Instances of comparison, such as Despite the fact that many more people have gone to Russia than I have, their English is deemed nonsensical by native speakers of English. As a result of the discrepancy between what we initially think .
We understand and what we actually do come to understand, this raises questions regarding the link between grammar and language processing. The results of the first comprehensive research of these so-called “comparative illusions” are presented in this work.
We Investigate Four Possible Explanations For Their Emergence:
We investigate four possible explanations for their emergence: a shallow syntactic parser, an ellipsis-based repair, an erroneously resolved lexical ambiguity, and an event comparison interpretation that persists even after the original event has passed.
When the matrix sentence supports an event comparison reading, speakers are more likely to fall into the illusion. A verbatim recall task investigates whether or not speakers’ recollections of the sentences contain evidence for such construals.
According to our hypothesis, this is the result of speakers entertaining an interpretation that is initially in line with the sentence, but failing to notice when this interpretation becomes unavailable at the than-clause.
Semantic knowledge obscures the existence of an illegal syntax operator-variable configuration. Comparative illusions, on the other hand, highlight the necessity of syntactic and semantic norms in sentence processing rather than displaying processing without grammatical analysis.
Because of the lack of agreement between the subjects of the subordinate “than” clause (“I”) and the parallel main clause (“more people”) in what is a parallel construction, the anaphora you utilise is an example of an ungrammatical unbounded dependency.
As a result, the anaphora of the subordinate clause “than I (have been to Russia)” does not match the anaphora of the subordinate clause “more individuals.” When people say, “More people have been to Russia than I have been.”
it creates an endless cycle of dependence because the subject “I” is a singular subject that cannot be divided into comparatively “more” or transversely “fewer,” not without buying into an absurdity or extraordinary circumstance.
That part of the subject “I” can go to Russia while another part cannot, like if the subject “I” were to amputate his or her arm and only that part would go to Russia.
Someone who says this is presumably trying to convey the idea that they are not the only one who has gone to Russia (e.g, I am not the only one who has been to Russia). Russia has been visited by more than one person.
Overview Of Grammatical Irregularities.
Escher phrases are ungrammatical because a matrix clause subject like more people compares two groups of individuals, yet in the second clause there is no such group of individuals. The subject of the second clause must be a bare plural for the phrase to be grammatically correct.
According to linguists, it is “striking” that individuals say that these phrases sound fine despite the grammar having no meaning and “amazing” that people rarely notice any errors.