Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Edward Gibson (2000)
Dependency Locality Theory
Anna Finzel Anne Beyer Melanie Tosik
October 28, 2013
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 1 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 2 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 3 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Why study psycholinguistics and languageprocessing?
Figure : c©Wikimedia Commons
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 4 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Difficulty
(1a) The canine carnivore whose habitat which localafforestations comprise is threatened by importedfungi spurns vegetal fodder.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 5 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Difficulty
(1a) The canine carnivore whose habitat which localafforestations comprise is threatened by importedfungi spurns vegetal fodder.
• infrequent lexical items
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 6 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Difficulty
(1a) The canine carnivore whose habitat which localafforestations comprise is threatened by importedfungi spurns vegetal fodder.
• infrequent lexical items• new discourse referents
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 7 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Difficulty
(1a) The canine carnivore whose habitat which localafforestations comprise is threatened by importedfungi spurns vegetal fodder.
• infrequent lexical items• new discourse referents• assignment of structures
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 8 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Difficulty
(1a) The canine carnivore whose habitat which localafforestations comprise is threatened by importedfungi spurns vegetal fodder.
• infrequent lexical items• new discourse referents• assignment of structures• distance
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 9 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Difficulty
(1a) The canine carnivore whose habitat which localafforestations comprise is threatened by importedfungi spurns vegetal fodder.
(1b)Foxes only eat meat. They live in forests, wheredangerous new mushrooms grow.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 10 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Dependency Locality Theory
• requires information sources• is constrained by computational resources
1. structural integration (BUILDING)2. memory (MAINTAINING)
• ⇒ depend on locality
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 11 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 12 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
No complexity
(2a) [A](2b) [The reporter disliked the editor].(2c) [NP V NP]
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 13 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Slight complexity
(3a) [B1 [A] B2](3b) [The reporter [who the senator attacked] disliked the editor].(3c) [NP [RC] V NP]
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 14 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
High complexity
(4a) [C1 [B1 [A] B2] C2](4b) [The reporter [who the senator [who John met] attacked]
disliked the editor].(4c) [NP [who NP [RC] V] V NP]
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 15 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Lexical frequency or plausibility?
NO!
(5a) [A [B] [C ]](5b) [John met the senator [who attacked the reporter] [who
disliked the editor]].(5c) [NP V NP [RC] [RC]]
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 16 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Lexical frequency or plausibility?
NO!
(4b) [The reporter [who the senator [who John met] attacked]disliked the editor].
(5b) [John met the senator [who attacked the reporter] [whodisliked the editor]].
Processing difficulty → quantity of resources required
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 17 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 18 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Incomplete Dependency Hypothesis
Hypothesis: Difficulty depends on number of incompletesyntactic dependencies.
(2b) [The reporter disliked the editor].
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 19 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Incomplete Dependency Hypothesis
Hypothesis: Difficulty depends on number of incompletesyntactic dependencies.
(2b) [The reporter ! disliked the editor].
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 20 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Incomplete Dependency Hypothesis
Hypothesis: Difficulty depends on number of incompletesyntactic dependencies.
(3b) [The reporter [who the senator attacked] disliked the editor].
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 21 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Incomplete Dependency Hypothesis
Hypothesis: Difficulty depends on number of incompletesyntactic dependencies.
(3b) [The reporter ! [who ! the senator ! attacked] dislikedthe editor].
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 22 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Incomplete Dependency Hypothesis
Hypothesis: Difficulty depends on number of incompletesyntactic dependencies.
(4b) [The reporter [who the senator [who John met] attacked]disliked the editor].
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 23 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Incomplete Dependency Hypothesis
Hypothesis: Difficulty depends on number of incompletesyntactic dependencies.
(4b) [The reporter ! [who ! the senator ! [who ! John ! met]attacked] disliked the editor].
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 24 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 25 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Why DLT then?(4b) [The reporter [who the senator [who John met] attacked]
disliked the editor].(6) [The reporter [who the senator [who I met] attacked]
disliked the editor].
• Incomplete Dependency Hypothesis does not explainfaster processing of pronouns (Warren & Gibson 1999)
• Syntactic Prediction Locality Theory (Gibson 1998) asantecedent of DLT
• DLT gives more accurate accounts• encompasses two aspects
1. needed resources of (a) integration and (b) storage2. distance
• ⇒ resources consume costsA. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 26 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 27 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
How do we process new input words?
eats
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 28 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
How do we process new input words?
VP
V
eats
...
• construct syntactic structure
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 29 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
How do we process new input words?
VP
V
eats
NP
• syntactic prediction (cf. Storage Cost)
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 30 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
How do we process new input words?
VP
V
eats
NP
NP
Det
an
N
apple
• integrate into structure built so far
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 31 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
How do we process new input words?
VP
V
eats
NP
Det
an
N
apple
• interpretation
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 32 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
How do we process new input words?
1. construct maximal projection2. structural integration3. interpretation
3.1 integration in discourse model3.2 evaluating plausibility
4. reanalysis
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 33 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
How do we process new input words?
1. construct maximal projection2. structural integration3. interpretation
3.1 integration in discourse model3.2 evaluating plausibility
4. reanalysis
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 34 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Discourse Integration
discourse referentEntity that has a spatiotemporal location in the discoursemodel
Simplification: only heads of NPs and VPs that introduce newdiscourse referents consume substantial resources
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 35 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Structural Integration
Relating the head of a newly constructed maximal projectionto a head in the current syntactic structure
XP
X
h1
YP
Z
w
Y
h2
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 36 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Structural Integration Cost
XP
X
h1
YP
Z
w︸︷︷︸depends on thenumber of words
(i.e. srtuctural integrations)in the interim
Y
h2
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 37 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Energy Unit (EU)
Simplified measurement for expressing resource requirementsas a combination of
• discourse processing cost
• structural integration cost
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 38 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
DLT Integration Cost
DLT simplified discourse processing cost1 EU if w is head of a new discourse referent0 EUs otherwise
DLT simplified integration cost1 EU for each new discourse referent between h1 and h2
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 39 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 40 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
General Nesting Complexity Effects
(1) The reporter [who the senator attacked] disliked theeditor.
(2) The reporter [who the senator [who John met]attacked] disliked the editor.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 41 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
General Nesting Complexity Effects
(3) The reporter [who the senator attacked] disliked theeditor.
(4) The reporter [who the senator [who John met]attacked] disliked the editor.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 42 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
DLT Integration Cost
DLT simplified discourse processing cost1 EU if w is head of a new discourse referent0 EUs otherwise
DLT simplified integration cost1 EU for each new discourse referent between h1 and h2
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 43 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Other Nesting Complexity Effects
Lack of difficulty when processing nested structures withpronoun subject:
(5) The reporter [who the senator [who John met]attacked] disliked the editor.
(6) The reporter [who the senator [who I met] attacked]disliked the editor.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 44 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Other Nesting Complexity Effects
Contrast between embedding RC within CC and CC withinRC:
(7) The fact that [CC the employee [RC who the managerhired] stole office supplies] worried the executive.
(8) The executive [RC who the fact that [CC the employeestole office supplies] worried] hired the manager.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 45 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Other Nesting Complexity Effects
Increased complexity when adding another new discoursereferent at a nested location:
(9) The possibility that the administrator who the nursesupervised lost the medical reports didn’t bother theintern from the maternity ward.
(10) The possibility that the adminisrtator who the nursefrom the maternity ward supervised lost the medicalreports didn’t bother the intern.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 46 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
DLT Integration Cost
Oversimplification!• structural integration cost not linear• no processing cost for old discourse referents/ other words• no storage cost (yet)
Still able to account for nesting complexityeffects other theories could not explain
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 47 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 48 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Subject-extracted vs. object-extracted RCs
(11) Subject extractionThe reporter who sent the photographer to the editorhoped for a good story.
(12) Object extractionThe reporter who the photographer sent to the editorhoped for a good story.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 49 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Subject-extracted vs. object-extracted RCs
(13) Subject extractionThe reporter who sent the photographer to the editorhoped for a good story.
(14) Object extractionThe reporter who the photographer sent to the editorhoped for a good story.
→ more complex
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 50 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
c©Gibson 2000: 111A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 51 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
c©Gibson 2000: 112
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 52 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 53 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
The DLT Storage Cost Component
DLT storage cost1 memory unit (MU) is associated with each syntactic headrequired to complete the current input as a grammaticalsentence.
Input wordThe reporter who the senator attacked disliked the editor
Storage cost 2 1 3 4 3 1 1 1 0
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 54 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Interrelation between Storage and Integration Cost
Set of assumptions:
• Integrations and storage access the same pool of resources• There is a fixed capacity of resources in the resource pool• Each predicted syntactic head takes up a fixed quantity ofresources
→ the more resources that are required in storage, the slowerintegrations occur
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 55 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 56 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Applying the DLT to Ambiguity Resolution
Ambiguity resolution hypothesisIn choosing among ambiguous structures, two of the factorsthat the processor uses to evaluate its choices are DLT storageand structural integration cost.
(15) The bartender told the detective that the suspect leftthe country yesterday. X
(16) The evidence examined by the lawyer turned out to beunreliable. ?→ temporary local ambiguity
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 57 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
What’s happening here?
