Back to search

FRIHUMSAM-Fri prosj.st. hum og sam

Experimental approaches to syntactic optionality

Alternative title: Eksperimentelle tilnærminger til syntaktisk valgfrihet

Awarded: NOK 10.8 mill.

In 2023 we continued with intense data collection, with focus on both new populations and new methods. The goal, as in previous years, was to answer the question of how strict grammatical rule systems arise. While we see that some flexibility is allowed within languages, there are forces that seem to decrease the amount of variation, i.e., that regularizes language, leading to more strict and deterministic mappings from meaning to form over time. Currently, we do not know if the pressures of regularization are mainly manifested during the acquisition processes, possibly caused by innated biases for specific mappings from meaning to form, or at language usage in adult speakers, related to processing pressures. We collected more speech production data from Norwegian first language speakers, and now in two different guises. In a first study, we elicited syntactic variation from a large sample of speakers who also participated in a perception experiment. In the perception experiment, we tested if the speakers could detect word order variation in spoken sentences. This was done to target the question of between-speaker variation in grammatical systems within the same population. When we find linguistic variation within a sample, it is important to sort out if the variation is caused by random behavior within individuals in the sample, or if individuals behave consistently and the variation rather is between individuals. In the latter case, we may conclude that speakers have developed partly different grammars. We found a correlation between production and perception of word order variation: speakers who stick to only one word order in variable syntactic contexts also more accurately detect variation in word order. This suggest that these speakers already have developed a stricter grammar, where word order alternations either encode semantic distinction or simply are unavailable. Still, the majority of the participants in our sample still produce variation and often fail to detect word order variation in contexts where they produce variation themselves. In another set of experiments, we probed the role of speech unit size in planning and production. Our investigation aimed to understand how prosodic elements, specifically the segmentation of speech into rhythmic units, influence the development of fixed word order patterns. Though ongoing, this research promises insights into speech planning dynamics. In addition to the L1 Norwegian data collection, we have also started a new sub-project that targets the production and perception of word order variation in second language (L2) learners of Norwegian. In previous studies, we have found that L2 speakers of Norwegian often stick to rigid, but sometimes incorrect, patterns in their production. Overall, the amount of word order variation is often smaller in L2 samples compared to L1 samples. It is not clear if this is a result of cross-linguistic influence, i.e., if L2-learners have expectations that form-meaning mappings should be equally rigid in the L2 as the L1, or if it is just a general heuristic in the second language acquisition process: stick to simple, strict pattern. In the study we investigate L2 speakers of different proficiencies and test three things: (1) at which proficiency does the amount variation approach the L1 levels, (2) to which extent do L2 speakers pay attention to variation in word order, and (3) to which extent does exposure to alternative word orders influence the L2 speakers’ own production. The results so far suggest that exposure to alternative words orders, or variation more generally, increases the amount of variation in production but only for speakers who have reached a rather high level of L2 proficiency. However, there does not seem to be a simple linear relation between proficiency and the influence from exposure of variation: both L1 speakers and the most proficient L2 speakers show little signs of changing their baseline patterns after exposure to other alternative word orders. In 2024 we will proceed with investigating variation in L1 child acquisition to see if we can find a similar “inverted U” development during the L1 acquisition as in L2 acquisition. This should help us further narrowing down at what stages of the acquisition process, or across the lifespan more generally, the regularization processes are most visible.

The natural languages of the world are characterized by largely rigid, often highly idiosyncratic rule systems. Within any given language, it is hard to find instances of true optionality (i.e. a many-to-one mapping from form to meaning). The ExSynOp project sets out to explore this central puzzle: what drives the evolution of complex, rigid rule systems in natural languages? We do this by investigating the sources of regularisation, i.e., the reduction of variation in a language. Our focus on regularisation will bring new insights to one of the most debated issues in linguistics: are languages shaped predominantly by the usage patterns of adults (evident in processing, register/style choices, MacDonald 2013, Bybee 2015), or the learning preferences/limitations of children (Clark 1987, Newport 2005, Yang 2017, Chomsky 1986)? This project takes as its starting point a unique naturally-occurring case study in (apparent) optionality: word order variation in the closely related Mainland Scandinavian languages and varieties. We have identified four word order variables where at least one variety shows optionality, and another a strict rule: subject shift, particle shift, object shift and long object shift. By studying acquisition (L1 child and L2 adult), and processing (production/comprehension) of variable and non-variable grammars in the context of closely related languages, we can identify where preferences for regular systems arise. We will address three fundamental issues in the establishment of rigid grammars: (1) are there processing benefits (or costs) associated with categorical rules; (2) is the L1 language learner pre-disposed to categorical rules, or do categorical tendencies develop later and (3) is low-frequent syntactic variation in speakers conditioned by register/dialect? To address these issues, we will use novel large-scale experiments for speech elicitations, combined with methods for text-speech alignment, which will be developed within the project.

Publications from Cristin

No publications found

No publications found

No publications found

Funding scheme:

FRIHUMSAM-Fri prosj.st. hum og sam