Abstract
We investigate the order in which speakers produce the proper names of couples they know personally in English and Japanese, two languages with markedly different constituent word orders. Results demonstrate that speakers of both languages tend to produce the name of the person they feel closer to before the name of the other member of the couple (N = 180). In this way, speakers’ unique personal histories give rise to a remarkably systematic linguistic generalization in both English and Japanese. Insofar as closeness serves as an index of cognitive accessibility, the current work demonstrates that systematicity emerges from a domain-general property of memory.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Miah Pitcher for suggesting we study the order of proper names and to Miah, Anne Marie Wright and Aditya Cowsik for running a pilot version on English. We are also grateful to Roger Levy and Zoey Liu for discussion, and to Ting Qian for statistical advice. Finally, we are grateful to three anonymous reviewers, and to Lynn Anthonissen, Peter Petré, and John Newman for very helpful feedback on an earlier draft.
References
Alim, H. Samy, John R. Rickford & Arnetha F. Ball. 2016. Raciolinguistics: How language shapes our ideas about race. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190625696.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Ariel, Mira. 1988. Referring and accessibility. Journal of Linguistics 24(1). 65–87.10.1017/S0022226700011567Search in Google Scholar
Arnold, Jennifer. E. 2003. Multiple constrains on reference form. In Preferred argument structure: Grammar as architecture for function. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/sidag.14.11arnSearch in Google Scholar
Baker, Mark. 2005. On verb-initial and verb-final word orders in Lokạạ. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 26(2). 125–164.10.1515/jall.2005.26.2.125Search in Google Scholar
Barrouillet, Pierre, Sophie Bernardin, Sophie Portrat, Evie Vergauwe & Valérie Camos. 2007. Time and cognitive load in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 33(3). 570.10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.570Search in Google Scholar
Bates, Elizabeth & Brian MacWhinney. 1989. Functionalism and the competition model. In Brian MacWhinney & Elizabeth Bates (eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing, 73–112. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Benor, S. B. & Roger Levy. 2006. The chicken or the egg? A probabilistic analysis of English binomials. Language 82(2). 233–278.10.1353/lan.2006.0077Search in Google Scholar
Bock, J. Katherine & William. J. M. Levelt. 1994. Language production: Grammatical encoding. In M. A. Gernsbacher (ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics, 945–984. San Diego: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bock, J. Katherine & R. K. Warren. 1985. Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition 21(1). 47–67.10.1016/0010-0277(85)90023-XSearch in Google Scholar
Bock, J. Kathryn. 1982. Toward a cognitive psychology of syntax: Information processing contributions to sentence formulation. Psychological Review 89(1). 1–47.10.1037/0033-295X.89.1.1Search in Google Scholar
Bock, J. Kathryn. 1987. An effect of the accessibility of word forms on sentence structures. Journal of Memory and Language 26(2). 119–137.10.1016/0749-596X(87)90120-3Search in Google Scholar
Boland, J. E., Michael K. Tanenhaus, Susan M. Garnsey & Gregory N. Carlson. 1995. Verb argument structure in parsing and interpretation: Evidence from wh-questions. Journal of Memory and Language 34(6). 774–806.10.1006/jmla.1995.1034Search in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. vol. 9. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/tsl.9Search in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511750526Search in Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. 1958. Communication theory, linguistics, and psycholinguistics. Review of Educational Research 28(2). 79–88.10.2307/1168862Search in Google Scholar
Chang, Franklin. 2009. Learning to order words: A connectionist model of heavy NP shift and accessibility effects in Japanese and English. Journal of Memory and Language 61(3). 374–397.10.1016/j.jml.2009.07.006Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Search in Google Scholar
Christianson, K. & Fernanda Ferreira. 2005. Conceptual accessibility and sentence production in a free word order language (Odawa). Cognition 98(2). 105–113.10.1016/j.cognition.2004.10.006Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, Anna-Lisa, Alexander Jaudas & Peter M. Gollwitzer. 2008. Number of cues influences the cost of remembering to remember. Memory & Cognition 36(1). 149–156.10.3758/MC.36.1.149Search in Google Scholar
Cooper, W. E. & J. R. Ross. 1975. World order. In R. E. Grossman, L. J. San & T. J. Vance (eds.), Papers from the parasession on functionalism, 63–111. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Search in Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2014. Words that go together: Measuring individual differences in native speakers’ knowledge of collocations. The Mental Lexicon 9(3). 401–418.10.1075/ml.9.3.02dabSearch in Google Scholar
Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2018. Experience, aptitude and individual differences in native language ultimate attainment. Cognition 178. 222–235.10.1016/j.cognition.2018.05.018Search in Google Scholar
Downing, Pamela & M. Noonan. 1995. Word order in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/tsl.30Search in Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 2000. Counting genera vs. counting languages. Linguistic Typology 4(3). 23.Search in Google Scholar
Du Bois, J. W., L. E. Kumpf & W. J. Ashby. (eds.). (2003). Preferred argument structure:Grammar as architecture for function, vol. 14. John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/sidag.14Search in Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 1989. Jocks and burnouts: Social categories and identity in the high school. New York: Teachers college press.Search in Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2017. Age as a sociolinguistic variable. In F. Coulmas (ed.), The handbook of sociolinguistics, 151–167. New York, NY: Wiley.10.1002/9781405166256.ch9Search in Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope & William Labov. 2017. Phonetics, phonology and social meaning. Journal of Sociolinguistics 21(4). 467–496.10.1111/josl.12244Search in Google Scholar
Eggins, S. 2004. Introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: A&C Black.Search in Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas & Stephen C. Levinson. 2009. The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32(5). 429–448.10.1017/S0140525X0999094XSearch in Google Scholar
Faghiri, Pegah & Pollet Samvelian. 2014. Constituent ordering in Persian and the weight factor. Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 10. 215–232.Search in Google Scholar
Ferreira, Fernanda. 1994. Choice of passive voice is affected by verb type and animacy. Journal of Memory and Language 33(6). 715–736.10.1006/jmla.1994.1034Search in Google Scholar
Ferreira, Victor S. & Gary S. Dell. 2000. Effect of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production. Cognitive Psychology 40(4). 296–340.10.1006/cogp.1999.0730Search in Google Scholar
Ferreira, Victor S. & H. Yoshita. 2003. Given-new ordering effects on the production of scrambled sentences in Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32(6). 669–692.10.1023/A:1026146332132Search in Google Scholar
Frazier, Lyn & Keith Rayner. 1982. Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology 14(2). 178–210.10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1Search in Google Scholar
Futrell, Richard, Kyle Mahowald & Edward Gibson. 2015. Large-scale evidence of dependency length minimization in 37 languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112(33). 10336–10341.10.1073/pnas.1502134112Search in Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk, G. Kristiansen & Y. Peirsman. 2010. Advances in cognitive sociolinguistics, vol. 45. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110226461Search in Google Scholar
Gibson, E. 1998. Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68(1). 1–76.10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1Search in Google Scholar
Gibson, Edward, Richard Futrell, Steven T. Piandadosi, Isabelle Dautriche, Kyle Mahowald, Leon Bergen & Roger Levy. 2019. How efficiency shapes human language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23(5). 389–407.10.1016/j.tics.2019.02.003Search in Google Scholar
Gildea, Daniel & David Temperley. 2010. Do grammars minimize dependency length? Cognitive Science 34(2). 286–310.10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01073.xSearch in Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1983. Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross- language studies, vol. 3. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing.10.1075/tsl.3Search in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2019. Explain me this: Creativity, competition, and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691183954Search in Google Scholar
Gonthier, Corentin, Brooke N. Macnamara, Michael Chow, Andrew R. A. Conway & Todd S. Braver. 2016. Inducing proactive control shifts in the AX-CPT. Frontiers in Psychology 7. 1822.10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01822Search in Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan. T. 1999. Particle movement: A cognitive and functional approach. Cognitive Linguistics 10(2). 105–146.10.1515/cogl.1999.005Search in Google Scholar
Haiman, John. 1985. Iconicity in syntax: Proceedings of a symposium on iconicity in syntax, Stanford, June 24–26 1983, vol. 6. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/tsl.6Search in Google Scholar
Hakuta, Kenji. 1981. Grammatical description versus configurational arrangement in language acquisition: The case of relative clauses in Japanese. Cognition 9(3). 197–236.10.1016/0010-0277(81)90001-9Search in Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. Baltimore: University Park Press.Search in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2007. Pre-established categories don’t exist: Consequences for language description and typology. Linguistic Typology 11(1). 119–132.10.1515/LINGTY.2007.011Search in Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie. 2005. The world atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1994. A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Hegarty, P., N. Watson, L. Fletcher & G. McQueen. 2011. When gentlemen are first and ladies are last: Effects of gender stereotypes on the order of romantic partners’ names. British Journal of Social Psychology 50(1). 21–35.10.1348/014466610X486347Search in Google Scholar
Hudson, Richard A. 1984. Word grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Iliev, Rumen & Anastasia Smirnova. 2016. Revealing word order: Using serial position in binomials to predict properties of the speaker. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 45(2). 205–235.10.1007/s10936-014-9341-3Search in Google Scholar
Kamide, Yuki, Gerry T. M. Altmann & Sarah L. Haywood. 2003. The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 49(1). 133–156.10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00023-8Search in Google Scholar
Kinzler, Katherine D. & K. M. DeJesus. 2012. Northern=smart and Southern=nice: The development of accent attitudes in the United States. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 66(6). 1146–1158.10.1080/17470218.2012.731695Search in Google Scholar
Kinzler, Katherine D., Emmanuel Dupoux & Elizabeth S. Spelke. 2007. The native language of social cognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104(30). 12577–12580.10.1073/pnas.0705345104Search in Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things. Chicago: Chicago Universty Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites, vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Levelt, William J. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Liu, H. T. 2008. Dependency distance as a metric of language comprehension difficulty. Journal of Cognitive Science 9(2). 159–191.10.17791/jcs.2008.9.2.159Search in Google Scholar
Liu, Zoey. To appear. Extent of dependency length minimization depends on headedness. Language Typology and Universals.Search in Google Scholar
Lohmann, Arne & Tayo Takada. 2014. Order in NP conjuncts in spoken English and Japanese. Lingua 152. 48–64.10.1016/j.lingua.2014.09.011Search in Google Scholar
MacDonald, Janet L., Kathryn Bock & Michael H. Kelly. 1993. Word and world order: Semantic, phonological, and metrical determinants of serial position. Cognitive Psychology 25(2). 188–230.10.1006/cogp.1993.1005Search in Google Scholar
MacDonald, MaryEllen C. 2013. How language production shapes language form and comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology 4. 1–16.10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226Search in Google Scholar
Morgan, Emily & Roger Levy. 2016. Abstract knowledge versus direct experience in processing of binomial expressions. Cognition 157. 384–402.10.1016/j.cognition.2016.09.011Search in Google Scholar
Namboodiripad, Savithry. 2017. An experimental approach to variation and variability in constituent order. UC San Diego: Doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Onishi, Kristine H., Gregory L. Murphy & Kathryn Bock. 2008. Prototypicality in sentence production. Cognitive Psychology 56(2). 103–141.10.1016/j.cogpsych.2007.04.001Search in Google Scholar
Otake, Takashi, Giyooo Hatano, Anne Cutler & Jacques Mehler. 1993. Mora or syllable? speech segmentation in Japanese. Journal of Memory and Language 32(2). 258–278.10.1006/jmla.1993.1014Search in Google Scholar
Perry, Lynn, Emily Mech, Maryellen C. MacDonald & Mark S. Seidenberg. 2016. Influences of speaker-listener similarity on shadowing and comprehension. Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society Conference. 1026–1031.Search in Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria. 1997. Situation perspective: On the relations of thematic roles, discourse categories, and grammatical relations to figure and ground. In A. E. Goldberg (ed.), Conceptual structure, discourse and language, 401–419. Chicago: CSLI publications.Search in Google Scholar
Prat-Sala, Merce & Holly Branigan. 2000. Discourse constraints on syntactic processing in language production: A cross-linguistic study in English and Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language 42(2). 168–182.10.1006/jmla.1999.2668Search in Google Scholar
Purnell, Thomas, William Idsardi & John Baugh. 1999. Perceptual and phonetic experiments on American English dialect identification. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 18(1). 10–30.10.1177/0261927X99018001002Search in Google Scholar
Rayner, Keith & Charles Clifton Jr. 2009. Language processing in reading and speech perception is fast and incremental: Implications for event-related potential research. Biological Psychology 80(1). 4–9.10.1016/j.biopsycho.2008.05.002Search in Google Scholar
Rickford, John R. & Sharese King. 2016. Language and linguistics on trial: Hearing Rachel Jeantel (and other vernacular speakers) in the courtroom and beyond. Language 92(4). 948–988.10.1017/9781316091142.014Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Francis & Bob McMurray. 2018. Lexical access in the face of degraded speech: The effects of cognitive adaptation. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 144(3). 1800.10.1121/1.5067944Search in Google Scholar
Stallings, Lynne M. & Maryellen C. MacDonald. 2011. It’s not Just the “Heavy NP”: Relative phrase length modulates the production of heavy-NP shift. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 40(3). 177–187.10.1007/s10936-010-9163-xSearch in Google Scholar
Tachihara, Karina, Miah Pitcher & Adele E. Goldberg. 2019. Jessie and Gary or Gary and Jessie? Cognitive accessibility predicts the order in English and Japanese. Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society Conference. 1083–1089.Search in Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Alexandra D’Arcy. 2009. Peaks beyond phonology: Adolescence, incrementation, and language change. Language 85(1). 58–108.10.1353/lan.0.0084Search in Google Scholar
Tanaka, Mikihiro N., Holly P. Branigan, Janet F. McLean & Martin J. Pickering. 2011. Conceptual influences on word order and voice in sentence production: Evidence from Japanese. Journal of Memory and Language 65(3). 318–330.10.1016/j.jml.2011.04.009Search in Google Scholar
Tomlin, Russell S. 1995. Focal attention, voice, and word order: An experimental, cross-linguistic study. In P. Downing & M. Noonan (eds.), Word order in discourse, 517–552. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/tsl.30.18tomSearch in Google Scholar
Treffers-Daller, Jeanine & Carmen Silva-Corvalán. 2016. Language dominance in bilinguals: Issues of measurement and operationalization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107375345Search in Google Scholar
van Valin Jr, Robert D. & Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, meaning, and function. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139166799Search in Google Scholar
Wasow, Thomas. 2002. Postverbal behavior No. 145. Chicago: CSLI publications.Search in Google Scholar
Wright, Saundra K., Jennifer Hay & Tessa Bent. 2005. Ladies first? Phonology, frequency, and the naming conspiracy. Linguistics 43(3). 531–561.10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.531Search in Google Scholar
Yamashita, Hiroko & Franklin Chang. 2001. “Long before short” preference in the production of a head-final language. Cognition 81(2). B45–B55.10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00121-4Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston