How speakers refer: The role of accessibility

Linguistics and Language Compass

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 187-203

  Arnold, Jennifer E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955995202     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1749818X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00193.x     Document Type: Review

References (110)

1. Almor A. Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: the informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review 1999, 106:748-65.
2. Almor A, Kempler D, MacDonald M C, Anderson E S, Tyler L K. Why do Alzheimer patients have difficulty with pronouns? Working memory, semantics and reference comprehension and production in Alzheimer's disease. Brain and Language 1999, 67:202-27.
3. Almor A, Nair V A. The form of referential expressions in disourse. Language and Linguistic Compass 2007, 1:84-99.
4. Ariel M. Accessing noun-phrase antecedents 1990, London, Routledge
5. Arnold J E. Reference form and discourse patterns 1998, Stanford University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation
6. Arnold J E. Marking salience: the similarity of topic and focus 1999, University of Pennsylvania, Unpublished manuscript
7. Arnold J E. The effects of thematic roles on pronoun use and frequency of reference. Discourse Processes 2001, 31:137-62.
8. Arnold J E. Multiple constraints on reference form: null, pronominal, and full reference in Mapudungun. Preferred argument structure: grammar as architecture for function 2003, 225-45. Du Bois J WKumpf L EAshby W J. ed. by, Amsterdam, John Benjamins
9. Arnold J E. Reference production: production-internal and addressee-oriented processes. Language and Cognitive Processes 2008, 23:495-527.
10. Arnold J E. Women and men have different discourse biases for pronoun interpretation 2010, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Manuscript
11. Arnold J E, Hudson Kam C, Tanenhaus M K. If you say thee uh- you're describing something hard: the on-line attribution of disfluency during reference comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2007b, 33:914-30.
12. Arnold J E, Eisenband J G, Brown-Schmidt S, Trueswell J C. The immediate use of gender information: eyetracking evidence of the time-course of pronoun resolution. Cognition 2000b, 76:B13-26.
13. Arnold J E, Bennetto L, Diehl J J. Reference production in young speakers with and without autism. Cognition 2009, 110:131-46.
14. Arnold J E, Fagnano M, Tanenhaus M K. Disfluencies signal theee, um, new information. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2003, 32:25-36.
15. Arnold J E, Tanenhaus M K. Disfluency effects in comprehension: how new information can become accessible. The processing and acquisition of reference forthcoming. Gibson E, Perlmutter N. Forthcoming, ed. by, MIT Press
16. Arnold J E, Tanenhaus M K, Altmann R, Fagnano M. The old and thee, uh, new. Psychological Science 2004a, 15:578-81.
17. Arnold J E, Brown-Schmidt S, Trueswell J C. Children's use of gender and order-of-mention during pronoun comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes 2007a, 22:527-65.
18. Arnold J E, Lao S C. Effects of non-shared attention on pronoun comprehension 2009, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Manuscript
19. Arnold J E, Wasow T, Asudeh A, Alrenga P. Avoiding attachment ambiguities: the role of constituent ordering. Journal of Memory and Language 2004b, 51:55-70.
20. Arnold J, Wasow T, Ginstrom R, Losongco A. Heaviness vs. newness: the effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language 2000a, 76:28-55.
21. Arnold J, Griffin Z M. The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: everyone counts. Journal of Memory and Language 2007, 56:521-36.
22. Asher A. Discourse topic. Theoretical Linguistics 2004, 30:163-201.
23. Babwah L. Distraction and reference in discourse 2008, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina, Honors Thesis
24. Baddeley A D, Hitch G. Working memory. The psychology of learning and motivation: advances in research and theory 1974, 47-89. Bower G H, ed. by, Vol. 8, New York, Academic Press
25. Bard E G, Aylett M P. Referential form, word duration, and modeling the listener in spoken dialogue. Approaches to studying world-situated language use: bridging the language-as-product and language-as-action traditions 2004, 173-91. Trueswell J C, Tanenhaus M K. ed. by, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press
26. Beattie G W. Planning units in spontaneous speech: some evi-dence from hesitation in speech and speaker gaze direction in conversation. Linguistics 1979, 17:61-78.
27. Bell A, Brenier J, Gregory M, Girand C. Predictability effects on durations of content and function words in conversational English. Journal of Memory and Language 2009, 60:92-111.
28. Bell A, Jurafsky D, Fosler-Lussier E, Girand C, Gregory M, Gildea D. Effects of disfluencies, predictability, and utterance position on word form variation in English conversation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2003, 113:1001-24.
29. Birner B J, Ward G. Information structure and syntactic structure. Language and Linguistics Compass
30. Birner B J, Ward G. Information status and noncanonical word order in English Amsterdam/Philadelphia, John Benjamins
31. Bock J K, Irwin D F. Syntactic effects of information availability in sentence production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1980, 19:467-84.
32. Bortfield H, Leon S D, Bloom J E, Schober M F, Brennan S E. Disfluency rates in conversation: effects of age, relationship, topic, role, and gender. Language and Speech 2001, 32:229-59.
33. Bower G H, Morrow D G. Mental models in narrative comprehension. Science 1990, 247:44-8.
34. Bransford J D, Barclay J R, Franks J J. Sentence memory: a constructive versus interpretive approach. Cognitive Psychology 1972, 3:193-209.
35. Brennan S E. Centering attention in discourse. Language and Cognitive Processes 1995, 102:137-67.
36. Brennan S E, Friedman M W, Pollard C J. A centering approach to pronouns. Proceedings from the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics 1987, July 6-9, Stanford, CA
37. Broadbent D E. In defence of empirical psychology 1973, London, Methuen
38. Brown G. Prosodic structure and the given/new distinction. Prosody, models, and measurements 1983, 67-77. Cutler ALadd D R. ed. by, New York, Springer-Verlag
39. Brown R, Fish D. The psychological causality implicit in language. Cognition 1983, 14:237-73.
40. Brown-Schmidt S, Konopka A E. Little houses and casas pequeñas: message formulation and syntactic form in unscripted speech with speakers of English and Spanish. Cognition 2008, 109:274-80.
41. Brown-Schmidt S, Tanenhaus M K. Watching the eyes when talking about size: an investigation of message formulation and utterance planning. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 54:592-609.
42. Chafe W. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. Subject and topic 1976, 25-56. Li C N. ed. by, New York, Academic Press Inc.
43. Chafe W. Discourse, consciousness, and time 1994, Chicago, Chicago University Press
44. Chambers C G, Smyth R. Structural parallelism and discourse coherence: a test of centering theory. Journal of Memory and Language 1998, 39:593-608.
45. Christodoulou A. Thinking prosody: how speakers indicate production difficulty through prosody 2009, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Unpublished Masters Thesis
46. Clark H H. Making sense of nonce sense. Arenas of language use 1992, 305-40. Clark H H. ed. by, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press
47. Clark H H, Marshall C R. Definite reference and mutual knowledge. Elements of discourse understanding 1981, 10-63. Joshi A K, Webber B LSag I A. ed. by, Cambridge UK, Cambridge University Press
48. Clark H H, Wilkes-Gibbs D. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 1986, 22:1-39.
49. Clark H H, Haviland S E. Comprehension and the given-new contract. Discourse production and comprehension, volume 1 of discourse processes: advances in research and theory 1977, 1-40. Freedle R O, ed. by, Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
50. Clark H H, Wasow T. Repeating words in spontaneous speech. Cognitive Psychology 1998, 37:201-42.
51. Cowles H W, Walenski M, Kluender R. Linguistic and cognitive prominence in anaphor resolution: topic, contrastive focus and pronouns. Topoi 2007, 26:3-18.
52. Dell G S. A spreading activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review 1986, 93:283-321.
53. van Dijk T A, Kintsch W. Strategies of discourse comprehension 1983, New York, Academic Press
54. Ferreira V S, Slevc L R, Rogers E S. How do speakers avoid ambiguous linguistic expressions? Cognition 2005, 96:263-84.
