Article published in:
Structuring the Argument: Multidisciplinary research on verb argument structure
Edited by Asaf Bachrach, Isabelle Roy and Linnaea Stockall
[Language Faculty and Beyond 10] 2014
► pp. 83118
References
Altmann, Gerry T.M. and Steedman, Mark
1988“Interaction with context during human sentence processing.” Cognition 30: 191–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Mark C
1988 Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
1997“Thematic Roles and Syntactic Structure.” In Elements of Grammar , Liliane Haegeman (Ed.), 73–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bates, Elizabeth, McNew, Sandra, MacWhinney, Brain, Devescovi, Antonella and Smith, Stan
1982“Functional constraints on sentence processing: A cross-linguistic study.” Cognition 11: 245–299. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bayer, Joseph, Bader, Markus and Meng, Michael
2001“Morphological underspecification meets oblique case: Syntactic and processing effects in German.” Lingua 111: 465–514. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, Adriana
2001“Inversion as Focalization.” In Subject Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar , Aafke Hulk and Jean-Yves Pollock (Eds), 60–90. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2004“Aspects of the Low IP Area.” In The Structure of CP and IP [The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 2], Luigi Rizzi (Ed.), 16–51. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana and Rizzi, Luigi
1988“Psych-verbs and θ-theory.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6: 291–352. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bennis, Hans
2004“Unergative Adjectives and Psych Verbs.” In The Unaccusativity Puzzle: Explorations of the Syntax-Lexicon Interface [Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 5], Artemis Alexiadou, Elena Anagnostopoulou and Martin Everaert (Eds), 84–114. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blumenthal, Peter and Rovere, Giovanni
1998 PONS: Wörterbuch der italienischen Verben: Konstruktionen, Bedeutungen, Übersetzungen . Stuttgart: Klett.Google Scholar
Bornkessel, Ina, McElree, Brian, Schlesewsky, Matthias and Friederici, Angela D
2004“Multi-dimensional contributions to garden path strength: Dissociating phrase structure from case marking.” Journal of Memory and Language 51: 495–522. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bornkessel, Ina and Schlesewsky, Matthias
2006“The extended Argument Dependency Model: A neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages.” Psychological Review 113: 787–821. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bornkessel, Ina, Schlesewsky, Matthias and Friederici, Angela D
2003“Eliciting thematic reanalysis effects: The role of syntax-independent information during parsing.” Language and Cognitive Processes 18: 268–298. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bornkessel, Ina, Zysset, Stefan, Friederici, Angela D
., von Cramon, D. Yves and Schlesewsky, Matthias 2005“Who did what to whom? The neural basis of argument hierarchies during language comprehension.” NeuroImage 26: 221–233. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina and Schlesewsky, Matthias
2008a“An alternative perspective on ‘semantic P600’ effects in language comprehension.” Brain Research Reviews 59: 55–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008b“Unmarked transitivity: a processing constraint on linking.” In Investigations of the syntax-semantics-pragmatics interface , Robert Van Valin, Jr. (Ed.), 413–434. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009a“The Role of Prominence Information in the Real-Time Comprehension of Transitive Constructions: A Cross-Linguistic Approach.” Language and Linguistics Compass 3: 19–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009b Processing Syntax and Morphology . A Neurocognitive Perspective . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Burzio, Luigi
1986 Italian Syntax . Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna
1997“Subjects and Clause Structure.” In The New Comparative Syntax , Liliane Haegeman (Ed.), 33–63. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2001“A second thought on emarginazione: Destressing vs. ‘Right Dislocation’.” In Current Studies in Italian Syntax: Essays Offered to Lorenzo Renzi [North-Holland Linguistic Series: Linguistic Variations 59], Guglielmo Cinque and Giampaolo Salvi (Eds), 117–136. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
2004“Toward a cartography of subject positions.” In The Structure of CP and IP [The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 2], Luigi Rizzi (Ed.), 115–165. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1981 Lectures on Government and Binding . Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
1995 The Minimalist Program . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2000“Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework.” In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik , Roger Martin, David Michaels and Juan Uriagereka (Eds), 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
2001“Derivation by Phase.” In Ken Hale: A Life in Language , Michael Kenstowicz (Ed.), 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Corrigan, Roberta
1988“Who Dun It? The Influence of Actor-Patient Animacy and Type of Verb in the Making of Causal Attributions.” Journal of Memory and Language 27: 447–465. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crain, Stephen and Steedman, Mark
1985“On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological parser.” In Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives , David Dowty, Lauri Karttunen and Arnold Zwicky (Eds), 320–357. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crocker, Matthew W
1994“On the nature of the principle-based sentence processor.” In Perspectives on sentence processing, Charles Clifton, Lyn Frazier and Keith Rayner (Eds), 245–266. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
DeLong, Katherine A., Urbach, Thomas P. and Kutas, Marta
2005“Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity.” Nature Neuroscience 8: 1117–1121. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Federmeier, Kara D. and Kutas, Marta
1999“A Rose by Any Other Name: Long-Term Memory Structure and Sentence Processing.” Journal of Memory and Language 41: 469–495. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, Fernanda
1994“Choice of Passive Voice Is Affected by Verb Type and Animacy.” Journal of Memory and Language 33: 715–736. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Janet D
1998“Learning to parse.” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 27: 285–319. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn and Fodor, Janet D
1978“The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model.” Cognition 6: 291–326. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gabriel, Christoph and Müller, Natascha
2008 Grundlagen der generativen Syntax: Französisch, Italienisch, Spanisch . Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Gattei, Carolina, Vasishth, Shravan and Dickey, Michael W
2011 The Role of Semantic Arguments Order and the Syntax-Semantics Interface in Spanish Sentence Comprehension . Poster presented at Structuring the Argument/Structurer l’argument (CNRS/Paris 8), Paris, France, September 5–7.
