■心理语言学研究仍然对语法转换的习语保持其比喻意义的情况感到困惑。有大量的语言和心理语言学研究,研究了哪些因素可以决定为什么一些成语比其他成语在语法上更固定。包括透明度,组合性,和句法冻结;然而,他们没有定论地返回,有时甚至相互冲突,结果。这是第一个研究论证结构的研究(即,动词接受的参数数量)和参数邻接(即,关键论点相对于动词的位置)及其对德语中惯用和字面句子处理的影响。我们的结果表明,传统的习语处理模型(根据该模型将习语存储为固定条目)和较新的混合理论(除了固定条目外还允许一些组合处理)都不能充分说明参数结构的影响或参数邻接。因此,这项研究挑战了现有的成语处理模式。
■在两个句子完成实验中,参与者以主动和被动语态聆听惯用和字面句子,而没有句子最终动词。他们指出了三个视觉上呈现的动词中哪一个最好地完成了句子。我们在实验中操纵了因子参数结构,并在实验中操纵了参数邻接。在实验1中,被动型三参数句的关键参数与动词相邻,而双参数句的关键参数与动词不相邻,在实验2中反之亦然。
■在两个实验中,语音与参数结构交互。活动句子-字面和惯用语-显示了两个和三个参数句子的等效处理。然而,被动句子返回对比效果。在实验1中,三个参数句子的处理速度比两个参数句子快,反之亦然。此模式对应于当关键自变量相邻比非相邻时更快的处理。
■结果表明,在句法转换句子的处理中,参数邻接对参数数量的主导作用。关于成语加工,我们得出的结论是,动词对其批判性论点的邻接性决定了被动习语是否保持其比喻意义,并提出了这一发现对相关习语处理模型的启示。
UNASSIGNED: Psycholinguistic research remains puzzled about the circumstances under which syntactically transformed idioms keep their figurative meaning. There is an abundance of linguistic and psycholinguistic studies that have examined which factors may determine why some idioms are more syntactically fixed than others, including transparency, compositionality, and syntactic frozenness; however, they have returned inconclusive, sometimes even conflicting, results. This is the first study to examine argument structure (i.e., the number of arguments a verb takes) and argument adjacency (i.e., the position of the critical arguments relative to the verb) and their effects on the processing of idiomatic and literal sentences in German. Our results suggest that neither the traditional models of idiom processing (according to which idioms are stored as fixed entries) nor more recent hybrid theories (which concede some compositional handling in addition to a fixed entry) adequately account for the effects of argument structure or argument adjacency. Therefore, this study challenges existing models of idiom processing.
UNASSIGNED: In two sentence-completion experiments, participants listened to idiomatic and literal sentences in both active and passive voice without the sentence-final verb. They indicated which of three visually-presented verbs best completed the sentence. We manipulated the factor argument structure within experiments and argument adjacency across experiments. In Experiment 1, passivized three-argument sentences had the critical argument adjacent to the verb while two-argument sentences had the critical argument non-adjacent to the verb, and vice versa in Experiment 2.
UNASSIGNED: In both experiments, voice interacted with argument structure. Active sentences-both literal and idiomatic-showed equivalent processing of two- and three-argument sentences. However, passive sentences returned contrasting effects. In Experiment 1, three-argument sentences were processed faster than two-argument sentences and vice versa in Experiment 2. This pattern corresponds to faster processing when critical arguments are adjacent than non-adjacent.
UNASSIGNED: The results point to the dominant role of argument adjacency over the number of arguments in the processing of syntactically transformed sentences. Regarding idiom processing, we conclude that the adjacency of the verb to its critical arguments determines whether passivized idioms keep their figurative meaning and present the implications of this finding for relevant models of idiom processing.