The role of contrastive intonation contours in the retrieval of contextual alternatives

Language and Cognitive Processes

Volumn 25, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 1024-1043

  Braun, Bettina ^a   Tagliapietra, Lara ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOLINGUISTICS   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Alternative set semantics; Contrast; Cross modal priming; Dutch; Intonation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PITCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECOGNITION; SEMANTICS; SPEECH;

EID: 77957778040     PISSN: 01690965     EISSN: 14640732     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01690960903036836     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.
3. Barr, D. J. (2008). Analyzing 'visual world' eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 457-474.
4. Bartels, C., & Kingston, J. (1994). Salient pitch cues in the perception of contrastive focus. In P. Bosch & R. van der Sandt (Eds.), Focus and natural language processing (pp. 1-10). Heidelberg, Germany: Working Papers of the Institute for Logics and Linguistics.
5. Birch, S., & Clifton, C. (1995). Focus, accent, and argument structure: Effects on language comprehension. Language and Speech, 38, 365-391.
6. Blutner, R., & Sommer, R. (1988). Sentence processing and lexical access: The influence of the focus-identifying task. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 359-367.
7. Braun, B. (2005). Production and perception of thematic contrast in German. Oxford, UK: Peter Lang Publishing.
8. Braun, B. (2006). Phonetics and phonology of thematic contrast in German. Language and Speech, 49, 451-493.
9. Cohen, A., & 't Hart, J. (1967). On the anatomy of intonation. Lingua, 19, 177-192.
10. Clark, H. (1977). Bridging. In P. Johnson-Laird & P. Wason (Eds.), Thinking (pp. 10-63). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11. Dahan, D., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Chambers, C. G. (2002). Accent and reference resolution in spoken-language comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 292-314.
12. Fischler, I. (1977). Semantic facilitation without association in a lexical decision task. Memory and Cognition, 5, 335-339.
13. Foss, D. J. & Ross, J. R. (1983). Great expectations: Context effects during sentence processing. In G. Flores D'Arcais & R. J. Jarvella (Eds.), The process of language understanding (pp. 169-191). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
14. Gussenhoven, C. (2005). Transcription of Dutch intonation. In S. Jun (Ed.), Prosodic typology and transcription: A unified approach (pp. 118-145). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
15. 't Hart, J., Collier, R., & Cohen, A. (1990). A perceptual study of intonation: An experimental-phonetic approach to speech melody. Cambridge Studies in Speech Science and Communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16. Ito, K., & Speer, S. (2008). Anticipatory effects of intonation: Eye movements during instructed visual search. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 541-573.
17. Ladd, D. R. (1983). Phonological features of intonational meaning. Language, 59, 721-759.
18. Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434-446.
19. Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Kadmon, N. (2001). Formal pragmatics: Semantics, pragmatics, presupposition, and focus. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
21. Lewis, D. (1979). Scorekeeping in a language game. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8, 339-359.
22. Lupker, S. J. (1984). Semantic priming without association: A second look. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 23, 709-733.
23. Moss, H. E., Ostrin, R. K., Tyler, L. K., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1995). Accessing different types of lexical semantic information: Evidence from priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 863-883.
24. Norris, D., Cutler, A., McQueen, J., & Butterfield, S. (2006). Phonological and conceptual activation in speech comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 53, 146-193.
25. Quené, H., & van den Bergh, H. (2004). On multi-level modeling of data from repeated measures designs: A tutorial. Speech Communication, 43, 103-121.
26. Rooth, M. (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 75-116.
27. Stalnaker, R. (2002). Common ground. Linguistics and Philosophy, 25, 701-721.
28. Steedman, M. (2000). Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 649-689.
29. Swinney, D., Onifer, W., Prather, P., & Hirschkowitz, M. (1979). Semantic facilitation across sensory modalities in the processing of individual words and sentences. Memory and Cognition, 7, 159-165.
30. Tabossi, P. (1988). Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential contexts. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 324-340.
31. Tabossi, P. (1996). Cross-modal semantic priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 569-576.
32. Timm, U. (2003). Rot. München, Germany: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.
33. Watson, D., Gunlogson, C., & Tanenhaus, M. (2008). Interpreting pitch accents in on-line comprehension: H* vs. L-H*. Cognitive Science, 32, 1232-1244.
34. Weber, A., Braun, B., & Crocker, M. (2006). Finding referents in time: Eye-tracking evidence for the role of contrastive accents. Language and Speech, 49, 367-392.
35. Welby, P. (2003). Effects of pitch accent type and status on focus projection. Language and Speech, 46, 53-81.
36. Williams, J. N. (1988). Constraints upon semantic activation during sentence comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3, 165-206.