Constructing filler-gap dependencies in Chinese possessor relative clauses

PACLIC 19 - Proceedings of the 19th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages

  Lin, Charles Chien Jer ^a   Fong, Sandiway ^a   Bever, Thomas G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

RELATIVE CLAUSE; TOPDOWN;

EXPERIMENTS;

FILLERS;

EID: 84864296337     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Birch, S. L., J. E. Albrecht and J. L. Myers. 2005. Syntactic Focusing Structures Influence Discourse Processing. Discourse Processes, 30, pp. 285-304.
2. Chomsky, N. 2001. Derivation by Phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.) Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp. 1-52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Ferreira, F. 2003. The Misinterpretation of Noncanonical Sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, pp. 164-203.
4. Fong, S. and Y. Hirose. 2005. Minimalist Parsing and Japanese: On Theory and Experiential Factors. The Proceedings of Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics (TCP 2005).
5. Frazier, L. and C. Clifton Jr. 1989. Successive Cyclicity in the Grammar and the Parser. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, pp. 93-126.
6. Frazier, L., C. Clifton Jr. and J. Randall. 1983. Filling Gaps: Decision Principles and Structure in Sentence Comprehension. Cognition, 13, pp. 187-222.
7. Frazier, L., C. Clifton, K. Rayner, P. Deevy, S. Koh and M. Bader. 2005. Interface Problems: Structural Constraints on Interpretation? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34, pp. 201-231.
8. Frazier, L. and G. Flores d'Arcais. 1989. Filler-Driven Parsing: A Study of Gap-Filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, pp. 331-344.
9. Gibson, E. 1998. Linguistic Complexity: The Locality of Syntactic Dependencies. Cognition, 68, pp. 1-76.
10. Gibson, E., T. Desmet, D. Grodner, D. Watson and K. Ko. 2005. Reading Relative Clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics, 16, pp. 313-353.
11. Hsiao, F. and E. Gibson. 2003. Processing Relative Clauses in Chinese. Cognition, 90, pp. 3-27.
12. King, J. and M. A. Just. 1991. Individual Differences in Syntactic Processing: The Role of Working Memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, pp. 580-602.
13. Mazuka, R., K. Itoh and T. Kondo. 2002. Costs of Scrambling in Japanese Sentence Processing. In M. Nakayama (Ed.) Sentence Processing in East Asian Languages (pp. 131-166), Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
14. Stowe, L. A. 1986. Parsing WH-Constructions: Evidence for On-Line Gap Location. Language and Cognition Processes, 1, pp. 227-245.
15. Tamaoka, K., H. Sakai and J. Kawahara. 2003. The Effects of Phrase-Length Order and Scrambling in the Processing of Visually Presented Japanese Sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, pp. 431-54.
16. Tamaoka, K., H. Sakai and J. Kawahara. 2005. Priority Information Used for the Processing of Japanese Sentences: Thematic Roles, Case Particles or Grammatical Functions? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34, 281-332.
17. Traxler, M. J., R. K. Morris and R. E. Seely. 2002. Processing Subject and Object Relative Clauses: Evidence from Eye Movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, pp. 69-90.
18. Tsai, W-T. D. 2003. Three Types of Existential Quantification in Chinese. In A. Li and A. Simpson (Eds.) Functional Structure(s), Form and Interpretation: Perspectives from Asian Languages, London: Routledge.