The syntax-morphology interface

Syntactic Priming As a Test of Argument Structure: A Self-paced Reading Experiment

“…The phonological material of the root is then incorporated into this null verbal head v . As pointed out in Acedo-Matellán ( 2010 , pp. 53–54), “the structure of unergative verbs as transitives is forced by the properties of the system: it is not possible for a functional head to project a specifier without projecting any complement, since the first DP/root merged with a functional head must be its complement.” This also includes cognate object constructions, which would also have a configuration as in (16b).…”

“…Research has extensively shown that exposure to a syntactic structure influences to different degrees the way we subsequently process a similar structure in comprehension and production in what has been called syntactic priming, structural priming, or structural persistence (e.g., Bock, 1986 ; Bock and Loebell, 1990 ; Bock et al, 1992 , 2007 ; Branigan et al, 1995 , 2000 ; Pickering and Branigan, 1998 , 1999 ; Hare and Goldberg, 1999 ; Pickering et al, 2002 , 2013 ; Loebell and Bock, 2003 ; Ferreira and Bock, 2006 ; Thothathiri and Snedeker, 2006 , 2008a , b ; Carminati et al, 2008 ; Hartsuiker et al, 2008 ; Pickering and Ferreira, 2008 ; Tooley et al, 2009 ; Tooley and Traxler, 2010 ; Segaert et al, 2012 , 2013 ; Tooley and Bock, 2014 ; Traxler et al, 2014 ; Wittenberg et al, 2014 ). The main goal of this paper is to use the process of syntactic priming as a behavioral tool to test two competing theoretical approaches to argument structure, namely (i) Hale and Keyser's ( 1993 ; 1998 ; 2002 ) approach as recently developed in Mateu ( 2002 ), Acedo-Matellán ( 2010 ), Mateu and Acedo-Matellán ( 2012 ), and Acedo-Matellán and Mateu ( 2013 ), what we will refer to as the generative semantics approach to argument structure, and (ii) Marantz ( 2005 ; 2011 ; 2013 ), which we will call interpretive semantics approach. These two theoretical models illustrate two different views of the syntax-semantics mapping.…”

“…As pointed out in Marantz ( 2005 ) (see also Poeppel and Embick, 2005 ), generative grammar can and should serve as a source of theoretical hypotheses about the representation of language in the mind and brain and how this is processed, to be formally assessed through standard experimental methods. In this paper we take two competing theories of argument structure, (i) Acedo-Matellán ( 2010 ); Mateu and Acedo-Matellán ( 2012 ), and Acedo-Matellán and Mateu ( 2013 ), and (ii) Marantz ( 2005 ; 2011 ; 2013 ) and test their claims and predictions with respect to the representation and processing of syntactic argument structure. Both theories are framed within Chomsky's Minimalist Program, and they both adopt a neoconstructionist view of syntax, whereby argument structure is not lexically projected 2 but created in the syntax by the computational system, a single generative engine for all structure building where minimal units of syntactico-semantic features are combined through the operation of merge to create hierarchical syntactic structures that will then receive a semantic and phonological interpretation.…”

“… 4 In Hale and Keyser ( 1993 , 1998 , 2002 ), syntactic configurations corresponded to pre-syntactic abstract structures, i.e., generated at l(exical) -syntax, prior to s(yntactic) -syntax. However, they are analyzed as surface structures generated in syntax proper in Acedo-Matellán ( 2010 ) and Acedo-Matellán ( 2010 ), Acedo-Matellán and Mateu ( 2013 ), as explicitly stated in e.g., Acedo-Matellán ( 2010 , p. 52). …”

Revisiting -ej(ar) verbs in Catalan: Argument and event structure

“…Beyond Bernal's (2000), Gràcia Solé et al's (2000), and Cabré's (2002) mainly descriptive studies, Oltra-Massuet & Castroviejo's (2013) (from now on O&C) is centred on deadjectival verbs suffixed with -ej(ar) and how they compare with Spanish deadjectival verbs derived via the cognate suffix -e(ar). 1 O&C review the event-structural properties of deadjectival -ej(ar) verbs and provide an analysis thereof in terms of Acedo-Matellán's (2010) and Acedo-Matellán & Mateu's (2013) neoconstructionist theory of argument structure.…”