Features matter: the role of number and gender features during the online processing of subject- and object- relative clauses in Italian

References

• Adani, F. (2011). Rethinking the acquisition of relative clauses in Italian: Towards a grammatically based account. Journal of Child Language, 38(1), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000909990250
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adani, F., Forgiarini, M., Guasti, M. T., & Van Der Lely, H. K. J. (2014). Number dissimilarities facilitate the comprehension of relative clauses in children with (grammatical) specific language impairment. Journal of Child Language, 41(4), 811–841. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000913000184
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adani, F., Stegenwallner-Schütz, M., & Niesel, T. (2017). The peaceful Co-existence of input frequency and structural intervention effects on the comprehension of complex sentences in German-speaking children. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1590. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01590
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adani, F., van der Lely, H. K. J., Forgiarini, M., & Guasti, M. T. (2010). Grammatical feature dissimilarities make relative clauses easier: A comprehension study with Italian children. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale, 120(9–3), 2148–2166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.03.018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arosio, F., Adani, F., & Guasti, M. T. (2009). Grammatical features in the comprehension of Italian relative clauses by children. In J. M. Brucart, A. Gavarró, & J. Solà (Eds.), Merging features: Computation, interpretation and acquisition (pp. 138–155). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Avetisyan, S., Lago, S., & Vasishth, S. (2020). Does case marking affect agreement attraction in comprehension? Journal of Memory and Language, 112, 104087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barber, H., & Carreiras, M. (2005). Grammatical gender and number agreement in spanish: An ERP comparison. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(1), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1162/0898929052880101
   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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (2015). Parsimonious mixed models. arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.04967.
   Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.5823.
   Google Scholar
• Belletti, A., Friedmann, N., Brunato, D., & Rizzi, L. (2012). Does gender make a difference? Comparing the effect of gender on children’s comprehension of relative clauses in hebrew and Italian. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale, 122(10), 1053–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.02.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belletti, A., & Manetti, C. (2019). Topics and passives in Italian-speaking children and adults. Language Acquisition, 26(2), 153–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2018.1508465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2013). Intervention in grammar and processing. In I. Caponigro, & C. Cecchetto (Eds.), From grammar to meaning: Experimental insights (pp. 294–311). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bentea, A. (2016). Intervention effects in language acquisition: The comprehension of A-bar dependencies in French and Romanian. [Doctoral dissertation, Université de Genève]. Archive ouvert UNIGE. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:87829.
   Google Scholar
• Bentea, A., & Durrleman, S. (2017). Now You hear It, Now You don’t: Number mismatch in the comprehension of relative clauses in French. In M. LaMendola, & J. Scott (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st annual Boston university conference on language development (pp. 60–73). Cascadilla Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bentea, A., Durrleman, S., & Rizzi, L. (2016). Refining intervention: The acquisition of featural relations in object A-bar dependencies. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale, 169, 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biondo, N., Vespignani, F., Rizzi, L., & Mancini, S. (2018). Widening agreement processing: A matter of time, features and distance. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 33(7), 890–911. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2018.1446542
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blaubergs, M. S., & Braine, M. D. (1974). Short-term memory limitations on decoding self-embedded sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102(4), 745–748. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036091
   Google Scholar
• Brown, H. D. (1971). Children’s comprehension of relativized English sentences. Child Development, 1923–1936. https://doi.org/10.2307/1127595
   Google Scholar
• Caplan, D., Alpert, N., Waters, G., & Olivieri, A. (2000). Activation of broca’s area by syntactic processing under conditions of concurrent articulation. Human Brain Mapping, 9(2), 65–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0193(200002)9:2<65::AID-HBM1>3.0.CO;2-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesi, C. (2015). On directionality of phrase structure building. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 44(1), 65–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9330-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesi, C., & Canal, P. (2019). Person features and lexical restrictions in Italian clefts. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2105. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cilibrasi, L., Adani, F., & Tsimpli, I. (2019). Reading as a predictor of complex syntax. The case of relative clauses. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1450. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01450
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 3–42. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Contemori, C., Carlson, M., & Marinis, T. (2018). On-line processing of English which-questions by children and adults: a visual world paradigm study. Journal of Child Language, 45(2), 415–441. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000917000277
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Contemori, C., & Marinis, T. (2014). The impact of number mismatch and passives on the real-time processing of relative clauses. Journal of Child Language, 41(3), 658–689. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000913000172
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crain, S., & Wexler, K. (1999). Methodology in the study of language acquisition: A modular approach. In W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of child language acquisition (pp. 387–425). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cunnings, I., & Sturt, P. (2018). Retrieval interference and semantic interpretation. Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Domenico, A., & Di Matteo, R. (2009). Processing Italian relative clauses: Working memory span and word order effects on RTs. The Journal of General Psychology, 136(4), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221300903266671
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon, B., Mishler, A., Sloggett, S., & Phillips, C. (2013). Contrasting intrusion profiles for agreement and anaphora: Experimental and modeling evidence. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(2), 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drummond, A. (2013). The Ibex farm. https://spellout.net/ibexfarm.
