Tracking the preference for bound-variable dependencies in ambiguous ellipses and only-structures

Syntax and Semantics

Volumn 37, Issue , 2011, Pages 67-100

  Koornneef, Arnout W ^a   Avrutin, Sergey ^a   Wijnen, Frank ^a   Reuland, Eric ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84942892193     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1163/9781780523750_004     Document Type: Chapter

References (52)

1. Arnold, J., Eisenband, J. G., Brown-Schmidt, S., & Trueswell, J. C. (2000). The rapid use of gender information: Evidence of the time course of pronoun resolution from eye tracking. Cognition, 76, B13-B26.
2. Badecker, W., & Straub, K. (2002). The processing role of structural constraints on the interpretation of pronouns and anaphora. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 28, 748-769.
3. Burkhardt, P. (2005). The syntax-discourse interface: Representing and interpreting dependency (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 80). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
4. Caramazza, A., Grober, E., Garvey, C., & Yates, J. (1977). Comprehension of anaphoric pronouns. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 601-609.
5. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
6. Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Clark, H. H., & Sengul, C. J. (1979). In search of referents for nouns and pronouns. Memory and Cognition, 7, 35-41.
8. Crain, S., & Steedman, M. (1985). On not being led up to garden path: The use of context by the psychological parser. In: D. Dowty, L. Karttunnen & A. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural Language Parsing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9. Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.
10. Fiengo, R., & May, R. (1994). Indices and identity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Fodor, J. A. (1983). Modularity of mind: An essay on faculty psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Foley, C., Nunez del Prado, Z., Barbier, I., & Lust, B. (1997). Operator variable binding in the initial state: An argument from VP ellipsis. In S. Somashekar, K. Yamakoshi, M. Blume, & C. Foley (Eds.), Papers on Language Acquisition, Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics, 15, 1-19.
13. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (2000). On bound variable interpretations: The LF-only hypothesis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 125-139.
14. Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 78-84.
15. Friederici, A. D., & Kotz, S. A. (2003). The brain basis of syntactic processes: Functional imaging and lesion studies. Neuroimage, 20, S8-S17.
16. Garnham, A. (2001). Mental models and the interpretation of anaphora. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
17. Grodzinsky, Y., & Friederici, A. D. (2006). Neuroimaging of syntax and syntactic processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 16, 240-246.
18. Grodzinsky, Y., & Reinhart, T. (1993). The innateness of binding and coreference. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 69-101.
19. Guo, F., Foley, C., Chien, Y. C., Chiang, C. P., & Lust, B. (1996). Operator-variable binding in the initial state: A cross-linguistic study of VP-ellipsis structures in Chinese and English. Cahiers de Linguistique-Asie Orientale, 25, 3-34.
20. Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA. Published in 1989 by Garland, New York.
21. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
22. Koeneman, O., Baauw, S., & Wijnen, F. (1998, March). Reconstruction in VP-ellipsis: Reflexive vs. non-reflexive predicates. Poster presented at the 11 th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing (19-21), New Brunswick, NJ.
23. Koornneef, A. W. (2008). Eye-catching Anaphora. Utrecht: LOT International Dissertation Series.
24. Koornneef, A. W. (2010). Looking at anaphora: The psychological reality of the primitives of binding model. In: M. Everaert, T. Lentz, H. de Mulder, Ø. Nilsen & A. Zondervan (Eds.), The linguistics enterprise: From knowledge of language to knowledge in linguistics (pp. 141-166). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
25. Koornneef, A. W., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2006). On the use of verb-based implicit causality in sentence comprehension: Evidence from self-paced reading and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 445-465.
26. MacDonald, M. C., & MacWhinney, B. (1990). Measuring inhibition and facilitation from pronouns. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 469-492.
