Cognitive Constraints and Island Effects #
@cite{hofmeister-sag-2010}
@cite{hofmeister-sag-2010} argue that island effects are gradient along multiple dimensions and that acceptability varies systematically with nonstructural manipulations (filler complexity, referential load) that leave island configurations intact. This challenges every categorical island constraint proposed: Subjacency, Complex NP Constraint, Barriers, and the Minimal Link Condition.
Key findings #
- More complex fillers (which-N phrases) improve acceptability inside islands relative to bare wh-words (who, what) — counterintuitively, richer representations resist interference and aid memory retrieval.
- Indefinite/plural island NPs improve acceptability relative to definite NPs, consistent with lower referential processing cost.
- Even the best island condition remains below non-island baselines: islands are ameliorated, not eliminated.
The cross-theory comparison (competence vs. performance vs. discourse) lives in
Phenomena.FillerGap.Studies.LuPanDegen2025, which integrates these findings
with @cite{lu-pan-degen-2025}'s discourse-based account.
Processing factors that independently contribute to the difficulty of filler-gap dependencies inside islands.
- locality : ProcessingFactor
Distance between filler and gap increases memory load (section 3.1). Confirmed by processing studies.
- referentialLoad : ProcessingFactor
Referential processing of intervening constituents depletes resources (section 3.2). Definites trigger referent search; proper names > definites > indefinites > pronouns in processing cost.
- clauseBoundary : ProcessingFactor
Clause boundaries impose processing cost independent of extraction (section 3.3). Even in yes-no questions, different complementizers elicit different neurological responses and acceptability.
- fillerComplexity : ProcessingFactor
Syntactic/semantic complexity of the filler phrase affects retrieval (section 3.4). Counterintuitively, MORE complex fillers REDUCE processing difficulty because richer representations resist interference and aid retrieval.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.instDecidableEqProcessingFactor x✝ y✝ = if h : x✝.ctorIdx = y✝.ctorIdx then isTrue ⋯ else isFalse ⋯
Complexity of the displaced wh-phrase. More complex fillers (which-N phrases) facilitate processing inside islands, because richer representations aid memory retrieval (section 3.4).
- bare : FillerType
Bare wh-word: who, what
- whichN : FillerType
Complex wh-phrase: which convict, which employee
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.instDecidableEqFillerType x✝ y✝ = if h : x✝.ctorIdx = y✝.ctorIdx then isTrue ⋯ else isFalse ⋯
Type of the island-forming NP (Experiment 1 only). Definite NPs trigger referent search and presupposition accommodation, consuming resources needed for dependency resolution (section 3.2).
- definite : IslandNPType
Definite singular: the report
- plural : IslandNPType
Indefinite plural: reports
- indefinite : IslandNPType
Indefinite singular: a report
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.instDecidableEqIslandNPType x✝ y✝ = if h : x✝.ctorIdx = y✝.ctorIdx then isTrue ⋯ else isFalse ⋯
An experimental condition from @cite{hofmeister-sag-2010}. Acceptability stored as Nat (judgment ratio x 100, so 78 means 0.78).
- island : ConstraintType
- filler : FillerType
- npType : Option IslandNPType
- acceptability : ℕ
Mean judgment ratio x 100
- citation : String
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Experiment 1: CNPC violations (section 5). 36 items, (2 x 3) + 1 design. Acceptability ratings on 1-8 scale, normalized as ratio of subject mean. Data from Figure 3 (p. 393).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Experiment 2: Wh-island violations (section 6). 24 items, 2 + 1 design. Acceptability on 1-7 scale, normalized. Data from Figure 5 (p. 397). Key finding: F1(1,15)=15.964, p=0.001; F2(1,19)=14.428, p=0.001.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Non-island baseline acceptability (CNPC experiment, Figure 3).
Equations
Instances For
Average acceptability for a filler type across a set of conditions.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Filler complexity effect in CNPC: which-N > bare wh (section 5.2). F1(1,20)=48.741, p<0.0001; F2(1,35)=39.494, p<0.0001. The structure is identical -- only the filler changes.
Filler complexity effect in wh-islands: which-N > bare wh (section 6.2). F1(1,15)=15.964, p=0.001.
NP type effect: indefinite > definite across both filler types (section 5.2). Consistent with lower referential processing cost for indefinites.
Even the best island condition (which-PL, 85) remains below the non-island baseline (108). Islands are ameliorated, not eliminated.
Pareto profiles re-encode H&S's key conditions in the format used by
Theories.Processing.Cost.Profile, supporting weight-free ordinal
comparison via Pareto dominance.
Bare wh + definite island-forming NP: worst CNPC condition. "I saw who Emma doubted the report that we had captured ___"
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.cnpcBareDefProfile = { locality := 8, boundaries := 1, referentialLoad := 2, ease := 0 }
Instances For
Which-N + indefinite island-forming NP: best CNPC condition. "I saw which convict Emma doubted a report that we had captured ___"
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.cnpcWhichIndefProfile = { locality := 8, boundaries := 1, referentialLoad := 1, ease := 2 }
Instances For
Non-island baseline (no extraction): "I saw who Emma doubted that ___"
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.cnpcBaselineProfile = { locality := 5, boundaries := 0, referentialLoad := 0, ease := 0 }
Instances For
Bare wh into wh-island: "Who did Albert learn whether they dismissed ___"
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.whIslandBareProfile = { locality := 7, boundaries := 1, referentialLoad := 1, ease := 0 }
Instances For
Which-N into wh-island: "Which employee did Albert learn whether they dismissed ___"
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.whIslandWhichProfile = { locality := 7, boundaries := 1, referentialLoad := 1, ease := 2 }
Instances For
Conditions tagged for use with OrderingPrediction.
- cnpcBareDef : ProcessingCondition
- cnpcWhichIndef : ProcessingCondition
- cnpcBaseline : ProcessingCondition
- whIslandBare : ProcessingCondition
- whIslandWhich : ProcessingCondition
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Islands.Studies.HofmeisterSag2010.instDecidableEqProcessingCondition x✝ y✝ = if h : x✝.ctorIdx = y✝.ctorIdx then isTrue ⋯ else isFalse ⋯
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Complex fillers reduce processing difficulty in CNPC. Pareto: cnpcWhichIndefProfile is easier than cnpcBareDefProfile because referentialLoad is lower (1 < 2) and ease is higher (2 > 0); locality and boundaries are equal.
Complex fillers reduce processing difficulty in wh-islands. Pareto: whIslandWhichProfile is easier than whIslandBareProfile because ease is higher (2 > 0) with all other dimensions equal.
Worst CNPC condition is harder than baseline. Pareto: cnpcBareDefProfile dominates on locality (8 > 5), boundaries (1 > 0), and referentialLoad (2 > 0); ease is equal.
Worst CNPC condition (bare-def) is strictly harder than best (which-indef).
Which-indef CNPC vs baseline is incomparable under Pareto: which-indef is
worse on locality (8 > 5), boundaries (1 > 0), and referentialLoad (1 > 0)
but better on ease (2 > 0). The trade-off is genuine — Pareto reports it as
incomparable rather than forcing a cardinal aggregate.
Pareto-orderable predictions over the H&S conditions.
Which-indef CNPC vs baseline is omitted because it is incomparable under
Pareto (see which_indef_vs_baseline_incomparable).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Every Pareto-orderable prediction is verified by the data.