Article published In:
Diachronica: Online-First ArticlesWord order change in German infinitival complementation
The role of processing factors
The present article discusses whether processing factors might play a role in the reduction of word order
variability in German infinitival complements of control verbs, connecting evidence from a diachronic corpus study to processing
considerations and psycholinguistic findings. We show that intraposition, a linearization pattern that has been claimed to be
costly in comprehension due to both center-embedding and temporary ambiguity, became less frequent in language use over time.
Findings from language production experiments show that present-day German speakers avoid producing intraposition patterns even
following repeated exposure to this pattern. Taken together, our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that processing
factors can influence the distribution of word order variants. Looking at the diachronic dimension, however, reveals that the
effect of processing factors can be modulated by sociolinguistic factors and the impact of language modality.
Keywords: word order change, German, Early New High German, language processing, language change, temporary ambiguity, center-embedding
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Structural properties of German infinitival complements
- 3.Sources of processing difficulty arising with intraposed infinitives
- 4.Intraposed infinitives over time: A corpus study
- 4.1Data and analysis
- 4.2Results
- 4.3Interim discussion
- 5.Evidence from language production experiments
- 5.1Elicited production
- 5.2Can intraposition be primed?
- 6.Discussion
- 7.Conclusion
- Notes
-
Primary sources -
References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].
Published online: 5 November 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.22037.dec
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.22037.dec
References (61)
Demske, Ulrike[Baumbank.UP] Demske, Ulrike. 2019. Referenzkorpus
Frühneuhochdeutsch: Baumbank.UP. Universität Potsdam: Institut für Germanistik. [URL]
Deutsches
Textarchiv[DTA] Deutsches
Textarchiv. Grundlage für ein Referenzkorpus der neuhochdeutschen Sprache. Herausgegeben von
der Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der
Wissenschaften, Berlin 2022. [URL]
Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche
Sprache[DeReKo] Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche
Sprache. Das Deutsche Referenzkorpus DeReKo. [URL]
DWDS Kernkorpus
20[DWDS20] DWDS Kernkorpus
20. Textkorpus bereitgestellt durch das Digitale Wörterbuch der deutschen
Sprache. [URL]
DWDS Kernkorpus
21[DWDS21] DWDS Kernkorpus
21. Textkorpus bereitgestellt durch das Digitale Wörterbuch der deutschen
Sprache. [URL]
Scheffler, Tatjana[Twitter] Scheffler, Tatjana. 2014. A
German Twitter Snapshot. In Proceedings of the Ninth International
Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14). Reykjavik. [URL]
Ralegh, Walter[Am] Ralegh, Walter. Americæ
achter Theil / in welchem erstlich beschrieben wirt das maechtige vnd goldtreiche Koenigreich Guiana (…) durch (…) Walthern
Ralegh Rittern und Hauptmann vber jrer koen. mayest. auß Engellandt Leibs Guardi (…). Alles erstlich in engellændischer Sprach
außgangen / jetzt aber auß der ollændischen Translation in die hochteutsche Sprache gebracht / durch Avgvstinum Cassiodorvm
Reinivm (…) an Tag gegeben durch Dieterschen von Bryseligen hinderlassenen
Erben. Frankfurt, 1599.
AvisoWalter Schöne, Julius Adolph von Söhne[Aviso] Aviso. Relation oder
Zeitung. hg. v. Walter Schöne, Julius Adolph von Söhne: Wolfenbüttel, 1609.
CONTINVATIO I/II[Cont] CONTINVATIO I/II. Der
Zehenjaerigen Relation/ oder Calendarii Historici decennalis. Warhafftige Beschreibung aller gedenkwuerdigen Historien/ so
sich seidhero des Leipzigischen Newen Tages Marckt Anno
1609. (…) Leipzig/ in vorlegung Abraham Lambergo/ Anno 1609.
FortunatusH.-G. Roloff[Fortunatus] Fortunatus. Nach der
Editio Princeps von 1509. hg. v. H.-G. Roloff. Stuttgart: Reclam, 1981.
Das LalebuchS. Ertz[Lalebuch] Das Lalebuch. Nach dem
Druck von 1597, hg. v. S. Ertz. Stuttgart: Reclam, 1982.
Die Relation des Jahres 1609Walter Schöne[Rel09] Die Relation des Jahres 1609, hg.
v. Walter Schöne, Faksimiledruck. Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1940.
Relation Aller Fürnemmen vnd gedenckwürdigen
Historien[Rel67] Relation Aller Fürnemmen vnd gedenckwürdigen
Historien. Jahrgang 1667.
Wickram, Georg[Rollwagenbüchlein] Wickram, Georg. Sämtliche
Werke, hg. v. H.-G. Roloff. Bd. 71: Das
Rollwagenbüchlein. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1973.
Tristrant und
IsaldeA. Brandstetter[Tristrant und Isalde] Tristrant und
Isalde. Prosaroman. Nach dem ältesten Druck aus Augsburg vom Jahre 1484, versehen mit den
Lesarten des zweiten Augsburger Druckes aus dem Jahre 1498 und eines Wormser Druckes unbekannten
Datums, hg. v. A. Brandstetter. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1966.
Axel, Katrin. 2007. Studies
on Old High German syntax: Left sentence periphery, verb placement and verb-second (Linguistik
Aktuell/Linguistics Today 112). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Baayen, R. Harald. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data: A
practical introduction to statistics using
R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bader, Markus & Tanja Schmid. 2009. Minimality
in verb-cluster
formation. Lingua 119(10). 1458–1481.
Bates, Douglas, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker. 2015. Fitting
linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical
Software 67(1). 1–48.
Bayer, Josef, Tanja Schmid & Markus Bader. 2005. Clause
union and clausal position. In Marcel den Dikken & Christina Tortora (eds.), The
function of function words and functional categories (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today
78). 79–113. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Bosch, Sina, Ilaria De Cesare, Claudia Felser & Ulrike Demske. 2022. A
multi-methodological approach to word order variation in German infinitival
complementation. In Robin Hörnig, Sophie von Wietersheim, Andreas Konietzko & Sam Featherston (eds.), Proceedings
of Linguistic Evidence 2020: Linguistic theory enriched by experimental
data. Tübingen: University of Tübingen. 281–298. [URL]
Bosch, Sina, Ilaria De Cesare, Ulrike Demske & Claudia Felser. 2023. Word-order
variation and coherence in German infinitival complementation. Journal of Comparative Germanic
Linguistics 26(1).
Bosch, Sina & Claudia Felser. 2023. The
role of L1 influence on L2 word order behaviour in German infinitival complementation. Ms. University of Potsdam.
De Cesare, Ilaria. 2021. Word
order variability and change in German infinitival complements. A multi-causal
approach. Potsdam, University of Potsdam dissertation.
Demske, Ulrike. 2015. Towards
coherent infinitival patterns in the history of German. Journal of Historical
Linguistics 5(1). 6–40.
Demske, Ulrike. 2016. Zur
Komplexität des Frühneuhochdeutschen. In Sarah Kwekkeboom & Sandra Waldenberger (eds.), PerspektivWechsel
oder: Die Wiederentdeckung der
Philologie, vol. 11, 437–454. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.
Demske, Ulrike. 2019. Referenzkorpus
Frühneuhochdeutsch: Baumbank.UP. Universität Potsdam, Institut für Germanistik. [URL]
Ebert, Robert Peter. 1980. Social and stylistic
variation in Early New High German word order: The sentence frame (Satztrahmen). Beiträge zur
Geschichte der deutschen
Sprache 1021. 357–398.
Fanselow, Gisbert & Stefan Frisch. 2006. Effects
of processing difficulty on judgements of acceptability. In Gisbert Fanselow, Caroline Fery & Matthias Schlesewsky (eds.), Gradience
in grammar: Generative
perspectives, 291–316. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Felser, Claudia & Sina Bosch. 2024. Processing
factors constrain word order variation in German: The trouble with third constructions. Journal
of Germanic
Linguistics 36(1). 47–75.
Ferreira, Victor S. 2019. A mechanistic framework for
explaining audience design in language production. Annual Review of
Psychology 70(1). 29–51.
Ferreira, Victor S. & Gary S. Dell. 2000. Effect
of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production. Cognitive
Psychology 401. 296–340.
Frazier, Lyn. 1979. On
comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut dissertation (reproduced by the Indiana University Linguistics Club).
Frazier, Lyn. 1985. Syntactic
complexity. In David R. Dowty, Lauri Karttunen & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), Natural
language
parsing, 129–189. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Frazier, Lyn & Keith Rayner. 1982. Making
and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous
sentences. Cognitive
Psychology 141. 178–210.
Gambi, Chiara & Martin J. Pickering. 2017. Models
linking production and comprehension. In Eva M. Fernández & Helen Smith Cairns (eds.), The
handbook of psycholinguistics, 157–181. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Gibson, Edward. 1998. Linguistic
complexity: Locality of syntactic
dependencies. Cognition 68(1). 1–76.
Gibson, Edward. 2000. The
dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic
complexity. In Alec Marantz, Yasushi Miyashita & Wayne O’Neil (eds.), Image,
language, brain: Papers from the first Mind Articulation Project
Symposium, 94–126. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Hawkins, John A. 1994. A performance theory of order and
constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haywood, Sarah L., Martin J. Pickering & Holly P. Branigan. 2005. Do
speakers avoid ambiguities during dialogue? Psychological
Science 16(5). 362–366.
Jaeger, T. Florian & Neal E. Snider. 2013. Alignment
as a consequence of expectation adaptation: Syntactic priming is affected by the prime’s prediction error given both prior and
recent
experience. Cognition 127(1). 57–83.
Lötscher, Andreas. 1995. Syntaktische
Prestigesignale in der literarischen Prosa des 16.
Jahrhunderts. Daphnis 24(2). 17–53.
von Polenz, Peter. 2000. Deutsche
Sprachgeschichte vom Spätmittelalter bis zur
Gegenwart (vol. 11), 2nd
edn. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.
R Core Team. 2021. R: A language and
environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. [URL]
Sapp, Christopher D. 2014. Extraposition in Middle and New
High German. The Journal of Comparative Germanic
Linguistics 17(2). 129–156.
Scheffler, Tatjana. 2014. A
German Twitter snapshot. In Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Thierry Declerck, Hrafn Loftsson, Bente Maegaard, inter
alia & Stelios Piperidis (eds.), Proceedings
of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation
(LREC’14). Reykjavik: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
Schildt, Joachim. 1976. Zur
Ausbildung des Satzrahmens. In Gerhard Kettmann & Joachim Schildt (eds.), Zur
Ausbildung der Norm der deutschen Literatursprache auf der syntaktischen Ebene (1470–1730): Der
Einfachsatz (Bausteine zur Sprachgeschichte des Neuhochdeutschen
56), 235–284. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
Schmid, Tanja, Markus Bader & Josef Bayer. 2005. Coherence:
An experimental approach. In Stephan v. Kepser & Marga Reis (eds.), Linguistic
Evidence. Empirical, Theoretical and Computational Perspectives (Studies in Generative Grammar
85), 435–456. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Scontras, Gregory, William Badecker, Lisa Shank, Eunice Lim & Evelina Fedorenko. 2015. Syntactic
complexity effects in sentence production. Cognitive
Science 39(3). 559–583.
Sternefeld, Wolfgang. 2006. Syntax.
Eine morphologisch motivierte generative Beschreibung des Deutschen, 1st
edn. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Trudgill, Peter. 2020. Millennia
of language change: Sociolinguistic studies in deep historical
linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Voigtmann, Sophia & Augustin Speyer. 2021. Information
density and the extraposition of German relative clauses. Frontiers of
Psychology 121.
Wallenberg, Joel C., Rachael Bailes, Christine Cuskley & Anton Karl Ingason. 2021. Smooth
signals and syntactic
change. Languages 6(2). 60.
Wasow, Thomas. 2015. Ambiguity
avoidance is overrated. In Susanne Winkler (ed.), Ambiguity:
Language and communication, 29–47. Berlin, Munich, Boston: De Gruyter.
Weiß, Helmut. 2005. Von
den vier Lebensaltern einer Standardsprache: Zur Rolle von Spracherwerb und
Medialität. Deutsche
Sprache 331. 289–307.