27. McDonald, J. L., & MacWhinney, B. (1995). The time course of anaphor resolution: Effects of implicit verb causality and gender. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 543-566.
28. Myers, J. L., & O'Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading. Discourse Processes, 26, 131-157.
29. Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5-19.
30. Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2006). Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: Evidence from ERPs. Brain Research, 1118, 155-167.
31. Nieuwland, M. S., Otten, M., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2007). Who are you talking about? Tracking discourse-level referential processing with ERPs. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 228-236.
32. Pickering, M. J., Frisson, S., McElree, B., & Traxler, M. (2004). Eye movements and semantic composition. In: M. Carreiras & C. Clifton, (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERPs, and beyond. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
33. Piñango, M. M., & Burkhardt, P. (2005). Pronominal Interpretation and the syntaxdiscourse interface: Real-time comprehension and neurological properties. In: A. Branco, T. McEnery & R. Mitkov (Eds.), Anaphora Processing: Linguistic, cognitive and computational modelling (pp. 221-238). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
34. Piñango, M. M., Burkhardt, P., Brun, D., & Avrutin, S. (2001). The psychological reality of the syntax-discourse interface: The case of pronominals. In: From Sentence Processing to Discourse Interpretation: Crossing the Borders (pp. 15-16). Utrecht: Utrecht University.
35. Reinhart, T. (1983). Anaphora and semantic interpretation. London: Croom Helm.
36. Reinhart, T. (1991). Elliptic conjunctions: Non-quantificational LF. In: A. Kasher (Ed.), The Chomskyan Turn (pp. 360-384). Oxford: Blackwell.
37. Reinhart, T. (2004). The processing costs of reference set computation: Acquisition of stress shift and focus. Language Acquisition, 12, 109-155.
38. Reinhart, T., & Reuland, E. (1993). Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 657-720.
39. Reuland, E. (2001). Primitives of binding. Linguistic Inquiry, 32, 439-492.
40. Reuland, E. (2011). Anaphora and language design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. Ruigendijk, E., Burkhardt, P., & Avrutin, S. (2005). Slow sentence processing in Agrammatic Broca's Aphasia. Evidence from Dutch reflexive-antecedent dependencies. Brain and Language, 95(1), 84-85.
42. Schumacher, P., Pinango, P., Ruigendijk, E., & Avrutin, S. (2010). Reference assignment in Dutch: Evidence for the syntax-discourse divide. Lingua, 120, 1738-1763.
43. Shapiro, L. P., & Hestvik, A. (1995). On-line comprehension of VP-ellipsis: Syntactic reconstruction and the semantic influence. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 517-532.
44. Shapiro, L. P., Hestvik, A., Lesan, L., & Garcia, A. R. (2003). Charting the time-course of VP-ellipsis sentence comprehension: Evidence for an initial and independent structural analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 1-19.
45. Smyth, R., & Chambers., C. (1996). Centering, parallelism, and pronoun interpretation. Poster Presented at the 9th CUNY Conference on Sentence Processing, NYC, NY.
46. Sturt, P. (2003). The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 542-562.
47. Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1999). Early referential context effects in sentence processing: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 147-182.
48. Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., Hagoort, P., & Zwitserlood, P. (2003). Eventrelated brain potentials reflect discourse-referential ambiguity in spoken-language comprehension. Psychophysiology, 40, 235-248.
49. Van Berkum, J. J. A., Koornneef, A. W., Otten, M., & Nieuwland, M. S. (2007). Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective. Brain Research, 1146, 158-171.
50. Van Berkum, J. J. A., Zwitserlood, P., Bastiaansen, M. C. M., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (2004). So who's "he" anyway? Differential ERP and ERSP effects of referential success, ambiguity and failure during spoken language comprehension. Annual meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society (CNS-2004), San Francisco, CA, April 18-20. Supplement to the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, p 70.
51. Vasić, N. (2006). Pronoun comprehension in Agrammatic Aphasia: The structure and use of linguistic knowledge. Utrecht: LOT International Dissertation Series.
52. Vasić, N., Avrutin, S., & Ruigendijk, E. (2006). Interpretation of pronouns in VPellipsis constructions in Dutch Broca's and Wernicke's aphasia. Brain and Language, 96, 191-206.