Portions and sorts in Icelandic: An ERP study

Matthew Whelpton; Drew Trotter; órhalla Gudmundsdóttir Beck; Curt Anderson; Joan Maling; Karthik Durvasula; Alan Beretta

doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2014.07.008

Portions and sorts in Icelandic: An ERP study

Matthew Whelpton, Drew Trotter, órhalla Gudmundsdóttir Beck, Curt Anderson, Joan Maling, Karthik Durvasula, Alan Beretta

Faculty of Languages and Cultures

University of Iceland

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

An ERP study investigated the processing of mass nouns used to convey 'portions' vs. 'sorts' interpretations in Icelandic. The sorts interpretation requires semantic Coercion to a count noun; the portions interpretation entails extra syntactic processing. Compared to a Neutral condition, Coercion escaped the expected penalty (N400), but the Extra Syntax condition incurred the anticipated costs (anterior negativity followed by P600).Furthermore, we examined the effects of having to revise an initial commitment to head-noun status. When another noun follows the mass noun (creating a compound), the second noun becomes the head-noun. We hypothesized, for Icelandic, there would be no effect for Extra Syntax because the compound should have been built before the second noun was encountered; by contrast, for the Coercion and Neutral conditions, processing costs would be incurred to detect and reconfigure the second noun as the head. These predictions were largely borne out (early and sustained anterior negativities).

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	44-57
Number of pages	14
Journal	Brain and Language
Volume	136
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2014.07.008
Publication status	Published - Sept 2014

Bibliographical note

Funding Information: We are indebted to many people without whose contributions this study would have been impossible; although we cannot acknowledge all of them here, we should at least mention the following: We would like to thank the 23 subjects at the University of Iceland who took part in the experiment; Þórhallur Eyþórsson and his students, Brynhildur Stefánsdóttir and Sigríður Sæunn Sigurðardóttir, for helping in stimuli construction; Þór Eysteinsson and Einar Jón Einarsson for offering us full, unfettered use of their laboratory facilities; Jóhannes Gísli Jónsson and Þórhallur Eyþórsson for assistance with administering pretests; Sigrún Helgadóttir and Steinþór Steingrímsson for their corpus work on frequency counts; to all of the brilliantly engaged students at the MSU EEG Lab meetings who made so many insightful suggestions over many months; to Dirk Koester and Heike Wiese for a thorough critical reading of an earlier version of the paper; to Jason Moser and Colin Phillips for consistently useful consultation and advice at different stages of the project; and to Karin Wurst, David Prestel, and Tom Lovik for their material assistance. To all of these people, we are sincerely appreciative. None of them is responsible for the errors that remain. The material is based in part on work done while the fifth author was serving as Director of the Linguistics Program at the U.S. National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this material are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. National Science Foundation.

Other keywords

Coercion
Compounds
ERP
Gender
Icelandic

Access to Document

10.1016/j.bandl.2014.07.008

Cite this

@article{31331bce785e4ab983296605804677c6,

title = "Portions and sorts in Icelandic: An ERP study",

abstract = "An ERP study investigated the processing of mass nouns used to convey 'portions' vs. 'sorts' interpretations in Icelandic. The sorts interpretation requires semantic Coercion to a count noun; the portions interpretation entails extra syntactic processing. Compared to a Neutral condition, Coercion escaped the expected penalty (N400), but the Extra Syntax condition incurred the anticipated costs (anterior negativity followed by P600).Furthermore, we examined the effects of having to revise an initial commitment to head-noun status. When another noun follows the mass noun (creating a compound), the second noun becomes the head-noun. We hypothesized, for Icelandic, there would be no effect for Extra Syntax because the compound should have been built before the second noun was encountered; by contrast, for the Coercion and Neutral conditions, processing costs would be incurred to detect and reconfigure the second noun as the head. These predictions were largely borne out (early and sustained anterior negativities).",

keywords = "Coercion, Compounds, ERP, Gender, Icelandic",

author = "Matthew Whelpton and Drew Trotter and Beck, \{{\'o}rhalla Gudmundsd{\'o}ttir\} and Curt Anderson and Joan Maling and Karthik Durvasula and Alan Beretta",

