Interaction between topic marking and subject preference strategy in sign language processing

References

• Aarons, D. (1994). Aspects of the syntax of American Sign Language (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.133.644&rep=rep1&type=pdf
   Google Scholar
• Aarons, D. (1996). Topics and topicalization in American Sign Language. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics, 30, 65–106.
   Google Scholar
• Alday, P. M., Schlesewsky, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2014). Towards a computational model of actor-based language comprehension. Neuroinformatics, 12(1), 143–179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, D. E., & Reilly, J. S. (1998). PAH! The acquisition of adverbials in ASL. Sign Language & Linguistics, 1(2), 117–142.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold, P., & Murray, C. (1998). Memory for faces and objects by deaf and hearing signers and hearing nonsigners. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27(4), 481–497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkinson, J., Campbell, R., Marshall, J., Thacker, A., & Woll, B. (2004). Understanding ‘not’: Neuropsychological dissociations between hand and head markers of negation in BSL. Neuropsychologia, 42(2), 214–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahan, B. J. (1996). Non-manual realization of agreement in American Sign Language (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Boston University, Boston.
   Google Scholar
• Baker-Shenk, C. L. (1983). A microanalysis of the nonmanual components of questions in American Sign Language (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://cloudfront.escholarship.org/dist/prd/content/qt7b03x0tz/qt7b03x0tz.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bettger, J. G., Emmorey, K., McCullough, S. H., & Bellugi, U. (1997). Enhanced facial diserimination: Effects of experience with American Sign Language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 2, 223–233.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Choudhary, K. K., Witzlack-Makarevich, A., & Bickel, B. (2008). Bridging the gap between processing preferences and typological distributions: Initial evidence from the online comprehension of control constructions in Hindi. In A. Malchukov & M. Richards (Eds.), Scales (Linguistische ArbeitsBerichte 86) (pp. 397–436). Leipzig: Institut für Linguistik.
   Google Scholar
• Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2009a). Processing syntax and morphology. A neurocognitive perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2009b). The role of Prominence information in the real-time comprehension of transitive constructions: A cross-linguistic approach. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3(1), 19–58.
   Google Scholar
• Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2013). Reconciling time, space and function: A new dorsal–ventral stream model of sentence comprehension. Brain and Language, 125(1), 60–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornkessel, I., McElree, B., Schlesewsky, M., & Friederici, A. D. (2004). Multi-dimensional contributions to garden path strength: Dissociating phrase structure from case marking. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(4), 495–522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornkessel, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2006). The extended argument dependency model: A neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. Psychological Review, 113(4), 787–821.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bos, H. F. (2016). Serial verb constructions in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Sign Language & Linguistics, 19(2), 238–251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bos, H. F. (2017). An analysis of main verb agreement and auxiliary agreement in NGT within the theory of Conceptual Semantics (Jackendoff 1990) [Papers from the Sign Linguistics Underground]. Sign Language & Linguistics, 20(2), 228–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capek, C. M., Grossi, G., Newman, A. J., McBurney, S. L., Corina, D., Roeder, B., & Neville, H. J. (2009). Brain systems mediating semantic and syntactic processing in deaf native signers: Biological invariance and modality specificity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(21), 8784–8789.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capek, C. M., Waters, D., Woll, B., MacSweeney, M., Brammer, M. J., McGuire, P. K., … Campbell, R. (2008). Hand and mouth: Cortical correlates of lexical processing in British Sign Language and speechreading English. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(7), 1220–1234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifton, C., & Frazier, L. (1989). Comprehending sentences with long-distance dependencies. In G. N. Carlson & M. K. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing. Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics ( Vol. 7, pp. 273–317). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Corina, D. P., Bellugi, U., & Reilly, J. (1999). Neuropsychological studies of linguistic and affective facial expressions in deaf signers. Language and Speech, 42(2-3), 307–331.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Corina, D., Chiu, Y. S., Knapp, H., Greenwald, R., San Jose-Robertson, L., & Braun, A. (2007). Neural correlates of human action observation in hearing and deaf subjects. Brain Research, 1152, 111–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corina, D. P., & Grosvald, M. (2012). Exploring perceptual processing of ASL and human actions: Effects of inversion and repetition priming. Cognition, 122(3), 330–345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crocker, M. W. (1994). On the nature of the principle-based sentence processor. In C. Clifton, Jr., L. Frazier, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp. 245–266). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• De Vincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian: The minimal chain principle ( Vol. 12). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Emmorey, K., Thompson, R., & Colvin, R. (2008). Eye gaze during comprehension of American Sign Language by native and beginning signers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 14(2), 237–243.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frazier, L. (1987). Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5(4), 519–559.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frazier, L., & d’Arcais, F. G. B. (1989). Filler driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(3), 331–344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68(1), 1–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1983). A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 55(4), 468–484.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24(2), 95–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hänel-Faulhaber, B., Skotara, N., Kügow, M., Salden, U., Bottari, D., & Röder, B. (2014). ERP correlates of German Sign Language processing in deaf native signers. BMC Neuroscience, 15(1), 62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Haupt, F. S., Schlesewsky, M., Roehm, D., Friederici, A. D., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2008). The status of subject-object reanalyses in the language comprehension architecture. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(1), 54–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hausch, C. (2008). Topickonstruktionen und Satzstrukturen in der ÖGS. In Gebärdensprachlinguistik und Gebärdensprachkommunikation. Referate der VERBAL-Sektion “Gebärdensprachlinguistik und -kommunikation” innerhalb der 34. Österreichischen Linguistiktagung an der Universität Klagenfurt, December 2006 (Vol. 13, pp. 85–94). Klagenfurt:Veröffentlichungen des Zentrums für Gebärdensprache und Hörbehindertenkommunikation der Universität Klagenfurt.
