The Emperor's Psycholinguistics

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 261-284

  Bever, Thomas G ^a   Sanz, Montserrat ^b   Townsend, David J ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b KOBE CITY UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN STUDIES   (Japan)

^c MONTCLAIR STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001604967     PISSN: 00906905     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1023206317518     Document Type: Article

References (114)

1. Abney, S. (1989). A computational model of human parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 129-144.
2. Ades, A., & Steedman, M. (1982). On the order of words. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 517-588.
3. Altmann, G., & Steedman, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30, 191-238.
4. Belletti, A. (1988). The case of unaccusatives. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 1-34.
5. Berwick, R., Abney, S., & Tenny, C. (Eds). (1991). Principle-based parsing: Computation and psycholinguistics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
6. Berwick, R., & Weinberg, A. (1984). The grammatical basis of linguistic performance: Language use and acquisition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Berwick, R., & Weinberg, A. (1985). Deterministic parsing and linguistic explanation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 190-134.
8. Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and language development (pp. 277-360). New York: Wiley & Sons.
9. Bever, T. G. (1992). The demons and the beast - Modular and nodular kinds of knowledge. In R. Ronan & N. Sharkey (Eds.), Connectionist approaches to natural language processing. (pp. 213-252). United Kingdom: Erlbaum.
10. Bever, T. G. (1972). The limits of intuition. Foundations of Language, 8, 411-412.
11. Bever, T. G., & McElree, B. (1988). Empty categories access their antecedents during comprehension. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 35-43.
12. Bever, T. G., Straub, K., Shenkman, K., Kim, J. J., & Carrithers, C. (1990). The psychological reality of NP-trace. In Proceedings of the Northeast Linguistic Society 20. (Vol. 1, pp. 46-59).
13. Bresnan, J. (1982). The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Brysbaert, M., & Mitchell, D. (1996). Modifier attachment in sentence parsing: Evidence from Dutch. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 664-695.
15. Carlson, G., & Tanenhaus, M. (1988). Thematic roles and language comprehension. In W. Wilkens (Ed.), Syntax and semantics 21: Thematic relations. (pp. 263-288). New York: Academic Press.
16. Chomsky, N. (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), A view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger (Current Studies in Linguistics). (pp. 1-52). Cambridge, England: MIT Press.
17. Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program (Current Studies in Linguistics). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.
19. Chomsky, N., & Lasnik, H. (1977). Filters and control. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 425-504.
20. Clark, R., & Gibson, T. (1988). A parallel model of adult sentence processing. In Proceedings of the Tenth Cognitive Science Conference. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Clifton, C., & Ferreira, F. (1989). Ambiguity in context. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 77-103.
22. Clifton, C., & Frazier, L. (1989). Comprehending sentences with long-distance dependencies. In G. Carlson & M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing (pp. 273-317). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
23. Clifton, C., & Frazier, L. (1986). The use of syntactic information in filling gaps. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 15, 209-224.
24. Clifton, C., Speer, S., & Abney, S. (1991). Parsing arguments: Phrase structure and argument structure as determinants of initial parsing decisions. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 251-271.
25. Cloitre, M., & Bever, T. G. (1988). Linguistic anaphors, levels of representation, and discourse. Language Cognitive Processes, 3, 293-322.
26. Correa, N. (1991). Empty categories, chain binding, and parsing. In R. Berwick, S. Abney, & C. Tenny (Eds.), Principle-based parsing: Computation and psycholinguistics. (pp. 83-121). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
27. Crain, S. & Fodor, J. D. (1985). How can grammars help parsers? In D. R. Dowty, L. Karttunen, & A. M.: 94-128.
28. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational and theoretical perspectives (Chap. 3, pp. 94-128). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
29. Crain, S., & Steedman, M. (1985). On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological parser. In D. Dowty, L. Karttunen, & A. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational and theoretical perspectives. (pp. 320-358). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
30. Crocker, M. W. (1991). A Principle-based system for syntactic analysis. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics, (Vol. 36, pp. 1-26).
31. Crocker, M. W. (1994). On the nature of the principle-based sentence processor. In Clifton, C. Jr., L. Frazier, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (Chap. 11, pp. 245-266). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Cuetos, F, & Mitchell, D. C. (1988). Cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the late closure strategy in Spanish. Cognition, 30, 73-105.
33. Dowty, D. R. (1989). On the semantic content of the notion of "Thematic Role." In G., Chierchia, B. Partee, & R. Turner, (Eds.), Properties, types and meaning (Vol II, pp 69-129). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
34. Emonds, J. (1985). A Unified theory of syntactic categories. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.
35. Epstein, S. D. (1990). Differentiation and reduction in syntactic theory: A case study. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 8, 313-323.
36. Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348-368.
37. Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Fodor, J. D. (1989). Empty categories in sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, SI155-109.
39. Fodor, J. D. (1990). Processing empty categories: A question of visibility. In G. Altmann & R. Shillcock (Eds.), Cognitive models of speech processing: The second sperlonga meeting. (pp. 434-456). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Fodor, J., Bever, T. G., & Garrett, M. (1974). The psychology of language. New York: McGraw-Hill.
41. Fodor, J. D., & Frazier, L. (1980). Is the human sentence parsing mechanism an ATN? Cognition, 8, 417-459.
42. Ford, M., Bresnan, J., & Kaplan, R. (1982). A competence based theory of syntactic closure. In J. Bresnan (Ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations (pp. 727-796). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43. Forster, K. (1971). The role of semantic factors in syntactic processing. In J. Mehler (Ed.), Problems Actueles Psycholinguistiques (Special issue of Languages) (pp. 391-409).
44. Frazier, L. (1989). Against lexical generation of syntax. In W. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.), Lexical Representation and Process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
45. Frazier, L. (1990). Exploring the architecture of the language system. In G. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives. (pp. 409-433). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46. Frazier, L. (1978). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
47. Frazier, L. (1987a). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
48. Frazier, L. (1987b). Theories of sentence processing. In J. L. Garfield (Ed.), Modularity in knowledge representation and natural language understanding (pp. 291-307). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
49. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
50. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1997). Construal: Overview, motivation, and some new evidence. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26.
51. Frazier, L., & d'Arcais, G. B. F. (1989). Filler driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 331-344.
52. Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6.
53. Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178-210.
54. Garnsey, S. M. (1993). Event-related brain potentials in the study of language: An introduction. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 337-356.
55. Gibson, T., Hickok, G., & Schutze, C. (1994). Processing empty categories in a parallel parsing framework. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23, 381-405.
56. Gibson, T., Pearlmutter, N., Canesco-Gonzales, E., & Hickok, G. (1996). Recency preference in the human sentence processing mechanism. Cognition, 59, 23-59.
57. Gorell, P. (1995). Syntax and parsing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
58. Gorell, P. (1991). Subcategorization and sentence processing. In R. Berwick, S. Abney, & C. Tenny (Eds), Principle-based parsing: Computation and psycholinguistics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
59. Johnson, M. (1991). Program transformation techniques for deductive parsing. In C Brown & G. Koch (Eds.), Natural language understanding and logic programming, III. (pp. 27-42). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
60. Juliano, C., Tabor, W., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1996). Parsing in a dynamical system: An attractor-based account of the interaction of lexical and structural constraints in sentence processing. Unpublished manuscript, University of Rochester.
61. Juliano, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1994). A constraint-based lexicalist account of the subject-object attachment preference. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research (Special Issue on Sentence Processing), 23, 459-471.
62. Kimball, J. (1975). Predictive analysis and over-the-top parsing. In J. Kimball (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 4, pp. 155-179). New York: Academic Press.
63. Kimball, J. (1973). Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language. Cognition, 2, 15-47.
64. Levelt, W. J. M. (Ed.) (1996). Advanced psycholinguistics. Nijmegan: The Netherlands Max Planck Institute.
65. Love, T., & Swinney, D. (1996). Conference processing and levels of analysis in object relative constructions: Demonstration of antecedent reactivation with the cross-modal priming paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 5-24.
66. MacDonald, M. (1980). A theory of syntactic recognition for natural language. Cambridge, England: MIT Press.
67. MacDonald, M. (1989). Priming effects from gaps to antecedents. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 35-56.
68. MacDonald, M. C. (1994). Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 157-201.
69. MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676-703.
70. Marcus, M., Hindle, D., & Fleck, M. (1983). D-theory: Talking about talking about trees. In Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA (p. 129-136)
71. Marslen-Wilson, W. (1975). Sentence perception as an interactive, parallel process. Science, 189, 226-228.
72. Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Tyler, L. K. (1987). Against modularity. In J. L. Garfield (Ed.), Modularity in knowledge representation and natural language understanding. (pp. 37-62). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
73. Mauner, G., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Carlson, G. N. (1995). Implicit arguments in sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 557-582.
74. McClelland, J., & Kawamoto, A. (1986). Mechanisms of sentence processing: Assigning roles to constituents of sentences. In J. McClelland and D. Rumelhart (Eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing (Vol. 2, pp. 272-325). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
75. McClelland, J., St. John, M., & Taraban, R. (1989). Sentence processing: A parallel distributed processing approach. Language and Cognitive Processes (Special Issue on Parsing and Interpretation), 4, 278-335.
76. McElree, B., & Bever, T. G. (1989). The psychological reality of linguistically defined gaps. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research (Special Issue on Sentence Processing), 18, 21-35.
77. McKoon, G. Ratcliff, R. & Ward, G. (1994). Testing theories of language processing: An empirical investigation of the on-line lexical decision task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1219-1228.
78. Mitchell, D. (1989). Verb-guidance and other lexical effects in parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes (Special Issue on Parsing and Interpretation), 4, 123-154.
