Different effects of focus in intra- and inter-sentential pronoun resolution in German

References

• Almor, A. (1999). Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review, 106(4), 748–765. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.748
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold, J. (1998). Reference form and discourse patterns (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, J. E. (2001). The effect of thematic roles on pronoun use and frequency of reference continuation. Discourse Processes, 31(2), 137–162. doi: 10.1207/S15326950DP3102_02
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold, J. E., 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 eyetracking. Cognition, 76(1), B13–B26. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00073-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H. (2011). languageR: Data sets and functions with “analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics.” R package version 1.4. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=languageR
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J. (2008). Analyzing ‘visual world’ eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 457–474. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Gann, T. M., & Pierce, R. S. (2011). Anticipatory baseline effects and information integration in visual world studies. Acta Psychologica, 137(2), 201–207. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.09.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
   Google Scholar
• Bott, O., & Solstad, T. (2014). From verbs to discourse - a novel account of implicit causality. In B. Hemforth, B. Schmiedtova, & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Psycholinguistics approaches to meaning and understanding across languages, Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics (pp. 83–109). Munich: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bouma, G., & Hopp, H. (2006). Effects of word order and grammatical function on pronoun resolution in German. In R. Artstein & M. Poesio (Eds.), Ambiguity in anaphora workshop proceedings (pp. 5–12). Retrieved from http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/Research/nle/anaphora/aa06proc.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Brunetti, L., Avanzi, M., & Gendrot, C. (2012). Entre syntaxe, prosodie et discours: les topiques sujets en français parlé. SHS Web of Conferences, 1, 2041–2054. doi:10.1051/shsconf/20120100209
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1977). Reading comprehension as eyes see it. In M. A. Just & P. A. Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 100–139). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Chafe, W. L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 25–55). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Colonna, S., Schimke, S., & Hemforth, B. (2012). Information structure effects on anaphora resolution in German and French: A crosslinguistic study of pronoun resolution. Linguistics, 50(5), 901–1073. doi: 10.1515/ling-2012-0031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colonna, S., Schimke, S., & Hemforth, B. (2014). Information structure and pronoun resolution in German and French: Evidence from the visual-world paradigm. In B. Hemforth, B. Schmiedtovà, & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Psycholinguistic approaches to meaning and understanding across languages (pp. 175–195). Munich: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Colonna, S., Schimke, S., Medam, T., & Hemforth, B. (2012, March). Different effects of focus in intra- and inter-sentential pronoun resolution in German and French. Poster session presented at the CUNY conference on human sentence processing, New-York.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6(1), 84–107. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(74)90005-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowles, H. W., & Garnham, A. (2011). The role of focus, semantic overlap and discourse function in noun-phrase anaphor resolution. In E. Gibson & N. Pearlmutter (Eds.), The processing and acquisition of reference (pp. 297–322). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cowles, H. W., Walenski, M., & Kluender, R. (2007). Linguistic and cognitive prominence in anaphor resolution: Topic, contrastive focus and pronouns. Topoi, 26(1), 3–18. doi:10.1007/s11245-006-9004-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dufter, A. (2009). Clefting and discourse organization: Comparing Germanic and Romance. In A. Dufter & D. Jacob (Eds.), Focus and background in Romance languages (pp. 83–123). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Ellert, M. (2013). Information structure affects the resolution of the subject pronouns Er and Der in Spoken German discourse. Discours. Revue de Linguistique, Psycholinguistique et Informatique, 12. doi:10.4000/discours.8756
   Google Scholar
• Erteschik-Shir, N., Ibnbari, L., & Taube, S. (2013). Missing objects as topic drop. Lingua, 136, 145–169. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foraker, S. (2004). The mechanisms involved in the prominence of referent representations during pronoun coreference. (Doctoral dissertation). New York University.
   Google Scholar
• Foraker, S., & McElree, B. (2007). The role of prominence in pronoun resolution: Active versus passive representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(3), 357–383. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frascarelli, M., & Hinterhölzl, R. (2007). Types of topics in German and Italian. In K. Schwabe & S. Winkler (Eds.), On information structure, meaning and form: Generalizations across languages (pp. 87–116). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Frey, W. (2004). The grammar-pragmatics interface and the German prefield. Sprache & Pragmatik, 52, 1–39.
   Google Scholar
• de la Fuente, I., & Hemforth, B. (2013a). Effects of clefting and left-dislocation on subject and object pronoun resolution in Spanish. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, G. Lord, A. de Prada Pérez, & J. E. Aaron (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 16th Hispanic linguistics symposium (pp. 27–45). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
   Google Scholar
• de la Fuente, I., & Hemforth, B. (2013b, September). Anti-focus effects in pronoun resolution? Poster session presented at AMLaP, Marseille, France.
