Processing typology and why psychologists need to know about it

Abstract

This paper illustrates an interdisciplinary research program based on cross-linguistic comparison that is of relevance for psychologists working on language processing, so-called “processing typology” [Hawkins, J. A. (1994). A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; (2004). Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press]. Its most original feature is the hypothesis that patterns and preferences found in performance in languages with several structures of a given type (e.g. preferences among alternative word orders) are the same patterns and preferences one finds across languages in the fixed conventions of grammars that permit less variation (i.e. in fixed word orders). Data supporting this “performance–grammar correspondence hypothesis” are summarized. One of its consequences is that principles of performance can be used to make predictions for patterns of grammatical variation, while preferences in grammars become relevant for the testing of psycholinguistic ideas. Two proposed principles of ordering in performance, in terms of “end weight” and “memory cost”, are criticized on the basis of cross-linguistic data. Both predict an asymmetry in ordering, whereby some category A precedes B. But end weight is not a valid cross-linguistic asymmetry, and memory cost cannot explain certain asymmetries for which it has been invoked when different language types are considered. The paper argues for greater mutual awareness between processing theorists and language typologists, for more consideration of non-European grammars and language types in psycholinguistics, and for a greater appeal to processing in the explanation of typological variation.