DE eng

Search in the Catalogues and Directories

Hits 1 – 13 of 13

1
A Generative Model of Phonotactics
In: MIT Press (2019)
BASE
Show details
2
SNAP judgments: A small N acceptability paradigm (SNAP) for linguistic acceptability judgments: Online Appendices
In: Language (2018)
BASE
Show details
3
SNAP judgments: A small N acceptability paradigm (SNAP) for linguistic acceptability judgments
In: Linguistic Society of America (2015)
BASE
Show details
4
Comparing pluralities
In: Cognition. - Amsterdam [u.a] : Elsevier 123 (2012) 1, 190-197
BLLDB
OLC Linguistik
Show details
5
The role of similarity in phonology
In: Lingua <Amsterdam>. - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier 122 (2012) 2, 107-111
BLLDB
OLC Linguistik
Show details
6
Subject preference and ergativity
In: Lingua <Amsterdam>. - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier 122 (2012) 3, 267-277
BLLDB
OLC Linguistik
Show details
7
Communicative efficiency in the lexicon
Graff, Peter Nepomuk Herwig Maria. - : Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2012
BASE
Show details
8
Mixed effect models for genetic and areal dependencies in linguistic typology : [the vanishing phonemes debate apropos of Atkinson 2011]
In: Linguistic typology. - Berlin [u.a.] : Mouton de Gruyter 15 (2011) 2, 281-320
BLLDB
OLC Linguistik
Show details
9
Mixed effect models for genetic and areal dependencies in linguistic typology
In: Walter de Gruyter (2011)
BASE
Show details
10
Subject Islands are Different
BASE
Show details
11
Subject Preference and Ergativity
Abstract: This paper presents the first-ever processing experiment on relativization in Avar, an ergative language with prenominal relatives. The results show no processing difference between the ergative subject gap and the absolutive object gap. The absolutive subject gap, however, is processed much faster. We propose a principled explanation for this result. On the one hand, Avar has a subject preference (cf. the Accessibility Hierarchy, Keenan and Comrie, 1977), which would make the processing of the ergative and the absolutive subject gap easier than the processing of the absolutive object gap. On the other hand, the ergative DP in a relative clause serves as a strong cue that allows the parser to project the remainder of the clause, including the absolutive object DP (cf. Marantz, 1991, 2000); such morphological cueing favors the absolutive object gap. Thus, two processing preferences, the one for subject relatives and the other for morphologically cued clauses, cancel each other out in terms of processing difficulty. As a result, reading time results for the ergative subject and absolutive object relative clauses are very similar. The overall processing results are significantly different from what is found in accusative languages, where subject preference and morphological cueing reinforce each other, leading to a strong transitive subject advantage. ; Linguistics ; Accepted Manuscript
Keyword: A-bar movement; Avar; ergativity; processing; relativization
URL: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:5027957
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.11.004
BASE
Hide details
12
Recht und Rechtswissenschaft
Müller-Graff, Peter-Christian (Hrsg.); Roth, Hartmut (Hrsg.). - Heidelberg : C.F. Müller Verlag, 2001
IDS Bibliografie zur Gesprächsforschung
Show details
13
Europa und Europabilder : [Sammelband der Vorträge des Studium Generale der Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg im Sommersemester 1999]
IDS Mannheim
Show details

Catalogues
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
Bibliographies
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
Linked Open Data catalogues
0
Online resources
0
0
0
0
Open access documents
7
0
0
0
0
© 2013 - 2024 Lin|gu|is|tik | Imprint | Privacy Policy | Datenschutzeinstellungen ändern