The role of thematic role accessibility in production: evidence from Korean

References

• Aissen, J. (1997). On the syntax of obviation. Language, 73, 705–750. doi:10.2307/417324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aissen, J. (2001). The obviation hierarchy and morphosyntactic markedness. Linguistica Atlantica, 23, 1–34.
   Google Scholar
• Artstein, R. (1999). Person, animacy and null subjects. In T. Cambier-Langeveld, A. Lipták, M. Redford, & E. J. van der Torre (Eds.), Proceedings of console VII (pp. 1–15). Leiden: SOLE.
   Google Scholar
• Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, M. (1989). Object sharing and projection in serial verb constructions. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 513–553.
   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. M., & Sarkar, D. (2007). Lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R-package version 0.99875-6.
   Google Scholar
• Bates, E., McNew, S., MacWhinney, B., Devescovi, A., & Smith, S. (1982). Functional constraints on sentence processing: A cross-linguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245–299. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(82)90017-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2009). Persistence of emphasis in language production: A cross-linguistic approach. Cognition, 112, 300–317. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.05.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language (pp. 279–362). New York, NY: Wiley. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199677139.003.0001
   Google Scholar
• Bock, J. K. (1986). Meaning, sound, and syntax: Lexical priming in sentence production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 575–586. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.12.4.575
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bock, J. K., & Irwin, D. E. (1980). Syntactic effects of information availability in sentence production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 467–484. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(80)90321-7
   Google Scholar
• Bock, J. K., Irwin, D. E., & Davidson, D. J. (2004). Putting first things first. In J. M. Henderson & F. Ferreira (Eds.), The integration of language, vision, and action: Eye movements and the visual world (pp. 249–278). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bock, J. K., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1994). Language production: Grammatical encoding. In M. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 945–984). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bock, J. K., Loebell, H., & Morey, R. (1992). From conceptual roles to structural relations: Bridging the syntactic cleft. Psychological Review, 99, 150–171. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.99.1.150
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bock, J. K., & Warren, R. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21, 47–67. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(85)90023-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breslow, N. E., & Clayton, D. G. (1993). Approximate inference in generalized linear mixed models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 9–25. doi:10.2307/2290687
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bresnan, J., & Kanerva, J. (1989). Locative inversion in Chichewa. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 1–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cai, Z. G., Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (2012). Mapping concepts to syntax: Evidence from structural priming in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 833–849. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.03.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang, F., Bock, J. K., & Goldberg, A. E. (2003). Can thematic roles leave traces of their places? Cognition, 90, 29–49. doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(03)00123-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi, H. (1996). Optimizing the structure in context: Scrambling and information structure (Doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., & Ferreira, F. (2005). Planning in sentence production: Evidence from a free word-order language (Odawa). Cognition, 98, 105–135. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.10.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J. F., & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 368–407. doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0752
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comrie, B. (1987). The world’s major languages. London: Croom Helm.
   Google Scholar
• Comrie, B. (1989). Language universals and linguistic typology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• DebRoy, S., & Bates, D. M. (2004). Linear mixed models and penalized least squares. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 91, 1–17. doi: 10.1016/j.jmva.2004.04.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dell, G. S., & Reich, P. A. (1981). Stages in sentence production: An analysis of speech error data. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 611–629. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(81)90202-4
   Google Scholar
• De Smedt, K. (1990). IPF: An incremental parallel formulator. In R. Dale, C. Mellish, & M. Zock (Eds.), Current research in natural language generation (pp. 167–192). London: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F. (1994). Choice of passive voice is affected by verb type and animacy. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 715–736. doi:10.1006/jmla.1994.1034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164–203. doi:10.1016/s0010-0285(03)00005-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., Christianson, K., & Hollingworth, A. (2001). Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: Implications for models of sentence processing and reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 3–20. doi: 10.1023/A:1005290706460
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. M. (1991). Recovery from misanalyses of garden-path sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 725–745. doi:10.1037/e665402011-369
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, V. S. (1996). Is it better to give than to donate? Syntactic flexibility in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 724–755. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferreira, V. S., & Yoshita, H. (2003). Given-new ordering effects on the production of scrambled sentences in Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32(6). 669–692. doi: 10.1023/A:1026146332132
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fillmore, C. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & R. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1–88). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
   Google Scholar
• Garrett, M. F. (1975). The analysis of sentence production. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 9, pp. 133–177). New York, NY: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60270-4
   Google Scholar
• Garrett, M. F. (1980) Levels of processing in sentence production. In B. Butterworth (Ed.), Language production (Vol. 1, pp. 177–220). London: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Garrett, M. F. (2000). Remarks on the architecture of language processing systems. In Y. Grodzinsky & L. P. Shapiro (Eds.), Language and the brain: Representation and processing. Foundations of neuropsychology series (pp. 31–69). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/b978-012304260-6/50004-9
   Google Scholar
• Gennari, S. P., Mirkovic, J., & MacDonald, M. C. (2012). Animacy and competition in relative clause production: A cross-linguistic investigation. Cognitive Psychology, 65, 141–176. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.03.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Givón, T. (1984). Syntax: A functional-typological introduction I. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Gleitman, L., January, D., Nappa, R., & Trueswell, J. (2007). On the give and take between event apprehension and utterance formulation. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 544–569. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.01.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gruber, J. (1965). Studies in lexical relations (Doctoral dissertation). MIT, Cambridge, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Hwang, H., & Kaiser, E. (2014). Having a syntactic choice is not always better: The effects of syntactic flexibility on Korean production. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 29, 1115–1131. doi:10.1080/23273798.2013.875212
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, H., & Kaiser, E. (2015). Accessibility effects on production vary cross-linguistically: Evidence from English and Korean. Journal of Memory and Language, 84, 190–204. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2015.06.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imamura, S. (2014, December). The influence of givenness and heaviness on OSV in Japanese. 28th Proceedings of Pacific Asia conference on language, information and computation, Phuket, Thailand, pp. 224–233. Retrieved from http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/Y14-1028
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (1987). Consciousness and the computational mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, K. (2008). The effect of information structure on Korean scrambling (Doctoral dissertation). University of Hawaii at Manoa, Hawaii, USA.
   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
• Kaiser, E., & Trueswell, J.C. (2004). The Role of discourse context in the processing of a flexible word-order language. Cognition, 94(2), 113–147. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.01.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, M. H., Bock, J. K., & Keil, F. C. (1986). Prototypicality in a linguistic context: Effects on sentence structure. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 59–74. doi:10.1016/0749-596x(86)90021-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kempen, G., & Hoenkamp, E. (1987) An incremental procedural grammar for sentence formulation. Cognitive Science, 11(2), 201–258. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1102_5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Köhne, J., Pickering, M. J., & Branigan, H. P. (2014). The relationship between sentence meaning and word order: Evidence from structural priming in German. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(2), 304–318. doi:10.1080/17470218.2013.807855
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larson, R. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 335–391. doi:10.1163/2210-7363_ecll_com_00000139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacDonald, M. C. (2013). How language production shapes language form and comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 1–16. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacWhinney, B. (1977). Starting points. Language, 53, 152–168. doi:10.2307/413059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myachykov, A., Garrod, S., & Scheepers, C. (2010). Perceptual priming of structural choice during English and Finnish sentence production. In R. K. Mishra, & N. Srinivasan (Eds.), Language & cognition: State of the art (pp. 53–71). Munich: Lincom Europa.
   Google Scholar
• Myachykov, A., Scheepers, C., Garrod, S., Thompson D., & Fedorova, O. (2013). Syntactic flexibility and competition in sentence production: The case of English and Russian. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(8), 1601– 1619. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.754910
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oshima, D. Y. (2006). Adversity and Korean/Japanese passives: Constructional analogy. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 15(2), 137–166. doi:10.1007/s10831-005-4915-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pappert, S., & Pechmann, T. (2014). Priming word order by thematic roles: No evidence for an additional involvement of phrase structure. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(11), 2260–2278. doi:10.1080/17470218.2014.918632
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickering, M. J., & Ferreira, V. S. (2008). Structural priming: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 427–459. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.427
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickering M. J., & Garrod S. (2007). Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 105–110. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.12.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prat-Sala, M. (1997). The production of different word orders: A psycholinguistic and developmental approach (Doctoral dissertation). Centre for Cognitive Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Prat-Sala, M., & Branigan, H. P. (2000). Discourse constraints on syntactic processing in language production: A cross-linguistic study in English & Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 168–182. doi:10.1006/jmla.1999.2668
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanford, A. J. (2002). Context, attention, and depth of processing during interpretation. Mind and Language, 17, 188–206. doi:10.1111/1468-0017.00195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanford, A. J., & Sturt, P. (2002). Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 382–386. doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(02)01958-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slobin, D. I. (1985). Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition (Vol. 2, pp. 1157–1256). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Speas, M. (1990). Phrase structure in natural language. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Suzuki, M. (2000). Word order variation in Japanese: Characteristics of OSV word order (MA thesis). The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Tanaka, M., Branigan, H.P., McLean, J. F., & Pickering, M. J. (2011). Conceptual influences on word order and voice in sentence production: Evidence from Japanese. Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 318–330. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.04.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (2001). Sentence comprehension: The integration of habits and rules. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Nice, K. Y., & Dietrich, R. (2003). Task-sensitivity of animacy effects: Evidence from German picture descriptions. Linguistics, 41, 825–849. doi:10.1515/ling.2003.027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamashita, H., & Chang, F. (2001). “Long before short” preference in the production of a head-final language. Cognition, 81, B45–B55. doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(01)00121-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yokoyama, O. (1987). Discourse and word order. Amsterdam, PA: Benjamins. doi:10.1075/pbcs.6
   Google Scholar