1 |
Processing Bare Plurals and Indefinites: Evidence from Eye Movements
|
|
|
|
In: University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
2 |
Strengthening 'or': Effects of Focus and Downward Entailing Contexts on Scalar Implicatures
|
|
|
|
In: University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
3 |
Thematic Relations in Parsing
|
|
|
|
In: University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
Parsing and Constraints on Word Order
|
|
|
|
In: University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
5 |
Comprehending Sentences with Multiple Filler-Gap Dependencies
|
|
|
|
In: University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
Reconstruction and Scope
|
|
|
|
In: University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
7 |
Finding Candidate Antecedents: Phrases or Conceptual Entities
|
|
|
|
In: University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
8 |
Modularity and the Representational Hypothesis
|
|
|
|
In: North East Linguistics Society (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
11 |
No longer an orphan: evidence for appositive attachment from sentence comprehension
|
|
|
|
In: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics; Vol 3, No 1 (2018); 32 ; 2397-1835 (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
12 |
No longer an orphan: evidence for appositive attachment from sentence comprehension
|
|
|
|
In: Linguistics Department Faculty Publication Series (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
18 |
Explicit and implicit prosody in sentence processing : studies in honor of Janet Dean Fodor
|
|
|
|
IDS Mannheim
|
|
Show details
|
|
19 |
Inner voice experiences during processing of direct and indirect speech
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
20 |
Do null subjects (mis-)trigger pro-drop grammars?
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Native speakers of English regularly hear sentences without overt subjects. Nevertheless, they maintain a [−pro] grammar that requires sentences to have an overt subject. It is proposed that listeners of English recognize that speakers reduce predictable material and thus attribute null subjects to this process, rather than changing their grammars to a [+pro] setting. Mack et al. (2012) showed that sentences with noise covering the subject are analyzed as having null subjects more often with a first person pronoun and with a present tense – properties correlated with more predictable referents -- compared to a third person pronoun and past tense. However, those results might in principle have been due to reporting null subjects for verbs that often occur with null subjects. An experiment is reported here in which comparable results are found for sentences containing nonsense verbs. Participants preferred a null subject more often for first person present tense sentences than for third person past tense sentences. The results are as expected if participants are responding to predictability, the likelihood of reduction, rather than to lexical statistics. The results are argued to be important in removing a class of mis-triggering examples from the language acquisition problem.
|
|
Keyword:
Article
|
|
URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25086703 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4583368/ https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9312-8
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
|