note = "Funding Information: We are indebted to many people without whose contributions this study would have been impossible; although we cannot acknowledge all of them here, we should at least mention the following: We would like to thank the 23 subjects at the University of Iceland who took part in the experiment; {\TH}{\'o}rhallur Ey{\th}{\'o}rsson and his students, Brynhildur Stef{\'a}nsd{\'o}ttir and Sigr{\'i}{\dh}ur S{\ae}unn Sigur{\dh}ard{\'o}ttir, for helping in stimuli construction; {\TH}{\'o}r Eysteinsson and Einar J{\'o}n Einarsson for offering us full, unfettered use of their laboratory facilities; J{\'o}hannes G{\'i}sli J{\'o}nsson and {\TH}{\'o}rhallur Ey{\th}{\'o}rsson for assistance with administering pretests; Sigr{\'u}n Helgad{\'o}ttir and Stein{\th}{\'o}r Steingr{\'i}msson for their corpus work on frequency counts; to all of the brilliantly engaged students at the MSU EEG Lab meetings who made so many insightful suggestions over many months; to Dirk Koester and Heike Wiese for a thorough critical reading of an earlier version of the paper; to Jason Moser and Colin Phillips for consistently useful consultation and advice at different stages of the project; and to Karin Wurst, David Prestel, and Tom Lovik for their material assistance. To all of these people, we are sincerely appreciative. None of them is responsible for the errors that remain. The material is based in part on work done while the fifth author was serving as Director of the Linguistics Program at the U.S. National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this material are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. National Science Foundation.",

year = "2014",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.bandl.2014.07.008",

language = "English",

volume = "136",

pages = "44--57",

journal = "Brain and Language",

issn = "0093-934X",

publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Portions and sorts in Icelandic

T2 - An ERP study

AU - Whelpton, Matthew

AU - Trotter, Drew

AU - Beck, órhalla Gudmundsdóttir

AU - Anderson, Curt

AU - Maling, Joan

AU - Durvasula, Karthik

AU - Beretta, Alan

N1 - Funding Information: We are indebted to many people without whose contributions this study would have been impossible; although we cannot acknowledge all of them here, we should at least mention the following: We would like to thank the 23 subjects at the University of Iceland who took part in the experiment; Þórhallur Eyþórsson and his students, Brynhildur Stefánsdóttir and Sigríður Sæunn Sigurðardóttir, for helping in stimuli construction; Þór Eysteinsson and Einar Jón Einarsson for offering us full, unfettered use of their laboratory facilities; Jóhannes Gísli Jónsson and Þórhallur Eyþórsson for assistance with administering pretests; Sigrún Helgadóttir and Steinþór Steingrímsson for their corpus work on frequency counts; to all of the brilliantly engaged students at the MSU EEG Lab meetings who made so many insightful suggestions over many months; to Dirk Koester and Heike Wiese for a thorough critical reading of an earlier version of the paper; to Jason Moser and Colin Phillips for consistently useful consultation and advice at different stages of the project; and to Karin Wurst, David Prestel, and Tom Lovik for their material assistance. To all of these people, we are sincerely appreciative. None of them is responsible for the errors that remain. The material is based in part on work done while the fifth author was serving as Director of the Linguistics Program at the U.S. National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this material are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. National Science Foundation.

PY - 2014/9

Y1 - 2014/9

N2 - An ERP study investigated the processing of mass nouns used to convey 'portions' vs. 'sorts' interpretations in Icelandic. The sorts interpretation requires semantic Coercion to a count noun; the portions interpretation entails extra syntactic processing. Compared to a Neutral condition, Coercion escaped the expected penalty (N400), but the Extra Syntax condition incurred the anticipated costs (anterior negativity followed by P600).Furthermore, we examined the effects of having to revise an initial commitment to head-noun status. When another noun follows the mass noun (creating a compound), the second noun becomes the head-noun. We hypothesized, for Icelandic, there would be no effect for Extra Syntax because the compound should have been built before the second noun was encountered; by contrast, for the Coercion and Neutral conditions, processing costs would be incurred to detect and reconfigure the second noun as the head. These predictions were largely borne out (early and sustained anterior negativities).

AB - An ERP study investigated the processing of mass nouns used to convey 'portions' vs. 'sorts' interpretations in Icelandic. The sorts interpretation requires semantic Coercion to a count noun; the portions interpretation entails extra syntactic processing. Compared to a Neutral condition, Coercion escaped the expected penalty (N400), but the Extra Syntax condition incurred the anticipated costs (anterior negativity followed by P600).Furthermore, we examined the effects of having to revise an initial commitment to head-noun status. When another noun follows the mass noun (creating a compound), the second noun becomes the head-noun. We hypothesized, for Icelandic, there would be no effect for Extra Syntax because the compound should have been built before the second noun was encountered; by contrast, for the Coercion and Neutral conditions, processing costs would be incurred to detect and reconfigure the second noun as the head. These predictions were largely borne out (early and sustained anterior negativities).

KW - Coercion

KW - Compounds

KW - ERP

KW - Gender

KW - Icelandic

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84906735912

U2 - 10.1016/j.bandl.2014.07.008

DO - 10.1016/j.bandl.2014.07.008

M3 - Article

C2 - 25129630

SN - 0093-934X

VL - 136

SP - 44

EP - 57

JO - Brain and Language

JF - Brain and Language

ER -

Portions and sorts in Icelandic: An ERP study

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Other keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this