Advertisement

Natural Language & Linguistic Theory

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 519–559 | Cite as

Syntactic processing: Evidence from dutch

  • Lyn Frazier
Article

Keywords

Artificial Intelligence Syntactic Processing 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bach, E., C. Brown, and W. Marslen-Wilson: 1986, ‘Crossed and Nested Dependencies in German and Dutch: a Psycholinguistic Study’, Language and Cognitice Process 1, 249–262.Google Scholar
  2. Besten, H. den: 1983, ‘On the Interactions of Root Transformations and Lexical Deletion Rules’, in W. Abraham (ed.), On the Formal Syntax of the Westgermania. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp. 47–131.Google Scholar
  3. Bever, T.: 1970, ‘The Cognitive Basis for Linguistic Structures’, in J. R. Hayes (ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language, Wiley, New York, pp. 297–352.Google Scholar
  4. Chomsky, N.: 1981, Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  5. Crain, S. and J. D. Fodor: 1985, ‘How can Grammars Help Parsers?’ in D. Dowty, L. Karttunen and A. Zwicky (eds.), Theoretical Perspectives on Natural Language Parsing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  6. Crain, S. and M. Steedman: 1985, ‘On not Being Led up the Garden Path: The Use of Context by the Psychological Parser’, in D. Dowty, L. Karttunen and A. Zwicky (eds.), Natural Language Parsing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  7. Ferreira, F. and Clifton, C.: 1986, ‘The Independence of Syntactic Processing’, Journal of Memory and Language 25, 348–368.Google Scholar
  8. Fodor, J. D.: 1978, ‘Parsing Strategies and Constraints on Transformations’, Linguistic Inquiry 9, 427–474.Google Scholar
  9. Fodor, J. D.: 1979, ‘Superstrategy’, in W. E. Cooper and E. C. T. Walker (eds.), Sentence Processing: Psycholinguistic Studies Presented to Merrill Garrett, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J.Google Scholar
  10. Ford, M.: 1983, ‘A Method for Obtaining Measure of Local Parsing Complexity throughout Sentences’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22, 203–218.Google Scholar
  11. Ford, M., J. Bresnan, and R. Kaplan: 1983, ‘A Competence-based Theory of Syntactic Closure’, in J. Bresnan (ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 727–796.Google Scholar
  12. Frauenfelder, U., J. Segui and J. Mehler: 1980, ‘Monitoring Around the Relative Clause’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19, 328–337.Google Scholar
  13. Frazier, L.: 1979, On Comprehending Sentences: Syntactic Parsing Strategies, University of Connecticut, doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
  14. Frazier, L.: 1985, ‘Syntactic Complexity’, in D. Dowty, L. Karttunen and A. Zwicky (eds.), Natural Language Parsing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  15. Frazier, L., C. Clifton and J. Randall: 1983, ‘Filling Gaps: Decision Principles and Structure in Sentence Comprehension’, Cognition 13, 187–222.Google Scholar
  16. Frazier, L. and J. D. Fodor: 1978, ‘The Sausage Machine: A New Two-stage Parsing Model’, Cognition 6, 291–325.Google Scholar
  17. Frazier, L. and K. Rayner: 1982, ‘Making and Correcting Errors During Sentence Comprehension: Eye Movements in Analysis of Structurally Ambiguous Sentences’, Cognitive Psychology 14, 178–210.Google Scholar
  18. Frazier, L. and K. Rayner: (in press), ‘Parameterizing the Language Processing System: Left- vs. Right-branching Within and Across Languages’, in J. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining Linguistic Universals, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  19. Frazier, L., L. Taft, T. Roeper, C. Clifton and K. Ehrlich: 1984, ‘Parallel Structures’, Memory and Cognition 12, 421–430.Google Scholar
  20. Gerken, L. A. and T. G. Bever: 1986, ‘Linguistic Intuitions are the Result of Interactions Between Perceptual Processes and Linguistic Universals’, Cognitive Science 10, 475–476.Google Scholar
  21. Holmes, V. M.: 1987, ‘Syntacting Parsing: In Search of the Garden-path’, in M. Coltheart (ed.), Attention and Performance XII (in press).Google Scholar
  22. Jackendoff, R. and P. Culicover: 1971, ‘A Reconsideration of Dative Movement’, Foundations of Language 7, 392–412.Google Scholar
  23. Jansen, F.: 1978, ‘Sentence-initial Elements in Spoken Dutch’, in W. Zonneveld (ed.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1974–1976, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  24. Kennedy, A. and W. S. Murray: 1984, ‘Inspection Times for Words in Syntactically ambiguous Sentences Under Three Presentation Conditions’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 10, 833–849.Google Scholar
  25. Kimball, J.: 1973, ‘Seven Principles of Surface Structure Parsing in Natural Language’, Cognition 2, 15–47.Google Scholar
  26. Miller, G. A.: 1956, ‘The Magical Number Seven Plus or Minus Two’, Psychological Review 63, 81–96.Google Scholar
  27. Rayner, K. and L. Frazier: (in press), ‘Parsing Temporarily Ambiguous Complements’, to appear in Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.Google Scholar
  28. Read, C., A. Kraak and L. Broves: 1980, ‘The Interpretation of Ambigous Wh-questions in Dutch: The effect of Intonation’, in W. Zonneveld and F. Weerman (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1977–1979. Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  29. Riemsdijk, H. van: 1978, A Case Study in Syntactic Markedness, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  30. Stowe, L.: 1986, ‘Parsing Wh-Constructions: Evidence for On-line Gap Location, Language and Cognitive Processes 1, 227–245.Google Scholar
  31. Stowell, T.: 1981, Origins of Phrase Structure, MIT doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar
  32. Tanenhaus, M. K., G. N. Carlson and M. S. Seidenberg: 1985, ‘Do Listeners Compute Linguistic Representations?’ in D. Dowty, L. Karttunen and A. Zwicky (eds.), Natural Language Parsing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  33. Wanner, E. and M. Maratsos: 1978, ‘An ATN Approach to Comprehension’, in M. Halle, J. Bresnan and G. A. Miller (eds.), Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  34. Woolford, E.: 1986, ‘The Distribution of Empty Nodes in Navajo: A Mapping Approach’, Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 301–330.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lyn Frazier
    • 1
  1. 1.Linguistics Department South CollegeUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations