Agreement In Gender
1. Here and above, the following standard symbols are used: N, Noun; NP, non-one sentence; P, preposition; PP, prepositionalphrase; V, verb; M, male; F, Feminine; N, neutered. While we examine binary characteristics or cases where attraction is observed in all combinations of characteristics (as in production experiments in Slovak and Russian), we can only use circumstantial evidence to assess the contribution of head and attraktor characteristics to the agreement process. Our reading experiences allow the first direct comparison and show that at least in understanding, it is the properties of the heads, not the attractors, that play a decisive role. We observed the attraction with attractors of all three sexes, but only with heads of N and F. The sex of the attractor did not even influence the size of the effect. These results suggest that the sex of the attractor has little or no influence on his chances of being called (it should correspond only to the sex of the false form of verb). Table 4. The number of errors in the attraction of the gender agreement according to the condition of the experiment 1. The assumption that the characteristics of the attractor are determinative was maintained in the more recent call account.
However, it is important to see that in this account, the properties of the head can also influence the agreement process. For example, to explain the plural effect of the mark, it is traditionally assumed that certain names are not marked for number and that “the system is biased to render explicitly marked components” (Wagers et al., 2009, p. 233), so that plural attractors can be easily accessed while singular attractors are almost never found. But another interpretation is possible: the plural function makes the heads easier to recover and therefore more stable, less sensitive to errors of attraction. For this reason, the attraction in singular plural configurations is virtually non-existent. On the other hand, the recovery of singular heads is prone to errors, hence the plethora of errors in the singular plural configurations11. As discussed below, the acceptance of such phrases differs depending on the animacy of names and genders that are combined, and there are significant individual differences between stakeholders. A decisive generalization, however, can be made: examples with female or cat forms of “everyone” are never even marginally acceptable, only a few examples with male forms are. 11. “Let us note that in this scenario, an attractor may also be called in a singular-singular configuration, but this will not cause contractual errors.
In nomine sentences, the adjectives do not show a match with the noun, although pronouns do. z.B. a szép k-nyveitekkel “with your beautiful books” (“szép”: nice): the suffixes of the plural, the possessive “your” and the fall marking “with” are marked only on the name. Data for each set of conditions (z.B MMM – MFM – MMF – MFF) were entered in a 2 × 2 Repeated Measures ANOVA with grammaticity and correspondence between the opponent and the substrates of the head as factors. We used IBM SPSS software (www.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/). Analyses of objects and participants were carried out.