Erratum to: Escape from the Island: Grammaticality and (Reduced) Acceptability of wh-island Violations in Danish (J Psycholinguistic Res, 10.1007/s10936-012-9210-x);Escape from the Island: Grammaticality and (Reduced) Acceptability of wh-island Violations in Danish

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 51-70

  Christensen, Ken Ramshøj ^a,b   Kizach, Johannes ^b   Nyvad, Anne Mette ^b  

^a AARHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

D linking; Parsing; Training effects; wh movement; Working memory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84872656144     PISSN: 00906905     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10936-012-9225-3     Document Type: Erratum

References (50)

1. Bader M., Meng M. (1999) Subject-object ambiguities in German embedded clauses: An across-the-board comparison. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28: 121-143.
2. Bastiaanse R. J., Bouma G., Post W. (2009) Linguistic complexity and frequency in agrammatic speech production. Brain and Language 109: 18-28.
3. Branigan H. (2007) Syntactic priming. Language and Linguistics Compass 1. 1-2: 1-16.
4. Caplan D., Waters G. S. (1999) Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 77-126.
5. Chomsky N. A. (1973) Conditions on transformations. In: Anderson S., Kiparsky P. (eds) A festschrift for Morris Halle. Holt, Rinehart, pp 232-286.
6. Chomsky N. A. (1986) Barriers. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
7. Chomsky N. A. (1995) The minimalist program. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
8. Chomsky N. A. (2001) Derivation by phase. In: Kenstowicz M. (Ed.), Ken Hale. A life in language. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1-52.
9. Chomsky N. A. (2005) Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 1: 1-22.
10. Christensen K. R., Wallentin M. (2011) The locative alternation: Distinguishing linguistic processing cost from error signals in Broca's region. NeuroImage 56. 3: 1622-1631.
11. Clifton C. Jr., Frazier L. (1989) Comprehending sentences with long-distance dependencies. In: Carlson G. N., Tannenhaus M. K. (eds) Linguistic structure in language processing. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 273-317.
12. Clifton C. Jr., Frazier L. (2004) Should given information come before new? Yes and no. Memory & Cognition 32. 6: 886-895.
13. Clifton C. Jr., Fanselow G., Frazier L. (2006) Amnestying superiority violations: Processing multiple questions. Linguistic Inquiry 37. 1: 51-68.
14. Fanselow G., Frisch S. (2006) Effects of processing difficulty on judgments of acceptability. In: Fanselow G., Fery C., Schlesewsky M. (eds) Gradience in grammar: Generative perspectives. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 291-316.
15. Fanselow G., Kliegl R., Schlesewsky M. (1999) Processing difficulty and principles of grammar. In: Kemper S., Kliegl R. (eds) Constraints on language: Aging, grammar and memory. Kluwer, Dortrecht, pp 171-202.
16. Featherston S. (2005) Universals and grammaticality: Wh-constraints in German and English. Linguistics 43. 4: 667-711.
17. Ferreira F., Christianson K., Hollingworth A. (2001) Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: Implications for models of reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 30: 3-20.
18. Fodor J. D., Inoue A. (1998) Attach anyway. In: Fodor J. D., Ferreira F. (eds) Reanalysis in sentence processing. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 101-141.
19. Frazier L., Clifton C. Jr. (2002) Processing "d-linked" phrases. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 31. 6: 633-659.
20. Gibson E. (1998) Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68: 1-76.
21. Gibson E. (2000) The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In: Miyashita Y., Marantz A., O'Neil W. (eds) Image, language, brain. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 95-126.
22. Grodzinsky Y. (1995) A restrictive theory on agrammatic comprehension. Brain and Language 50: 27-51.
23. Grodzinsky Y. (2000) The neurology of syntax: Language use without Broca's area. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23: 1-71.
24. Hakuri T. E., Levine R. D. (1995) Adjunct extraction. Journal of Linguistics 31. 2: 195-226.
25. Hawkins J. A. (1994) A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
26. Hawkins J. A. (2004) Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
27. Hofmeister P., Sag I. (2010) Cognitive constraints and island effects. Language 86(2): 366-415.
28. Kiparsky P., Kiparsky C. (1970) Fact. In: Bierwisch M., Heidolph K. (eds) Progress in linguistics. Mouton, The Hague, pp 143-173.
29. Kluender R. (1998) On the distinction between strong and weak islands: A processing perspective. In: Culicover P., McNally L. (eds) Syntax and semantics, vol. 29: The limits of syntax. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp 241-279.
30. Kluender R., Kutas M. (1993) Subjacency as a processing phenomenon. Language and Cognitive Processes 8: 573-633.
31. Luka B. J., Barsalou L. W. (2005) Structural facilitation: Mere exposure effects for grammatical acceptability as evidence for syntactic priming in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 52: 436-459.
32. Pesetsky D. (1987) Wh-in situ and unselective binding. In: Reuland E., Meulen A. (eds) The representation of (in-) definiteness. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 98-129.
33. Phillips C., Kazanina N., Abada S. H. (2005) ERP effects of the processing of syntactic long-distance dependencies. Cognitive Brain Research 22. 3: 407-428.
34. Phillips, C. (forthcoming). Some arguments and nonarguments for reductionist accounts of syntactic phenomena. Language and Cognitive Processes. doi: 10. 1080/01690965. 2010. 530960.
35. Pickering M., Barton S., Shillcock R. (1994) Unbounded dependencies, island constraints, and processing complexity. In: Clifton C., Frazier L., Rayner K. (eds) Perspectives on sentence processing. Erlbaum, London, pp 199-224.
36. Pickering M., Traxler M. (2001) Strategies for processing unbounded dependencies: Lexical information and verb-argument assignment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 27: 1401-1410.
37. Poole G. (2011) Syntactic theory (2nd ed.). Palgrave MacMillan, Houndmills.
38. Poulsen M. (2008) Acceptability and processing of long-distance dependencies in Danish. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 31. 1: 73-107.
39. Pritchett, B. L. (1992). Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
40. Rizzi L. (1990) Relativized minimality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
41. Rizzi L. (2004) Locality and left periphery. In: Belletti A. (Ed.), Structures and beyond. The cartography of syntactic structures (Vol. 3). Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 223-251.
42. Roberts R., Gibson E. (2002) Individual differences in sentence memory. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 31. 6: 573-598.
43. Ross, J. R. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. PhD dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
44. Sabel J. (2002) A minimalist analysis of syntactic islands. The Linguistic Review 19: 271-315.
45. Snyder W. (2000) An experimental investigation of syntactic satiation effects. Linguistic Inquiry 31: 575-582.
46. Sprouse J. (2007) Continuous acceptability, categorical grammaticality, and experimental syntax. Biolinguistics 1: 123-134.
47. Sprouse J. (2008) The differential sensitivity of acceptability judgments to processing effects. Linguistic Inquiry 39. 4: 686-694.
48. Sprouse, J., Wagers, M., & Phillips, C. (2012). A test of the relation between working memory capacity and syntactic islands effects. Language(to appear) (pre-print version available online at: http://www. socsci. uci. edu/~jsprouse/).
49. Vikner S. (1995) Verb movement and expletive subjects in the Germanic languages. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
50. Warren T., Gibson E. (2002) The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. Cognition 85: 79-112.