Wie viel Information können wir antizipieren? Zum Problem der Inkrementalität und uneingeschränkten Interaktivität beim Satzverstehen

Autor

  • Jolanta Sękowska Maria-Curie-Skłodowska-Universität in Lublin, Institut für Germanistik und Angewandte Linguistik, Pl. Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej 4a, 20-031 Lublin

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1427-9665.13.02

Słowa kluczowe:

sentence comprehension, sentence processing, incrementality, anticipation, interactivity

Abstrakt

Pobrania

Statystyki pobrań niedostępne.

Bibliografia

Altmann G.T.M., Mirković J. (2009), Incrementality and prediction in human sentence processing. In: Cognitive Science, H. 33, S. 583–609.

Aoshima S., Phillips C., Weinberg A. (2004), Processing filler-gap dependencies in a headfinal lan­guage. In: Journal of Memory and Language, H. 51, S. 23–54.

Bader M., Lasser I.(1994), German verb-final clauses and sentence processing: Evidence for im­mediate attachment. In: Clifton Ch./Frazier L./Rayner K. (Hgg.), Perspectives on Sentence Processing, Hillsdale NJ, S. 225–242.

Bever T.G.(1970), The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In: Hayes J.R. (Hg.), Cognition and the development of language, New York, S. 279–362.

Boland J.E., Boehm-Jernigan H.(1998), Lexical constraints and prepositional phrase attachment.In: Journal of Memory and Language, H. 39, S. 684–719.

Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Schlesewsky M.(2009), Processing Syntax and Morphology: A Neuro­cognitive Perspective, Oxford.

Bresnan J.(2001) (Hg.), Lexical-Functional Syntax, Oxford.

Chomsky N.(1965), Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge.

Chomsky N.(1981), Lectures on Government and Binding. The Pisa Lectures, Dordrecht.

Crocker M.W., Keller F.(2006), Probabilistic grammars as models of gradience in language pro­cessing. In: Fanselow G./Féry C./Vogel R./Schlesewsky M. (Hgg.), Gradience in Grammar: Generative Perspectives, Oxford, S. 227–245.

Featherston S.(2005), The decathlon model of empirical syntax. In: Kepser S./Reis M. (Hgg.), Lin­guistic evidence – Empirical, theoretical, and computational perspectives, Berlin, S. 187–208.

Ferreira F., Clifton Ch.(1986), The independence of syntactic processing. In: Journal of Memory and Language, Bd. 25, H. 3, S. 348–368.

Fillmore Ch.(1988), The mechanisms of “Construction Grammar”. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Bd. 14, S. 33–35.

Fillmore Ch., Kay P., O’Connor M.C. (1988), Regularity and idiomacity in grammatical constructi­ons. In: Language, Bd. 64, H. 3, S. 501–538.

Hindle D., Rooth, M.(1993), Structural Ambiguity and Lexical Relations. In: Computational Lin­guistics, H. 19, S. 103–120.

Jurafsky D.(2003), Probabilistic modelling in psycholinguistics: Linguistic comprehension and production. In: Bod R./Hay J./Jannedy S. (Hgg.), Probablistic Linguistics, Cambridge, MA, S. 39–96.

Kamide Y., Altmann G.T.M., Haywood S.L. (2003), The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. In: Journal of Memory and Language, H. 49, S. 133–156.

Kamide Y., Mitchell D.C. (1999), Incremental pre-head attachment in Japanese parsing. In: Lan­guage and Cognitive Processes, H. 14, S. 631–662.

Kempen G., Harbusch K. (2005), The relationship between grammaticality ratings and corpus fre­quencies: A case study into word order variability in the midfield of German clauses. In: Kep­ser S./Reis M.(Hgg.), Linguistic evidence – Empirical, theoretical, and computational per­spectives, Berlin, S. 329–349.

Lombardo V., Sturt P. (2002), Incrementality and lexicalism: A treebank study. In: Merlo P./Steven­son S.(Hgg.), The Lexical Basis of Sentence Processing. Formal, computational and experi­mental issues. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, S. 137–156.

MacDonald M.C., Pearlmutter N.J., Seidenberg M.S. (1994), The lexical nature of syntactic ambi­guity resolution. In: Psychological Review, Bd. 101, H. 4, S. 676–703.

McRae K., Spivey-Knowlton M.J., Tanenhaus M.K.(1998), Modeling the Influence of Thematic Fit (and Other Constraints) in On-line Sentence Comprehension. In: Journal of Memory and Language, Bd. 38, H. 3, S. 283–312.

Miyamoto E.T.(2002), Case markers as clause boundary inducers in Japanese. In: Journal of Psy­cholinguistic Research, Bd. 31, H. 4, S. 307–347.

Naumann S., Langer H.(1994), Parsing – Eine Einführung in die maschinelle Analyse natürlicher Sprache, Stuttgart.

Pablos L. (2011), Rich agreement in Basque: Evidence for pre-verbal structure building. In: Ya­mashita H./Hirose Y./Packard J.L. (Hgg.), Processing and Producing Head-final Structures, Dordrecht u.a., S. 3–22.

Pickering M.J., Traxler M., Crocker M.W.(2000), Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing: Evidence against frequency-based accounts. In: Journal of Memory and Language, H. 43, S. 447–475.

Rayner K., Carlson M., Frazier L.(1983), The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. In: Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, Bd. 22, H. 3, S. 358–374.

Schwenk H.-J.(2017a), Ergänzungen und Angaben und sonst nichts? Die syntaktische Umgebung des deutschen Verbs und ihre Gliederung, Frankfurt a.M.u.a.

Schwenk H.-J. (2017b), Exemplarisches Valenz- und Konstruktionswörterbuch deutscher Verben. Die Differenzierung und Klassifizierung der Begleiter des deutschen Verbs und ihre lexiko­graphische Umsetzung in neuer Konzeption, Frankfurt a.M.u.a.

Schütze C.T., Gibson E. (1999), Argumenthood and English prepositional phrase attachment.In: Journal of Memory and Language, H. 40, S. 409–431.

Trueswell J.C., Tanenhaus M.K.(1994), Toward a lexicalist framework for constraint-based syn­tactic ambiguity resolution. In: Clifton C. Jr./Frazier L./Rayner K. (Hgg.), Perspectives in sentence processing, Hillsdale, NJ, S. 155–179.

Trueswell J.C., Tanenhaus, M.K., Garnsey S.M.(1994), Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. In: Journal of Memory and Lan­guage, Bd. 33, H. 3, S. 285–318.

Trueswell J.C., Tanenhaus M.K., Kello, C.(1993), Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. In: Journal of Experimental Psy­chology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, H. 19, S. 528–553.

Vosse T., Kempen G.(2000), Syntactic structure assembly in human parsing: a computational model based on competitive inhibition and a lexicalist grammar. In: Cognition, Bd. 72, H. 2, S. 105–143.

Yoo D.G. (2007), Syntax und Kontext: Satzverarbeitung in kopffinalen Sprachen, Dissertation, Uni­versität Bielefeld.

Opublikowane

2017-12-30

Jak cytować

Sękowska, Jolanta. 2017. “Wie Viel Information können Wir Antizipieren? Zum Problem Der Inkrementalität Und uneingeschränkten Interaktivität Beim Satzverstehen”. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Germanica, no. 13 (December): 9-20. https://doi.org/10.18778/1427-9665.13.02.