Incremental sentence processing is guided by a preference for agents: EEG evidence from Basque.

Comprehenders across languages tend to interpret role-ambiguous arguments as the subject or the agent of a sentence during parsing. However, the evidence for such a subject/agent preference rests on the comprehension of transitive, active-voice sentences where agents/subjects canonically precede patients/objects. The evidence is thus potentially confounded by the canonical order of arguments. Transitive sentence stimuli additionally conflate the semantic agent role and the syntactic subject function. We resolve these two confounds in an experiment on the comprehension of intransitive sentences in Basque. When exposed to sentence-initial role-ambiguous arguments, comprehenders preferentially interpreted these as agents and had to revise their interpretation when the verb disambiguated to patient-initial readings. The revision was reflected in an N400 component in ERPs and a decrease in power in the alpha and lower beta bands. This finding suggests that sentence processing is guided by a top-down heuristic to interpret ambiguous arguments as agents, independently of word order and independently of transitivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]