Processing corrective focus and information focus at different positions: an electrophysiological investigation

References

• Baumann, S., & Schumacher, P. B. (2012). (De-)accentuation and the processing of information status: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Language and Speech, 55(5), 361–381.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Benatar, A., & Clifton, C. Jr., (2014). Newness, givenness and discourse updating: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 71(1), 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Birch, S., & Rayner, K. (2010). Effects of syntactic prominence on eye movements during reading. Memory & Cognition, 38(6), 740–752.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornkessel, I., Schlesewsky, M., & Friederici, A. (2003). Contextual information modulates initial processes of syntactic integration: The role of inter- versus intrasentential predictions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(5), 871–882.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breen, M., Fedorenko, E., Wagner, M., & Gibson, E. (2010). Acoustic correlates of information structure. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25(7–9), 1044–1098.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhardt, P. (2006). Inferential bridging relations reveal distinct neural mechanisms: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Brain and Language, 98(2), 159–168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, L. (2018). On the processing of pragmatic information: ERP effects of emphasis processing. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(8), 1005–1016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, L., Li, X., & Yang, Y. (2012). Focus, newness and their combination: Processing of information structure in discourse. PLoS ONE, 7(8), e42533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, L., Wang, L., & Yang, Y. (2014). Distinguish between focus and newness: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 31(2), 28–41.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, L., & Yang, Y. (2015). Emphasizing the only character: Emphasis, attention and contrast. Cognition, 136, 222–227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, H., & Lee, C. (2012). Phonetic prominence of contrastive focus in English across multiple types and its semantic implications. English Language and Linguistics, 18(3), 1–29.
   Google Scholar
• Cowles, H. W., Kluender, R., Kutas, M., & Polinsky, M. (2007). Violations of information structure: An electrophysiological study of answers to wh-questions. Brain and Language, 102(3), 228–242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutler, A., & Fodor, J. A. (1979). Semantic focus and sentence comprehension. Cognition, 7, 49–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitrova, D., Chu, M., Wang, L., Özyürek, A., & Hagoort, P. (2016). Beat that word: How listeners integrate beat gesture and focus in multimodal speech discourse. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28(9), 1255–1269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitrova, D. V., Stowe, L. A., & Hoeks, J. C. J. (2015). When correction turns positive: Processing corrective prosody in Dutch. PLoS ONE, 10(5), e0126299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dimitrova, D. V., Stowe, L. A., Redeker, G., & Hoeks, J. C. J. (2012). Less is not more: Neural responses to missing and superfluous accents in context. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(12), 2400–2418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraundorf, S. H., Benjamin, A. S., & Watson, D. G. (2013). What happened (and what did not): Discourse constraints on encoding of plausible alternatives. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(3), 196–227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freunberger, R., Klimesch, W., Doppelmayr, M., & Höller, Y. (2007). Visual P2 component is related to theta phase-locking. Neuroscience Letters, 426(3), 181–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gundel, J. (1999). On different kinds of focus. In P. Bosch, & R. van der Sandt (Eds.), Focus: Linguistic, cognitive, and computational perspectives (pp. 293–305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gussenhoven, C. (2007). Types of focus in English. In C. Lee, M. Gordon, & D. Büring (Eds.), Topic and focus: Cross-linguistic perspectives on meaning and intonation (pp. 83–100). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M. A. K. (1967). Notes on transitivity and theme in English: Part 2. Journal of Linguistics, 3(2), 199–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirotani, M., Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (2006). Punctuation and intonation effects on clause and sentence wrap-up: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(3), 425–443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holcomb, P. J., Grainger, J., & O’Rourke, T. (2002). An electrophysiological study of the effects of orthographic neighborhood size on printed word perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(6), 938–950.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hruska, C., & Alter, K. (2004). Prosody in dialogues and single sentences: How prosody can influence sentence perception. In A. Steube (Ed.), Information structure: Theoretical and empirical aspects (pp. 211–226). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Hruska, C., Alter, K., Steinhauer, K., & Steube, A. (2001). Misleading dialogs: Human’s brain reaction to prosodic information. In C. Cave, I. Guaitella, & S. Santi (Eds.), Orality and gestures. Interactions et comportements multimodaux dans la communication (pp. 425–430). Paris: L’Hartmattan.
   Google Scholar
• Hung, Y. C., & Schumacher, P. B. (2012). Topicality matters: Position-specific demands on Chinese discourse processing. Neuroscience Letters, 511(2), 59–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang, H. K. (2012, May). Asymmetries between production, perception and comprehension of focus types in Japanese. In Q. W. Ma, H. W. Ding, & D. Hirst (Eds.), Speech prosody 2012, ISCA archive.