   Google Scholar
• Felser, C., Marinis, T., & Clahsen, H. (2003). Children’s processing of ambiguous sentences: A study of relative clause attachment. Language Acquisition, 11(3), 127–163. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327817la1103_1
   Google Scholar
• Franck, J., Colonna, S., & Rizzi, L. (2015). Task-dependency and structure-dependency in number interference effects in sentence comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 349. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00349
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (1996). Construal. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(2), 78–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01839-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friederici, A. D. (2011). The brain basis of language processing: From structure to function. Physiological Reviews, 91(4), 1357–1392. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00006.2011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale, 119(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann, N., Rizzi, L., & Belletti, A. (2017). No case for Case in locality: Case does not help interpretation when intervention blocks A-bar chains. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 2(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.165
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujita, H., & Cunnings, I. (2022). Interference and filler-gap dependency formation in native and non-native language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48(5), 702–716. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001134
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68(1), 1–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In A. Marantz, Y. Miyashita, & W. O’Neil (Eds.), Image, language, brain (pp. 95–126). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Johnson, M. (2001). Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(6), 1411–1423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.6.1411
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Johnson, M. (2004). Effects of noun phrase type on sentence complexity. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(1), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.02.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gordon, P. C., & Lowder, M. W. (2012). Complex sentence processing: A review of theoretical perspectives on the comprehension of relative clauses. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(7), 403–415. https://doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.347
   Google Scholar
• Grillo, N. (2008). Generalized minimality: Syntactic underspecification in broca’s aphasia. LOT.
   Google Scholar
• Grodner, D., & Gibson, E. (2005). Consequences of the serial nature of linguistic input for sentenial complexity. Cognitive Science, 29(2), 261–290. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grodzinsky, Y. (1989). Agrammatic comprehension of relative clauses. Brain and Language, 37(3), 480–499. https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-934X(89)90031-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guasti, M. T., Vernice, M., & Franck, J. (2018). Continuity in the adult and children’s comprehension of subject and object relative clauses in French and Italian. Languages, 3(3), 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages3030024
   Google Scholar
• Hagoort, P. (2003). How the brain solves the binding problem for language: A neurocomputational model of syntactic processing. NeuroImage, 20, S18–S29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.09.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagoort, P. (2013). MUC (Memory, Unification, Control) and beyond. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 416. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00416
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmeister, P. (2011). Representational complexity and memory retrieval in language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(3), 376–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.492642
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmeister, P., & Vasishth, S. (2014). Distinctiveness and encoding effects in online sentence comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1237. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01237
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, S., Gavarró, A., Vernice, M., & Guasti, M. T. (2016). The acquisition of Chinese relative clauses: Contrasting two theoretical approaches. Journal of Child Language, 43(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000914000865
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Izumi, S. (2003). Processing difficulty in comprehension and production of relative clauses by learners of English as a second language. Language Learning, 53(2), 285–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00218
   Web of Science ®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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jäger, L. A., Engelmann, F., & Vasishth, S. (2017). Similarity-based interference in sentence comprehension: Literature review and Bayesian meta-analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 316–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kidd, E., & Bavin, E. L. (2002). English-speaking children’s comprehension of relative clauses: Evidence for general-cognitive and language-specific constraints on development. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31(6), 599–617. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021265021141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, J., & Just, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(5), 580–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90027-H
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmertest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lago, S., Shalom, D. E., Sigman, M., Lau, E. F., & Phillips, C. (2015). Agreement attraction in spanish comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 82, 133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.02.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, R. L., & Vasishth, S. (2005). An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cognitive Science, 29(3), 375–419. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis, R. L., Vasishth, S., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2006). Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(10), 447–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Love, T. E. (2007). The processing of non-canonically ordered constituents in long distance dependencies by pre-school children: A real-time investigation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 36(3), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-006-9040-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mancini, S., Molinaro, N., Rizzi, L., & Carreiras, M. (2011). A person is not a number: Discourse involvement in subject-verb agreement computation. Brain Research, 1410, 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2011.06.055
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mancini, S., Postiglione, F., Laudanna, A., & Rizzi, L. (2014). On the person-number distinction: Subject-verb agreement processing in Italian. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue internationale De Linguistique Generale, 146, 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.04.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manetti, C., Moscati, V., Rizzi, L., & Belletti, A. (2016). The role of number and gender features in the comprehension of Italian clitic left dislocations. In J. Scott, & D. Waughtal (Eds.), Proceedings of the 40th annual Boston university conference on language development (pp. 229–240). Cascadilla Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martini, K. (2020). Aspects of the acquisition of locality: comprehension and production studies in Italian and French. [Doctoral dissertation, Université de Genève]. Archive ouvert UNIGE. https://doi.org/10.13097/archive-ouverte/unige:152043.
   Google Scholar
• Martini, K., Belletti, A., Centorrino, S., & Garraffa, M. (2020). Syntactic complexity in the presence of an intervener: The case of an Italian speaker with anomia. Aphasiology, 34(8), 1016–1042. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2019.1686744
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McElree, B. (2006). Accessing Recent Events. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 46, 155–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(06)46005-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mertzen, D., Laurinavichyute, A., Dillon, B., Engbert, R., & Vasishth, S. (2020). Is there cross-linguistic evidence for proactive cue-based retrieval interference in sentence comprehension? Eye-tracking data from English. German and Russian. PsyArXiv, https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/t2j8v
   Google Scholar
• Miller, G. A., & Isard, S. (1964). Free recall of self-embedded English sentences. Information and Control, 7(3), 292–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(64)90310-9
   Google Scholar
• Muralikrishnan, R., & Idrissi, A. (2021). Salience-weighted agreement feature hierarchy modulates language comprehension. Cortex, 141, 168–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2021.03.029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicenboim, B., Vasishth, S., Engelmann, F., & Suckow, K. (2018). Exploratory and confirmatory analyses in sentence processing: A case study of number interference in German. Cognitive Science, 42(4), 1075–1100. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12589
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Phillips, C., & Ehrenhofer, L. (2015). The role of language processing in language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5(4), 409–453. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.5.4.01phi
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core, Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized minimality. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rizzi, L.. (2004). Locality and left periphery. In A. Belletti (Ed.), Structures and Beyond: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures (Vol. 3, pp. 223–251).
   Google Scholar
• Rizzi, L. (2018). Intervention effects in grammar and language acquisition. Probus, 30(2), 339–367. https://doi.org/10.1515/probus-2018-0006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, L., Marinis, T., Felser, C., & Clahsen, H. (2007). Antecedent priming at trace positions in children’s sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 36(2), 175–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-006-9038-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, F. P. (1984). Accelerating language learning in young children. Journal of Child Language, 11(1), 89–107. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900005602
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schad, D. J., Vasishth, S., Hohenstein, S., & Kliegl, R. (2020). How to capitalize on a priori contrasts in linear (mixed) models: A tutorial. Journal of Memory and Language, 110, 104038. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2019.104038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheldon, A. (1974). The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13(3), 272–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(74)80064-2
   Google Scholar
• Smith, G., & Vasishth, S. (2020). A principled approach to feature selection in models of sentence processing. Cognitive Science, 44(12), e12918. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12918
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starke, M. (2001). Move dissolves into merge: A theory of locality. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Université de Genève.
   Google Scholar
• Staub, A. (2010). Eye movements and processing difficulty in object relative clauses. Cognition, 116(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.04.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staub, A., Dillon, B., & Clifton, C. (2017). The matrix verb as a source of comprehension difficulty in object relative sentences. Cognitive Science, 41(6), 1353–1376. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12448
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stromswold, K., Caplan, D., Alpert, N., & Rauch, S. (1996). Localization of syntactic comprehension by positron emission tomography. Brain and Language, 52(3), 452–473. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1996.0024
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavakolian, S. L. (1981). The conjoined-clause analysis of relative clauses. In S. L. Tavakolian (Ed.), Language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 167–187). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J. D. (1995). Center-embedding and self-embedding in human language processing. MIT.
   Google Scholar
• Traxler, M. J., Morris, R. K., & Seely, R. E. (2002). Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from Eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 47(1), 69–90. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2836
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker, M. A., Idrissi, A., & Almeida, D. (2021). Attraction effects for verbal gender and number Are similar but Not identical: Self-paced Reading evidence from modern standard arabic. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 586464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.586464
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Dyke, J. A., & McElree, B. (2006). Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(2), 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.03.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vernice, M., Cecchetto, C., Donati, C., & Moscati, V. (2016). Relative clauses are not adjuncts: An experimental investigation of a corollary of the raising analyses. Linguistische Berichte, 2016(246), 139–169.
   Google Scholar
• Villata, S., & Franck, J. (2020). Similarity-based interference in agreement comprehension and production: Evidence from object agreement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(1), 170–188. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000718
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villata, S., & Lorusso, P. (2020). When initial thematic role attribution lingers: Evidence for digging-in effects in Italian relative clauses. In V. Torrens (Ed.), Typical and impaired processing in morphosyntax (Vol. 64 (pp. 57–71). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Villata, S., Rizzi, L., & Franck, J. (2016). Intervention effects and relativized minimality: New experimental evidence from graded judgments. Lingua. International Review of General Linguistics. Revue Internationale de Linguistique Generale, 179, 76–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2016.03.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villata, S., Tabor, W., & Franck, J. (2018). Encoding and retrieval interference in sentence comprehension: Evidence from agreement. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagers, M. W., Lau, E. F., & Phillips, C. (2009). Agreement attraction in comprehension: Representations and processes. Journal of Memory and Language, 61(2), 206–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren, T., & Gibson, E. (2005). Effects of NP type in Reading cleft sentences in English. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20(6), 751–767. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960500051055
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zawiszewski, A., Santesteban, M., & Laka, I. (2016). Phi-features reloaded: An event-related potential study on person and number agreement processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(3), 601–626. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271641500017X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar