The effects of restrictiveness on relative clause processing in Farsi
- PMID: 38761751
- DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104299
The effects of restrictiveness on relative clause processing in Farsi
Abstract
With an eye-tracking experiment, we investigated the processing of Farsi object and subject relative clauses. Since restrictive relative clauses in Farsi are marked and distinguished clearly by the enclitic particle ی /-i/ attached to the head noun, we also compared the processing of restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses. Seifi (2021) conducted a corpus analysis that showed that object relative clauses are in general less frequent than subject relative clauses. However, while non-restrictive relative clauses are predominantly subject relative clauses, restrictive relative clauses are more balanced in the corpus. In an eye-tracking experiment, Farsi speakers processed restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses differently. In non-restrictive relative clauses, the effect is similar to that found in most other languages: a clear processing delay in object relative clauses, compared to subject relative clauses. This effect was visible both at the relative clause verb and at the end of the matrix sentence. In restrictive relative clauses, on the other hand, the picture is different: Just as for the non-restrictive relative clauses object relative clauses had long reading times in the relative clause, but at the end of the sentence a reverse effect was found. Thus, the processing data reflected the pattern found in the corpus. We discuss these findings in terms of the distinct functions of restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses.
Keywords: Eye-movements; Farsi relative clauses; First language; Frequency distribution; Non-restrictive; Restrictive; Sentence processing.
Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of competing interest This is to state that neither author has a conflict of interest.
Similar articles
-
Effects of local and global context on processing sentences with subject and object relative clauses.J Psycholinguist Res. 2013 Jun;42(3):227-37. doi: 10.1007/s10936-012-9215-5. J Psycholinguist Res. 2013. PMID: 22485022
-
Canonical word order and interference-based integration costs during sentence comprehension: the case of Spanish subject- and object-relative clauses.Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012;65(11):2108-28. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.674951. Epub 2012 Apr 23. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012. PMID: 22524672
-
Disambiguation and Integration in Korean Relative Clause Processing.J Psycholinguist Res. 2017 Aug;46(4):827-845. doi: 10.1007/s10936-016-9461-z. J Psycholinguist Res. 2017. PMID: 27943081
-
Effects of Age and Location in Chinese Relative Clauses Processing.J Psycholinguist Res. 2017 Oct;46(5):1067-1086. doi: 10.1007/s10936-017-9480-4. J Psycholinguist Res. 2017. PMID: 28236141
-
The role of animacy in Chinese relative clause processing.Acta Psychol (Amst). 2013 Sep;144(1):145-53. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.04.022. Epub 2013 Jun 22. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2013. PMID: 23800546
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources