The
Role of Emphasis and Argument Order in the Judgments of Grammaticality
of Japanese Bitransitive Sentences Violating Chomsky's Principle
of Full Interpretation
H. Nagata |
Adult
Japanese speakers judged the grammaticality of isolated simple bitransitive
sentences involving an illegitimate extra argument in addition to
three legitimate arguments. The sentences therefore violated Chomsky's
principle of Full Interpretation. The extra argument was a mere repetition
of a preceding legitimate argument. The role of emphasis placed on
the extra argument in the judgments was studied. The role of argument
type, subjective and objective, was also investigated for sentences
different in argument order, basic and transformed. Findings showed
first that the sentences were judged moderately on a 7-point scale.
Second, the transformed sentences were judged less grammatical than
basic sentences. Third, sentences having two objective arguments
(objective sentences) were judged more grammatical than those having
two subjective arguments (subjective sentences) both for the basic
and for the transformed sentences. Lastly, for the transformed sentences
emphasis slightly increased the judged grammaticality of both the
subjective and the objective sentences. These endings are not compatible
with Chomsky's theory of knowledge of language that he claims every
speaker possesses. Key words: Principle of Full Interpretation, grammaticality judgments, bitransitive sentences, emphasis, argument order |