On Directionality of Phrase Structure Building

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 65-89

  Chesi, Cristiano ^a  

^a SCUOLA UNIVERSITARIA SUPERIORE IUSS PAVIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; HUMAN; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS; SEMANTICS;

COGNITION; HUMANS; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; SEMANTICS;

EID: 84922103023     PISSN: 00906905     EISSN: 15736555     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10936-014-9330-6     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Abelson, H., & Sussman, J. (1996). Structure and interpretation of computer programs pp. 261–264. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2013). Intervention in grammar and processing. In I. Caponigro & C. Cecchetto (Eds.), From grammar to meaning: The spontaneous logicality of language (pp. 293–311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language (pp. 279–362). New York, NY: Wiley.
4. Bianchi, V. (2009). A note on backward anaphora. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa, 34, 3–34.
5. Bianchi, V., & Chesi, C. (2006). Phases, left branch islands, and computational islands. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 12(1), 15–28.
6. Bianchi, V., & Chesi, C. (2010). Reversing the perspective on Quantifier Raising. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa, 35, 3–38.
7. Bianchi, V., & Chesi, C. (2012). Subject islands and the Subject Criterion. In V. Bianchi & C. Chesi (Eds.), Enjoy Linguistics! Papers offered to Luigi Rizzi on the occasion of his 60th birthday (pp. 25–53). Siena: CISCL Press.
8. Boeckx, C. (2003). Islands and chains: Resumption as stranding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
9. Cecchetto, C., & Donati, C. (2010). On labeling: Principle C and head movement. Syntax, 13(3), 241–278.
10. Chesi, C. (2004). Phases and cartography in linguistic computation: Toward a cognitively motivated computational model of linguistic competence. PhD thesis, Università di Siena.
11. Chesi, C. (2007). An introduction to phase-based minimalist grammars: Why move is top-down from left-to-right. Studies in Linguistics, 1, 49–90.
12. Chesi, C. (2012). Competence and computation: Toward a processing friendly minimalist grammar. Padova: Unipress.
13. Chesi, C. (2013). Do the ‘right’ thing. Studies in Linguistics, 6, 131–164.
14. Choi, Y., Yoon, J. (2006). Argument cluster coordination and constituency test (non)-conflicts. In Paper presented at NELS 37. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
15. Chomsky, N. (1973). Conditions on transformations. In S. Anderson & P. Kiparsky (Eds.), A festschrift for Morris Halle (pp. 232–286). New York: Holt Rinehart, & Winston.
16. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
17. Chomsky, N. (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Chomsky, N. (1998). Minimalist inquiries: The framework (No. 15). MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, MIT, Department of Linguistics.
20. Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 1–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Chomsky, N. (2008). On phases. In R. Freidin, C. P. Otero, & M.-L. Zubizarreta (Eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Chomsky, N. (2013). Problems of projection. Lingua, 130, 33–49.
23. Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Collins, C. (1997). Local economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25. Collins, C. (2002). Eliminating labels. In S. D. Epstein & T. D. Seely (Eds.), Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
26. Culicover, P. W., & Postal, P. M. (2001). Parasitic gaps. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. De Vincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian: The minimal chain principle. Berlin: Springer.
28. De Vincenzi, M., Arduino, L., Ciccarelli, L., Job, R. (1999). Parsing strategies in children comprehension of interrogative sentences. In Proceeding of ECCS ’99. Siena.
29. Engdahl, E. (1983). Parasitic gaps. Linguistics and Philosophy, 6, 5–34.
30. Felser, C. (2004). Wh-copying, phases and successive cyclicity. Lingua, 114(5), 543–574.
31. Fodor, J. D. (1978). Parsing strategies and constraints on transformations. Linguistic Inquiry, 9, 427–473.
32. Fox, D., & Pesetsky, D. (2005). Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. In Object shift (Ed.) By Katalin E. Kiss, special issue. Theoretical Linguistics, 31(1–2), 1–46.
33. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C, Jr. (1989). Successive cyclicity in the grammar and the parser. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4(2), 93–126.
34. Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6, 291–325.
35. Frazier, L. (1978). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. PhD Thesis, University of Connecticut.
36. Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua, 119, 67–88.
37. Gibson, E., & Pearlmutter, N. J. (2000). Distinguishing serial and parallel parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(2), 231–240.
38. Gordon, P., Hendrick, R., & Johnson, M. (2004). Effects of noun phrase type on sentence complexity. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 97–114.
39. Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Levine, W. H. (2002). Memory-load interference in syntactic processing. Psychological Science, 13(5), 425–430.
40. Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Johnson, M. (2001). Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 1411–1423.
41. Grimshaw, J. (1991). Extended projection. In P. Coopmans, M. Everaert, & J. Grimshaw (Eds.), Lexical specification and insertion (pp. 115–134). The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
42. Hofmeister, P., & Sag, I. A. (2010). Cognitive constraints and island effects. Language, 86(2), 366–415.
43. Hopcroft, J. E., Motwani, R., & Ullman, J. D. (2001). Introduction to automata theory, languages, and computation (2nd ed.). Reading: Addison-Wesley.
44. Huang, C. T. J. (1982). Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. PhD thesis. MIT.
45. Huck, G., & Na, Y. (1990). Extraposition and focus. Language, 66, 51–77.
46. Joshi, A. K. (1985). Tree adjoining grammars: How much context-sensitivity is required to provide reasonable structural descriptions? pp. 206–250. University of Pennsylvania, Moore School of Electrical Engineering, Department of Computer and Information Science.
47. Kayne, R. (1983). Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris.
48. Kayne, R. (1994). The antisimmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
49. Kempson, R., Meyer-Viol, W., & Gabbay, D. (2001). Dynamic syntax: The flow of language understanding. Oxford: Blackwell.
50. Ko, H. (2005). Syntax of why-in-situ: Merge into [Spec, CP] in the overt syntax. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 23(4), 867–916.
51. Larson, R. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 335–391.
52. Lasnik, H., & Saito, M. (1992). Move alpha: Conditions on its application and output. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
53. Levine R., & Sag I. A. (2003). Some empirical issues in the grammar of extraction. In S. Müller (eds.), Proceedings of the HPSG03 Conference. Michigan State University, East Lansing. CSLI Publications. Life in Language (pp. 1–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54. Lewis, R. L. (2000). Falsifying serial and parallel parsing models: Empirical conundrums and an overlooked paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(2), 241–248.
55. McCloskey, J. (2002). Resumption, successive cyclicity, and the locality of operations. In Samuel Epstein & Daniel T. Seely (Eds.), Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program (pp. 184–226). New York: Blackwell.
56. McElree, B., & Griffith, T. (1998). Structural and lexical constraints on filling gaps during sentence processing: A time-course analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 432–460.
57. McElree, B., Foraker, S., & Dyer, L. (2003). Memory structures that subserve sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(1), 67–91.
58. McKinnon, R., & Osterhout, L. (1996). Event-related potentials and sentence processing: Evidence for the status of constraints on movement phenomena. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 495–523.
59. Moro, A. (2000). Dynamic antisymmetry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
60. Nunes, J., & Uriagereka, J. (2000). Cyclicity and extraction domains. Syntax, 3, 20–43.
61. Pesetsky, D., & Torrego, E. (2001). T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language (pp. 355–426). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
62. Phillips, C. (1996). Order and structure. PhD thesis, MIT.
63. Phillips, C. (2003). Linear order and constituency. Linguistic Inquiry, 34(1), 37–90.
64. Phillips, C. (2006). The real-time status of Island phenomena. Language, 82, 795–823.
65. Phillips, C. (2013). On the nature of island constraints. I: Language processing and reductionist accounts. In J. Sprouse & N. Hornstein (Eds.), Experimental syntax and island effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
66. Pollard, C., & Sag, I. (1994). Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Stanford: CSLI.
67. Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
68. Rizzi, L. (2001). On the position “int(errogative)” in the left periphery of the clause. In G. Cinque & G. Salvi (Eds.), Current studies in Italian syntax. Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi (pp. 287–296). Amsterdam: Elsevier North-Holland.
69. Rizzi, L. (2006). On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. In L. Cheng & N. Corver (Eds.), Wh-movement: Moving on (pp. 97–134). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
70. Ross, J. R. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. PhD Thesis. MIT.
71. Sauerland, U. (2004). The interpretation of traces. Natural Language Semantics, 12, 63–127.
72. Shlonsky, U. (1992). Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry, 23(3), 443–468.
73. Sprouse, J., Wagers, M., & Phillips, C. (2012). A test of the relation between working memory capacity and syntactic island effects. Language, 88(1), 82–123.
74. Stabler, E. (1997). Derivational minimalism. In Retoré (Ed.), Logical aspects of computational Linguistics. Berlin: Springer.
75. Stepanov, A. (2007). The end of CED? Minimalism and extraction domains. Syntax, 10, 80–126.
76. Tavakolian, S. L. (1981). The conjoined-clause analysis of relative clauses. In S. L. Tavakolian (Ed.), Language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 167–187). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
77. Uriagereka, J. (1999). Multiple spell-out. In S. D. Epstein & N. Hornstein (Eds.), Working minimalism (pp. 251–282). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
78. Van Dyke, J. A., & McElree, B. (2006). Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(2), 157–166.
79. Wanner, E., & Maratsos, M. (1978). An ATN approach to comprehension. In M. Halle, J. Bresnan, & G. A. Miller (Eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality, chapter 3 (pp. 119–161). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
80. Warren, T., & Gibson, E. (2005). Effects of NP type in reading cleft sentences in English. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 751–767.
81. Warren, T., & Gibson, E. (2002). The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. Cognition, 85, 79–112.
82. Weinberg, A. (2001). A minimalist theory of human sentence processing. In Epstein & N. Hornstein (Eds.), Working minimalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.