Non-antecedent Suppression in American Sign Language

Language and Cognitive Processes

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 103-120

  Emmorey, Karen ^a  

^a SALK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL STUDIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031528128     PISSN: 01690965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/016909697386925     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Chang, F. (1980). Active memory processes in visual sentence comprehension: Clause effects and pronominal reference. Memory and Cognition, 8, 58-64.
2. Clark, H. (1973). The language as-a-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychology research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335-359.
3. Corbett, A., & Chang, F. (1983). Pronoun disambiguation: Accessing potential antecedents. Memory and Cognition, 11, 283-294.
4. Dell, G., McKoon, G., & Ratcliffe, R. (1983). The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 121-132.
5. Emmorey, K., & Lillo-Martin, D. (1995). Processing spatial anaphora: Referent reactivation with overt and null pronouns in American Sign Language. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 631-664.
6. Emmorey, K., Norman, F., & O'Grady, L. (1991). The activation of spatial antecedents from overt pronouns in American Sign Language. Language and Cognitive Processes, 6, 207-228.
7. Emmorey, K., Corina, D., & Bellugi, U. (1995). Differential processing of topographic and referential functions of space. In K. Emmorey & J. Reilly (Eds), Language, gesture, and space, pp. 43-62. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
8. Engberg-Pedersen, E. (1993). Space in Danish Sign Language: The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. International Studies on Sign Language Research and Communication of the Deaf, Vol. 19. Hamburg: Signum-Verlag.
9. Garrod, S., Freudenthal, D., & Boyle, E. (1994). The role of different types of anaphor in the on-line resolution of sentences in a discourse. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 39-68.
10. Gernsbacher, M. (1989). Mechanisms that improve referential access. Cognition, 32, 99-156.
11. Gernsbacher, M. (1990). Language comprehension as structure building. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
12. Lillo-Martin, D. (1986). Two kinds of null arguments in American Sign Language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 4, 415-444.
13. MacDonald, M.C., & MacWhinney, B. (1990). Measuring inhibition and facilitation from pronouns. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 469-492.
14. Mayberry, R. (1994). The importance of childhood to language acquisition: Evidence from American Sign Language. In J. Goodman & H. Nusbaum (Eds), The development of speech perception: The transition from speech sounds to spoken words, pp. 57-90. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Meier, R. (1990). Person deixis in American Sign Language. In S. Fischer & P. Siple (Eds), Theoretical issues in sign language research, Vol. 1, pp. 175-190. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16. Newport, E. (1990). Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science, 14, 11-28.
17. Newport, E. (1991). Contrasting conceptions of the critical period for language. In S. Carey & R. Gelman (Eds). The epigenesis of mind: Essays in biology and cognition, pp. 111-130. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
18. Nicol, J. (1988). Coreference processing during sentence comprehension. PhD dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
19. Padden, C. (1983). Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego, CA.
20. Trask, R.L. (1993). A dictionary of grammatical terms in linguistics. New York: Routledge.