The scalar meaning prediction in the processing of Spanish focus operators hasta and nada más

References

• Altmann, G. T. M., & Mirković, J. (2010). Incrementality and prediction in human sentence processing. Cognitive Science, 33(4), 538–609. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01022.x.Incrementality
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen, G. (2001). Pragmatic markers and sociolinguistics variation. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Asr, F. T., & Demberg, V. (2020). Interpretation of discourse connectives is probabilistic: Evidence from the study of but and although. Discourse Processes, 57(4), 376–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2019.1700760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaver, D. I., & Clark, B. Z. (2008). Sense and sensitivity. How focus determines meaning. Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Blakemore, D. (2000). Indicators and procedures: Nevertheless and but. Journal of Linguistics, 36(3), 463–486. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700008355
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carston, R. (2016). The heterogeneity of procedural meaning. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale, 175–176, 154–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.12.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chemla, E., & Singh, R. (2014). Remarks on the experimental turn in the study of scalar implicature. Language and Linguistics Compass, 8(9), 373–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12080
   Google Scholar
• de Vega, M. (2005). El procesamiento de oraciones con conectores adversativos y causales. Cognitiva, 17(1), 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1174/0214355053114745
   Google Scholar
• Drenhaus, H., Demberg, V., Köhne, J., & Delogu, F. (2014). Incremental and predictive discourse processing based on causal and concessive. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 36, 403–408.
   Google Scholar
• Giannakidou, A. (2007). The landscape of EVEN. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25(1), 39–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-006-9006-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gotzner, N., & Spalek, K. (2017). The connection between focus and implicatures: Investigating alternative activation under working memory load. In S. Pistoia-Reda, & F. Domaneschi (Eds.), Linguistic and psycholinguistic approaches on implicatures and presuppositions (pp. 175–198). Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Gotzner, N., Spalek, K., Degen, N. G. J., & Franke, M. (2014). Exhaustive inferences and additive presuppositions: The interplay of focus operators and contrastive intonation. In Judith Degen, Michael Franke, & Noah Goodman (Eds.), Proceedings of the formal and experimental pragmatics workshop (ESSLII 2014) (pp. 7–13). Tübingen University.
   Google Scholar
• Gotzner, N., Wartenburger, I., & Spalek, K. (2016). The impact of focus particles on the recognition and rejection of contrastive alternatives. Language and Cognition, 8(1), 59–95. https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2015.25
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gutzmann, D. (2013). Expressives and beyond: An introduction to varieties of use-conditional meaning. In Daniel Gutzmann & Hans-Martin Gärtner (Eds.), Beyond Expressives: Explorations in Use-Conditional Meaning (pp. 1–58). Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Horn, L. R. (2016). A presuppositional analysis of only and even. Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, 5(1969), 98–107.
   Google Scholar
• Huettig, F., & Mani, N. (2016). Is prediction necessary to understand language? Probably not. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1072223
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamide, Y., Altmann, G. T. M., & Haywood, S. L. (2003). The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(1), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00023-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., & Zwaan, R. A. (2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics, 38(7), 1033–1050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kay, P. (1990). Even. Linguistics and Philosophy, 13(1), 59–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00630517
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, C. S., Gunlogson, C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Runner, J. T. (2015). Context-driven expectations about focus alternatives. Cognition, 139, 28–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoepke, J., Richter, T., Isberner, M.-B. B., Naumann, J., Neeb, Y., & Weinert, S. (2017). Processing of positive-causal and negative-causal coherence relations in primary school children and adults: A test of the cumulative cognitive complexity approach in German. Journal of Child Language, 44(2), 297–328. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000915000872
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koehne, J., Demberg, V., Köhne, J., & Demberg, V. (2013). The time-course of processing discourse connectives. 35th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2760–2765.
   Google Scholar
• Köhne-Fuetterer, J., Drenhaus, H., Delogu, F., & Demberg, V. (2021). The online processing of causal and concessive discourse connectives. Linguistics, 59(2), 417–448. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2021-0011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuperberg, G. R., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016). What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension? Language Cognition & Neuroscience, 31(1), 32–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1102299
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larrivée, P., & Chungmin, L. (2016). Negation and polarity: Experimental perspectives. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Millis, K. K. A., & Just, M. A. (1994). The influence of connectives on sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(1), 128–147. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1994.1007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nadal, L., Cruz, A., Recio, I., & Loureda, Ó. (2016). El significado procedimental y las partículas discursivas del español: Una aproximación experimental. Revista Signos, 49, 52–77. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-09342016000400004
   Google Scholar
• Otten, M., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2008). Discourse-based word anticipation during language processing: Prediction or priming? Discourse Processes, 45(6), 464–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530802356463
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Portolés, J. (1998). Marcadores del discurso. Ariel.
   Google Scholar
• Portolés, J. (2007). Escalas informativas aditivas: Pruebas del español. Spanish in Context, 4(2), 135–157. https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.4.2.02por
   Google Scholar
• RC Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
   Google Scholar
• Recanati, F. (2004). Pragmatics and semantics. In L.-R. Horn, & G. Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp. 442–462). Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, C. (2006). Only, presupposition and implicature. Journal of Semantics. Advance online publication. https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/roberts.21/only.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Romoli, J., Khan, M., Sudo, Y., & Snedeker, J. (2014). Resolving temporary referential ambiguity using presupposed content. In F. Schwarz (Ed.), Experimental perspectives on presuppositions. Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics (pp. 67–87). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07980-6_3
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, T. (1997). Semantic and pragmatic sources of coherence: On the categorization of coherence relations in context. Discourse Processes, 24(1), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709545009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawada, O. (2017). Pragmatic aspects of scalar modifiers: The semantics-pragmatics interface. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scholman, M. C. J., Rohde, H., & Demberg, V. (2017). “On the one hand” as a cue to anticipate upcoming discourse structure. Journal of Memory and Language, 97, 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.07.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz, F. (2016). Experimental work in presupposition and presupposition projection. Annual Review of Linguistics, 2(1), 273–292. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011415-040809
   Google Scholar
• Schwenter, S. A. (1999). The pragmatics of conditional marking: Implicature, scalarity, and exclusivity. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Spalek, K., Gotzner, N., & Wartenburger, I. (2014). Not only the apples: Focus sensitive particles improve memory for information-structural alternatives. Journal of Memory and Language, 70, 68–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staub, A., & Clifton, C. J. (2006). Syntactic prediction in language comprehension: Evidence from either … or. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(2), 425–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.2.425
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanenhaus, M. K., Carlson, G., & Trueswell, J. C. (1989). The role of thematic structures in interpretation and parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4(3–4), SI211–SI234. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690968908406368
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Traxler, M. J., Bybee, M. D., & Pickering, M. J. (1997). Influence of connectives on language comprehension: Eye-tracking evidence for incremental interpretation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 50(3), 481–497. https://doi.org/10.1080/027249897391982
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19(3), 528–553. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.3.528
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, K. P., & Horn, L. (2018). Pragmatics, truth and underspecification. Towards an atlas of meaning. Brill.
   Google Scholar
• van Bergen, G., & Bosker, H. R. (2018). Linguistic expectation management in online discourse processing: An investigation of Dutch inderdaad ‘indeed’ and eigenlijk ‘actually’. Journal of Memory and Language, 103(August), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.08.004
   Google Scholar
• van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., Zwitserlood, P., Kooijman, V., & Hagoort, P. (2005). Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: Evidence from ERPs and reading times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 443–467. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.3.443
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, A., Grice, M., & Crocker, M. W. (2006). The role of prosody in the interpretation of structural ambiguities: A study of anticipatory eye movements. Cognition, 99(2), B63–B72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.07.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, K. (1996). The scope of even. Natural Language Semantics, 4(3), 193–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00372819
   Google Scholar
• Xiang, M., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2015). Reversing expectations during discourse comprehension. In Language Cognition & Neuroscience, 30(6), 648–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2014.995679
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, X., Chen, Q., Panther, K. U., & Wu, Y. (2018). Influence of concessive and causal conjunctions on pragmatic processing: Online measures from eye movements and self-paced reading. Discourse Processes, 55(4), 387–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1272088
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhan, L., Crain, S., & Zhou, P. (2015). The online processing of only if- and even if- conditional statements: Implications for mental models. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26(7), 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2015.1016527
   Google Scholar