Case And Gender Agreement

Data for each set of conditions (e.g.B. MMM – MFM – MMF – MFF) were fed into a 2 × 2 repeated ANOVA measures with grammar and sexual comparison between the attractor and the head factors. We used IBM`s SPSS software (www.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/). Analyses were carried out according to items and participants. Data from all regions were tested, but there were only significant results in regions 4-6 under M-head conditions and in 5-6 regions under F- and N-head conditions. Region 4 is copula, region 5 is an adjective or participation, regions 6 to 10 contain several words that modify the predicate. The test results for the regions concerned are presented in Table 6. Errors of conformity attraction are observed in spontaneous speech and in well-treated texts. They have also been tested, mainly in English, but also in French, Spanish, Italian, Dutch, German and a few other languages (Bock and Miller, 1991; Vigliocco et al., 1995, 1996; Pearlmutter et al., 1999; Anton-Mendez et al., 2002; Hartsuiker et al., 2003, to name a few). Early reports indicated that the verb simply corresponded to the most linear noun (Jespersen, 1924); Quirk et al., 1972; François, 1986, a.-o.).

However, subsequent studies have shown that the attraction of similarities is a structural phenomenon. For example, Vigliocco and Nicol (1998) have shown that people make attraction mistakes that ask questions, for example.B. “Is the helicopter safe for flights?” Several factors that influence attraction have also been identified. The oppression of gender value would take time, which would slow down the reaction and create more errors in relation to the congruent-masculine condition. It could be argued that the reported response effect model is due to the adoption of a response strategy by subjects. . . .