Gennari, Silvia P. and MacDonald, Maryellen C
2008“Semantic indeterminacy in object relative clauses.” Journal of Memory and Language 58: 161–187. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, Jane
1990 Argument Structure . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hruska, Claudia and Alter, Kai
2004“Prosody in dialogues and single sentences: How prosody can influence sentence perception.” In Information structure: Theoretical and empirical evidence , Anita Steube (Ed.), 211–226. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Huynh, Huynh and Feldt, Leonard S
1970“Conditions under which the mean square ratios in repeated measurement designs have exact F-distributions.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 65: 1582–1589. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kaan, Edith, Harris, Anthony, Gibson, Edward and Holcomb, Phillip
2000“The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty.” Language and Cognitive Processes 15: 159–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kailuweit, Rolf
2005 Linking: Syntax und Semantik französischer und italienischer Gefühlsverben . Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kamide, Yuki
2008“Anticipatory Processes in Sentence Processing.” Language and Linguistics Compass 2: 647–670. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kasper, Simon
2008A comparison of ‘thematic role’ theories. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. Philipps-Universität, Marburg.
Kretzschmar, Franziska, Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina, Staub, Adrian, Roehm, Dietmar and Schlesewsky, Matthias
2012“Prominence facilitates ambiguity resolution: On the interaction between referentiality, thematic roles and word order in syntactic reanalysis.” In Case, word order and prominence. Interacting cues in language production and comprehension [Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics 40], Monique Lamers and Peter de Swart (Eds), 239–271. Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kutas, Marta, DeLong, Katherine A. and Smith, Nathaniel J
2011“A Look around at What Lies Ahead: Prediction and Predictability in Language Processing.” In Predictions in the Brain: Using Our Past to Generate a Future , Moshe Bar (Ed.), 190–207. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kutas, Marta and Hillyard, Steven A
1984“Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association.” Nature 307: 161–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kutas, Marta, Van Petten, Cyma and Kluender, Robert
2006 “Psycholinguistics electrified II (1994–2005).” In Handbook of Psycholinguistics , 2nd edition, Matthew J. Traxler and Morton A. Gernsbacher (Eds), 659–724. London: Elsevier. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Landau, Idan
2010 The Locative Syntax of Experiencers . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian, Bates, Elizabeth and Kliegl, Reinhold
1984“Cue Validity and Sentence Interpretation in English, German, and Italian.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23: 127–150. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mauchly, John W
1940“Significance test for sphericity of a normal n-variate distribution.” Annual of Mathematical Statistics 11: 204–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Osterhout, L. and Holcomb, P
1992“Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly.” Journal of Memory and Language 31: 785–806. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, David
1995 Zero Syntax: Experiencers and Cascades . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Primus, Beatrice
1999 Cases and Thematic Roles – Ergative, Accusative and Active . Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004“Protorollen und Verbtyp: Kasusvariation bei psychischen Verben.” In Semantische Rollen , Rolf Kailuweit and Martin Hummel (Eds), 377–401. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi
1982 Issues in Italian Syntax . Dordrecht: Foris. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1986“Null Objects in Italian and the Theory of pro.” Linguistic Inquiry 17: 501–557.Google Scholar
1997“The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery.” In Elements of Grammar , Liliane Haegeman (Ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004“Locality and Left Periphery.” In Structures and Beyond [The Cartography of Syntactic Structures 3], Adriana Belletti (Ed.), 223–251. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2005“On Some Properties of Subjects and Topics.” In Contributions to the 30th Incontro di Grammatica Generativa , Laura Brugè, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, Walter Schweikert and Giuseppina Turano (Eds), 203–224. Venezia: Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia.Google Scholar
2006“On the Form of Chains: Criterial Positions and ECP Effects.” In Wh-Movement: Moving On , Lisa Cheng and Norbert Corver (Eds), 97–134. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Schlesewsky, Matthias and Bornkessel, Ina
2006“Context-sensitive neural responses to conflict resolution: Electrophysiological evidence from subject-object ambiguities in language comprehension.” Brain Research 1098: 139–152. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Cynthia K. and Lee, Miseon
2009“Psych verb production and comprehension in agrammatic Broca’s aphasia.” Journal of Neurolinguistics 22: 354–369. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Berkum, Jos J.A., Brown, Colin M., Zwitserlood, Pienie, Kooijman, Valesca and Hagoort, Peter
2005 “Anticipating Upcoming Words in Discourse: Evidence From ERPs and Reading Times.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 31: 443–467. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van de Meerendonk, Nan, Kolk, Herman H.J., Chwilla, Dorothee J. and Vissers, Constance Th. W.M
2009“Monitoring in language perception.” Language and Linguistics Compass 3: 1211–1224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wicha, Nicole Y.Y., Moreno, Eva M. and Kutas, Marta
2004“Anticipating Words and Their Gender: An Event-related Brain Potential Study of Semantic Integration, Gender Expectancy, and Gender Agreement in Spanish Sentence Reading.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16: 1272–1288. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, Susann, Schlesewsky, Matthias, Hirotani, Masako and Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina
2008“The neural mechanisms of word order processing revisited: Electrophysiological evidence from Japanese.” Brain and Language 107: 133–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar