Article published in:
Weak Referentiality
Edited by Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn and Joost Zwarts
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219] 2014
► pp. 365388
References

References

Abbott, B.
2004Definiteness and indefiniteness. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, L. Horn & G. Ward (eds), 122–149. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Aguilar-Guevara, A.
2014Weak Definites. Semantics, Lexicon and Pragmatics. PhD dissertation, Utrecht University.
Aguilar-Guevara, A. & Schulpen, M.
2011Understanding the meaning enrichment of weak definites. In Proceedings of the 2011 ESSLLI student session .
Aguilar-Guevara A. & M. Schulpen
2014Modified weak definites. In Weak Referentiality, A. Aguilar-Guevara, B. Le Bruyn & J. Zwarts (eds), 237–264. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aguilar-Guevara, A. & J. Zwarts
2010Weak definites and reference to kinds. In Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 20, N. Li & D. Lutz (eds), 179–196. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Almor, A.
1999Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review 106(4): 748–765. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J.E. & Holcomb, P.J.
2005An electrophysiological investigation of the effects of coreference on word repetition and synonymy. Brain and Language 94(2): 200–216. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ašić T. & F. Corblin
2014Telic definites and their prepositions: French and Serbian. In Weak Referentiality, A. Aguilar-Guevara, B. Le Bruyn & J. Zwarts (eds), 183–212. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Asher, N.
1993Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse [Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 50]. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baggio, G., Choma, T., van Lambalgen, M. & Hagoort, P.
2010Coercion and compositionality. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 22(9): 2131–2240. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Birner, B. & Ward, G.
1994Uniqueness, familiarity, and the definite article in English. Berkeley Linguistics Society 20: 93–102.Google Scholar
Burkhardt, P.
2006Inferential bridging relations reveal distinct neural mechanisms: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Brain & Language 98(2): 159–168. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007The P600 reflects cost of new information in discourse memory. Neuroreport 18(17): 1851–1854. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008Two types of definites: Evidence for presupposition cost. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 12, A. Grøn (ed.), 66–80. Oslo: ILOS.Google Scholar
Carlson, G.
1977Reference to Kinds in English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Carlson, G. & Sussman, R.
2005Seemingly indefinite definites. In Linguistic Evidence: Empirical, Theoretical and Computational Perspectives, S. Kepser & M. Reis (eds), 71–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, G., Sussman, R., Klein, N. & Tanenhaus, M.
2006Weak definite noun phrases. In Proceedings of NELS 36, C. Davis, A.R. Eal & Y. Zabbal (eds), 179–196. Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Clark, H.H.
1975Bridging. In Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing, B. Nash-Webber & R. Schank (eds), 188–193. New Haven CT: Yale University Mathematical Society Sciences Board.Google Scholar
Consten, M., Knees, M. & Schwarz-Friesel, M.
2007The function of complex anaphors in texts. In Anaphors in Text [Studies in Language Companion Series 86], M. Schwarz-Friesel, M. Consten & M. Knees (eds), 81–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S. & Van Petten, C.
2002Conceptual integration and metaphor: An event-related potential study. Memory and Cognition 30(6): 958–968. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, D.
1967The logical form of action sentences. In The Logic of Decision and Action, N. Rescher (ed.), 81–95. Pittsburg PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
De Villiers, P.A.
1974Imagery and theme in recall of connected discourse. Journal of Experimental Psychology 103(2): 263–268. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, R.
2000Roles and non-unique definites. Berkeley Linguistics Society 25: 122–133.Google Scholar
Garrod, S. & Sanford, A.
1977Interpreting anaphoric relations: The integration of semantic information while reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 16(1): 77–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gernsbacher, M.A. & Robertson, R.R.W.
2002The definite article the as a cue to map thematic information. In Thematics: Interdisciplinary Studies [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research], W. van Peer & M.M. Louwerse (eds), 119–137. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grosz, B.J., Joshi, A.K. & Weinstein, S.
1995Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics 21(2): 203–225.Google Scholar
Gundel, J.K., Hedberg, N. & Zacharski, R.
1993Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69(2): 274–307. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, D.
1980Über Verschmelzungen von Präposition und bestimmten Artikel. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 47(2): 160–183.Google Scholar
Haviland, S.E. & Clark, H.H.
1974What’s new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13(5): 512–521. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, J.A.
1978Definiteness and Indefiniteness. Atlantic Highland NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Heim, I.
1982The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts.
Hirotani, M. & Schumacher, P.B.
2011Context and topic marking affect distinct processes during discourse comprehension in Japanese. Journal of Neurolinguistics 24(3): 276–292. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hung, Y.-C. & Schumacher, P.B.
2012Topicality matters: Position-specific demands on Chinese discourse processing. Neuroscience Letters 511(2): 59–64. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huynh, H. & Feldt, L.S.
1970Conditions under which mean square ratios repeated measurements designs have exact F distributions. Journal of the American Statistical Assocation 65(332): 1582–1589. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jasper, H.H.
1958The ten twenty electrode system of the international federation. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 10(2): 371–375.Google Scholar
Kaan, E., Dallas, A.C. & Barkley, C.M.
2007Processing bare quantifiers in discourse. Brain Research 1146: 199–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
King, J.W. & Kutas, M.
1995Who did what and when? Using word- and clause-level ERPs to monitor working memory usage in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 7: 376–395. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Keppel, G.
1991Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Klein, N.
2011Convention and Cognition: Weak Definite Noun Phrases. PhD dissertation, University of Rochester.
Kutas, M. & Federmeier, K.D.
2011Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology 62: 621–647. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kutas, M., van Petten, C. & Kluender, R.
2006Psycholinguistics electrified II: 1994-2005. In Handbook of Psycholinguistics, 2nd edn, M. Traxler & M.A. Gernsbacher (eds), 659–724. New York NY: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D.
1979Scorekeeping in a language game. In Semantics from Different Points of View, R. Bauerle, U. Egli & A. von Stechow (eds), 172–187. Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Löbner, S.
1985Definites. Journal of Semantics 4: 279–326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maienborn, C.
2003Die logische Form von Kopulasätzen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McKoon, G. & Ratcliff, R.
1986Inferences about predictable events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition 12(1): 82–91. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, G.
1995Transfers of meaning. Journal of Semantics 12: 109–133. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pylkkänen, L. & McElree, B.
2006The syntax-semantics interface: On-line composition of sentence meaning. In Handbook of Psycholinguistics, 2nd edn, M. Traxler & M.A. Gernsbacher (eds), 537–577. New York NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T.
1981Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica 27(1): 53–94.Google Scholar
Rips, L.J., Shoben, E.J. & Smith, E.E.
1973Semantic distance and verification of semantic relations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12(1): 1–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rugg, M.D.
1985The effects of semantic priming and word repetition on event-related potentials. Psychophysiology 22(6): 642–647. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scholten, J. & Aguilar-Guevara, A.
2010Assessing the discourse referential properties of weak definites. Linguistics in the Netherlands 27: 115–128. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schumacher, P.B. & Baumann, S.
2010Pitch accent type affects the N400 during referential processing. Neuroreport 21(9): 618–622. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schumacher, P.B., Consten, M. & Knees, M.
2010Constraints on ontology changing complexation processes: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Language and Cognitive Processes 25(6): 840–865. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schumacher, P.B. & Hung, Y.C.
(2012) Positional influences on information packaging: Insights from topological fields in German. Journal of Memory and Language 67(2): 295–310. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schumacher, P.B.
2009Definiteness marking shows late effects during discourse processing: Evidence from ERPs. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 5847: 91–106.Google Scholar
2011 The hepatitis called...: Electrophysiological evidence for enriched composition. In Experimental Pragmatics/Semantics [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 175], J. Meibauer & M. Steinbach (eds), 199–219. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schwarz, F.
2009Two Types of Definites in Natural Language. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
2014Functional frames in the interpretation of weak nominals. In Weak Referentiality, A. Aguilar-Guevara, B. Le Bruyn & J. Zwarts (eds), 213–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schumacher, P.B.
2013When combinatorial processing results in reconceptualization: Towards a new approach of compositionality. Frontiers in Psychology 4: 677. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Streb, J., Rösler, F. & Hennighausen, E.
1999Event-related responses to pronoun and proper name anaphors in parallel and nonparallel discourse structures. Brain and Language 70(2): 273–286. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Berkum, J.J.A., Brown, C.M. & Hagoort, P.
1999Early referential context effects in sentence processing: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Memory and Language 41(2): 147–182. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, S.
2011Weak Definites and Generics. BA thesis, Universität Osnabrück.
von Heusinger, K.
1997Salienz und Referenz. Der Epsilonoperator in der Semantik der Nominalphrase und anaphorischer Pronomen. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
2006Salience and anaphoric definite noun phrases. Acta Lingvistica Hafniensia 38: 33–53. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weisbrod, M., Kiefer, M., Winkler, S., Maier, S., Hill, H., Roesch-Ely, D. & Spitzer, M.
1999Electrophysiological correlates of direct versus indirect semantic priming in normal volunteers. Cognitive Brain Research 8(3): 289–298. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zwarts, J.
2014Functional frames in the interpretation of weak nominals. In Weak Referentiality, A. Aguilar-Guevara, B. Le Bruyn & J. Zwarts (eds), 265–286. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar