The role of linear order in the computation of referential dependencies

[1]  Z. Harris,et al.  Foundations of language , 1941 .

[2]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Conditions on transformations , 1971 .

[3]  T. Wasow.  Anaphoric relations in English , 1972 .

[4]  Ray Jackendoff,et al.  Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar , 1972 .

[5]  Nomi Erteschik-Shir,et al.  On the nature of island constraints , 1973 .

[6]  R. S. Jackendo,et al.  Toward an Explanatory Semantic Representation , 1976 .

[7]  Tanya Reinhart,et al.  The syntactic domain of anaphora , 1976 .

[8]  Thomas Wasow,et al.  Anaphora in Generative Grammar , 1979 .

[9]  J. Higginbotham.  Pronouns and Bound Variables , 1980 .

[10]  A. Garnham.  Mental models as representations of text , 1981, Memory & cognition.

[11]  Irene Heim,et al.  The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases : a dissertation , 1982 .

[12]  H. Koopman,et al.  VARIABLES AND THE BIJECTION PRINCIPLE , 1982 .

[13]  Scott Weinstein,et al.  Providing a Unified Account of Definite Noun Phrases in Discourse , 1983, ACL.

[14]  Ivan A. Sag,et al.  On parasitic gaps , 1983 .

[15]  T. Reinhart.  Anaphora and semantic interpretation , 1983 .

[16]  Ray Jackendoff.  Semantics and Cognition , 1983 .

[17]  Richard S. Kayne.  Connectedness and binary branching , 1984 .

[18]  A. Barss,et al.  A note on anaphora and double objects , 1986 .

[19]  Nicholas Asher,et al.  Belief in discourse representation theory , 1986, J. Philos. Log..

[20]  E. Williams.  THE ATB THEORY OF PARASITIC GAPS , 1987 .

[21]  Mira Ariel.  Referring and accessibility , 1988, Journal of Linguistics.

[22]  Hans Kamp,et al.  Discourse Representation Theory: What it is and Where it Ought to Go , 1988, Natural Language at the Computer.

[23]  R. Larson.  On the double object construction , 1988 .

[24]  M. Chodorow,et al.  Pronoun resolution in two-clause sentences: Effects of ambiguity, antecedent location, and depth of embedding ☆ , 1988 .

[25]  William H. Smith.  Problems in applying discourse representation theory , 1989 .

[26]  J. Frampton.  Parasitic gaps and the theory of 'Wh'-chains , 1990 .

[27]  Mira Ariel.  Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents , 1990 .

[28]  R. Jackendoff.  On Larson's treatment of the double object construction , 1990 .

[29]  Robert Kluender,et al.  Deriving Island Constraints from Principles of Predication , 1992 .

[30]  C. Pollard.  Anhaphors in English and the scope of binding theory , 1992 .

[31]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Morphosyntactic and Pragmatic Factors Affecting the Accessibility of Discourse Entities , 1993 .

[32]  Jeanette K. Gundel,et al.  Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse , 1993 .

[33]  M. Kutas,et al.  Bridging the Gap: Evidence from ERPs on the Processing of Unbounded Dependencies , 1993, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[34]  Richard S. Kayne.  The Antisymmetry of Syntax , 1994 .

[35]  Ivan A. Sag,et al.  Book Reviews: Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar and German in Head-driven Phrase-structure Grammar , 1996, CL.

[36]  Mira Ariel.  Interpreting anaphoric expressions: a cognitive versus a pragmatic approach , 1994, Journal of Linguistics.

[37]  Scott Weinstein,et al.  Centering: A Framework for Modeling the Local Coherence of Discourse , 1995, CL.

[38]  John A. Hawkins,et al.  A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency , 1995 .

[39]  Ray Jackendoff,et al.  The Architecture of the Language Faculty , 1996 .

[40]  Jane Oakhill,et al.  The mental models theory language of comprehension , 1996 .

[41]  I. I. N. Kamp.  Combining Montague Semantics and Discourse Representation , 1996 .

[42]  Nomi Erteschik-Shir,et al.  The dynamics of focus structure , 1997 .

[43]  A. Garnham,et al.  The Interpretation of Anaphoric Noun Phrases Time Course, and Effects of Overspecificity , 1997 .

[44]  P. Gordon,et al.  Intuitive knowledge of linguistic co-reference , 1997, Cognition.

[45]  Randall Hendrick,et al.  The Representation and Processing of Coreference in Discourse , 1998, Cogn. Sci..

[46]  Robert Kluender,et al.  On the distinction between strong and weak islands: a processing perspective , 1998 .

[47]  Louise McNally,et al.  The Limits of Syntax , 1998 .

[48]  M. Gernsbacher,et al.  Three models of discourse comprehension , 1999 .

[49]  J. Hawkins.  PROCESSING COMPLEXITY AND FILLER-GAP DEPENDENCIES ACROSS GRAMMARS , 1999 .

[50]  Alan Munn.  Explaining Parasitic Gap Restrictions , 1999 .

[51]  A. Almor.  Constraints and Mechanisms in Theories of Anaphor Processing , 2000 .

[52]  David Lebeaux,et al.  Language acquisition and the form of the grammar , 2000 .

[53]  Mira Ariel.  Accessibility theory: An overview , 2001 .

[54]  R. Sainsbury.  Reference And Anaphora , 2002 .

[55]  Ruth Kempson,et al.  The dynamics of syntax: Anaphora, relative pronouns and crossover , 2002 .

[56]  Caroline Heycock,et al.  Topic, Focus, and Syntactic Representa- tions , 2002 .

[57]  C. Schorn,et al.  Acquisition and Processing , 2003 .

[58]  Johan Bos,et al.  Implementing the Binding and Accommodation Theory for Anaphora Resolution and Presupposition Projection , 2003, CL.

[59]  Robert Kluender,et al.  Are Subject Islands Subject to a Processing Account , 2004 .

[60]  Mira Ariel.  Accessibility Marking: Discourse Functions, Discourse Profiles, and Processing Cues , 2004, Discourse Processes.

[61]  Morton Ann Gernsbacher,et al.  Accessibility in Text and Discourse Processing , 2004, Discourse processes.

[62]  David I. Beaver,et al.  The Optimization of Discourse Anaphora , 2004 .

[63]  Gilbert Harman,et al.  Semantics of natural language , 2004, Synthese.

[64]  Alex Lascarides,et al.  Logics of Conversation , 2005, Studies in natural language processing.

[65]  Thomas E. Hukari,et al.  The unity of unbounded dependency constructions , 2006 .

[66]  Christian Barker,et al.  Explaining Crossover and Superiority as Left-to-right Evaluation , 2006 .

[67]  I. Arnon,et al.  Cross-linguistic Variation in a Processing Account: The Case of Multiple Wh-questions∗ , 2006 .

[68]  I. Sag,et al.  Locality and Accessibility in Wh-Questions , 2007 .

[69]  Ivan A. Sag,et al.  Processing Complexity in Subjacency Violations: The Complex Noun Phrase Constraint , 2007 .

[70]  Marcel Den Dikken.  Specificational Copular Sentences and Pseudoclefts , 2007 .

[71]  Ellen F. Lau,et al.  The effect of syntactic constraints on the processing of backwards anaphora , 2007 .

[72]  Michelangelo Falco.  Weak Crossover, specificity and LF chains , 2007 .

[73]  Nomi Erteschik-Shir,et al.  Information Structure: The Syntax-Discourse Interface , 2007 .

[74]  I. Sag,et al.  Processing Accounts for Superiority Eects , 2008 .

[75]  A. Sanford,et al.  When is cataphoric reference recognised? , 2008, Cognition.

[76]  T. Stowell.  Weakest Crossover , 2008 .

[77]  Philip Hofmeister,et al.  Representational complexity and memory retrieval in language comprehension , 2011, Language and cognitive processes.

[78]  Nomi Erteschik-Shir,et al.  Missing objects as Topic Drop , 2013 .

[79]  Edward Göbbel.  Extraposition of relative clauses: Phonological solutions , 2013 .

[80]  M. Rochemont.  Discourse new, F-marking, and normal stress , 2013 .

[81]  Jeanette K. Gundel,et al.  Cognitive Status and the form of Referring Expressions in Discourse , 1993, The Oxford Handbook of Reference.