(17) The evidence examined by the lawyer turned out to beunreliable.
→ temporary ambiguity at examined between main verb (MV)and past-participle reduced relative (RR) interpretation
• MV and RR equally frequent (Brown corpus)• Plausibility favours RR(evidence is likely to be examined, but not vice versa)
• No structural integration cost difference(both attachements are local)
• Potentially small memory cost difference favouring MV
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 58 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
What’s happening here?
(18) The evidence examined by the lawyer turned out to beunreliable.
→ temporary ambiguity at examined between main verb (MV)and past-participle reduced relative (RR) interpretation
• DLT memory costs are balanced or favouring MV
• Weighing all factors together, RR is preferred (plausibility)
→ Resource use?
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 59 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Resource Use HypothesisIs ambiguity resolution really only determined by lexicalfrequencies and plausibility, with no effect of resource use?(“constraint-based” processing theories)
→ Comparing the resolution of an ambiguity with a smallresource complexity difference with the resolution ofambiguities with larger resource complexity differences:
(19) The witness who the evidence examined by the lawyerimplicated seemed to be very nervous.
→ DLT strongly favours MV structure
→ Plausibility factors highly favouring RR
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 60 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Test set(20) Large storage cost difference, ambiguous
The witness who the evidence examined by the lawyerimplicated seemed to be very nervous.
(21) Large storage cost difference, unambiguousThe witness who the evidence that was examined bythe lawyer implicated seemed to be very nervous.
(22) Small storage cost difference, ambiguousThe witness thought that the evidence examined bythe lawyer implicated his next-door neighbour.
(23) Small storage cost difference, unambiguousThe witness thought that the evidence that wasexamined by the lawyer implicated his next-doorneighbour.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 61 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion Integration Comprehension Times Storage Ambiguity
Figure : c©Gibson 2000: 118
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 62 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 63 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Criticism
1. no proper “exchange rate” for the “currency”2. no explanation of priming effects3. no critical attitude towards spillover effect
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 64 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Criticism
“To reduce noise, the words are grouped in two- andthree-word regions, and the average residual reading times areprovided for each region. Because there is a reading-timespillover in self-paced reading, such that slow reading times areoften reflected one or two words after a point of highcomplexity, locations of high predicted DLT integration costwere grouped with the following word.” (Gibson 2000: 111)
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 65 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Criticism
Figure : c©Gibson 2000: 111A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 66 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Any questions?
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 67 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 68 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Discussion
Konieczny 2000:(7a) Er hat den Abgeordneten begleitet, und . . .(7b) Er hat den Abgeordneten ans Rednerpult begleitet, und. . .(7c) Er hat den Abgeordneten an das grosse Rednerpultbegleitet, und . . .
• ⇒ speed-up while getting closer to the verb• similar results in Hindi (Vasishth 2002; Vasishth & Lewis2006)
• contradiction to DLT
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 69 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
Discussion
• How do you explain the findings in German and Hindi?• What about the facts
1. that German relative clauses are verb-final,2. that German is very case-sensitive and3. that in Hindi, relative pronouns remain in their
original position and do not have to be moved to thebeginning of the relative clause?
• Can we conclude anything from this?
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 70 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
OutlineIntroductionNesting ComplexityIncomplete Dependency HypothesisWhy DLT then?The Dependency Locality Theory
Integration CostsNesting Complexity Effects
Comprehension TimesStorage CostsAmbiguity Resolution
CriticismDiscussionBibliography
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 71 / 72
Intro Complexity IDH Why? DLT Criticism Discussion
BibliographyGibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntacticdependencies. Cognition, 68, 1–76.
Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: Adistance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In Miyashita, Y.,Marantz, A., & O’Neil, W. (eds.), Image, language, brain,Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 95–126.
Konieczny, L. (2000). Locality and parsing complexity. Journal ofPsycholinguistic Research, 29(6), 627–645.
Vasishth, S. (2002). Working memory in sentence comprehension:Processing Hindi center embeddings. PhD thesis, Ohio StateUniversity.
Vasishth, S. and Lewis, R. L. (2006). Argument-head distance andprocessing complexity: Explaining both locality and anti-localityeffects. Language, 82(4), 767–794.
Warren, T. and Gibson, E. (1999). The effects of discourse statuson intuitive complexity: Implications for quantifying distance in alocality-based theory of linguistic complexity. Poster presented atthe Twelfth CUNY Sentence Processing Conference, CUNY, NewYork.
A. Finzel, A. Beyer, M. Tosik Dependency Locality Theory 72 / 72