results suggest that the canonical word order does not necessarily have a processing advantage in terms of speed and accuracy over non-canonical orders and do not provide support to sentence processing accounts that assume an advantage for canonical structures. The results indicate that processing speed depends on the distance between the subject and the verb, thus supporting a locality dependent working memory based model of sentence processing. The results provide evidence for the role of specific cognitive processes in Hindi sentence processing with further implications for language and literacy acquisition in Hindi.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altmann, G. T. M., & Mirković, J. (2009). Incrementality and prediction in human sentence processing. Cognitive Science, 33, 1–27.
Bahlmann, J., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Rotte, M., & Munte, T. F. (2007). An fMRI study of canonical and noncanonical word order in German. Human Brain Mapping, 28, 940–949.
Braze, D., Shankweiler, D., Ni, W., & Palumbo, L. C. (2002). Readers’ eye movements distinguish anomalies of form and content. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 25–44.
Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children’s reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 31–42.
Carretti, B., Borella, E., Cornoldi, C., & De Beni, R. (2009). Role of working memory in explaining the performance of individuals with specific reading comprehension difficulties: A meta-analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 246–251.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of theory of syntax. MA: MIT.
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Foris: Dordrecht.
Choudhary, K. K. (2010). Incremental argument interpretation in a split ergative language: electrophysiological evidence from Hindi. Ph.D. Thesis submitted to University of Leipzig, Germany to be published in MPI Series of Cognitive Sciences, Leipzig.
Choudhary, K. K., Schlesewsky, M., Roehm, D., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2009). The N400 as a correlate of interpretively relevant linguistic rules: Evidence from Hindi. Neuropsychologia, 47, 3012–3022.
Comrie, B. (1981). Language universals and linguistic typology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Dayal, V., & Mahajan, A. (2004). Clause structure in South Asian languages. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
de Villiers, P. A., & de Villiers, J. G. (1972). Early judgments of semantic and syntactic acceptability by children. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1, 299–310.
Erdocia, K., Laka, I., Mestres-Misse, A., & Rodriguez-Fornells, A. (2009). Syntactic complexity and ambiguity resolution in a free word order language: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidences from Basque. Brain and Language, 109, 1–17.
Fodor, J. D. (1978). Parsing strategies and constraints on transformations. Linguistic Inquiry, 9, 427–473.
Frazier, L. (1995). Constraint satisfaction as a theory of sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 6, 437–468.
Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6, 291–325.
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1–76.
Karimi, S. (Ed.). (2003). Word order and scrambling. London: Blackwell.
Kayne, R. S. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kim, J., Koizumi, M., Ikuta, N., et al. (2009). Scrambling effects on the processing of Japanese sentences: An fMRI study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22, 151–166.
Kolk, H., & Weijts, M. (1996). Judgment of semantic anomaly in aggrammatic patients. Brain and Language, 54, 86–135.
Kuperberg, G., Caplan, D., Sitnikova, T., Eddy, M., & Holcomb, P. (2006). Neural correlates of processing syntactic, semantic, and thematic relationship. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 489–530.
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic anomalies. Nature, 307, 161–163.
Lewis, R. L., & Vasishth, S. (2005). An activation model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cognitive Science, 29, 375–419.
Mishra, R. K. (2007). Spatial premise integration in Hindi. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33, 103–118.
Miyagawa, S. (2005). EPP and semantically-vacuous scrambling. In J. Sabel & M. Saito (Eds.), The Free Word Order Phenomenon: Its Syntactic Sources and Diversity (pp. 181–220). Mouton de Gruyter.
Mohanan, K. P., & Mohanan, T. (1994). Issues in word order. In M. Butt, T. H. King, & G. Ramchand (Eds.), Perspectives on word order in South Asian languages. Stanford: CSLI.
Nakayama, M. (1995). Scrambling and probe recognition. In R. Mazuka & N. Nagai (Eds.), Japanese sentence processing. Hillsdale, HJ: Erlbaum.
Nakayama, M. (1999). Sentence processing. In M. Tsujimura (Ed.), The handbook of Japanese linguistics (pp. 398–424). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Nation, K., Adams, J. W., Bower-Crane, C. A., & Snowling, M. J. (1999). Working memory deficits in poor comprehenders reflect underlying language impairments. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 73, 139–158.
Ni, W., Fodor, J. D., Crain, S., & Shankweiler, D. (1998). Anomaly detection: Eye movement patterns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 515–540.
Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5–19.
Pechmann, T., Uszkoreit, H., Engelkamp, J., & Zerbst, D. (1994). Word order in the German middle field: Linguistic theory and psycholinguistic evidence (CLAUS report no. 43). Germany: Department of Computational Linguistics, Saarland University.
Rosler, F., Pechmann, T., Streb, J., Roder, B., & Hennighausen, E. (1998). Parsing of sentences in a language with varying word order: Word-by-word variations of processing demands are revealed by event-related brain potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 150–176.
Schlesewsky, M., Bornkessel, I., & Frisch, S. (2003). The neurophysiological basis of word order variations in German. Brain and Language, 86, 116–128.
Sekerina, I. (1997). The syntax and processing of Russian scrambled constructions. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation, City University of New York, NY.
Sekerina, I. (2003). Scrambling processing: Dependencies, complexity, and constraints. In S. Karimi (Ed.), Word order and scrambling (pp. 301–324). UK: Blackwell.
Sugisaki, K. (2008). Early acquisition of basic word order in Japanese. Language Acquisition, 15, 183–191.
Tamaoka, K., Sakai, H., Kawahara, J., & Miyoaka, Y. (2003). The effects of phrase-length order and scrambling in the processing of visually presented Japanese sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research, 32, 431–454.
Wexler, K. (1998). Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: A new explanation of the optional infinitive stage. Lingua, 106, 23–79.
Weyerts, H., Penke, M., Munte, T. F., Heinze, H. J., & Clahsen, H. (2002). Word order in sentence processing: An experimental study of verb placement in German. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research, 31, 211–268.
Wolff, S., Schlesewsky, M., Hirotani, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2008). The neural mechanisms of word order processing revisited: Electrophysiological evidence from Japanese. Brain and Language, 107, 133–157.
Yamashita, H. (1997). The effects of word-order and case marking information on the processing of Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 163–188.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mishra, R.K., Pandey, A. & Srinivasan, N. Revisiting the scrambling complexity hypothesis in sentence processing: a self-paced reading study on anomaly detection and scrambling in Hindi. Read Writ 24, 709–727 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9255-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9255-x