{"title":"伪窃听中语音不匹配的实验研究:来自可接受性判断和处理的见解","authors":"Sang-Hee Park , Jungsoo Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.lingua.2025.104006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper investigates the acceptability and processing of the pseudogapping construction, focusing on the puzzle of voice mismatch between the antecedent and elliptical clauses (e.g., <em>My problem will be looked into by Tom, but he won’t yours.</em>). While syntactic accounts predict ungrammaticality for such mismatches, semantic accounts suggest that they should be acceptable. Through two acceptability judgment experiments and a self-paced reading experiment, we examine how these mismatches interact with factors that are known to influence ellipsis: information structure and the syntactic complexity of the antecedent. Results of the acceptability judgment experiments indicate that voice mismatch consistently lowers acceptability, with its impact varying by interaction with information structure and antecedent complexity. The self-paced reading experiment further shows that voice mismatch leads to longer reading times both at and before the ellipsis site. In addition, information structure and antecedent complexity independently influence processing, with the latter also modulating the effects of voice mismatch. These findings suggest that pseudogapping is not entirely resistant to syntactic mismatches; however, its judgment and processing are shaped by factors beyond syntactic identity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47955,"journal":{"name":"Lingua","volume":"325 ","pages":"Article 104006"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Experimental Investigation into Voice Mismatches in Pseudogapping: Insights from Acceptability Judgments and Processing\",\"authors\":\"Sang-Hee Park , Jungsoo Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lingua.2025.104006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This paper investigates the acceptability and processing of the pseudogapping construction, focusing on the puzzle of voice mismatch between the antecedent and elliptical clauses (e.g., <em>My problem will be looked into by Tom, but he won’t yours.</em>). While syntactic accounts predict ungrammaticality for such mismatches, semantic accounts suggest that they should be acceptable. Through two acceptability judgment experiments and a self-paced reading experiment, we examine how these mismatches interact with factors that are known to influence ellipsis: information structure and the syntactic complexity of the antecedent. Results of the acceptability judgment experiments indicate that voice mismatch consistently lowers acceptability, with its impact varying by interaction with information structure and antecedent complexity. The self-paced reading experiment further shows that voice mismatch leads to longer reading times both at and before the ellipsis site. In addition, information structure and antecedent complexity independently influence processing, with the latter also modulating the effects of voice mismatch. These findings suggest that pseudogapping is not entirely resistant to syntactic mismatches; however, its judgment and processing are shaped by factors beyond syntactic identity.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lingua\",\"volume\":\"325 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104006\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lingua\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024384125001317\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lingua","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024384125001317","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
An Experimental Investigation into Voice Mismatches in Pseudogapping: Insights from Acceptability Judgments and Processing
This paper investigates the acceptability and processing of the pseudogapping construction, focusing on the puzzle of voice mismatch between the antecedent and elliptical clauses (e.g., My problem will be looked into by Tom, but he won’t yours.). While syntactic accounts predict ungrammaticality for such mismatches, semantic accounts suggest that they should be acceptable. Through two acceptability judgment experiments and a self-paced reading experiment, we examine how these mismatches interact with factors that are known to influence ellipsis: information structure and the syntactic complexity of the antecedent. Results of the acceptability judgment experiments indicate that voice mismatch consistently lowers acceptability, with its impact varying by interaction with information structure and antecedent complexity. The self-paced reading experiment further shows that voice mismatch leads to longer reading times both at and before the ellipsis site. In addition, information structure and antecedent complexity independently influence processing, with the latter also modulating the effects of voice mismatch. These findings suggest that pseudogapping is not entirely resistant to syntactic mismatches; however, its judgment and processing are shaped by factors beyond syntactic identity.
期刊介绍:
Lingua publishes papers of any length, if justified, as well as review articles surveying developments in the various fields of linguistics, and occasional discussions. A considerable number of pages in each issue are devoted to critical book reviews. Lingua also publishes Lingua Franca articles consisting of provocative exchanges expressing strong opinions on central topics in linguistics; The Decade In articles which are educational articles offering the nonspecialist linguist an overview of a given area of study; and Taking up the Gauntlet special issues composed of a set number of papers examining one set of data and exploring whose theory offers the most insight with a minimal set of assumptions and a maximum of arguments.