Intuitive knowledge of linguistic co-reference

Cognition

Volumn 62, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 325-370

  Gordon, Peter C ^a   Hendrick, Randall ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS;

HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS;

EID: 0031087636     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(96)00788-3     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Badecker, W., & Straub, K. (1994, March). Evidence that binding principles participate in a constraint satisfaction process. Poster presented at the 7th CUNY Sentence Processing Conference, New York.
2. Berwick, R.C., & Weinberg, A.S. (1984). The grammatical basis of linguistic performance: Language use and acquistion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Carden, G. (1982). Backwards anaphora and discourse context. Journal of Linguistics, 18, 361-387.
4. Carlson, G.N., & Tanenhaus, M.K. (1989). Introduction. In G.N. Carlson & M.K. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing (pp. 1-26). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
5. Carroll, J.M., Bever, T.G., & Pollack, C.R. (1981). The non-uniqueness of linguistic intuitions. Language, 57, 368-383.
6. Chien, Y.-C., & Wexler, K. (1987). Children's acquisition of the locality condition for reflexives and pronouns. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 25.
7. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
8. Chomsky, N. (1982). Some concepts and consequences of the theory of government and binding. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.
10. Chomsky, N. (1988). Language and problems of knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Cinque, G. (1990). Types of A-bar Dependencies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Clifton, C., & Odom, R. (1966). Similarity relations among certain English sentence constructions. Psychological Monographs, 80, whole no. 613.
13. Crain, S., & McKee, C. (1985). Acquisition of structural restrictions on anaphora. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting, North Eastern Linguistic Society. GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
14. Crawley, R.A., Stevenson, R.J., & Kleinman, D. (1990). The use of heuristic strategies in the interpretation of pronouns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 19, 245-264.
15. Evans, G. (1980). Pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 337-362.
16. Fodor, J. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Garnham, A. (1989). Integrating information in text comprehension: The interpretation of anaphoric noun phrases. In G. Carlson and M.K. Tanenhaus (Ed.), Linguistic structure in language processing (pp. 359-399). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
18. Gerken, L., & Bever, T. (1986). Linguistic intuitions are the result of interactions between perceptual processes and linguistic universals. Cognitive Science, 10, 457-476.
19. Gordon, P.C. (1993). Computational and psychological models of discourse. In H. Brownell & Y. Joanette (Eds.), Narrative discourse in normal aging and neurologically impaired adults (pp. 23-46). San Diego, CA: Singular.
20. Gordon, P.C., & Chan, D. (1995). Pronouns, passives and discourse coherence. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 216-231.
21. Gordon, P.C., Grosz, B.J., & Gilliom, L.A. (1993). Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science, 17, 311-347.
22. Gordon, P.C., & Hendrick, R. (1996). The representation and processing of co-reference in discourse. Manuscript under review.
23. Gordon, P.C., & Scearce, K.A. (1995). Pronominalization and discourse coherence, discourse structure and pronoun interpretation. Memory and Cognition, 23, 313-323.
24. Grimshaw, J., & Rosen, S.T. (1990). Knowledge and obedience: The developmental status of the binding theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 187-222.
25. Grober, E.H., Beardsley, W., Caramazza, A. (1978). Factors influencing assignment of pronoun antecedents. Cognition, 3, 227-243.
26. Grodzinsky, Y., & Reinhart, T. (1993). The innateness of binding and co-reference. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 69-102.
27. Grosz, B.J., Joshi, A.K., & Weinstein, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA.
28. Grosz, B.J., Joshi, A.K., & Weinstein, S. (1986). Towards a computational theory of discourse interpretation. Unpublished manuscript.
29. Grosz, B.J., Joshi, A.K., & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modelling the local coherence of discourse, Computational Linguistics, 21, 203-226.
30. Grosz, B.J., & Sidner, C.L. (1986). Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12, 175-204.
31. Heim, I. (1983). File change semantics and the familiarity theory of definiteness. In R. Bauerle, C. Schwartze, & A. von Stechow (Eds.), Meaning, use and interpretation of language. Berlin: de Gruyters.
32. Helson, H. (1947). Adaptation-level as frame of reference for prediction of psychophysical data. American Journal of Psychology, 60, 1-29.
33. Hendrick, R. (1988). Anaphora in Celtic and universal grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
34. Hestvik, A. (1990). Against the notion governing cateogry. Proceedings of the Ninth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp. 263-275). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
35. Higginbotham, J. (1980). Pronouns and bound variables. Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 679-708.
36. Higginbotham, J. (1985). On semantics. Linguistic Inquiry, 16, 547-593.
37. Huang, Cheng-Teh (1982a). Logical Relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
38. Huang, Cheng-Teh (1982b). A note on the binding theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 554-561.
39. Kamp, H., & Reyle, U. (1993). From discourse to logic: Introduction to model theoretic semantics of natural language, formal logic and discourse representation theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
40. Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T.A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
41. Larson, R. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 335-392.
42. Larson, R. (1990). Double objects revisited: Reply to Jackendoff. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 589-632.
43. Lasnik, H. (1976). Remarks on Co-reference. Linguistic Analysis, 2.
44. Lebeaux, D. (1985). Locality and anaphoric binding. Linguistic Review, 4, 343-363.
45. Lust, B. (Ed.). (1986). Studies in the acquisition of anaphora. Dordrecht: Reidel.
46. McCloskey, J. (1990). Irish resumptive pronouns. In R. Hendrick (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, 23, 199-248.
47. Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in co-reference assignment during sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5-19.
48. Parducci, A. (1956). Direction of shift in the judgment of single stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 169-178.
49. Parducci, A. (1984). Perceptual and judgmental relativity. In V. Sarris & A. Parducci (Eds.), Perspectives in psychological experimentation (pp. 135-149). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
50. Parsons, T. (1990). Events in the semantics on English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
51. Postal, P. (1971). Cross over phenomena. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
52. Reinhart, T. (1976). The syntactic domain of anaphora. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
53. Reinhart, T. (1981). Definite NP anaphora and c-command domains. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 605-636.
54. Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
55. Sheldon, A. (1974). The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 272-281.
56. Sidner, C. (1983). Focusing in the comprehension of definite anaphora. In M. Brady & R. Berwick (Eds.), Computational models of discourse (pp. 267-330). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
57. Solan, L. (1983). Pronominal reference: Child language and the theory of grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.
58. Stowell, T., & Lasnik, H. (1991). Weakest crossover. Linguistic Inquiry, 22, 687-720.
59. van Riemsdijk, H., & Williams, E. (1986). Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
60. Wasow, T. (1979). Anaphora in generative grammar. Ghent: E. Story Scientia.
61. Wexler, K., & Chien, Y.-C. (1985). The development of lexical anaphors and pronouns. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 24. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.