79. Mitchell, D. C. (1994). Sentence parsing. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics. (pp. 375-409). New York: Academic Press.
80. Mitchell, D. C., & Cuetos, R. (1991). The origins of parsing strategies. In C. Smith (Ed.), Current issues in natural language processing. Austin: University of Austin, TX, Center for Cognitive Science.
81. Nicol, J. L. Fodor, J. D., & Swinney, D. (1994). Using cross-modal lexical decision tasks to investigate sentence processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, pp. 1229-1238.
82. Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5-19.
83. Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P. J. (1992). Event-related potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785-806.
84. Osterhout, L., & Swinney, D. (1993). On the temporal course of gap-filling during comprehension of verbal passives. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 273-286.
85. Percus, O. (1995). A horse raced to logical form. In C. Schutze, J. Ganger, & K. Broihier (Eds), Papers on language processing and acquisition (pp. 473-519). (MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 26). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
86. Pereira, F. (1985). A new characterization of attachment preferences. In D. R. Dowry, L. Karttunen, & A. M. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural Language Parsing (Chap. 9, pp. 307-319). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
87. Perlmutter, D. (1978). Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. In Proceedings of the Fourth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, (pp. 157-189).
88. Pearlmutter, N. J., & MacDonald, M. C. (1995). Individual differences and probabilistic constraints in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 521-542.
89. Phillips, C., & Gibson E. (1997). On the strength of the local attachment preference. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 323-346.
90. Pickering, M., & Barry, G. (1991). Sentence processing without empty categories. Language and Cognitive Processes, 6, 229-259.
91. Pritchett, B. L. (1992). Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
92. Rayner, K., Carlson, M., & Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 358-374.
93. Sanz, M., & Bever, T. G. (1997). Empty categories access their antecedents during comprehension: Unaccusatives in Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry, 28, 69-91.
94. Sanz, M., Bever, T., & Laka, I. (1992). Linguistics and psycholinguistics of unaccusativity in Spanish. In Proceedings of Northeast Linguistic Society 22, 399-409.
95. Sanz, M. (1996). Telicity, objects and the mapping onto predicate types: A cross-linguistic study of the role of syntax in processing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester.
96. Schank, R., & Birnbaum, L. (1984). Memory, meaning, and syntax. In T. Bever, J. Carroll, & L. Miller (Eds), Talking minds. (pp. 209-251). Cambridge, MA: MlT Press.
97. Seidenberg, M., Tanenhaus, M., Leiman, J., & Bienkowski, M. (1982). Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of Knowledge-based processes. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 489-537.
98. Spivey-Knowlton, M., & Sedivy, J. (1995). Resolving attachment ambiguities with multiple constraints. Cognition, 55, 227-267.
99. Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Trueswell, J. C. (1993). Context effects in syntactic ambiguity resolution: Discourse and semantic influences in parsing reduced relative clauses. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 276-309.
100. Steedman, M., & Altman, G. (1989). Ambiguity in context: A reply. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 105-122.
101. Stowe, L. A. (1989). Thematic structures and sentence comprehension. In G. Carlson & M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Linguistic Structure in Language Processing (pp. 319-357). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
102. Swinney, D. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645-659.
103. Swinney, D., Ford, M., Frauenfelder, U., & Bresnan, J. (1988). On the temporal course of gap filling and antecedent assignment during sentence comprehension. In B. Grosz, R. Kaplan, M. Macken, & I. Sag (Eds.), Language Structure and Processing. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
104. Tenny, C. (1994). Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface (Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
105. Torrego, E. (1989). Unergative-unaccusative alternations in Spanish. In I. Laka & A. Mahajan (Eds.), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics: Functional Heads and Clause Structure (Vol. 10). Cambridge, MA: MIT
106. Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (1988). Knowledge representations during reading depend on reading strategy and reading skill. In M. Gruneberg, D. Sykes, & P. Morris (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory: Current research and issues. Vol. 2. Clinical and educational implications. (pp. 309-314). New York: Wiley.
107. Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (1989). Expertise and constraints in interactive sentence processing. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. (pp. 482-489). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
108. Townsend, D., & Bever, T. G. (1978). Interclause relations and clausal processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 509-521.
109. Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (1982). Natural units of representation interact during sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 688-703.
110. Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (1991). The use of higher-level constraints in monitoring for a change in speaker demonstrates functionally distinct levels of representation in discourse comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 6, 49-77.
111. Trueswell, J. C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1994). Toward a lexicalist framework of constraint-based syntactic ambiguity resolution. In C. Clifton, K. Rayner, & L. Frazier (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp. 155-179). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
112. Trueswell J. C. (1996). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 566-585.
113. Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285-318.
114. Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, memory and cognition. (Vol. 19, pp. 528-553).