   Google Scholar
• He, Y. (2016). Interactive processing within and beyond sentence-level: An ERP investigation of simple and complex Chinese sentences (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Mainz, Mainz.
   Google Scholar
• Hosemann, J. A. (2015). The processing of German Sign Language sentences: Three event-related potential studies on phonological, morpho-syntactic, and semantic aspects (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://d-nb.info/1074285859/34
   Google Scholar
• Hosemann, J., Herrmann, A., Steinbach, M., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2013). Lexical prediction via forward models: N400 evidence from German Sign Language. Neuropsychologia, 51(11), 2224–2237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, C.-T. J., Li, Y.-h. A., & Li, Y. (2009). The syntax of Chinese. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jednoróg, K., Bola, Ł, Mostowski, P., Szwed, M., Boguszewski, P. M., Marchewka, A., & Rutkowski, P. (2015). Three-dimensional grammar in the brain: Dissociating the neural correlates of natural sign language and manually coded spoken language. Neuropsychologia, 71, 191–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kegl, J., & Poizner, H. (1997). Crosslinguistic/crossmodal syntactic consequences of left-hemisphere damage: Evidence from an aphasic signer and his identical twin. Aphasiology, 11(1), 1–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krebs, J. (2017). The syntax and the processing of argument relations in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Salzburg, Salzburg.
   Google Scholar
• Krebs, J., Malaia, E., Wilbur, R. B., & Roehm, D. (2018). Subject preference emerges as cross-modal strategy for linguistic processing. Brain Research, 1691, 105–117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krebs, J., Wilbur, R. B., Alday, P. M. & Roehm, D. (2018). The impact of transitional movements and non-manual markings on the disambiguation of locally ambiguous argument structures in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS). Language and Speech, 0023830918801399.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krebs, J., Wilbur, R. B., & Roehm, D. (2017). Two agreement markers in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS). Sign Language and Linguistics, 20(1), 27–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kretzschmar, F., Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I., Staub, A., Roehm, D., & Schlesewsky, M. (2012). Prominence facilitates ambiguity resolution: On the interaction between referentiality, thematic roles and word order in syntactic reanalysis. In M. J. A. Lamers & P. de Swart (Eds.), Case, word order, and prominence. Interacting cues in language production and comprehension (pp. 239–271). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kutas, M., Neville, H. J., & Holcomb, P. J. (1987). A preliminary comparison of the N400 response to semantic anomalies during reading, listening and signing. In R. J. Ellingson, N. M. F. Murray, & A. M. Halliday (Eds.), Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology supplement 39, The London Symposia (pp. 325–330). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1976). Subject and topic: A new typology of language. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 457–461). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liddell, S. K. (1978). Nonmanual signals and relative clauses in American Sign Language. In P. Siple (Ed.), Understanding language through sign language research (pp. 59–90). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Liddell, S. K. (1980). American Sign Language syntax. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Lillo-Martin, D. (1995). The point of view predicate in American Sign Language. In K. Emmorey & J. Reilly (Eds.), Language, gesture, and space (pp. 155–170). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Lillo-Martin, D., & Meier, R. P. (2011). On the linguistic status of ‘agreement’ in sign languages. Theoretical Linguistics, 37(3-4), 95–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lourenço, G., & Wilbur, R. B. (2018, June). Are plain verbs really plain?: Location as the exponent of agreement in Brazilian Sign Language. Paper presented at the Venice Feast Colloquium, Formal and Experimental Advances in Sign Language Theory, Venice, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• McCawley, J. (1988). The syntactic phenomena of English. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCullough, S., & Emmorey, K. (1997). Face processing by deaf ASL signers: Evidence for expertise in distinguishing local features. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 2, 212–222.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McCullough, S., Emmorey, K., & Sereno, M. (2005). Neural organization for recognition of grammatical and emotional facial expressions in deaf ASL signers and hearing nonsigners. Cognitive Brain Research, 22(2), 193–203.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McIntire, M. L., & Reilly, J. S. (1988). Nonmanual behaviors in L1 & L2 learners of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 61(1), 351–375.
   Google Scholar
• Neidle, C., Kegl, J., MacLaughlin, D., Bahan, B., & Lee, R. G. (2000). The syntax of American Sign Language: Functional categories and hierarchical structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neville, H. J., Coffey, S. A., Lawson, D. S., Fischer, A., Emmorey, K., & Bellugi, U. (1997). Neural systems mediating American Sign Language: Effects of sensory experience and age of acquisition. Brain and Language, 57(3), 285–308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ni, D. (2014). Topikkonstruktionen in der Österreichischen Gebärdensprache (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Hamburg, Hamburg.
   Google Scholar
• Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9(1), 97–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pendzich, N.-K., Steinbach, M., & Hermann, A. (2016, September). Manipulating nonmanuals in a lexical decision task: A reaction time study of German Sign Language (DGS). Paper presented at the Venice Feast Colloquium, Formal and Experimental Advances in Sign Language Theory, Venice, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Pfau, R., & Quer, J. (2010). Nonmanuals: Their grammatical and prosodic roles. In D. Brentari (Ed.), Sign languages (Cambridge language surveys) (pp. 381–402). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Primus, B. (1999). Cases and thematic roles. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
   Google Scholar
• Prince, E. F. (1984). Topicalization and left-dislocation: A functional analysis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 433(1), 213–225.
   Google Scholar
• Quer, J. (2005). Context shift and indexical variables in sign languages. In E. Georgala & J. Howell (Eds.), Proceedings from semantics and linguistic theory 15 (pp. 152–168). Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Quer, J., & Steinbach, M. (2015). Ambiguities in sign languages. The Linguistic Review, 32(1), 143–165.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Reilly, J. S., McIntire, M., & Bellugi, U. (1990). The acquisition of conditionals in American Sign Language: Grammaticized facial expressions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 11(4), 369–392.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlesewsky, M., Fanselow, G., Kliegl, R., & Krems, J. (2000). The subject preference in the processing of locally ambiguous wh-questions in German. In B. Hemforth & L. Konieczny (Eds.), German sentence processing (pp. 65–93). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Schriefers, H., Friederici, A. D., & Kuhn, K. (1995). The processing of locally ambiguous relative clauses in German. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(4), 499–520.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siple, P. (1978). Visual constraints for sign language communication. Sign Language Studies, 19(1), 95–110.
   Google Scholar
• Veinberg, S. C., & Wilbur, R. B. (1990). A linguistic analysis of the negative headshake in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 68(1), 217–244.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, L. (2011). The influence of animacy and context on word order processing: Neurophysiological evidence from Mandarin Chinese (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_858568/component/file_861031/content
   Google Scholar
• Wang, L., Schlesewsky, M., Bickel, B., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2009). Exploring the nature of the ‘subject’-preference: Evidence from the online comprehension of simple sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(7-8), 1180–1226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilbur, R. B. (1994a). Foregrounding structures in American Sign Language. Journal of Pragmatics, 22(6), 647–672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilbur, R. B. (1994b). Eyeblinks & ASL phrase structure. Sign Language Studies, 84(1), 221–240.
   Google Scholar
• Wilbur, R. B. (2000). Phonological and prosodic layering of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. In H. Lane & K. Emmorey (Eds.), The signs of language revisited: Festschrift for Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima (pp. 213–241). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Wilbur, R. B. (2012). Information structure. In R. Pfau, M. Steinbach, & B. Woll (Eds.), Sign language. An international handbook (HSK - Handbooks of linguistics and communication science) (pp. 462–489). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Wilbur, R. B., & Malaia, E. (2018). A new technique for analyzing narrative prosodic effects in sign languages using motion capture technology. In A. Hübel & M. Steinbach (Eds.), Linguistic foundations of narration in spoken and sign languages (pp. 15–40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Wilbur, R. B., & Martínez, A. M. (2002). Physical correlates of prosodic structure in American Sign Language. Chicago Linguistic Society, 38, 693–704.
   Google Scholar
• Wilbur, R. B., & Nolen, S. B. (1986). The duration of syllables in American Sign Language. Language and Speech, 29(3), 263–280.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilbur, R. B., & Patschke, C. (1998). Body leans and the marking of contrast in American Sign Language. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(3), 275–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yasunaga, D., Yano, M., Yasugi, Y., & Koizumi, M. (2015). Is the subject-before-object preference universal? An event-related potential study in the Kaqchikel Mayan language. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(9), 1209–1229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziv, Y. (1994). Left and right dislocations: Discourse functions and anaphora. Journal of Pragmatics, 22(6), 629–645.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar