Focus, newness and their combination: Processing of information structure in discourse

PLoS ONE

Volumn 7, Issue 8, 2012, Pages

  Chen, Lijing ^a,b   Li, Xingshan ^a   Yang, Yufang ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF PSYCHOLOGY   (China)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHINESE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHINESE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE MOVEMENT; EYE TRACKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; MENTAL PERFORMANCE; NEUROBIOLOGY; NORMAL HUMAN; ONLINE SYSTEM; READING; VISUAL INFORMATION; VISUAL MEMORY; WORD RECOGNITION;

ADULT; EYE MOVEMENTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINGUISTICS; MALE; MENTAL PROCESSES; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84865063654     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042533     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Halliday MAK, (1967) Notes on transitivity and theme in English, part 2. Journal of Linguistics 3: 199-244.
2. Schwarzschild R, (1999) Givenness, avoidF and other constraints on the placement of accent. Natural language semantics 7: 141-177.
3. Kiss KÉ, (1998) Identificational focus vs. information focus. Language 74: 245-273.
4. Gundel JK (1999) On different kinds of focus. In Bosch P, van der Sandt R, editors. Focus: Linguistic, cognitive, and computational perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 293-305.
5. Prince EF (1992) The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In Mann WC, Thompson SA, editors. Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund raising text. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. pp. 295-325.
6. Féry C, Krifka M (2008) Information structure: Notional distinctions, ways of expression. In van Sterkenburg P, editors. Unity and diversity of languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 123-136.
7. Selkirk E, (2008) Contrastive focus, givenness and the unmarked status of "discourse-new". Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55: 331-346.
8. Selkirk E (2002) Contrastive focus vs. presentational focus: Prosodic evidence from right node raising in English. In Bel B, Marlien I, editors. Speech Prosody 2002: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Speech Prosody. Aix-en-Provence: Laboratoire Parole et Langage. pp. 643-646.
9. Katz J, Selkirk E, (2012) Contrastive focus vs. discourse-new: Evidence from prosodic prominence in English. Language In press.
10. Féry C, Ishihara S, (2009) The phonology of second occurrence focus. Journal of Linguistics 45: 285-313.
11. Beaver DI, Clark BZ, Flemming ES, Jaeger TF, Wolters MK, (2007) When semantics meets phonetics: Acoustical studies of second occurrence focus. Language 83: 245-276.
12. Klin CM, Weingartner KM, Guzman AE, Levine W, (2004) Readers' sensitivity to linguistic cues in narratives: How salience influences anaphor resolution. Memory & Cognition 32: 511-522.
13. Foraker S, McElree B, (2007) The role of prominence in pronoun resolution: Active versus passive representations. Journal of Memory and Language 56: 357-383.
14. Almor A, (1999) Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Riview 106: 748-765.
15. Almor A, Eimas P, (2008) Focus and noun phrase anaphors in spoken language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes 23: 201-225.
16. Sanford AJS, Price J, Sanford AJ, (2009) Enhancement and suppression effects resulting from information structuring in sentences. Memory & Cognition 37: 880-888.
17. Sturt P, Sanford AJ, Stewart A, Dawdyiak E, (2004) Linguistic focus and good-enough representations: An application of the change-detection paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 11: 882-888.
18. Birch SL, Garnsey SM, (1995) The effect of focus on memory for words in sentences. Journal of Memory and Language 34: 232-267.
19. Blutner R, Sommer R, (1988) Sentence processing and lexical access: The influence of the focus-identifying task. Journal of Memory & Language 7: 359-367.
20. Cutler A, Fodor JA, (1979) Semantic focus and sentence comprehension. Cognition 7: 49-59.
21. Paterson KB, Liversedge SP, Underwood G, (1999) The influence of focus operators on syntactic processing of short relative clause sentences. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology 52: 717-737.
22. Liversedge SP, Paterson KB, Clayes EL, (2002) The influence of only on syntactic processing of "long" relative clause sentences. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 55: 225-240.
23. Ni W, (1996) Sidestepping garden paths: Assessing the contributions of syntax, semantics and plausibility in resolving ambiguities. Language and Cognitive Processes 11: 283-334.
24. Sedivy JC, (2002) Invoking discourse-based contrast sets and resolving syntactic ambiguities. Journal of Memory and Language 46: 341-370.
25. Cowles H, Kluender R, Kutas M, Polinsky M, (2007) Violations of information structure: An electrophysiological study of answers to wh-questions. Brain and Language 102: 228-242.
26. Bornkessel I, Schlesewsky M, Friederici A, (2003) Contextual information modulated initial processes of syntactic integration: the role of inter- versus intrasentential predictions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29: 871-882.
27. Stolterfoht B, Friederici AD, Alter K, Steube A, (2007) Processing focus structure and implicit prosody during reading: Differential ERP effects. Cognition 104: 565-590.
28. Ward P, Sturt P, (2007) Linguistic focus and memory: An eye movement study. Memory & Cognition 35: 73-86.
29. Morris RK, Folk JR, (1998) Focus as a contextual priming mechanism in reading. Memory & Cognition 26: 1313-1322.
30. Rayner K, (1998) Eye movements in reading: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin 124: 372-422.
31. Birch SL, Rayner K, (2010) Effects of Syntactic Prominence on Eye Movements during Reading. Memory & Cognition 38: 740-752.
32. Zimmer HD, Engelkamp J, (1981) The given-new structure of cleft sentences and their influence on picture viewing. Psychological Research 43: 375-389.
33. Irwin DE, Bock JK, Stanovich KE, (1982) Effects of information structure cues on visual word processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 21: 307-325.
34. Li X, Hagoort P, Yang Y, (2008) Event-related potential evidence on the influence of accentuation in spoken discourse comprehension in Chinese. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 20: 906-915.
35. Camblin CC, Ledoux K, Boudewyn M, Gordon PC, Swaab TY, (2007) Processing new and repeated names: Effects of coreference on repetition priming with speech and fast RSVP. Brain Research 1146: 172-184.
36. Van Petten C, Kutas M, Kluender R, Mitchiner M, McIsaac H, (1991) Fractionating the word repetition effect with eventrelated potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 3: 131-150.
37. Anderson JE, Holcomb PJ, (2005) An electrophysiological investigation of the effects of coreference on word repetition and synonymy. Brain & Language 94: 200-216.
38. Ledoux K, Gordon PC, Camblin CC, Swaab TY, (2007) Coreference and lexical repetition: Mechanisms of discourse integration. Memory & Cognition 35: 801-815.
39. Raney GE, Rayner K, (1995) Word frequency effects and eye movements during two readings of a text. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 49: 151-172.
40. Traxler MJ, Foss DJ, Seely RE, Kaup B, Morris RK, (2000) Priming in sentence processing: Intralexical spreading activation, schemas, and situation models. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 29: 581-594.
41. Liversedge SP, Pickering MJ, Clayes EL, Branigan HP, (2003) Thematic processing of adjuncts: Evidence from an eye-tracking experiment. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10: 667-675.
42. Fang M, (1995) Hanyu duibi jiaodian de jufa biaoxian shouduan [The syntactic devices of contrastive focus in Chinese]. Zhongguo Yuwen [Studies of the Chinese Language] 247: 279-288.
43. Camblin CC, Gordon PC, Swaab TY, (2007) The interplay of discourse congruence and lexical association during sentence processing: Evidence from ERPs and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language 56: 103-128.
44. Paterson KB, Liversedge SP, Filik R, Juhasz BJ, White S, et al. (2007) Focus identification during sentence comprehension: Evidence from eye movements. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 60: 1423-1445.
45. Van Gompel RPG, Majid A, (2004) Antecedent frequency effects during the processing of pronouns. Cognition 90: 255-264.
46. Rayner K, Warren T, Juhasz BJ, Liversedge SP, (2004) The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30: 1290-1301.
47. Filik R, (2008) Contextual override of pragmatic anomalies: Evidence from eye movements. Cognition 106: 1038-1046.
48. Sternberg S, (1969) The discovery of processing stages: Extension of Donder's method. Acta Psychologica 30: 276-315.
49. Yang CL, Gordon PC, Hendrick R, (1999) Comprehension of referring expressions in Chinese. Language and Cognitive Processes 14: 715-743.
50. Rooth M, (1992) A theory of focus interpretation. Natural language semantics 1: 75-116.
51. Givón T, (1992) The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistics 30: 5-55.
52. Wang L, Hagoort P, Yang Y, (2009) Semantic illusion depends on information structure: ERP evidence. Brain research 1282: 50-56.
53. Sanford AJS, Sanford AJ, Molle J, Emmott C, (2006) Shallow processing and attention capture in written and spoken discourse. Discourse Processes 42: 109-130.
54. Raney GE, (2003) A context-dependent representation model for explaining text repetition effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10: 15-28.
55. Klin CM, Drumm AM, Ralano AS, (2009) Repeated text in unrelated passages: repetition versus meaning selection effect. Memory & Cognition 37: 556-568.
56. Tenpenny PL, (1995) Abstractionist versus episodic theories of repetition priming and word identification. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2: 339-363.
57. Carr TH, Brown JS, (1990) Perceptual abstraction and interactivity in repeated oral reading: Where do things stand? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 16: 731-738.
58. Kaakinen JK, Hyönä J, (2010) Task effects on eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 36: 1561-1566.
59. Drenhaus H, Zimmermann M, Vasishth S, (2011) Exhaustiveness effects in clefts are not truth-functional. Journal of Neurolinguistics 24: 320-337.
60. Filik R, Paterson K, Liversedge S, (2009) The influence of only and even on online semantic interpretation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 16: 678-83.
61. Gordon PC, Grosz BJ, Gilliom LA, (1993) Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science 17: 311-347.
62. Van Berkum JJ, Koornneef AW, Otten M, Nieuwland MS, (2007) Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective. Brain Research 1146: 158-171.
63. Li X, Liu P, Rayner K, (2011) Eye movement guidance in Chinese reading: Is there a preferred viewing location? Vision Research 51: 1146-1156.