Discourse structure and relative clause processing

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 170-181

  Mak, Willem M ^a,b   Vonk, Wietske ^a,c   Schriefers, Herbert ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

^b UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE; LEARNING; NORMAL HUMAN; READING; THEORETICAL STUDY; WORD RECOGNITION; COGNITION; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME;

COGNITION; COMMUNICATION; HUMANS; READING; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 41649106079     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/MC.36.1.170     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. ALTMANN, G., & STEEDMAN, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30, 191-238.
2. BAAYEN, R. H., PIEPENBROCK, R., & GULIKERS, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.
3. CRAIN, S., & STEEDMAN, M. (1985). On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological syntax processor. In D. R. Dowty, L. Karttunen, & A. M. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives (pp. 320-358). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. FOX, B. A., & THOMPSON, S. A. (1990). A discourse explanation of the grammar of relative clauses in English conversation. Language, 66, 297-316.
5. FRAUENFELDER, U., SEGUI, J., & MEHLER, J. (1980). Monitoring around the relative clause. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19, 328-337.
6. FRAZIER, L. (1987). Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 5, 519-559.
7. FRIEDERICI, A. D., STEINHAUER, K., MECKLINGER, A., & MEYER, M. (1998). Working memory constraints on syntactic ambiguity resolution as revealed by electrical brain responses. Biological Psychology, 47, 193-221.
8. GIBSON, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1-76.
9. GORDON, P. C., HENDRICK, R., & JOHNSON, M. (2001). Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 1411-1423.
10. HOEKS, J. C. J., VONK, W., & SCHRIEFERS, H. (2002). Processing coordinated structures in context: The effect of topic-structure on ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory & Language, 46, 99-119.
11. HOLMES, V. M., & O'REGAN, J. K. (1981). Eye fixation patterns during the reading of relative-clause sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 20, 417-430.
12. KAAN, E. (2001). Effects of NP type on the resolution of word-order ambiguities. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 529-547.
13. KING, J. [W.], & JUST, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 30, 580-602.
14. KING, J. W., & KUTAS, M. (1995). Who did what and when? Using word-and clause-level ERPs to monitor working memory usage in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 376-395.
15. KUNO, S. (1976). Subject, theme, and the speaker's empathy: A reexamination of relativization phenomena. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 417-444). New York: Academic Press.
16. LAMBRECHT, K. (1988). There was a farmer had a dog: Syntactic amalgams revisited. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 319-339). Berkeley: University of California, Department of Linguistics.
17. LAMBRECHT, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. MACWHINNEY, B. (1977). Starting points. Language, 53, 152-168.
19. MACWHINNEY, B. (1998). The emergence of language from embodiment. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 213-256). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. MACWHINNEY, B., & PLÉH, C. (1988). The processing of restrictive relative clauses in Hungarian. Cognition, 29, 95-141.
21. MAK, W. M. (2001). Processing relative clauses: Effects of pragmatic, semantic, and syntactic variables. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nijmegen.
22. MAK, W. M., VONK, W., & SCHRIEFERS, H. (2002). The influence of animacy on relative clause processing. Journal of Memory & Language, 47, 50-68.
23. MAK, W. M., VONK, W., & SCHRIEFERS, H. (2006). Processing relative clauses in Dutch: When rocks crush hikers. Journal of Memory & Language, 54, 466-490.
24. MECKLINGER, A., SCHRIEFERS, H., STEINHAUER, K., & FRIEDERICI, A. D. (1995). Processing relative clauses varying on syntactic and semantic dimensions: An analysis with event-related potentials. Memory & Cognition, 23, 477-494.
25. MITCHELL, D. C., CORLEY, M. M. B., & GARNHAM, A. (1992). Effects of context in human sentence parsing: Evidence against a discourse-based proposal mechanism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 69-88.
26. POLLATSEK, A., & WELL, A. D. (1995). On the use of counterbalanced designs in cognitive research: A suggestion for a better and more powerful analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 785-794.
27. SCHRIEFERS, H., FRIEDERICI, A. D., & KÜHN, K. (1995). The processing of locally ambiguous relative clauses in German. Journal of Memory & Language, 34, 499-520.
28. TRAXLER, M. J., MORRIS, R. K., & SEELY, R. E. (2002). Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory & Language, 47, 69-90.
29. TRAXLER, M. J., WILLIAMS, R. S., BLOZIS, S. A., & MORRIS, R. K. (2005). Working memory, animacy, and verb class in the processing of relative clauses. Journal of Memory & Language, 53, 204-224.
30. VAN BERKUM, J. J. A., BROWN, C. M., & HAGOORT, P. (1999). Early referential context effects in sentence processing: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Memory & Language, 41, 147-182.
31. VAN VALIN, R. D., JR., & WILKINS, D. P. (1996). The case for "effector": Case roles, agents, and agency revisited. In M. Shibatani & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning (pp. 289-322). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.
32. WARREN, T., & GIBSON, E. (2002). The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. Cognition, 85, 79-112.