The search result changed since you submitted your search request. Documents might be displayed in a different sort order.
  • search hit 10 of 673
Back to Result List

Middle ratings rise regardless of grammatical construction

  • People perceive sentences more favourably after hearing or reading them many times. A prominent approach in linguistic theory argues that these types of exposure effects (satiation effects) show direct evidence of a generative approach to linguistic knowledge: only some sentences improve under repeated exposure, and which sentences do improve can be predicted by a model of linguistic competence that yields natural syntactic classes. However, replications of the original findings have been inconsistent, and it remains unclear whether satiation effects can be reliably induced in an experimental setting at all. Here we report four findings regarding satiation effects in wh-questions across German and English. First, the effects pertain to zone of well-formedness rather than syntactic class: all intermediate ratings, including calibrated fillers, increase at the beginning of the experimental session regardless of syntactic construction. Second, though there is satiation, ratings asymptote below maximum acceptability. Third, these effectsPeople perceive sentences more favourably after hearing or reading them many times. A prominent approach in linguistic theory argues that these types of exposure effects (satiation effects) show direct evidence of a generative approach to linguistic knowledge: only some sentences improve under repeated exposure, and which sentences do improve can be predicted by a model of linguistic competence that yields natural syntactic classes. However, replications of the original findings have been inconsistent, and it remains unclear whether satiation effects can be reliably induced in an experimental setting at all. Here we report four findings regarding satiation effects in wh-questions across German and English. First, the effects pertain to zone of well-formedness rather than syntactic class: all intermediate ratings, including calibrated fillers, increase at the beginning of the experimental session regardless of syntactic construction. Second, though there is satiation, ratings asymptote below maximum acceptability. Third, these effects are consistent across judgments of superiority effects in English and German. Fourth, wh-questions appear to show similar profiles in English and German, despite these languages being traditionally considered to differ strongly in whether they show effects on movement: violations of the superiority condition can be modulated to a similar degree in both languages by manipulating subject-object initiality and animacy congruency of the wh-phrase. We improve on classic satiation methods by distinguishing between two crucial tests, namely whether exposure selectively targets certain grammatical constructions or whether there is a general repeated exposure effect. We conclude that exposure effects can be reliably induced in rating experiments but exposure does not appear to selectively target certain grammatical constructions. Instead, they appear to be a phenomenon of intermediate gradient judgments.show moreshow less

Export metadata

Additional Services

Search Google Scholar Statistics
Metadaten
Author details:J. M. M. BrownORCiD, Gisbert FanselowORCiDGND, Rebecca Hall, Reinhold KlieglORCiDGND
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251280
ISSN:1932-6203
Pubmed ID:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33974664
Title of parent work (English):PLOS ONE / Public Library of Science
Subtitle (English):Testing syntactic variability in a repeated exposure paradigm
Publisher:PLOS
Place of publishing:San Fransisco
Publication type:Article
Language:English
Date of first publication:2021/05/11
Publication year:2021
Release date:2022/11/17
Volume:16
Issue:5
Article number:e0251280
Number of pages:26
Funding institution:Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)German Research Foundation (DFG) [317633480 - SFB 1287]
Organizational units:Humanwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Strukturbereich Kognitionswissenschaften / Department Linguistik
DDC classification:5 Naturwissenschaften und Mathematik / 50 Naturwissenschaften / 500 Naturwissenschaften und Mathematik
6 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften / 61 Medizin und Gesundheit / 610 Medizin und Gesundheit
Peer review:Referiert
Publishing method:Open Access / Gold Open-Access
Accept ✔
This website uses technically necessary session cookies. By continuing to use the website, you agree to this. You can find our privacy policy here.