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Katz, J., & Selkirk, E. (2011). Contrastive focus vs. discourse-new: Evidence from phonetic prominence in English. Language, 87, 771–816.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiss, K. E. (1998). Identificational focus versus information focus. Language, 74(2), 245–273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krifka, M. (2008). Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 55(3–4), 243–276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuperberg, G. R., Kreher, D. A., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D. N., & Holcomb, P. J. (2007). The role of animacy and thematic relationships in processing active English sentences: Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain and Language, 100(3), 223–237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuperberg, G. R., Paczynski, M., & Ditman, T. (2010). Establishing causal coherence across sentences: An ERP study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(5), 1230–1246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, C. (2003). Contrastive topic and/or contrastive focus. In B. McClure (Ed.), Japanese/Korean linguistics (Vol. 12, pp. 1–13). Stanford: CSLI.
   Google Scholar
• Li, W. J., Deng, N. L., Yang, Y. F., & Wang, L. (2017). Process focus and accentuation at different positions in dialogues: An ERP study. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(2), 255–274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, W. J., & Yang, Y. F. (2009). Perception of prosodic hierarchical boundaries in mandarin Chinese sentences. Neuroscience, 158(4), 1416–1425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, W. J., & Yang, Y. F. (2010). Perception of Chinese poem and its electrophysiological effects. Neuroscience, 168(3), 757–768.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Xiaoqing, Yang, Yufang, & Hagoort, Peter. (2008). Pitch accent and lexical tone processing in Chinese discourse comprehension: An ERP study. Brain Research, 1222, 192–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, W. J., Zhang, J. J., & Yang, Y. F. (2017). The cognitive processing of contrastive focus and its relationship with pitch accent. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 49(9), 1137–1149.
   Google Scholar
• Lowder, M. W., & Gordon, P. C. (2015). Focus takes time: Structural effects on reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(6), 1733–1738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magne, C., Astésano, C., Lacheret-Dujour, A., Morel, M., Alter, K., & Besson, M. (2005). On-line processing of “pop-out” words in spoken French dialogues. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(5), 740–756.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McAteer, E. (1992). Typeface emphasis and information focus in written language. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6(4), 345–359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meinhardt, J., Kühn-Popp, N., Sommer, M., & Sodian, B. (2012). Distinct neural correlates underlying pretense and false belief reasoning: Evidence from ERPs. NeuroImage, 63(2), 623–631.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris, R. K., & Folk, J. R. (1998). Focus as a contextual priming mechanism in reading. Memory & Cognition, 26(6), 1313–1322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouyang, I. C., & Kaiser, E. (2015). Prosody and information structure in a tone language: An investigation of mandarin Chinese. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(1–2), 57–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prince, E. F. (1992). The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In W. C. Mann, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund raising text (pp. 295–325). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Rooth, M. (1985). Association with Focus (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/28568
   Google Scholar
• Rooth, M. (1992). A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 75–116.
   Google Scholar
• Sanford, A. J. S., Sanford, A. J., Molle, J., & Emmott, C. (2006). Shallow processing and attention capture in written and spoken discourse. Discourse Processes, 42(2), 109–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schumacher, P. B., & Hung, Y.-C. (2012). Positional influences on information packaging: Insights from topological fields in German. Journal of Memory and Language, 67(2), 295–310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selkirk, E. (2008). Contrastive focus, givenness and the unmarked status of “discourse-new”. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 55(55), 331–346.
   Google Scholar
• Steinhauer, K., Alter, K., & Friederici, A. D. (1999). Brain potentials indicate immediate use of prosodic cues in natural speech processing. Nature Neuroscience, 2(2), 191–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolterfoht, B., Friederici, A., Alter, K., & Steube, A. (2007). Processing focus structure and implicit prosody during reading: Differential ERP effects. Cognition, 104(3), 565–590.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stowe, L. A., Kaan, E., Sabourin, L., & Taylor, R. C. (2018). The sentence wrap-up dogma. Cognition, 176, 232–247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toepel, U., Pannekamp, A., & Alter, K. (2007). Catching the news: Processing strategies in listening to dialogs as measured by ERPs. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 3(1), 53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang, H. (2013). Influence of highlighting, columns, and font size on visual search performance with respect to on-screen Chinese characters. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 117(2), 528–541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, L., Bastiaansen, M., Yang, Y., & Hagoort, P. (2011). The influence of information structure on the depth of semantic processing: How focus and pitch accent determine the size of the N400 effect. Neuropsychologia, 49(5), 813–820.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, L., Hagoort, P., & Yang, Y. (2009). Semantic illusion depends on information structure: ERP evidence. Brain Research, 1282(28), 50–56.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang, L., & Schumacher, P. B. (2013). New is not always costly: Evidence from online processing of topic and contrast in Japanese. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(363), 1–20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ward, P., & Sturt, P. (2007). Linguistic focus and memory: An eye movement study. Memory & Cognition, 35(1), 73–86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Y., Yang, X., & Yang, Y. (2018). Importance conveyed in different ways: Effects of hierarchy and focus. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 47, 37–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, L. (2004). Manifestation of informational focus. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue international De Linguistique Generale, 114(3), 277–299.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmermann, M., & Onea, E. (2011). Focus marking and focus interpretation. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale, 121(11), 1651–1670.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar