Misinterpretations in agreement and agreement attraction
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] Ting Qian,et al. Rapid Expectation Adaptation during Syntactic Comprehension , 2013, PloS one.
[2] Nikole D. Patson,et al. The mental representation of plural events , 2015, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.
[3] Kathryn Bock,et al. Making syntax of sense: number agreement in sentence production. , 2005, Psychological review.
[4] K. Bock,et al. Broken agreement , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.
[5] M. Pickering,et al. The activation of inappropriate analyses in garden-path sentences: Evidence from structural priming , 2006 .
[6] Elisabeth Dévière,et al. Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2009 .
[7] D. Barr,et al. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.
[8] Ellen F. Lau,et al. Agreement Attraction in Comprehension: Representations and Processes. , 2009 .
[9] K. Forster,et al. Subject-verb agreement processes in comprehension , 1997 .
[10] Steven Pinker,et al. Computation of semantic number from morphological information , 2005 .
[11] F. Ferreira,et al. Lingering misinterpretations of garden path sentences arise from competing syntactic representations , 2013 .
[12] Nikole D. Patson,et al. Evidence for distributivity effects in comprehension. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.
[13] Gabriella Vigliocco,et al. Subject-verb agreement errors in French and English: The role of syntactic hierarchy , 2002 .
[14] Ray Jackendoff,et al. A Parallel Architecture perspective on language processing , 2007, Brain Research.
[15] Susan M. Garnsey,et al. Semantic Influences On Parsing: Use of Thematic Role Information in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution , 1994 .
[16] Carrick C. Williams,et al. Younger and Older Adults' "Good-Enough" Interpretations of Garden-Path Sentences , 2006, Discourse processes.
[17] Colin Phillips,et al. 5: Grammatical Illusions and Selective Fallibility in Real-Time Language Comprehension , 2011 .
[18] Robert J. Hartsuiker,et al. One or more labels on the bottles? Notional concord in Dutch and French , 1996 .
[19] H. Eichenbaum. The Cognitive Neuroscience of Memory , 2002 .
[20] Matthew J. Rambert,et al. Number Agreement in British and American English: Disagreeing to Agree Collectively , 2006 .
[21] Daniel L. Schacter,et al. The Cognitive Neuroscience of Memory Distortion , 2004, Neuron.
[22] Serdar Bozdag,et al. Age-specific signatures of glioblastoma at the genomic, genetic, and epigenetic levels. , 2013, PloS one.
[23] Roger Levy,et al. A noisy-channel model of rational human sentence comprehension under uncertain input , 2008, EMNLP 2008.
[24] Matthias Schlesewsky,et al. The extended argument dependency model: a neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. , 2006, Psychological review.
[25] Fernanda Ferreira,et al. The 'Good Enough' Approach to Language Comprehension , 2007, Lang. Linguistics Compass.
[26] Robert S. Leiken,et al. A User’s Guide , 2011 .
[27] Fernanda Ferreira,et al. The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences , 2003, Cognitive Psychology.
[28] Laurel Brehm,et al. The time-course of feature interference in agreement comprehension: Multiple mechanisms and asymmetrical attraction. , 2014, Journal of memory and language.
[29] D. Caplan,et al. The role of animacy and thematic relationships in processing active English sentences: Evidence from event-related potentials , 2007, Brain and Language.
[30] Steven G. Luke,et al. Context Strengthens Initial Misinterpretations of Text , 2011 .
[31] C. Clifton,et al. Feature manipulation in sentence comprehension , 2008 .
[32] Lyn Frazier,et al. Feature manipulation in sentence comprehension: 2703 , 1999 .
[33] C. Clifton,et al. The independence of syntactic processing , 1986 .
[34] Emily S. Darowski,et al. Lingering misinterpretations in garden-path sentences: evidence from a paraphrasing task. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.
[35] Kathleen M. Eberhard,et al. The Marked Effect of Number on Subject–Verb Agreement☆ , 1997 .
[36] Phillip J. Holcomb,et al. Neural correlates of processing syntactic, semantic, and thematic relationships in sentences , 2006 .
[37] R. Harald Baayen,et al. Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice , 2012, Language Variation and Change.
[38] Kathleen M. Eberhard,et al. The Accessibility of Conceptual Number to the Processes of Subject–Verb Agreement in English☆☆☆ , 1999 .
[39] Kathryn Bock,et al. What counts in grammatical number agreement? , 2013, Cognition.
[40] Steven G. Luke,et al. Effects of plausibility on structural priming. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.
[41] A. Hollingworth,et al. Thematic Roles Assigned along the Garden Path Linger , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.
[42] A. Staub. On the interpretation of the number attraction effect: Response time evidence. , 2009, Journal of memory and language.
[43] C. Felser,et al. Grammatical processing in language learners , 2006, Applied Psycholinguistics.
[44] William Badecker,et al. Morphology, agreement and working memory retrieval in sentence production : Evidence from gender and case in Slovak , 2007 .
[45] Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al. Plausibility and grammatical agreement , 2003 .
[46] Susan M. Garnsey,et al. Agreement Processes in Sentence Comprehension , 1999 .
[47] Brian Butterworth,et al. Subject-verb agreement in Spanish and English: Differences in the role of conceptual constraints , 1996, Cognition.