Coargumenthood and the processing of reflexives

Journal of Memory and Language

Volumn 75, Issue , 2014, Pages 117-139

  Cunnings, Ian ^a   Sturt, Patrick ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF READING   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Anaphora resolution; Eye movements; Memory retrieval; Reading

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904597252     PISSN: 0749596X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2014.05.006     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Baayen H. Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R 2008, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
2. Baayen H., Davidson D., Bates D. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:390-412.
3. Badecker W., Straub K. The processing role of structural constraints on the interpretation of pronouns and anaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2002, 28:748-769.
4. Barr D., Levy R., Scheepers C., Tily H. Random-effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 2013, 68:255-278.
5. Chomsky N. Lectures on government and binding 1981, Foris, Dordrecht.
6. Chomsky N. Knowledge of language. Its nature, origin, and use 1986, Praeger, New York.
7. Clackson K., Felser C., Clahsen H. Children's processing of reflexives and pronouns in English: Evidence from eye-movements during listening. Journal of Memory and Language 2011, 65:128-144.
8. Cowan N. The magic number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2000, 24:87-185.
9. Cunnings I., Felser C. The role of working memory in the processing of reflexives. Language and Cognitive Processes 2013, 28:188-219.
10. Dahan D., Tanenhaus M. Looking at the rope when looking for the snake: Conceptually mediated eye movements during spoken-word recognition. Psychological Bulletin & Review 2005, 12:455-459.
11. Daneman M., Carpenter P. Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1980, 19:456-466.
12. Dillon, B. (2011). Structured access in sentence comprehension. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Maryland.
13. Dillon B., Mishler A., Sloggett S., Phillips C. Contrasting intrusion profiles for agreement and anaphora: Experimental and modelling evidence. Journal of Memory and Language 2013, 69:85-103.
14. Domínguez L., Hicks G., Song H. Untangling locality and orientation constraints in the L2 acquisition of anaphoric binding: A feature based approach. Language Acquisition 2012, 19:266-300.
15. Hicks G. The derivation of anaphoric dependencies 2009, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
16. Jaeger F. Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 59:434-446.
17. Kaiser E., Runner J., Sussman R., Tanenhaus M. Structural and semantic constraints on the resolution of pronouns and reflexives. Cognition 2009, 112:55-80.
18. Keller F., Asudeh A. Constraints on linguistic coreference: Structural vs. pragmatic factors. Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference of the cognitive science society 2001, 483-488. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJ. J. Moore, K. Stenning (Eds.).
19. Kennison S., Trofe J. Comprehending pronouns: A role for word-specific gender stereotype information. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2003, 32:355-378.
20. Kreiner H., Sturt P., Garrod S. Processing definitional and stereotypical gender in reference resolution: Evidence from eye-movements. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 58:239-261.
21. Kuno S. Functional syntax: Anaphora, discourse and empathy 1987, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
22. Lewis R.L., Vasishth S. An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cognitive Science 2007, 29:1-45.
23. Lewis R.L., Vasishth S., Van Dyke J.A. Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2006, 10:44-54.
24. Martin A., McElree B. A content-addressable pointer mechanism underlies comprehension of verb-phrase ellipsis. Journal of Memory and Language 2008, 58:879-906.
25. McElree B. Sentence comprehension is mediated by content-addressable memory structures. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2000, 29:111-123.
26. McElree B. Working memory and focal attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2001, 27:817-835.
27. McElree B., Foraker S., Dyer L. Memory structures that subserve sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 2003, 48:67-91.
28. Nairne J. A feature model of immediate memory. Memory & Cognition 1990, 18:251-269.
29. Nicol J., Swinney D. The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1989, 18:5-20.
30. Nicol J., Swinney D. The psycholinguistics of anaphora. Anaphora: A reference guide 2003, 72-104. Blackwell, Oxford. A. Barss (Ed.).
31. Pearlmutter N., Garnsey S., Bock K. Agreement processes in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 1999, 41:427-456.
32. Pollard C., Sag I. Anaphors in English and the scope of binding theory. Linguistic Inquiry 1992, 23:261-303.
33. Reinhart T. Anaphora and semantic interpretation 1983, Croom Helm, London.
34. Reinhart T., Reuland E. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 1993, 24:657-720.
35. Reuland E. Primitives of binding. Linguistic Inquiry 2001, 32:439-492.
36. Reuland E. Anaphora and language design 2011, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
37. Runner J., Sussman R., Tanenhaus M. Assignment of references to reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases: evidence from eye movements. Cognition 2003, 89:B1-B13.
38. Runner J., Sussman R., Tanenhaus M. Processing reflexives and pronouns in picture noun phrases. Cognitive Science 2006, 30:193-241.
39. Sanford A., Garrod S. Proper names as controllers of discourse focus. Language and Speech 1988, 31:43-56.
40. Sturt P. The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language 2003, 48:542-562.
41. Swets B., Desmet T., Clifton C., Ferreira F. Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: Evidence from self-paced reading. Memory & Cognition 2008, 36:201-216.
42. Van Dyke J. Interference effects from grammatically unavailable constituents during sentence processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2007, 33:407-430.
43. Van Dyke J., Johns C. Memory interference as a determinant of language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass 2012, 6:193-211.
44. Van Dyke J., McElree B. Retrieval interference in sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 55:157-166.
45. Van Dyke J., McElree B. Cue-dependent interference in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 2011, 65:247-263.
46. Wagers M., Lau E., Phillips C. Attraction in comprehension: Representation and processes. Journal of Memory and Language 2009, 61:206-237.
47. Xiang M., Dillon B., Phillips C. Illusory licensing effects across dependency types: ERP evidence. Brain & Language 2009, 108:40-55.