   Google Scholar
• de la Fuente, I., Hemforth, B., Colonna, S., & Schimke, S. (in press). The role of syntax, semantics, and pragmatics in pronoun resolution: A cross-linguistic overview. In Anke Holler, Christine Göb, & Katja Suckow (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on anaphora resolution: Information structural evidence in the race for salience. Berlin: de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA, pp. 44–50.
   Google Scholar
• Grosz, B. J., Weinstein, S., & Joshi, A. K. (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21, 203–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hedberg, N. (2013). Multiple focus and cleft sentences. In A. Haida, T. Veenstra, & K. Hartmann (Eds.), The structure of clefts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., Scheepers, C., Colonna, S., Schimke, S., Baumann, P. & Pynte, J. (2010). Language specific preferences in anaphor resolution: Exposure or gricean maxims? In S. Ohlsson & R. Catrambone (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the cognitive science society, Portland, USA (pp. 2218–2223). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
   Google Scholar
• Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 434–446. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Järvikivi, J., Pyykkönen-Klauck, P., Schimke, S., Colonna, S., & Hemforth, B. (2014). Information structure cues for 4-year-olds and adults: Tracking eye movements to visually presented anaphoric referents. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(7), 877–892. doi:10.1080/01690965.2013.804941
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1981). Control of inference: Role of some aspects of discourse structure-centering. In Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on artificial intelligence – volume 1 (pp. 385–387). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Kaiser, E. (2011). Focusing on pronouns: Consequences of subjecthood, pronominalisation, and contrastive focus. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(10), 1625–1666. doi:10.1080/01690965.2010.523082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kehler, A., Kertz, L., Rohde, H., & Elman, J. L. (2008). Coherence and coreference revisited. Journal of Semantics, 25(1), 1–44. doi:10.1093/jos/ffm018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiss, K. É. (1998). Identificational focus versus information focus. Language, 74(2), 245–273. doi: 10.1353/lan.1998.0211
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, W. (2009). How time is encoded. In W. Klein & P. Li (Eds.), The expression of time (pp. 39–82). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Krifka, M. (2007). The notions of information structure. In C. Féry & G. Fanselow (Eds.), Interdisciplinary studies of information structure (Vol. 6, pp. 13–56). Postdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.
   Google Scholar
• Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lambrecht, K. (2001). A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics, 39(3), 463–516. doi: 10.1515/ling.2001.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Love, J., & McKoon, G. (2011). Rules of engagement: Incomplete and complete pronoun resolution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(4), 874–887. doi:10.1037/a0022932
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miltsakaki, E. (2002). Toward an aposynthesis of topic continuity and intrasentential anaphora. Computational Linguistics, 28(3), 319–355. doi: 10.1162/089120102760276009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prince, E. F. (1978). A comparison of wh -clefts and it -clefts in discourse. Language, 54, 883–906. doi: 10.2307/413238
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pyykkönen, P., & Järvikivi, J. (2010). Activation and persistence of implicit causality information in spoken language comprehension. Experimental Psychology, 57(1), 5–16. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Reichle, R. V. (2014). Cleft type and focus structure processing in French. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 1, 107–124. doi:10.1080/01690965.2012.7446464
   Google Scholar
• Reinhart, T. (1982). Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
   Google Scholar
• Rialland, A., Doetjes, J., & Rebuschi, G. (2002). What is focused in C'est XP qui/que cleft sentences in French? In B. Bel & I. Marlien (Eds), Proceedings of the first international conference on prosody (pp. 595–598). Aix-en-Provence. Retrieved from http://ed268.univ-paris3.fr/lpp/publications/2002_Rialland_What_is.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Salverda, A. P., Brown, M., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2011). A goal-based perspective on eye movements in visual world studies. Acta Psychologica, 137(2), 172–180. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.09.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sgall, P., Hajicová, E., & Panevová, J. (1986). The meaning of the sentence in its semantic and pragmatic aspects. Praha: Academia.
   Google Scholar
• Stevenson, R. J., Crawley, R. A., & Kleinman, D. (1994). Thematic roles, focus and the representation of events. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9(4), 519–548. doi:10.1080/01690969408402130
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, A. J., Holler, J., & Kidd, E. (2007). Shallow processing of ambiguous pronouns: Evidence for delay. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(12), 1680–1696. doi:10.1080/17470210601160807
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integrative of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 117(3046), 528–529.
   Google Scholar
• Tanenhaus, M. K., & Trueswell, J. C. (2006). Eye movements and spoken language comprehension. In M. J. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (2nd ed., pp. 863–900). New York: Academic Press/Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Tomlin, R. S., Forrest, L., & Pu, M. M. (1997). Discourse semantics. In T. Van Dijk (Eds.), Discourse as structure and process (pp. 63–111). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Weil, H. (1844). De l'ordre des mots dans les langues anciennes comparées aux langues modernes. Paris: L'imprimerie de Crapelet.
   Google Scholar