學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 以眼動追蹤技術探討閱讀中文把字句與被字句的處理歷程
The online processing of Bǎ/Bèi construction in Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from eye movements of sentence reading作者 蔡旭容
Tsai, Hsu-Jung貢獻者 蔡介立
Tsai, Jie-Li
蔡旭容
Tsai, Hsu-Jung關鍵詞 把字句
被字句
眼動閱讀
施事者優先
有生性日期 2021 上傳時間 2-Mar-2021 14:30:45 (UTC+8) 摘要 以競爭模型為基礎的許多研究顯示，語意是中文重要的語言線索，幫助讀者指派語意角色給句中論元，達到語意理解的目的。論元擴展依存模型則描繪出語意關係建立的時序，指出語意角色指派的歷程存在於論元之間，在不同階段使用不同語意線索建立出句子的整體語意。過去的研究發現，在處理「名詞—名詞—動詞」句型時，與處理一般簡單句「名詞—動詞—名詞」句型時不同，採用的是「受事者優先」偏好；此外，相對於介詞「被」，「把」對其後的論元名詞具生命性與否的約束強度較弱。然而，近年有研究指出，在處理和「名詞—名詞—動詞」同為動詞在後結構的把字句和被字句時，「施事者優先」的偏好仍然存在，且中文讀者在處理這兩種句式時有相似的眼動表現。因此本論文將透過兩個眼動閱讀實驗，操弄句首論元有生性、句式和介詞後論元有生性，探討這些因素對「施事者優先」偏好的影響，以及對介詞後論元有生性的約束情形。實驗結果顯示，在閱讀把字句時，效率優於被字句，且句首論元的有生性不影響把字句的閱讀處理效率。此外，句首論元為生命體時會對被字句產生干擾，顯示符合典型施事特徵的生命體將會強化「施事者優先」的預期。介詞後論元的有生性並不影響把字句與被字句的閱讀處理效率，顯示當介詞提早將論元的語意角色確立後，介詞後論元的有生性對眼動表現沒有影響。整體而言，中文句子的閱讀處理符合擴展論元依存模型，「施事者優先」則是中文讀者的語意角色指派偏好。 參考文獻 參考文獻中央研究院（2017）。中研院現代漢語平衡語料庫4.0，網址：http://asbc.iis.sinica.edu.tw，檢索年月：2020年7月。王力（1984）。王力文集第一卷：中國語法理論。山東：山東教育出版社。朱德熙（1982）。語法講義。北京：商務印書館。吳靜蘭（2007）。角色指稱語法簡介。語言暨語言學，8(1)，5-70。呂叔湘（1999）。現代漢語八百詞增訂本。北京：商務印書館。柯華葳、陳明蕾與廖家寧（2005）。詞頻、詞彙類型與眼球運動型態：來自篇章閱讀的證據。中華心理學刊，47(4)，381-398。doi:10.6129/CJP.2005.4704.06張伯江（2000）。論“把”字句的句式語義。語言研究，1，28-40。張伯江（2001）。被字句和把字句的對稱與不對稱。中國語文，6，519-524。張伯江（2002）。施事角色的語用屬性。中國語文，6， 483-574。張伯江（2007）。施事和受事的語義語用特徵及其在句式中的實現（博士論文）。復旦大學，上海。張育慈（2017）。語義及句法對西班牙語及中文母語人士在中文理解的影響（碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。湯廷池（1986）。國語語法與功用解釋：兼談國語與英語功用語法的對比分析。師大學報，31，437-469。劉月華、潘文娛與故韡（2007）。實用現代漢語語法（增訂本）。北京：商務印書館。蔡介立（2000）。從眼動控制探討中文閱讀的線索處理歷程：應用眼動誘發呈現技術之系列研究（博士論文）。國立政治大學，台北市。蔡介立、顏妙璇與汪勁安（2005）。眼球移動測量即在中文閱讀研究之應用。應用心理研究，28, 91-104。繆小春、陳國鵬與應厚昌（1984）。詞序和詞義在漢語語句理解中的作用再探。心理科學，6，1-7。Bader, M. M., Michael. (1999）. Subject-Object Ambiguities in German Embedded Clauses: An Across-the-Board Comparison. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28(2), 121-143.Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. Macwhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157-193). London and New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Bates, E., & Macwhinney, B. (1989). Functionalism and the competition model. The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing, 3, 73-112.Bates, E., McNew, S., Macwhinney, B., Devescovi, A., & Smith, S. (1982). Functional constraints on sentence processing: A cross-linguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245-299.Bencini, G. M., Pozzan, L., Biundo, R., McGeown, W. J., Valian, V. V., Venneri, A., & Semenza, C. (2011). Language-specific effects in Alzheimer’s disease: Subject omission in Italian and English. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 24(1), 25-40.Bever, T. G. (1974). The ascent of the specious, or there’s a lot we don’t know about mirrors. In D. Cohen (Ed.), Explaining linguistic phenomena (pp. 173-200). New York: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.Bock, J. K., & Warren, R. K. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21(1), 47-67.Bornkessel, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2006). The extended argument dependency model: a neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. Psychological Review, 113(4), 787-821. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.787Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Tanaka, M. (2008). Contributions of animacy to grammatical function assignment and word order during production. Lingua, 118(2), 172-189. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.003Chao, Y. R. (1968). A grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.Comrie, B. (1989). Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology (2 ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago press.Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 173-200.Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory (pp. 1-88). London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Foley, W. A., & Van Valin, J. R. D. (1977). On the organization of "subject" properties in universal grammar. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 3, 293-320. doi:10.3765/bls.v3i0.3297Frazier, L., & Flores D’Arcais, G. B. (1989). Filler driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(3), 331-344. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(89)90037-5Gerwien, J. (2019). The interpretation and prediction of event participants in Mandarin verb-final active and passive sentences. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science, 3(2), 257-283. doi:10.1007/s41809-019-00049-xGerwien, J., & Xi, K. (2017). Predicting object states in Mandarin Chinese- insights from the bǎ-construction. In Poster presented at the 30th annual CUNY conference on human sentence processing, March 30–April 1.Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1-76.Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In A. Marantz, Y. Miyashita, & O. O`Neil (Eds.), Image, language, brain: Papers from the first mind articulation project symposium (pp. 95-126). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGorell, P. (1996). Parsing theory and phrase-order variation in German V2 clauses. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25(1), 135-156.Grewe, T., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Zysset, S., Wiese, R., von Cramon, D. Y., & Schlesewsky, M. (2007). The role of the posterior superior temporal sulcus in the processing of unmarked transitivity. Neuroimage, 35(1), 343-352. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.11.045Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., Scheepers, C., & Strube, G. (1998). Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution In German. Sentence processing: A crosslinguistic perspective,31, 293-312Holcomb, P. J., & Neville, S. A. C. J. (1992). Visual and Auditory Sentence Processing: A Developmental Analysis Using Event-Related Brain Potentials. Developmental Neuropsychology, 8(2-3), 203-241.Huang, Y. T., Zheng, X., Meng, X., & Snedeker, J. (2013). Children`s assignment of grammatical roles in the online processing of Mandarin passive sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(4). doi:10.1016/j.jml.2013.08.002Inhoff, A. W., & Liu, W. (1998). The perceptual span and oculomotor activity during the reading of Chinese sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 20-34.Inhoff, A. W., & Radach, R. (1998). Definition and computation of oculomotor measures in the study of cognitive processes. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 29-53). Oxford: ElsevierKeenan, E. (1976). Towards a universal definition of “subject”. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics: Subject and Topic (pp. 303–333). New York: Acadamic Press.LaPolla, R. J. (1993). Arguments against ‘subject’ and ‘direct Object’ as Viable Concepts in Chinese. Chung Yang Yen Chiu Yuan Li Shih Yu Yen Yen Chiu So Chi K`an /Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica, 63(4). 1-35.LaPolla, R. J. (1995). Pragmatic relations and word order in Chinese. In P. Downing & M. Noonan (Eds.), Word order in discourse(pp. 297-329). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.LaPolla, R. J. (2009). Chinese as a topic-comment (not topic- prominent and not SVO) language. In J. Xing (Ed.), Studies of Chinese Linguistics: Functional Approaches (pp. 9-22). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Lee, M.-W. (2004). Another Look at the Role of Empty Categories in Sentence Processing (and Grammar). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 33(1), 51-73.Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1974). An explanation of word order change SVO→SOV. Foundations of Language, 12(2), 201-214.Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1989). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar (Vol. 3). Berkley: University of California Press.Li, P., Bates, E., Liu, H., & Macwhinney, B. (1992). Cues as functional constraints on sentence processing in Chinese. Language processing in Chinese, 90, 207-234.Li, P., Bates, E., & Macwhinney, B. (1993). Processing a language without inflection: A reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 169-192.Li, X.-Q., Zhao, H.-Y., Zheng, Y.-Y., & Yang, Y.-F. (2015). Two-stage interaction between word order and noun animacy during online thematic processing of sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(5), 555-573. doi:10.1080/23273798.2014.954590MacＷhinney, B. (1978). The Acquisition of Morphophonology. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 43(1/2), 1-123.Macwhinney, B., Bach, E., & Kliegl, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23(2), 127-150. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(84)90093-8MacWhinney, B., Pléh, C., & Bates, E. (1985). The development of sentence interpretation in Hungarian. Cognitive Psychology, 17(2), 178-209. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(85)90007-6McDonald, S. A., & Shillcock, R. C. (2003a). Eye movements reveal theon-line computation of lexical probabilities during reading. PsychologicalScience, 14, 648–652.McDonald, S. A., & Shillcock, R. C. (2003b). Low-level predictive inference in reading: The influence of transitional probabilities on eye movements. Vision Research, 43, 1735–1751.Metzner, P., Von Der Malsburg, T., Vasishth, S., & Rösler, F. (2017). The importance of reading naturally: Evidence from combined recordings of eye movements and electric brain potentials. Cognitive Science, 41, 1232-1263. doi:10.1111/cogs.12384Miao, X., & Zhu, M. (1992). Language Development in Chinese Children. In C. Hsuan Chih & T. Ovid J.L. (Eds.), Language processing in Chinese (pp. 237-276). Amsterdam: Elsevier science publishersMichael, E. B., Keller, T. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (2001). fMRI investigation of sentence comprehension by eye and by ear: modality fingerprints on cognitive processes. Human Brain Mapping, 13(4), 239-252. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.103Penolazzi, B., De Vincenzi, M., Angrilli, A., & Job, R. (2005). Processing of temporary syntactic ambiguity in Italian "who"-questions: a study with event-related potentials. Neuroscience Letters, 377(2), 91-96. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2004.11.074Philipp, M., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Bisang, W., & Schlesewsky, M. (2008). The role of animacy in the real time comprehension of Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from auditory event-related brain potentials. Brain and Language, 105(2), 112-133. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2007.09.005Rayner, K. (1977). Visual attention in reading: Eye movements reflect cognitive processes. Memory & Cognition, 5(4), 443-448.Rayner, K. (1998). Eye Movementsin Reading and Information Processing: 20 Years of Research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506. doi:10.1080/17470210902816461Richardson, D. C., Dale, R., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Eye movements in language and cognition: a brief introduction. In G.-M. M., M. I., C. S., & S. M. J. (Eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics (pp. 323-344). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Schlesewsky, M., Fanselow, G., Kliegl, R., & Krems, J. (2000). The subject preference in the processing of locally ambiguous wh-questions in German. In B. Hemforth & L. Konieczny (Eds.), German sentence processing (Vol. 24, pp. 65-93). Dordrecht: Springer.Sun, C.-F., & Givón, T. (1985). On the so-called sov word order in Mandarin Chinese: a quantified text study and its implications. Language, 61(2), 329-351.Tai, J. H. (1973). Chinese as a SOV language. Chicago Linguistic Society, 9, 659-671.Tzeng, C.-C. (2005). Cultural representations of the passive voice and the Mandarin Bei-construction in L1 and L2 corpora. Journal of Chinese Language and Computing, 15(2), 89-101.Van Valin, J. R. D. (1981). Grammatical relations in ergative languages. Studies in Language, 5(3), 361-394.Van Valin, J. R. D. (1999). Generalized semantic roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Empirical issues in formal syntax and semantics, 2, 373-389.Van Valin, J. R. D. (2005). A Summary of Role and Reference Grammar. Retrieved from http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~rrgpage/rrg/RRGsummary.pdfVan Valin, J. R. D., & LaPolla, R. J. (1997). Syntax: Structure, meaning, and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Wang, L. (2011). The influence of animacy and context on word order processing: Neurophysiological evidence from Mandarin Chinese. (Doctoral dissertation, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences Leipzig).Wang, L., Schlesewsky, M., Bickel, B., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2009). Exploring the nature of the ‘subject’-preference: Evidence from the online comprehension of simple sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(7-8), 1180-1226. doi:10.1080/01690960802159937Wang, L., Schlesewsky, M., Philipp, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2012). The role of animacy in online argument interpretation in Mandarin Chinese. In M. Lamers & P. d. Swart (Eds.), Case, word, order and prominence (pp. 91-119). Dordrecht: SpringerYan, G., Tian, H., Bai, X., & Rayner, K. (2006). The effect of word and character frequency on the eye movements of Chinese readers. British Journal of Psychology, 97(2), 259-268. doi:10.1348/000712605X70066Yang, H.-M., & McConkie, G. W. (1999). Reading Chinese: Some basic eye-movement characteristics. In J. Wang, A. W. Inhoff, & H. C. Chen (Eds.), Reading Chinese script: A cognitive analysis (pp. 207-222). New Jersey: Erlbaum.Zang, C., Fu, Y., Bai, X., Yan, G., & Liversedge, S. P. (2018). Investigating word length effects in Chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(12), 1831-1841. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
華語文教學碩博士學位學程
106161003資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1061610031 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 蔡介立 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Tsai, Jie-Li en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 蔡旭容 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Tsai, Hsu-Jung en_US dc.creator (作者) 蔡旭容 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Tsai, Hsu-Jung en_US dc.date (日期) 2021 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-Mar-2021 14:30:45 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-Mar-2021 14:30:45 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Mar-2021 14:30:45 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G1061610031 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/134079 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 華語文教學碩博士學位學程 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 106161003 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 以競爭模型為基礎的許多研究顯示，語意是中文重要的語言線索，幫助讀者指派語意角色給句中論元，達到語意理解的目的。論元擴展依存模型則描繪出語意關係建立的時序，指出語意角色指派的歷程存在於論元之間，在不同階段使用不同語意線索建立出句子的整體語意。過去的研究發現，在處理「名詞—名詞—動詞」句型時，與處理一般簡單句「名詞—動詞—名詞」句型時不同，採用的是「受事者優先」偏好；此外，相對於介詞「被」，「把」對其後的論元名詞具生命性與否的約束強度較弱。然而，近年有研究指出，在處理和「名詞—名詞—動詞」同為動詞在後結構的把字句和被字句時，「施事者優先」的偏好仍然存在，且中文讀者在處理這兩種句式時有相似的眼動表現。因此本論文將透過兩個眼動閱讀實驗，操弄句首論元有生性、句式和介詞後論元有生性，探討這些因素對「施事者優先」偏好的影響，以及對介詞後論元有生性的約束情形。實驗結果顯示，在閱讀把字句時，效率優於被字句，且句首論元的有生性不影響把字句的閱讀處理效率。此外，句首論元為生命體時會對被字句產生干擾，顯示符合典型施事特徵的生命體將會強化「施事者優先」的預期。介詞後論元的有生性並不影響把字句與被字句的閱讀處理效率，顯示當介詞提早將論元的語意角色確立後，介詞後論元的有生性對眼動表現沒有影響。整體而言，中文句子的閱讀處理符合擴展論元依存模型，「施事者優先」則是中文讀者的語意角色指派偏好。 zh_TW dc.description.tableofcontents 目錄第一章、緒論 1一、研究背景 1二、研究目的 5第二章、文獻探討 7第一節、主語偏好與施事者優先偏好 7第二節、中文語法 12一、中文的主語爭議及語序 12二、把字句與被字句 15第三節、中文的語意角色指派歷程 18一、競爭模型 18二、擴展論元依存模型 24第四節、把字句與被字句的語意處理 30第五節、眼動追蹤技術與影響中文閱讀處理的因素 37一、眼動追蹤技術 37二、影響閱讀處理的因素 39第六節、研究問題 41第三章、實驗一：把字句與被字句的施事者優先偏好 44第一節、研究方法 45一、實驗參與者 45二、實驗材料與設計 45三、實驗設備 51四、實驗程序 51第二節、實驗結果 53一、資料排除條件 54二、實驗結果 55第三節、討論 68第四章、實驗二：介詞「把」與「被」對其後論元的有生性約束 71第一節、研究方法 72一、實驗參與者 72二、實驗材料與設計 72三、實驗設備 77四、實驗程序 78第二節、實驗結果 78一、資料排除條件 78二、實驗結果 79第三節、討論 89第五章、綜合討論與建議 92第一節、綜合討論 93一、把字句的閱讀處理優勢與施事者優先偏好 93二、「把」與「被」在語意角色指派歷程中的功能 94三、「把」與「被」對其後論元的有生性約束 96四、論元有生性對晚期語意整合的影響 98五、結論 99第二節、研究建議 100參考文獻 103附錄一：實驗一實驗材料 112附錄二：實驗二前測—主觀克漏作業材料 117附錄三：實驗二實驗材料 118 zh_TW dc.format.extent 3112054 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1061610031 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 把字句 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 被字句 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 眼動閱讀 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 施事者優先 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 有生性 zh_TW dc.title (題名) 以眼動追蹤技術探討閱讀中文把字句與被字句的處理歷程 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The online processing of Bǎ/Bèi construction in Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from eye movements of sentence reading en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 參考文獻中央研究院（2017）。中研院現代漢語平衡語料庫4.0，網址：http://asbc.iis.sinica.edu.tw，檢索年月：2020年7月。王力（1984）。王力文集第一卷：中國語法理論。山東：山東教育出版社。朱德熙（1982）。語法講義。北京：商務印書館。吳靜蘭（2007）。角色指稱語法簡介。語言暨語言學，8(1)，5-70。呂叔湘（1999）。現代漢語八百詞增訂本。北京：商務印書館。柯華葳、陳明蕾與廖家寧（2005）。詞頻、詞彙類型與眼球運動型態：來自篇章閱讀的證據。中華心理學刊，47(4)，381-398。doi:10.6129/CJP.2005.4704.06張伯江（2000）。論“把”字句的句式語義。語言研究，1，28-40。張伯江（2001）。被字句和把字句的對稱與不對稱。中國語文，6，519-524。張伯江（2002）。施事角色的語用屬性。中國語文，6， 483-574。張伯江（2007）。施事和受事的語義語用特徵及其在句式中的實現（博士論文）。復旦大學，上海。張育慈（2017）。語義及句法對西班牙語及中文母語人士在中文理解的影響（碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。湯廷池（1986）。國語語法與功用解釋：兼談國語與英語功用語法的對比分析。師大學報，31，437-469。劉月華、潘文娛與故韡（2007）。實用現代漢語語法（增訂本）。北京：商務印書館。蔡介立（2000）。從眼動控制探討中文閱讀的線索處理歷程：應用眼動誘發呈現技術之系列研究（博士論文）。國立政治大學，台北市。蔡介立、顏妙璇與汪勁安（2005）。眼球移動測量即在中文閱讀研究之應用。應用心理研究，28, 91-104。繆小春、陳國鵬與應厚昌（1984）。詞序和詞義在漢語語句理解中的作用再探。心理科學，6，1-7。Bader, M. M., Michael. (1999）. Subject-Object Ambiguities in German Embedded Clauses: An Across-the-Board Comparison. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28(2), 121-143.Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48. doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. Macwhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157-193). London and New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Bates, E., & Macwhinney, B. (1989). Functionalism and the competition model. The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing, 3, 73-112.Bates, E., McNew, S., Macwhinney, B., Devescovi, A., & Smith, S. (1982). Functional constraints on sentence processing: A cross-linguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245-299.Bencini, G. M., Pozzan, L., Biundo, R., McGeown, W. J., Valian, V. V., Venneri, A., & Semenza, C. (2011). Language-specific effects in Alzheimer’s disease: Subject omission in Italian and English. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 24(1), 25-40.Bever, T. G. (1974). The ascent of the specious, or there’s a lot we don’t know about mirrors. In D. Cohen (Ed.), Explaining linguistic phenomena (pp. 173-200). New York: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.Bock, J. K., & Warren, R. K. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21(1), 47-67.Bornkessel, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2006). The extended argument dependency model: a neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. Psychological Review, 113(4), 787-821. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.787Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Tanaka, M. (2008). Contributions of animacy to grammatical function assignment and word order during production. Lingua, 118(2), 172-189. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.003Chao, Y. R. (1968). A grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.Comrie, B. (1989). Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology (2 ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago press.Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 173-200.Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory (pp. 1-88). London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Foley, W. A., & Van Valin, J. R. D. (1977). On the organization of "subject" properties in universal grammar. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 3, 293-320. doi:10.3765/bls.v3i0.3297Frazier, L., & Flores D’Arcais, G. B. (1989). Filler driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(3), 331-344. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(89)90037-5Gerwien, J. (2019). The interpretation and prediction of event participants in Mandarin verb-final active and passive sentences. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science, 3(2), 257-283. doi:10.1007/s41809-019-00049-xGerwien, J., & Xi, K. (2017). Predicting object states in Mandarin Chinese- insights from the bǎ-construction. In Poster presented at the 30th annual CUNY conference on human sentence processing, March 30–April 1.Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1-76.Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In A. Marantz, Y. Miyashita, & O. O`Neil (Eds.), Image, language, brain: Papers from the first mind articulation project symposium (pp. 95-126). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGorell, P. (1996). Parsing theory and phrase-order variation in German V2 clauses. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25(1), 135-156.Grewe, T., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Zysset, S., Wiese, R., von Cramon, D. Y., & Schlesewsky, M. (2007). The role of the posterior superior temporal sulcus in the processing of unmarked transitivity. Neuroimage, 35(1), 343-352. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.11.045Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., Scheepers, C., & Strube, G. (1998). Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution In German. Sentence processing: A crosslinguistic perspective,31, 293-312Holcomb, P. J., & Neville, S. A. C. J. (1992). Visual and Auditory Sentence Processing: A Developmental Analysis Using Event-Related Brain Potentials. Developmental Neuropsychology, 8(2-3), 203-241.Huang, Y. T., Zheng, X., Meng, X., & Snedeker, J. (2013). Children`s assignment of grammatical roles in the online processing of Mandarin passive sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(4). doi:10.1016/j.jml.2013.08.002Inhoff, A. W., & Liu, W. (1998). The perceptual span and oculomotor activity during the reading of Chinese sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 20-34.Inhoff, A. W., & Radach, R. (1998). Definition and computation of oculomotor measures in the study of cognitive processes. In G. Underwood (Ed.), Eye guidance in reading and scene perception (pp. 29-53). Oxford: ElsevierKeenan, E. (1976). Towards a universal definition of “subject”. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics: Subject and Topic (pp. 303–333). New York: Acadamic Press.LaPolla, R. J. (1993). Arguments against ‘subject’ and ‘direct Object’ as Viable Concepts in Chinese. Chung Yang Yen Chiu Yuan Li Shih Yu Yen Yen Chiu So Chi K`an /Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology Academia Sinica, 63(4). 1-35.LaPolla, R. J. (1995). Pragmatic relations and word order in Chinese. In P. Downing & M. Noonan (Eds.), Word order in discourse(pp. 297-329). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.LaPolla, R. J. (2009). Chinese as a topic-comment (not topic- prominent and not SVO) language. In J. Xing (Ed.), Studies of Chinese Linguistics: Functional Approaches (pp. 9-22). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Lee, M.-W. (2004). Another Look at the Role of Empty Categories in Sentence Processing (and Grammar). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 33(1), 51-73.Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1974). An explanation of word order change SVO→SOV. Foundations of Language, 12(2), 201-214.Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1989). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar (Vol. 3). Berkley: University of California Press.Li, P., Bates, E., Liu, H., & Macwhinney, B. (1992). Cues as functional constraints on sentence processing in Chinese. Language processing in Chinese, 90, 207-234.Li, P., Bates, E., & Macwhinney, B. (1993). Processing a language without inflection: A reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 169-192.Li, X.-Q., Zhao, H.-Y., Zheng, Y.-Y., & Yang, Y.-F. (2015). Two-stage interaction between word order and noun animacy during online thematic processing of sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(5), 555-573. doi:10.1080/23273798.2014.954590MacＷhinney, B. (1978). The Acquisition of Morphophonology. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 43(1/2), 1-123.Macwhinney, B., Bach, E., & Kliegl, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23(2), 127-150. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(84)90093-8MacWhinney, B., Pléh, C., & Bates, E. (1985). The development of sentence interpretation in Hungarian. Cognitive Psychology, 17(2), 178-209. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(85)90007-6McDonald, S. A., & Shillcock, R. C. (2003a). Eye movements reveal theon-line computation of lexical probabilities during reading. PsychologicalScience, 14, 648–652.McDonald, S. A., & Shillcock, R. C. (2003b). Low-level predictive inference in reading: The influence of transitional probabilities on eye movements. Vision Research, 43, 1735–1751.Metzner, P., Von Der Malsburg, T., Vasishth, S., & Rösler, F. (2017). The importance of reading naturally: Evidence from combined recordings of eye movements and electric brain potentials. Cognitive Science, 41, 1232-1263. doi:10.1111/cogs.12384Miao, X., & Zhu, M. (1992). Language Development in Chinese Children. In C. Hsuan Chih & T. Ovid J.L. (Eds.), Language processing in Chinese (pp. 237-276). Amsterdam: Elsevier science publishersMichael, E. B., Keller, T. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (2001). fMRI investigation of sentence comprehension by eye and by ear: modality fingerprints on cognitive processes. Human Brain Mapping, 13(4), 239-252. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.103Penolazzi, B., De Vincenzi, M., Angrilli, A., & Job, R. (2005). Processing of temporary syntactic ambiguity in Italian "who"-questions: a study with event-related potentials. Neuroscience Letters, 377(2), 91-96. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2004.11.074Philipp, M., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Bisang, W., & Schlesewsky, M. (2008). The role of animacy in the real time comprehension of Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from auditory event-related brain potentials. Brain and Language, 105(2), 112-133. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2007.09.005Rayner, K. (1977). Visual attention in reading: Eye movements reflect cognitive processes. Memory & Cognition, 5(4), 443-448.Rayner, K. (1998). Eye Movementsin Reading and Information Processing: 20 Years of Research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372-422.Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506. doi:10.1080/17470210902816461Richardson, D. C., Dale, R., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Eye movements in language and cognition: a brief introduction. In G.-M. M., M. I., C. S., & S. M. J. (Eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics (pp. 323-344). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Schlesewsky, M., Fanselow, G., Kliegl, R., & Krems, J. (2000). The subject preference in the processing of locally ambiguous wh-questions in German. In B. Hemforth & L. Konieczny (Eds.), German sentence processing (Vol. 24, pp. 65-93). Dordrecht: Springer.Sun, C.-F., & Givón, T. (1985). On the so-called sov word order in Mandarin Chinese: a quantified text study and its implications. Language, 61(2), 329-351.Tai, J. H. (1973). Chinese as a SOV language. Chicago Linguistic Society, 9, 659-671.Tzeng, C.-C. (2005). Cultural representations of the passive voice and the Mandarin Bei-construction in L1 and L2 corpora. Journal of Chinese Language and Computing, 15(2), 89-101.Van Valin, J. R. D. (1981). Grammatical relations in ergative languages. Studies in Language, 5(3), 361-394.Van Valin, J. R. D. (1999). Generalized semantic roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Empirical issues in formal syntax and semantics, 2, 373-389.Van Valin, J. R. D. (2005). A Summary of Role and Reference Grammar. Retrieved from http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~rrgpage/rrg/RRGsummary.pdfVan Valin, J. R. D., & LaPolla, R. J. (1997). Syntax: Structure, meaning, and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Wang, L. (2011). The influence of animacy and context on word order processing: Neurophysiological evidence from Mandarin Chinese. (Doctoral dissertation, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences Leipzig).Wang, L., Schlesewsky, M., Bickel, B., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2009). Exploring the nature of the ‘subject’-preference: Evidence from the online comprehension of simple sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(7-8), 1180-1226. doi:10.1080/01690960802159937Wang, L., Schlesewsky, M., Philipp, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2012). The role of animacy in online argument interpretation in Mandarin Chinese. In M. Lamers & P. d. Swart (Eds.), Case, word, order and prominence (pp. 91-119). Dordrecht: SpringerYan, G., Tian, H., Bai, X., & Rayner, K. (2006). The effect of word and character frequency on the eye movements of Chinese readers. British Journal of Psychology, 97(2), 259-268. doi:10.1348/000712605X70066Yang, H.-M., & McConkie, G. W. (1999). Reading Chinese: Some basic eye-movement characteristics. In J. Wang, A. W. Inhoff, & H. C. Chen (Eds.), Reading Chinese script: A cognitive analysis (pp. 207-222). New Jersey: Erlbaum.Zang, C., Fu, Y., Bai, X., Yan, G., & Liversedge, S. P. (2018). Investigating word length effects in Chinese reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(12), 1831-1841. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202100231 en_US
