  Grammatical cues are sometimes redundant with word meanings in natural
language. For instance, English word order rules constrain the word order of a
sentence like "The dog chewed the bone" even though the status of "dog" as
subject and "bone" as object can be inferred from world knowledge and
plausibility. Quantifying how often this redundancy occurs, and how the level
of redundancy varies across typologically diverse languages, can shed light on
the function and evolution of grammar. To that end, we performed a behavioral
experiment in English and Russian and a cross-linguistic computational analysis
measuring the redundancy of grammatical cues in transitive clauses extracted
from corpus text. English and Russian speakers (n=484) were presented with
subjects, verbs, and objects (in random order and with morphological markings
removed) extracted from naturally occurring sentences and were asked to
identify which noun is the subject of the action. Accuracy was high in both
languages (~89% in English, ~87% in Russian). Next, we trained a neural network
machine classifier on a similar task: predicting which nominal in a
subject-verb-object triad is the subject. Across 30 languages from eight
language families, performance was consistently high: a median accuracy of 87%,
comparable to the accuracy observed in the human experiments. The conclusion is
that grammatical cues such as word order are necessary to convey subjecthood
and objecthood in a minority of naturally occurring transitive clauses;
nevertheless, they can (a) provide an important source of redundancy and (b)
are crucial for conveying intended meaning that cannot be inferred from the
words alone, including descriptions of human interactions, where roles are
often reversible (e.g., Ray helped Lu/Lu helped Ray), and expressing
non-prototypical meanings (e.g., "The bone chewed the dog.").
