@phdthesis{Adelt2024,
  author    = {Adelt, Anne},
  title     = {The Relativized Minimality approach to comprehension of German relative clauses in aphasia},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-62331},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-623312},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {xiii, 166},
  year      = {2024},
  abstract  = {It is a well-attested finding in head-initial languages that individuals with aphasia (IWA) have greater difficulties in comprehending object-extracted relative clauses (ORCs) as compared to subject-extracted relative clauses (SRCs). Adopting the linguistically based approach of Relativized Minimality (RM; Rizzi, 1990, 2004), the subject-object asymmetry is attributed to the occurrence of a Minimality effect in ORCs due to reduced processing capacities in IWA (Garraffa \& Grillo, 2008; Grillo, 2008, 2009). For ORCs, it is claimed that the embedded subject intervenes in the syntactic dependency between the moved object and its trace, resulting in greater processing demands. In contrast, no such intervener is present in SRCs. Based on the theoretical framework of RM and findings from language acquisition (Belletti et al., 2012; Friedmann et al., 2009), it is assumed that Minimality effects are alleviated when the moved object and the intervening subject differ in terms of relevant syntactic features. For German, the language under investigation, the RM approach predicts that number (i.e., singular vs. plural) and the lexical restriction [+NP] feature (i.e., lexically restricted determiner phrases vs. lexically unrestricted pronouns) are considered relevant in the computation of Minimality. Greater degrees of featural distinctiveness are predicted to result in more facilitated processing of ORCs, because IWA can more easily distinguish between the moved object and the intervener. This cumulative dissertation aims to provide empirical evidence on the validity of the RM approach in accounting for comprehension patterns during relative clause (RC) processing in German-speaking IWA. For that purpose, I conducted two studies including visual-world eye-tracking experiments embedded within an auditory referent-identification task to study the offline and online processing of German RCs. More specifically, target sentences were created to evaluate (a) whether IWA demonstrate a subject-object asymmetry, (b) whether dissimilarity in the number and/or the [+NP] features facilitates ORC processing, and (c) whether sentence processing in IWA benefits from greater degrees of featural distinctiveness. Furthermore, by comparing RCs disambiguated through case marking (at the relative pronoun or the following noun phrase) and number marking (inflection of the sentence-final verb), it was possible to consider the role of the relative position of the disambiguation point. The RM approach predicts that dissimilarity in case should not affect the occurrence of Minimality effects. However, the case cue to sentence interpretation appears earlier within RCs than the number cue, which may result in lower processing costs in case-disambiguated RCs compared to number-disambiguated RCs. In study I, target sentences varied with respect to word order (SRC vs. ORC) and dissimilarity in the [+NP] feature (lexically restricted determiner phrase vs. pronouns as embedded element). Moreover, by comparing the impact of these manipulations in case- and number-disambiguated RCs, the effect of dissimilarity in the number feature was explored. IWA demonstrated a subject-object asymmetry, indicating the occurrence of a Minimality effect in ORCs. However, dissimilarity neither in the number feature nor in the [+NP] feature alone facilitated ORC processing. Instead, only ORCs involving distinct specifications of both the number and the [+NP] features were well comprehended by IWA. In study II, only temporarily ambiguous ORCs disambiguated through case or number marking were investigated, while controlling for varying points of disambiguation. There was a slight processing advantage of case marking as cue to sentence interpretation as compared to number marking. Taken together, these findings suggest that the RM approach can only partially capture empirical data from German IWA. In processing complex syntactic structures, IWA are susceptible to the occurrence of the intervening subject in ORCs. The new findings reported in the thesis show that structural dissimilarity can modulate sentence comprehension in aphasia. Interestingly, IWA can override Minimality effects in ORCs and derive correct sentence meaning if the featural specifications of the constituents are maximally different, because they can more easily distinguish the moved object and the intervening subject given their reduced processing capacities. This dissertation presents new scientific knowledge that highlights how the syntactic theory of RM helps to uncover selective effects of morpho-syntactic features on sentence comprehension in aphasia, emphasizing the close link between assumptions from theoretical syntax and empirical research.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Mertzen2022,
  author    = {Mertzen, Daniela},
  title     = {A cross-linguistic investigation of similarity-based interference in sentence comprehension},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-55668},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-556685},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {xvii, 129},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {The aim of this dissertation was to conduct a larger-scale cross-linguistic empirical investigation of similarity-based interference effects in sentence comprehension. Interference studies can offer valuable insights into the mechanisms that are involved in long-distance dependency completion. Many studies have investigated similarity-based interference effects, showing that syntactic and semantic information are employed during long-distance dependency formation (e.g., Arnett \& Wagers, 2017; Cunnings \& Sturt, 2018; Van Dyke, 2007, Van Dyke \& Lewis, 2003; Van Dyke \& McElree, 2011). Nevertheless, there are some important open questions in the interference literature that are critical to our understanding of the constraints involved in dependency resolution. The first research question concerns the relative timing of syntactic and semantic interference in online sentence comprehension. Only few interference studies have investigated this question, and, to date, there is not enough data to draw conclusions with regard to their time course (Van Dyke, 2007; Van Dyke \& McElree, 2011). Our first cross-linguistic study explores the relative timing of syntactic and semantic interference in two eye-tracking reading experiments that implement the study design used in Van Dyke (2007). The first experiment tests English sentences. The second, larger-sample experiment investigates the two interference types in German. Overall, the data suggest that syntactic and semantic interference can arise simultaneously during retrieval. The second research question concerns a special case of semantic interference: We investigate whether cue-based retrieval interference can be caused by semantically similar items which are not embedded in a syntactic structure. This second interference study builds on a landmark study by Van Dyke \& McElree (2006). The study design used in their study is unique in that it is able to pin down the source of interference as a consequence of cue overload during retrieval, when semantic retrieval cues do not uniquely match the retrieval target. Unlike most other interference studies, this design is able to rule out encoding interference as an alternative explanation. Encoding accounts postulate that it is not cue overload at the retrieval site but the erroneous encoding of similar linguistic items in memory that leads to interference (Lewandowsky et al., 2008; Oberauer \& Kliegl, 2006). While Van Dyke \& McElree (2006) reported cue-based retrieval interference from sentence-external distractors, the evidence for this effect was weak. A subsequent study did not show interference of this type (Van Dyke et al., 2014). Given these inconclusive findings, further research is necessary to investigate semantic cue-based retrieval interference. The second study in this dissertation provides a larger-scale cross-linguistic investigation of cue-based retrieval interference from sentence-external items. Three larger-sample eye-tracking studies in English, German, and Russian tested cue-based interference in the online processing of filler-gap dependencies. This study further extends the previous research by investigating interference in each language under varying task demands (Logačev \& Vasishth, 2016; Swets et al., 2008). Overall, we see some very modest support for proactive cue-based retrieval interference in English. Unexpectedly, this was observed only under a low task demand. In German and Russian, there is some evidence against the interference effect. It is possible that interference is attenuated in languages with richer case marking. In sum, the cross-linguistic experiments on the time course of syntactic and semantic interference from sentence-internal distractors support existing evidence of syntactic and semantic interference during sentence comprehension. Our data further show that both types of interference effects can arise simultaneously. Our cross-linguistic experiments investigating semantic cue-based retrieval interference from sentence-external distractors suggest that this type of interference may arise only in specific linguistic contexts.},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Pauly2021,
  author    = {Pauly, Dennis Nikolas},
  title     = {The effect of noun capitalization when reading German and English},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-49803},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-498031},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {III, 200},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Das Promotionsprojekt hatte als Ziel, die Fragestellung zu beantworten, ob die strukturelle wortinitiale Substantivgroßschreibung, wie sie sich neben dem Deutschen sonst nur noch im Luxemburgischen finden l{\"a}sst, {\"u}ber eine Funktion verf{\"u}gt, die dem Leser einen Vorteil bringt. Die {\"u}bergeordnete Hypothese war, dass ein Vorteil dadurch erreicht wird, dass durch die parafoveale Wahrnehmung der Majuskel bereits eine syntaktische Kategorie, n{\"a}mlich der Kern einer Nominalgruppe, aktiviert wird. Durch diese Wahrnehmung aus dem Augenwinkel sollte das nachfolgende Substantiv schon vorverarbeitet werden k{\"o}nnen. Im Ergebnis sollte eine Erleichterung der Satzverarbeitung bewirkt werden, was sich letztlich in insgesamt schnelleren Lese- bzw. Fixationszeiten zeigen sollte. Die Struktur des Projekts beinhaltet drei Studien, die teilweise jeweils unterschiedliche Versuchspersonengruppen umfassten: Studie 1: - Studiendesign: Semantisches Priming mittels sogenannter Holzwegs{\"a}tze sollten die Funktionsweise der Substantivgroßschreibung f{\"u}r den Leser hervorbringen - Versuchspersonen: Deutsche L1-Sprecher lesen Deutsch Studie 2: - Studiendesign: gleiches Design wie Studie 1, allerdings auf Englisch - Versuchspersonengruppen: Studie 3: 1. Englische L1-Sprecher g{\"a}nzlich ohne Deutschkenntnisse, 2. englische L1-Sprecher, die regelm{\"a}ßig deutsche Texte lesen, 3. deutsche L1-Sprecher mit exzellenten Englischkenntnissen. - Studiendesign: Einfluss der Substantivfrequenz auf eine potentielle Vorverarbeitung mittels boundary paradigm; Untersuchungsprachen: Deutsch und Englisch - Versuchspersonengruppen: 1. Deutsche L1-Sprecher lesen Deutsch, 2. englische L1-Sprecher g{\"a}nzlich ohne Deutschkenntnisse lesen Englisch, 3. deutsche L1-Sprecher mit exzellenten Englischkenntnissen lesen Englisch. Zusammenfassung der Ergebnisse: Die Substantivgroßschreibung hat eindeutig einen Einfluss auf die Satzverarbeitung sowohl im Deutschen als auch im Englischen. Dass dieser einen substanziell entscheidenden Vorteil bringt, kann nicht best{\"a}tigt werden.},
  language  = {en}
}