No abstract

The informal judgments of the well-formedness of phrases and sentences have long been used as the primary data source for syntacticians. In recent years, the reliability of data based on linguists' introspective intuitions is increasingly subject to scrutiny. Although a number of studies were able to replicate a vast majority of English judgments published in a textbook and in peer-reviewed journal articles, the status of data in many non-English languages has yet to be experimentally examined. In this work, we employed formal quantitative methods to evaluate the reliability of judgments in the widely used textbook, The Syntax of Chinese (Huang, Li, & Li, 2009). We first assessed example sentences based on the acceptability ratings from 148 native Mandarin Chinese speakers. Using a target forced-choice task, we further explored the potentially problematic sentence pairs. Results of the two experiments suggest an eminently successful replication of judgments in the book: out of the 557 data samples tested, only five sentence pairs require further investigation. This large-scale study represents the first attempt to replicate the judgments in a non-English syntax textbook, in hopes to bridge the gap between the informal data-collection in Chinese linguistic research and the protocols of experimental cognitive science.

Contradicting prevailing claims in the literature, we report experimental evidence showing that the Chinese reflexive taziji has both local and long-distance binding options. We per-formed a series of formal judgment experiments manipulating the gender feature of the potential antecedents such that they matched or mismatched the anaphor’s gender using a bi-clausal structure with an argument reflexive in the embedded clause (e.g., Name1-says-Name2-Verb-taziji). Participants were asked to choose the antecedent of the anaphor (antecedent choice task) and also to judge the acceptability of the sentence (acceptability judgment task). Results showed that the reflexive taziji had both long-distance and local binding options, although the local binding option was preferred. Also, the pattern was replicated for the original examples taken from a widely used Chinese syntax textbook (Huang et al. 2009), contra the judgments reported there. We discuss the implications of this study from both theoretical and methodological perspectives.

The informal judgments of the well-formedness of phrases and sentences have long been used as the primary data source for syntacticians. In recent years, the reliability of data based on linguists’ introspective intuitions is increasingly subject to scrutiny. Although a number of studies were able to replicate a vast majority of English judgments published in a textbook and in peer-reviewed journal articles, the status of data in many non-English languages has yet to be experimentally examined. In this work, we em- ployed formal quantitative methods to evaluate the reliability of judgments in the widely used textbook, The Syntax of Chinese (Huang, Li, & Li, 2009). We first assessed example sentences based on the acceptability ratings from 148 native Mandarin Chinese speakers. Using a target forced-choice task, we further explored the potentially problematic sentence pairs. Results of the two experiments suggest an eminently successful replication of judgments in the book: out of the 557 data samples tested, only five sentence pairs require further investigation. This large-scale study represents the first attempt to replicate the judgments in a non-English syntax textbook, in hopes to bridge the gap between the informal data-collection in Chinese linguistic research and the protocols of experimental cognitive science.