55. Foraker S, McElree B. The role of prominence in pronoun resolution: active versus passive representations. Journal of Memory and Language 2007, 56:357-83.
56. Ford M. Sentence planning units: implications for the speaker's representation of meaningful relations underlying sentences. The mental representation of grammatical relations 1982, 797-827. Bresnan J. ed. by, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press
57. Fowler C A, Housum J. Talkers' signaling of ''new'' and ''old'' words in speech and listeners' perception and use of the distinction. Journal of Memory and Language 1987, 26:489-504.
58. Fox Tree J E, Clark H H. Pronouncing "the" as "thee" to signal problems in speaking. Cognition 1997, 62:151-167.
59. Francik E P. Referential choice and focus of attention in narratives (discourse anaphora, topic continuity, language production). 1985, Stanford University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation
60. Garvey C, Caramazza A. Implicit causality in verbs. Linguistic Inquiry 1974, 5:459-64.
61. Gernsbacher M A. Language comprehension as structure building 1990, Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
62. Greene S B, Gerrig R J, McKoon G, Ratcliff R. Unheralded pronouns and management by common ground. Journal of Memory and Language 1994, 33:511-26.
63. Givón T. Topic continuity in discourse: an introduction. Topic continuity in discourse: a quantitative cross-language study 1983, 1-42. Givón T. ed. by, Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing
64. Goldman-Eisler F. Psycholinguistics: experiments in spontaneous speech 1968, London, Academic Press
65. Gordon P C, Grosz B J, Gilliom L A. Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science 1993, 17:311-47.
66. Grice H P. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics III. Speech acts 1975, 41-58. Cole PMorgan J. ed. by, New York, Academic Press
67. Griffin Z M. A reversed word length effect in coordinating the preparation and articulation of words in speaking. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2003, 10:603-9.
68. Griffin Z M, Arnold J E. Cognitive resources modulate pronoun use 2008, Paper presented at the CUNY conference on human sentence processing, Chapel Hill, NC
69. Griffin Z M, Bock K. What the eyes say about speaking. Psychological Science 2000, 11:274-9.
70. Grosz B J, Joshi A K, Weinstein S. Centering: a framework for modelling the local discourse. Computational Linguistics 1995, 21(2):203-25.
71. Grosz B, Sidner C. Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics 1986, 12:175-204.
72. Gundel J K, Hedberg N, Zacharaski R. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions. Language 1993, 69:274-307.
73. Halliday M A K. Intonation and grammar in British English 1967, The Hague, Mouton
74. Hirschberg J. Pitch accent in context: predicting intonational prominence from text. Artificial Intelligence 1993, 63:305-40.
75. Hudson-D'Zmura S, Tanenhaus M K. Assigning antecedents to ambiguous pronouns: the role of the center of attention as the default assignment. Centering theory in discourse 1998, 199-226. Walker M, Joshi APrince E. ed. by, Oxford, Oxford University Press
76. Isaacs E A, Clark H H. References in conversations between experts and novices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1987, 116:26-37.
77. Järvikivi J, van Gompel R P G, Hyönä J, Bertram R. Ambiguous pronoun resolution: contrasting the first-mention and subject-preference accounts. Psychological Science 2005, 16:260-4.
78. Johnson-Laird P N. Mental models: toward a cognitive science of language, inference and consciousness 1983, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press
79. Jurafsky D, Bell A, Fosler-Lussier E, Girand C, Raymond W D. Reduction of English function words in switchboard. ICSLP-98 1998, 3111-4. Sydney, Vol. 7
80. Jurafsky D, Bell A, Gregory M, Raymond W D. Probabilistic relations between words: evidence from reduction in lexical production. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure 2001, 229-54. Joan B, Hopper P, ed. by, Amsterdam, John Benjamins
81. Kaiser E, Trueswell J C. Investigating the interpretation of pronouns and demonstratives in Finnish: going beyond salience. The processing and acquisition of reference Gibson E, Pearlmutter N. ed. by, forthcoming, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press
82. Kehler A. Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar 2002, Stanford, CA, CSLI Publications
83. Kehler A. Discourse topics, sentence topics, and coherence. Theoretical Linguistics 2004, 30:227-40.
84. Kertz L, Kehler A, Elman J L. Grammatical and coherence-based factors in pronoun interpretation. Proceedings of the 28th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2006, Vancouver, Canada
85. Krause J C, Braida L D. Investigating alternative forms of clear speech: the effects of speaking rate and speaking mode on intelligibility. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2002, 112:2165-72.
86. Levelt W J M. Speaking: from intention to articulation 1989, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press
87. Levelt W J M. Models of word production. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1999, 3:223-32.
88. Nadig A, Sedivy J. Evidence of perspective-taking constraints in children's on-line reference resolution. Psychological Science 2002, 13:329-36.
89. Nunberg G. The pragmatics of reference 1977, New York, City University of New York dissertation
90. Nunberg G. The pragmatics of deferred interpretation. The handbook of pragmatics. 2004, 344-364. Horn L RWard G L. ed. by, Malden, MA, Blackwell Publishing
91. Olson D R. Language and thought: aspects of a cognitive theory of semantics. Psychological Review 1970, 77:257-73.
92. Prince E F. Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. Radical pragmatics 1981, 223-56. Cole P. ed. by, New York, Academic Press
93. Prince E F. The ZPG letter: subjects, definiteness, and information-status. Discourse description: diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text 1992, 295-325. Mann W CThompson S A. ed. by, Amsterdam, John Benjamins
94. Reinhart T. Pragmatics and linguistics: an analysis of sentence topics: Philosophica 1982, 27:3-94.
95. Rohde H, Kehler A, Elman J L. Pronoun interpretation as a side effect of discourse coherence. Proceedings of the 29th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2007, Nashville, TN
96. Sanford A J, Garrod S C. Understanding written language 1981, New York, Wiley
97. Schober M F, Brennan S E. Processes of interactive spoken discourse: the role of the partner. Handbook of discourse processes 2003, 123-64. Graesser A C, Gernsbacher M AGoldman S R. ed. by, Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum
98. Schober M F, Clark H H. Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology 1989, 21:211-32.
99. Shriberg E. Phonetic consequences of speech disfluency. 1999, 619-22. Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS-99), San Francisco, CA, Vol. I
100. Siegman A W. Cognition and hesitation in speech. Of speech and time: temporal speech patterns in interpersonal contexts 1979, 151-78. Siegman A WFeldstein S. ed. by, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum
101. Stevenson R J, Crawley R A, Kleinman D. Thematic roles, focus and the representation of events. Language and Cognitive Processes 1994, 9:473-592.
102. Stewart A J, Pickering M J, Sanford A J. The time course of the influence of implicit causality information: focusing versus integration accounts. Journal of Memory and Language 2000, 42:423-43.
103. Terken J, Hirschberg J. Deaccentuation of words representing 'given' information: effects of persistence of grammatical function and surface position. Language and Speech 1994, 37:125-45.
104. Vallduví E. Information packaging: a survey. Report prepared for word order, prosody, and information structure 1993, Edinburgh, Centre for Cognitive Science and Human Communication Research Centre, University of Edinburgh
105. Venditti J J, Hirschberg J. Intonation and discourse. Invited panel presentation, Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of Phonetic Science 2003, 107-14. Barcelona
106. Walker M, Iida M, Cote S. Japanese discourse and the process of centering. Computational Linguistics 1994, 20(2):193-232.
107. Walker M A, Joshi A K, Prince E F. Centering in naturally-occurring discourse: an overview. Centering in discourse 1998a, 1-28. Walker M A, Joshi A K, Prince E F. ed. by, Oxford, Oxford University Press
108. Walker M A, Joshi A K, Prince E F. Centering in discourse 1998b, Oxford, Oxford University Press
109. Ward G. Equatives and deferred reference. Language 2004, 80:262-89.
110. Wardlow Lane L, Groisman M, Ferrira V S. Don't talk about pink elephants!. Psychological Science 2006, 273-77.