Références bibliographiques

Abney, S. P. (1989). A computational model of human parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 129-144.
Albrecht, J. E. & O’Brien, E. J. (1991). Effects of centrality on retrieval of text-based concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 932-939.
Almor, A. (1999). Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis. Psychological Review, 106, 748-765.
Almor, A. (2004). A computational investigation of reference in production and comprehension. In J. C. Trueswell & M. K. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Approaches to studying world-situated language use: bridging the language-as-product and language-as-action traditions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Almor, A., Kempler, D., MacDonald, M. C., Andersen, E. S., & Tyler, L. K. (1999). Why do Alzheimer patients have difficulty with pronouns? Working memory, semantics, and reference in comprehension and production in Alzheimer’s disease. Brain and Language, 67, 202-227.
Almor, A. & Nair, V. A. (2007). The form of referential expressions in discourse. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1, 84-99.
Almor, A., Smith, D., V., Bonilha, L., Fridriksson, J., & Rorden, C. (2007). What is in a name? Spatial brain circuits are used to track discourse reference. NeuroReport, 18, 1215-1219.
Altmann, G. T. M. & Steedman, M. (1988). Interactions with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30, 191-238.
Altmann, G. T. M., Van Nice, K. Y., Garnham, A., & Henstra, J.-A. (1998). Late Closure in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 459-484.
Apothéloz, D. (1995). Rôle et fonctionnement de l’anaphore dans la dynamique textuelle. Genève: Droz.
Ariel, M. (1988). Retrieving propositions from context: Why and how. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 567-600.
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London: Croom Helm.
Ariel, M. (1996). Referring expressions and the +/- coreference distinction. In T. Fretheim & J. K. Gundel (Eds.), Reference and referent accessibility (pp. 13-35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ariel, M. (1999). Cognitive universals and linguistic conventions: The case of resumptive pronouns. Studies In Language, 23, 217-269.
Ariel, M. (2001). Accessibility theory: An overview. In T. J. M. Sanders (Ed.), Text representation. Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects. (pp. 29-87). Philadelphia, PA, USA: John Benjamins.
Arnold, D. (2004). Non-restrictive relative clauses in construction based HPSG. Paper presented at the HPSG04 Conference, Stanford.
Arnold, J. E. (2001). The effect of thematic roles on pronoun use and frequency of reference continuation. Discourse Processes, 31, 137-162.
Arnold, J. E., Eisenband, J. G., Brown-Schmidt, S., & Trueswell, J. C. (2000). The rapid use of gender information: Evidence of the time course of pronoun resolution from eyetracking. Cognition, 76, B13-B26.
Arnold, J. E. & Griffin, Z. (2007). The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: Everyone counts. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 521-536.
Arnold, J. E., Wasow, T., Asudeh, A., & Alrenga, P. (2004). Avoiding attachment ambiguities: The role of constituent ordering. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 55-70.
Arnold, J. E., Wasow, T., Losongco, A., & Ginstrom, R. (2000). Heaviness vs. newness: The effect of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language, 76, 28-55.
Auroux, S. & Rosier, I. (1987). Les sources historiques de la conception des deux types de relatives. Langages, 88, 9-29.
Baayen, R. H. (à paraître). Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Baccino, T., De Vincenzi, M., & Job, R. (2000). Cross-linguistic studies of the late closure strategy: French and Italian. In M. De Vincenzi & V. Lombardo (Eds.), Cross-linguistic perspectives on language processing (pp. 89-118): Kluwer Academics.
Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Working memory and language: an overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36, 189-208.
Baltazart, D. & Kister, L. (2000). Is it possible to predetermine a referent included in a French N de N structure? In S. Botley (Ed.), Corpus-based and computational approaches do discourse anaphora. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Bates, D. M. & DebRoy, S. (2004). Linear lixed models and penalized least squares. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 91, 1-17.
Bates, E., Devescovi, A., & D’Amico, S. (1999). Processing complex sentences: A cross-linguistic study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 69-123.
Bates, E., McNew, S., MacWhinney, B., Devescovi, A., & Smith, S. (1982). Functional constraints on sentence processing: A cross-linguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245-299.
Bayley, R. (1999). Relativization strategies in Mexican-American English. American Speech, 74, 115-139.
Beach, C. M. (1991). The interpretation of prosodic patterns at points of syntactic structure ambiguity: Evidence for cue trading relations. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 644-663.
Beaver, D. (2004). The optimization of discourse anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27, 3-56.
Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language (pp. 279-362). New York: Wiley.
Biber, D. (1986). Spoken and written textual dimensions in English: Resolving the contradictory findings. Language, 62.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bock, K. & Irwin, D. E. (1980). Syntactic effects of information availability in sentence production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 467-484.
Bock, K. & Levelt, W. (1994). Language production: Grammatical encoding. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 945-984). Sand Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Bock, K. & Warren, R. K. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21, 47-67.
Boland, J., Tanenhaus, M. K., Garnsey, S. M., & Carlson, G. N. (1995). Verb argument structure in parsing and interpretation: Evidence from wh-questions. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 774-806.
Bouma, G. & Hopp, H. (2006, 7-11 August). Effects of word order and grammatical function on pronoun resolution in German. Paper presented at the Ambiguity in Anaphora Workshop, ESSLI 2006, Malaga, Spain.
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Cleland, A. A. (1999). Syntactic priming in written production: Evidence for rapid decay. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 635-640.
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Tanaka, M. (2008). Contributions of animacy to grammatical function assingment and word order during production. Lingua, 118, 172-189.
Brennan, S. E. (1995). Centering attention in discourse. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 137-167.
Brennan, S. E., Friedman, M. W., & Pollard, C. J. (1987). A centering approach to pronouns. Paper presented at the 25th Annual Meeting of the ACL, Stanford, CA.
Brysbaert, M. & Mitchell, D. C. (1996). Modifier attachment in sentence parsing: Evidence from Dutch. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 664-695.
Caplan, D., Alpert, N., & Waters, G. (1998). Effects of syntactic structure and propositional number on patterns of regional cerebral blood flow. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 541-552.
Caplan, D., Alpert, N., & Waters, G. (1999). PET studies of syntactic processing with auditory sentence presentation. NeuroImage, 9, 343-351.
Caramazza, A., Grober, E., Garvey, C., & Yates, J. (1977). Comprehension of anaphoric pronouns. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 601-609.
Carlson, K., Clifton, C., Jr., & Frazier, L. (2001). Prosodic boundaries in adjunct attachment. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 58-81.
Carreiras, M. & Clifton, C., Jr. (1993). Relative clause interpretation preferences in Spanish and English. Language and Speech, 36, 353-372.
Carreiras, M. & Clifton, C., Jr. (1999). Another word on parsing relative clauses: Eyetracking evidence from Spanish and English. Memory and Cognition, 27, 826-833.
Carreiras, M., Salillas, E., & Barber, H. (2004). Event-related potentials elicited during parsing of ambiguous relative clauses in Spanish. Cognitive Brain Research, 20, 98-105.
Chafe, W. L. (1974). Language and consciousness. Language, 50, 111-133.
Chafe, W. L. (1996). Inferring identifiability and accessibility. In T. Fretheim & J. K. Gundel (Eds.), Reference and referent accessibility (pp. 37-46). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chambers, C. G. & Smyth, R. (1998). Structural parallelism and discourse coherence: A test of Centering Theory. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 593-608.
Charolles, M. (1990). Coût, surcoût et pertinence. Cahiers de linguistique française, 11, 49-75.
Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J., & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the garden-path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 368-407.
Clark, H. H. (1975). Bridging. In R. C. Schank & B. L. Nash-Webber (Eds.), Theoretical issues in natural language processing. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
Clifton, C., Jr. (1993). Thematic roles in sentence parsing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 222-246.
Clifton, C., Jr., Carlson, K., & Frazier, L. (2002). Informative prosodic boundaries. Language and Speech, 45, 87-114.
Clifton, C., Jr., Traxler, M. J., Mohamed, M. T., Williams, R. S., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (2003). The use of thematic role information in parsing: Syntactic processing autonomy revisited. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 317-334.
Cloitre, M. & Bever, T. G. (1988). Linguistic anaphors, levels of representation, and discourse. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3, 293-322.
Cohen, H., Douaire, J., & Elsabbagh, M. (2001). The role of prosody in discourse prosody. Brain and Cognition, 46, 73-82.
Colonna, S. (2001). Facteurs influençant la levée des ambiguïtés syntaxiques. Université Aix-Marseille I, Aix-en-Provence.
Colonna, S. & Pynte, J. (2002). La levée des ambiguïtés syntaxiques : apport des recherches inter-langues. L’Année Psychologique, 102, 151-187.
Comrie, B. (1981). Relative clauses. In Language universals and linguistic typology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Cornish, F. (2000). L’accessibilité cognitive des référents, le Centrage d’attention et la structuration du discours : une vue d’ensemble. Verbum, 22, 7-30.
Cornish, F. (2001). L’anaphore pronominale indirecte : une question de focus. In W. de Mulder, C. Vet & C. Vetters (Eds.), L’anaphore pronominale et nominale : études pragma-sémantiques (pp. 1-25). New York - Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Cornish, F., Garnham, A., Cowles, H. W., Fossard, M., & André, V. (2005). Indirect anaphora in English and French: A cross-linguistic study of pronoun resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 363-376.
Coulson, S., King, J. W., & Kutas, M. (1998). Expect the unexpected: Event-related brain response to morphosyntactic violations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 13, 21-58.
Crain, S. & Steedman, M. (1985). On not being led up the garden path: the use of context by the psychological parser. In D. R. Dowty, L. Karttunen & A. M. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crawley, R. A., Stevenson, R., & Kleinman, D. (1990). The use of heuristic strategies in the interpretation of pronouns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 19, 24-264.
Creissels, D. (2006). Syntaxe générale, une introduction typologique. Paris: Hermès.
Crocker, M. W. & Keller, F. (2006). Probabilistic grammars as models of gradience in language processing. In G. Fanselow, C. Féry, R. Vogel & M. Schlesewsky (Eds.), Gradience in grammar: Generative perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cuetos, F. & Mitchell, D. C. (1988). Cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the Late Closure strategy in Spanish. Cognition, 30, 73-105.
Dahl, Ö. & Fraurud, K. (1996). Animacy in grammar and discourse. In T. Fretheim & J. K. Gundel (Eds.), Reference and referent accessibility (pp. 47-64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Damourette, J. & Pichon, E. (1969). Des mots à la pensée. Essai de grammaire de la langue française 1911-1934 (Vol. 4). Paris: Editions d’Artrey.
Dapretto, M. & Bookheimer, S. Y. (1999). Form and content: Dissociating syntax and semantics in sentence comprehension. Neuron, 24, 427-432.
De Vincenzi, M. & Job, R. (1993). Some observations on the universality of the late-closure strategy. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 189-206.
De Vincenzi, M. & Job, R. (1995). An investigation of Late Closure: The role of syntax, thematic structure, and pragmatics in initial and final interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1303-1321.
Delle Luche, C. (2004). Contributions des indices syntaxiques et sémantiques dans la compréhension de phrases. Unpublished Master Thesis, Université Lyon 2 Lumière, Lyon.
Delle Luche, C. (2006, 4-7 juillet). Syntaxe et sémantique dans la compréhension de propositions relatives en français. Paper presented at the Colloque international des étudiants chercheurs en didactique des langues et en linguistique, Grenoble.
Demberg, V. & Keller, F. (à paraître). Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity. Cognition.
Desmet, T., Brysbaert, M., & De Baecke, C. (2002). The correspondance between sentence production and corpus frequencies in modifier attachment. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 879-896.
Desmet, T., De Baecke, C., & Brysbaert, M. (2002). The influence of referential discourse context on modifier attachment in Dutch. Memory and Cognition, 30, 150-157.
Desmet, T., De Baecke, C., Drieghe, D., Brysbaert, M., & Vonk, W. (2006). Relative clause attachment in Dutch: On-line comprehension corresponds to corpus frequencies when lexical variables are taken into account. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 453-485.
Desmet, T. & Declercq, M. (2006). Cross-linguistic priming of syntactic hierarchical configuration information. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 610-632.
Desmet, T. & Gibson, E. (2003). Disambiguation preferences and corpus frequencies in noun phrase conjunction. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 353-374.
Di Eugenio, B. (1998). Centering in Italian. In M. A. Walker, A. K. Joshi & E. F. Prince (Eds.), Centering in discourse (pp. 115-137). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Donnellan, K. S. (1966). Reference and definite descriptions. The Philosophical Review, 75, 281-304.
Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 429-446.
Dussias, P. E. (2001). Sentence parsing in fluent Spanish-English bilinguals. In J. Nicol (Ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing (pp. 159-176). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Dussias, P. E. & Sagarra, N. (2007). The effect of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 101-116.
Ehrlich, K. (1980). Comprehension of pronouns. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 247-255.
Ehrlich, K. (1981). Search and inference strategies in pronoun resolution: An experimental study. Paper presented at the 19th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics.
Ehrlich, K. & Rayner, K. (1983). Pronoun assignment and semantic integration during reading: Eye movements and immediacy of processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 75-87.
Elman, J. L., Hare, M., & McRae, K. (2004). Cues, constraints, and competition in sentence processing. In M. Tomasello & D. I. Slobin (Eds.), Beyond nature-nurture: Essays in honor of Elizabeth Bates. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Epstein, R. (2002). The definite article, accessibilty, and the construction of discourse referents. Cognitive Linguistics, 12, 333-378.
Erkü, F. & Gundel, J. K. (1987). The pragmatics of indirect anaphors. In J. Verschueren & M. Bertucelli-Papi (Eds.), The pragmatic perspective: Selected papers from the 1985 International Pragmatics Conference. Amsterdam, PA: John Benjamins.
Farmer, T. A., Anderson, S. E., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Gradiency and visual context in syntactic garden-paths. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 570-595.
Farmer, T. A., Cargill, S. A., Hindy, N. C., Dale, R., & Spivey, M. J. (2007). Tracking the continuity of language comprehension: Computer mouse trajectories suggest parallel syntactic processing. Cognitive Science, 31, 889-909.
Ferreira, F. & Clifton, C., Jr. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348-368.
Ferreira, F. & Henderson, J. M. (1990). Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 555-568.
Ferreira, F. & Henderson, J. M. (1991). Recovery from misanalyses of garden-path sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 725-745.
Ferreira, F. & Henderson, J. M. (1993). Reading processes during syntactic analysis and reanalysis. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 247-275.
Ferreira, V. S. (2003). The persistence of optional complementizer production: Why saying "that" is not saying "that" at all. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 379-398.
Ferreira, V. S. (à paraître). Ambiguity, accessibility, and a division of labor for communicative success. Psychology of Learning and Motivation.
Ferreira, V. S. & Dell, G. S. (2000). Effect of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 296-340.
Ferstl, E. C. & von Cramon, Y. D. (2001). The role of coherence and cohesion in text comprehension: an event-related fMRI study. Cognitive Brain Research, 11, 325-340.
Fletcher, C. R. (1984). Markedness and topic continuity in discourse processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 487-493.
Fodor, J. A. (1986). La modularité de l’esprit : essai sur la psychologie des facultés. Paris: Editions de Minuit.
Fodor, J. D. (1998). Learning to parse? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 285-319.
Forster, K. I. & Forster, J. C. (2002). DMDX version 2.9.01. Retrieved 12/2000, from http://www.u.arizona.edu/~kforster/dmdx/dmdx.htm
Frank, S., Koppen, M., Noordman, L. G., & Vonk, W. (2003). Modeling knowledge-based inferences in story comprehension. Cognitive Science, 27, 875-910.
Frazier, L. (1985). Syntactic complexity. In D. R. Dowty, L. Karttunen & A. M. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing. Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives (pp. 129-189). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), The psychology of reading. Attention and performance XII (pp. 559-586). Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Frazier, L. (1990a). Exploring the architecture of the language-processing system. In G. T. M. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing. Cambridge: MIT press.
Frazier, L. (1990b). Parsing modifiers: Special purpose routines in the human sentence processing mechanism? In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d’Arcais & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 303-330). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Frazier, L. (1995). Constraint satisfaction as a theory of sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 437-468.
Frazier, L. & Clifton, C., Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Frazier, L. & Clifton, C., Jr. (1997). Construal: Overview, motivation, and some new evidence. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 277-295.
Frazier, L. & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6, 291-325.
Frazier, L. & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178-210.
Frazier, L. & Rayner, K. (1987). Resolution of syntactic category ambiguities: Eye movements in parsing lexically ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 505-526.
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2004). Ambiguities and anomalies: What can eye-movements and event-related potentials reveal about second language sentence processing? In J. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of Bilingualism (pp. 268-284). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Frenck-Mestre, C. & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 119-148.
Frenck-Mestre, C. & Pynte, J. (2000a). Resolving syntactic ambiguities: Cross-linguistic differences? In M. De Vincenzi & V. Lombardo (Eds.), Cross-linguistic perspectives on language processing: Kluwer Academics.
Frenck-Mestre, C. & Pynte, J. (2000b). ‘Romancing’ syntactic ambiguity: Why the French and the Italians don’t see eye to eye. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach & D. Heller (Eds.), Perceptual processes in reading: Elsevier.
Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 78-84.
Friederici, A. D., Hahne, A., & Saddy, D. (2002). Distinct neurophysiological patterns reflecting aspects of syntactic complexity and syntactic repair. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 45-63.
Friederici, A. D., Pfeifer, E., & Hahne, A. (1993). Event-related brain potentials during natural speech processing: Effects of semantic, morphological and syntactic violations. Cognitive Brain Research, 1, 183-192.
Fuchs, C. (1996). Les ambiguïtés du français. Paris: Ophrys.
Galliot, M. & Laubreaux, R. (1966). Le français langue vivante. Paris: Privat-Didier.
Garnham, A. & Oakhill, J. (1985). On-line resolution of anaphoric pronouns: Effects of inference making and verb semantics. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 385-393.
Garnham, A., Oakhill, J., & Cain, K. (1997). The interpretation of anaphoric noun phrases: Time course, and effect of overspecificity. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 149-162.
Garnsey, S. M., Pearlmutter, N. J., Myers, E., & Lotocky, M. A. (1997). The contributions of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 58-93.
Garrod, S., Freudenthal, D., & Boyle, E. (1994). The role of different types of anaphor in the on-line resolution of sentences in discourse. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 39-68.
Garrod, S. & Sanford, A. (1977). Interpreting anaphoric relations: The integration of semantic information while reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 77-90.
Garrod, S. & Sanford, A. (1990). Referential processes in reading: Focusing on roles and individuals. In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d’Arcais & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 465-485). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Garrod, S. & Sanford, A. (1994). Resolving sentences in a discourse context. How discourse representaiton affects language understanding. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 675-698). Sand Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1989). Mechanisms that improve referential access. Cognition, 32, 99-156.
Gernsbacher, M. A. & Hargreaves, D. J. (1988). Accessing sentence participants: The advantage of first mention. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 699-717.
Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1-76.
Gibson, E. (2000). The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In A. Marantz (Ed.), Image, language, brain: Papers from the first Mind Articulation Project symposium (pp. 95-126). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gibson, E., Desmet, T., Grodner, D., Watson, D., & Ko, K. (2005). Reading relative clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics, 16, 313-353.
Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N. J., Canseco-Gonzalez, E., & Hickok, G. (1996). Recency preference in the human sentence processing mechanism. Cognition, 59, 23-59.
Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Torrens, V. (1999). Recency and lexical preferences in Spanish. Memory and Cognition, 27, 603-611.
Gibson, E. & Schütze, C. T. (1999). Disambiguation preferences in noun phrase conjunction do not mirror corpus frequency. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 263-279.
Gibson, E., Schütze, C. T., & Salomon, A. (1996). The relationship between the frequency and the processing complexity of linguistic structure. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 61-92.
Gilboy, E. & Sopena, J.-M. (1996). Segmentation effects in the processing of complex NPs with relative clauses. In M. Carreiras, G.-A. J. E. & N. Sebastián-Gallés (Eds.), Language processing in Spanish (pp. 191-206). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gilboy, E., Sopena, J.-M., Clifton, C., Jr., & Frazier, L. (1995). Argument structure and association preferences in Spanish and English complex NPs. Cognition, 54, 131-167.
Giora, R. (1988). On the informativeness requirement. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 547-565.
Givón, T. (1982). Logic vs. pragmatics, with human language as the referee: Toward an empirically viable epistemology. Journal of Pragmatics, 6, 81-133.
Givón, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In T. Givón (Ed.), Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study (pp. 5-41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Givón, T. (1990). Syntax: A functional typological introduction (Vol. 2). Amsterdam, Ph: John Benjamins.
Givón, T. (1992). The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistics, 30, 5-55.
Gordon, P. C. & Chan, D. (1995). Pronouns, passives, and discourse coherence. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 216-231.
Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B., & Gilliom, L. (1993). Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science, 3, 311-347.
Gordon, P. C. & Hendrick, R. (1997). Intuitive knowledge of linguistic co-reference. Cognition, 62, 325-370.
Gordon, P. C. & Hendrick, R. (1998). The representation and processing of coreference in discourse. Cognitive Science, 22, 389-424.
Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., Ledoux, K., & Yang, C. L. (1999). Processing of reference and the structure of language: An analysis of complex noun phrases. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 353-379.
Gordon, P. C. & Scearce, K. A. (1995). Pronominalization and discourse coherence, discourse structure and pronoun interpretation. Memory and Cognition, 23, 313-323.
Green. (2006). Absence of real evidence against competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 1-17.
Greene, S. B., Gerrig, R. J., McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1994). Unheralded pronouns and management by common ground. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 511-526.
Greene, S. B., McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Pronoun resolution and discourse models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 266-283.
Grodner, D., Gibson, E., & Watson, D. (2005). The influence of contextual contrast on syntactic processing: Evidence for strong interaction in sentence comprehension. Cognition, 95, 275-296.
Grosz, B., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse. Paper presented at the 21st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA.
Grosz, B., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modelling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21, 203-225.
Grosz, B. & Sidner, C. L. (1997). Lost intuitions and forgotten intentions. In M. A. Walker, A. K. Joshi & E. F. Prince (Eds.), Centering in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69, 274-307.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (2000). Statut cognitif et forme des anaphoriques indirects. Verbum, 22, 79-102.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (2001). Definite descriptions and cognitive status in English: Why accommodation is unnecessary. English Language and Linguistics, 5, 273-295.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (2002, September 18-20). Pronouns without explicit antecedents: How do we know when a pronoun is referential? Paper presented at the DAARC-4 (the fourth Discourse Anaphora and Anaphora Resolution Colloquium), Lisbon, Portugal.
Gunter, T. C., Friederici, A. D., & Schriefers, H. (2000). Syntactic gender and semantic expectancy: ERPs reveal early autonomy and late interaction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 556-568.
Guy, G. R. & Bayley, R. (1995). On the choice of relative pronouns in English. American Speech, 70(148-162).
Hagoort, P. & Brown, C. M. (2000). ERP effects of listening to speech compared to reading: The P600/SPS to syntactic violations in spoken sentences and rapid serial visual presentation. Neuropsychologia, 38, 1531-1549.
Hagoort, P., Brown, C. M., & Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 439-483.
Hahne, A. & Friederici, A. D. (2002). Differential task effects on semantic and syntactic processes as revealed by ERP’s. Cognitive Brain Research, 13, 339-356.
Halmari, H. (1996). On accessibility and coreference. In T. Fretheim & J. K. Gundel (Eds.), Reference and referent accessibility (pp. 155-178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hare, M., Tanenhaus, M. K., & McRae, K. (2007). Understanding and producing the reduced relative construction: Evidence from ratings, editing and corpora. Journal of Memory and Language, 56, 410-435.
Harville, D. A. & Mee, R. W. (1984). A mixed-model procedure for analyzing ordered categorical data. Biometrics, 40, 393-408.
Haviland, S. E. & Clark, H. H. (1974). What’s new? Acquiring new information as a process in comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 512-521.
Hawkins, J. A. (1984). A note on referent identifiability and co-presence. Journal of Pragmatics, 8, 649-659.
Heim, I. (1998). Anaphora and semantic interpretation: A reinterpretation of Reinhart’s approach. In U. Sauerland & O. Percus (Eds.), The interpretive tract: Working paper in syntax and semantics (Vol. 25, pp. 205-246): MIT Working Paper in Linguistics.
Heine, A., Tamm, S., Hofmann, M., Hutzler, F., & Jacobs, A. M. (2006). Does the frequency of the antecedent noun affect the resolution of pronominal anaphors? Neuroscience Letters, 7-12.
Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., & Scheepers, C. (2000). Syntactic attachment and anaphor resolution: The two sides of relative clause attachment. In M. W. Crocker, M. J. Pickering & C. Clifton, Jr. (Eds.), Architectures and mechanisms for language processing (pp. 259-282). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Henderson, C. R. (1975). Best linear unbiased estimation and prediction under a selection model. Biometrics, 31, 423-447.
Hill, R. L. & Murray, W. S. (1999). Commas and spaces: Effects of punctuation on eye movements and sentence parsing. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process. Oxford: Elsevier.
Hindle, D. & Rooth, M. (1993). Structural ambiguity and lexical relations. Computational Linguistics, 19, 103-120.
Hirotani, M., Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (2006). Punctuation and intonation effects on clause and sentence wrap-up: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 425-443.
Hobbs, J. R. (1978). Resolving pronoun references. Lingua, 44, 311-338.
Hobbs, J. R. (1979). Coherence and coreference. Cognitive Science, 3, 67-90.
Hoeks, J. C. J., Hendriks, P., Vonk, W., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (2006). Processing the noun phrase versus sentence coordination ambiguity: Thematic information does not completely eliminate processing difficulty. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1581-1599.
Holmes, V. M. (1988). Hesitations and sentence planning. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3, 323-361.
Holmes, V. M. (1995). A crosslinguistic comparison of the production of utterances in discourse. Cognition, 54, 169-207.
Holmes, V. M. & O’Regan, J. K. (1981). Eye fixation patterns during the reading of relative-clause sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 417-430.
Igoa, J. M., Carreiras, M., & Meseguer, E. (1998). A study on late closure in Spanish: Principle-grounded vs. frequency-based accounts of attachment preferences. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51A, 561-592.
Jackendoff, R. (1999). Parallel constraint-based generative theories of language. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 393-400.
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformational or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language.
Jaeger, T. F. & Wasow, T. (à paraître). Processing as a source of accessibility effects on variation. Paper presented at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1980). Mental models in cognitive science. Cognitive Science, 4, 71-115.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. & Garnham, A. (1980). Descriptions and discourse models. Linguistics and Philosophy, 3, 371-393.
Jones, M. A. (1996). Foundations of French syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jun, S.-A. (2003). Prosodic phrasing and attachment preferences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32.
Jurafsky, D. (1996). A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive Science, 20, 137-194.
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., Keller, T. A., Eddy, W. F., & Thulborn, K. R. (1996). Brain activation modulated by sentence comprehension. Science, 274, 114-116.
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Wooley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111, 228-238.
Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. (2000). The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 159-201.
Kaan, E. & Swaab, T. Y. (2003). Repair, revision, and complexity in syntactic analysis: An electrophysiological differentiation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 98-110.
Kaan, E., Wijnen, F., & Swaab, T. Y. (2004). Gapping: Electrophysiological evidence for immediate processing of "missing" verbs in sentence comprehension. Brain and Language, 89, 584-592.
Kameyama, M. (1998). Intrasentiential centering: A case study. In M. A. Walker, A. K. Joshi & E. F. Prince (Eds.), Centering in discourse (pp. 89-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Karabanov, A., König, P., & Bosch, P. (2006). Eye-tracking evidence for online processes in the comprehension of referential expressions. Paper presented at the International Conference on Linguistic Evidence.
Keenan, E. L. & Comrie, B. (1987). Noun phrase accessibility and Universal Grammar. In E. L. Keenan (Ed.), Universal Grammar: 15 essays (pp. 3-45). London: Croom Helm.
Kehler, A. (1993). Intrasentential constraints on intersentential anaphora in Centering Theory. Paper presented at the Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse, University of Pennsylvania.
Kehler, A. (1997). Current theories of Centering for pronoun interpretation: A critical evaluation. Computational Linguistics, 23, 467-475.
Kibble, R. (2001). A reformulation of Rule 2 of Centering Theory. Computational Linguistics, 27, 579-587.
King, J. W. & Just, M. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 580-602.
Kintsch, W. & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
Kister, L. (1999). Identification des chaînes de référence dans les systèmes automatiques : le cas des anaphores dans les N de N. Paper presented at the VEXTAL’99, Venezia, San Servolo.
Kister, L. (2002, 24-27 juin). Relatifs et référents inclus dans un SN : des paramètres pour présélectionner la saisie.Paper presented at the TALN 2002, Nancy.
Kjelgaard, M. M. & Speer, S. R. (1999). Prosodic facilitation an interference in the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 153-194.
Kleiber, G. (1987). Relatives restrictives/relatives appositives : Dépassement(s) autorisé(s). Langages, 88, 41-63.
Kleiber, G. (1990). Marqueurs référentiels et processus interprétatifs : pour une approche "plus sémantique". Cahiers de linguistique française, 11, 241-258.
Kleiber, G. (1994). Anaphores et pronoms. Louvain-la-Neuve: Duculot.
Klin, C. M., Guzmán, A. E., Weingartner, K. M., & Ralano, A. S. (2006). When anaphor resolution fails: Partial encoding of anaphoric inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 131-143.
Kortmann, B., Burridge, K., Mesthrie, R., Schneider, E. W., & Upton, C. (Eds.). (2004). A handbook of varieties of English (Vol. 2: Morphology and Syntax). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kuperberg, G. R., Kreher, D. A., Sitnikova, T., Caplan, D. N., & Holcomb, P. (2006). The role of animacy and thematic relationships in processing active English sentences: Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain and Language.
Kuperberg, G. R., Lakshmanan, B. M., Caplan, D. N., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). Making sense of discourse: An fMRI study of causal inferencing across sentences. NeuroImage, 33, 343-361.
Kutas, M. & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature, 307, 161-163.
Kutas, M. & Kluender, R. (1994). What is who violating? A reconsideration of linguistic violations in light of event-related brain potentials. In H. T. Heinze, G. R. Mangun & T. F. Münte (Eds.), Cognitive Electrophysiology (pp. 183-210). Boston: Birkhaeuser.
Kutas, M. & Van Petten, C. (1988). Event-related brain potential studies of language. Advances in Psychophysiology, 3, 139-187.
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ledoux, K., Gordon, P. C., Camblin, C., & Swaab, T. Y. (2007). Coreference and lexical repetition: Mechanisms of discourse integration. Memory and Cognition, 35, 801-815.
Leech, G. (1981). Semantics: The study of meaning (2nd ed.). London: Pelican.
Levine, W. H., Guzmán, A. E., & Klin, C. M. (2000). When anaphor resolution fails. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 594-617.
Levinson, S., C. (1987a). Minimization and conversational inference. In J. Verschueren & M. Bertucelli-Papi (Eds.), The pragmatic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Levinson, S., C. (1987b). Pragmatics and the grammar of anaphora: A partial pragmatic reduction of Binding and Control phenomena. Journal of Linguistics, 23, 379-434.
Loock, R. (2003). Les fonctions des propositions subordonnées relatives "appositives" en discours. Anglophonia, 12, 113-131.
Loock, R. (2007). Appositive relative clauses and their functions in discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 336-362.
MacDonald, M. C. (1993). The interaction of lexical and syntactic ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 692-715.
MacDonald, M. C. (1994). Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 157-201.
MacDonald, M. C. (1999). Distributional information in language comprehension, production, and acquisition: three puzzles and a moral. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 177-196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
MacDonald, M. C., Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 56-98.
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676-703.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1987). Functional parallelism in spoken-word recognition. Cognition, 25, 71-102.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D. & Tyler, L. K. (1980). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition, 8, 1-71.
Matsui, T. (1993). Bridging reference and the notions of ‘topic’ and ‘focus’. Lingua, 90, 49-68.
Maynell, L. A. (1999). Effect of pitch accent placement on resolving relative clause ambiguity in English. Paper presented at the 12th Annual CUNY, New York.
Maynell, L. A. (2000). Prosodic effects on relative clause attachment. Paper presented at the 13th Annual CUNY, La Jolla.
McDonald, J. L. & MacWhinney, B. (1995). The time course of anaphor resolution: Effects of implicit verb causality and gender. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 543-566.
McKoon, G., Gerrig, R. J., & Greene, S. B. (1996). Pronoun resolution without pronouns: Some consequences of memory-based text processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 919-932.
McKoon, G. & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99, 440-466.
McKoon, G. & Ratcliff, R. (2003). Meaning through syntax: Language comprehension and the reduced remative clause construction. Psychological Review, 110, 490-525.
McKoon, G., Ratcliff, R., Ward, G., & Sproat, R. (1993). Syntactic prominence effects on discourse processes. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 593-607.
McRae, K., Ferretti, T. R., & Amyote, L. (1997). Thematic roles as verb-specific concepts. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 137-176.
McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 283-312.
Meseguer, E., Carreiras, M., & Clifton, C., Jr. (2002). Overt reanalysis strategies and eye movements during the reading of mild garden path sentences. Memory and Cognition, 30, 551-561.
Miltsakaki, E. (2004a). A centering analysis of relative clauses in English and Greek. Paper presented at the 28th Penn Linguistics Colloquium, University of Pennsylvania, PA.
Miltsakaki, E. (2004b). Toward an aposynthesis of topic continuity and intrasentential anaphora. Computational Linguistics, 28, 319-355.
Mitchell, D. C. (1989). Verb guidance and other lexical effects in parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, SI 123-154.
Mitchell, D. C. (1994). Sentence parsing. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Mitchell, D. C. & Brysbaert, M. (1998). Challenges to recent theories of cross-linguistic variation in parsing: Evidence from Dutch. In D. Hillert (Ed.), Sentence processing: A cross-linguistic perspective. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Mitchell, D. C., Cuetos, F., Corley, M. M. B., & Brysbaert, M. (1995). Exposure-based models of human parsing: Evidence for the use of coarse-grained (nonlexical) statistical record. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 469-488.
Mitchell, D. C., Cuetos, F., & Zagar, D. (1990). Reading in different languages: Is there a universal mechanism for parsing sentences? In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d’Arcais & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 285-302). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mitchell, D. C. & Green, D. W. (1978). The effects of context and content on immediate processing in reading. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 609-636.
Mulkern, A. E. (1996). The game of the name. In T. Fretheim & J. K. Gundel (Eds.), Reference and referent accessibility (pp. 235-250). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Neville, H. J., Mills, D. L., & Lawson, D. S. (1992). Fractioning language: Different neural subsystems with different sensitive periods. Cerebral Cortex, 2, 244-258.
New, B., Pallier, C., Ferrand, L., & Matos, R. (2001). Une base de données lexicales du français contemporain sur internet : LEXIQUETM. L’Année Psychologique, 101, 447-462.
Nicol, J. & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 5-19.
Nieuwland, M. S., Otten, M., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2007). Who are you talking about? Tracking discourse-level referential processing with event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 228-236.
Nieuwland, M. S., Petersson, K. M., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2007). On sense and reference: Examining the functional neuroanatomy of referential processing. NeuroImage, 37, 993-1004.
Nieuwland, M. S. & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2006). Individual differences and contextual bias in pronoun resolution: Evidence from ERPs. Brain Research, 1118, 155-167.
O’Brien, E. J. & Albrecht, J. E. (1991). The role of context in accessing antecedents in texts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1991, 94-102.
O’Brien, E. J., Raney, G. E., Albrecht, J. E., & Rayner, K. (1997). Processes involved in the resolution of explicit anaphors. Discourse Processes, 23, 1-24.
Osterhout, L. & Holcomb, P. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 785-806.
Osterhout, L., McLaughlin, J., & Bersick, M. (1997). Event-related brain potentials and human language. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 203-209.
Osterhout, L. & Mobley, L. A. (1995). Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 739-773.
Osterhout, L. & Nicol, J. (1999b). On the distinctiveness, independence, and time course of the brain responses to syntactic and semantic anomalies. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 283-317.
Palolahti, M., Leino, S., Jokela, M., Kopra, K., & Paavilainen, P. (2005). Event-related potentials suggest early interaction between syntax and semantics during on-line sentence comprehension. Neuroscience Letters, 384, 222-227.
Pearlmutter, N. J., Garnsey, S. M., & Bock, K. (1999). Agreement processes in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 427-456.
Petrone, C., Colonna, S., Hemforth, B., d’Imperio, M., & Pynte, J. (2005). Length effects in PP-attachment. Paper presented at the 11th Annual Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing.
Pickering, M. J. & Traxler, M. J. (1998). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 940-961.
Pickering, M. J., Traxler, M. J., & Crocker, M. W. (2000). Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing: Evidence against frequency-based accounts. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 447-475.
Poesio, M., Stevenson, R., Di Eugenio, B., & Hitzeman, J. (2004). Centering: a parametric theory and its instantiations. Computational Linguistics, 30, 309-363.
Poesio, M. & Vieira, R. (1998). A corpus-based investigation of definite description use. Computational Linguistics, 24, 183-216.
Pollatsek, A. & Well, A. D. (1995). On the use of counterbalanced designs in cognitive research: A suggestion for a better and more powerful analysis. Journal of Experimental psychology: Learning, memory, and Cognition, 21, 785-794.
Prat-Sala, M. & Branigan, H. P. (2000). Discourse constraints on syntactic processing in language production: A cross-linguistic study of English and Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 168-182.
Prince, E. F. (1990). Syntax and discourse: A look at resumptive pronouns. Paper presented at the 16th annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society.
Pynte, J. & Colonna, S. (2000). Decoupling syntactic parsing from visual inspection: The case of relative clause attachment in French. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process. Oxford: Elsevier.
Pynte, J. & Colonna, S. (2001). Competition between primary and non-primary relations during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 569-599.
Pynte, J. & Kennedy, A. (2007). The influence of punctuation and word class on distributed processing in normal reading. Vision Research, 47, 1215-1227.
Pynte, J. & Prieur, B. (1996). Prosodic breaks and attachment decisions in sentence parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 165-191.
Race, D. S. & MacDonald, M. C. (2003). The use of "that" in the production and comprehension of object relative clauses. Paper presented at the 25th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.
Rayner, K. (1978). Eye movements in reading and information processing. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 618-660.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
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. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 358-374.
Rayner, K. & Clifton, C., Jr. (2002). Language processing. In D. Medin (Ed.), Stevens handbook of experimental psychology, Third edition: Vol 2, Memory and cognitive processes. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Rayner, K. & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory and Cognition, 14, 191-201.
Rayner, K. & Frazier, L. (1987). Parsing temporarily ambiguous complements. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 657-673.
Rayner, K., Garrod, S., & Perfetti, C. A. (1992). Discourse influences during parsing are delayed. Cognition, 45, 109-139.
Rayner, K., Kambe, G., & Duffy, S. A. (2000). The effect of clause wrap-up on eye movements during reading. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 1061-1080.
Rayner, K. & Sereno, J. A. (1994). Eye movements in reading. Psycholinguistic studies. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 57-81). Sand Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Rayner, K., Sereno, J. A., Morris, R. G., Schmauder, A. R., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1989). Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4(SI 21-49).
Reboul, A. (1989). Résolution de l’anaphore pronominal : Sémantique et/ou pragmatique. Cahiers de linguistique française, 10, 77-100.
Reboul, A. (1995). La pragmatique à la conquête de nouveaux domaines : la référence. L’information grammaticale, 66, 32-37.
Reboul, A. (1997). What (if anything) is accessibility? A relevance-oriented criticism of Ariel’s Accessibility Theory of referring expressions. In J. F. Connolly (Ed.), Discourse and pragmatics in functional grammar. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Reboul, A. (2001). Foundations of reference and predication. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Oesterreicher & W. Raible (Eds.), Language typology and language universals. An international handbook (pp. 509-522). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Reichman, R. (1978). Conversational coherency. Cognitive Science, 2, 283-237.
Riegel, M., Pellat, J.-C., & Rioul, R. (2004). Grammaire méthodique du français. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 192-233.
Rosenbach, A. (2005). Animacy versus weight as determinants of grammatical variation in English. Language, 81, 613-644.
Rosenbach, A. (2008). Animacy and grammatical variation - Findings from English genitive variation. Lingua, 118, 151-171.
Sanford, A. & Garrod, S. (1989). What, when, an how? Questions of immediacy in anaphoric reference resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, SI 235-262.
Sanford, A., Garrod, S., Lucas, A., & Henderson, R. (1983). Pronouns witout explicit antecedents? Journal of Semantics, 2, 303-318.
Schafer, A., Carter, J., Clifton, C., Jr., & Frazier, L. (1996). Focus in relative clause construal. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 135-163.
Schafer, A., Speer, S. R., Warren, P., & White, S. D. (2000). Intonational disambiguation in sentence production and comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29.
Schelstraete, M.-A. (1993). La conception du traitement syntaxique en compréhension de phrases. L’Année Psychologique, 93, 543-582.
Schelstraete, M.-A. & Degand, L. (1998). Assignment of grammatical functions in French relative clauses. Language Science, 20, 163-188.
Schmalhofer, F., McDaniel, M. A., & Keefe, D. (2002). A unified model for predictive and bridging inferences. Discourse Processes, 33, 105-132.
Schmid, H. (1994). Probabilistic part-of-speech tagging using decision trees. Paper presented at the International Conference on New Methods in Language Processing.
Schütze, C. T. & Gibson, E. (1999). Argumenthood and English prepositional phrase attachment. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 409-431.
Seppänen, A. (1999). Dialectal variation in English relativization. Lingua, 109, 15-34.
Sheldon, A. (1974). On the role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 272-281.
Sidner, C. L. (1979). Towards a computational theory of definite anaphora comprehension in English discourse. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Sidner, C. L. (1981). Focusing for interpretation of pronouns. American Journal of Computational Linguistics, 7, 217-231.
Singer, M. (1994). Discourse inference processes. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 479-515). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Smyth, R. (1994). Grammatical determinants of ambiguous pronoun resolution. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23, 197-229.
Solomon, E. S. & Pearlmutter, N. J. (2004). Semantic integration and syntactic planning in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 49, 1-46.
Speer, S. R., Kjelgaard, M. M., & Dobroth, K. M. (1996). The influence of prosodic structure on the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguities. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 249-271.
Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1989). La pertinence : communication et cognition. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit.
Spivey-Knowlton, M. J. & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Resolving attachment ambiguities with multiple constraints. Cognition, 55, 227-267.
Spivey-Knowlton, M. J. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1994). Referential context and syntactic ambiguity resolution. In C. Clifton, Jr., L. Frazier & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives in sentence processing (pp. 415-439): Lawrence Erlbaum.
Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Trueswell, J. C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1993). Context effects in syntactic ambiguity resolution: Discourse and semantic influences in parsing reduced relative clauses. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 276-309.
Spivey, M. J. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1521-1543.
Stahlke, H. F. W. (1976). Which that. Language, 52, 584-610.
Steinhauer, K. (2003). Electrophysiological correlates of prosody and punctuation. Brain and Language, 86, 142-164.
Steinhauer, K. & Friederici, A. D. (2001). Prosodic boundaries, comma rules, and brain responses: The closure positive shift in ERPs as a universal marker for prosodic phrasing in listeners and readers. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 267-295.
Stevenson, R. (2002). The role of salience in the production of referring expressions: A psycholinguistic perspective. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23, 295-322.
Stevenson, R., Crawley, R. A., & Kleinman, D. (1994). Thematic roles, focus and the representation of events. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 519-548.
Stevenson, R., Knott, A., Oberlander, J., & McDonald, S. (2000). Interpreting pronouns and connectives: Interactions among focusing, thematic roles and coherence relations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 225-262.
Streb, J., Rösler, F., & Hennighausen, E. (1999). Event-relative responses to pronoun an proper name anaphors in parallel and nonparallel discourse structures. Brain and Language, 70, 273-286.
Strohner, H., Sichelschmidt, L., Duwe, I., & Kessler, K. (2000). Discourse focus and conceptual relations in resolving referential ambiguity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 497-516.
Strube, G. & Hahn, U. (1999). Functional centering - Grounding referential coherence in information structure. Computational Linguistics, 25, 309-344.
Sturt, P. (2003). The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 542-562.
Sturt, P., Scheepers, C., & Pickering, M. J. (2002). Syntactic ambiguity resolution after initial misanalysis: The role of recency. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 371-390.
Tabor, W., Juliano, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1997). Parsing in a dynamical system: An attractor-based account of the interaction of lexical and structural constraints in sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 211-271.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Boland, J., Garnsey, S. M., & Carlson, G. N. (1989). Lexical structure in parsing long-distance dependencies. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 37-50.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Carlson, G. N., & Trueswell, J. C. (1989). The role of thematic structures in interpretation and parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, SI 211-234.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632-1634.
Tanenhaus, M. K. & Trueswell, J. C. (1995). Sentence comprehension. In J. L. Miller & P. D. Eimas (Eds.), Handbook in Perception and Cognition, Volume 11: Speech Language and Communication: Academic Press.
Tao, H. & McCarthy, M. J. (2001). Understanding non-restrictive which-clauses in spoken English, which is not an easy task. Language Science, 23, 651-677.
Taraban, R. & McClelland, J. L. (1988). Constituent attachment and thematic role assignment in sentence processing: Influences of content-based expectations. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 597-632.
Tellier, C. (1996). Éléments de syntaxe du français : méthodes d’analyse en grammaire générative. Montréal, Canada: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal.
Temperley, D. (2003). Ambiguity avoidance in English relative clauses. Language, 79, 464-484.
Temperley, D. (2007). Minimization of denependency length in written English. Cognition, 105, 300-333.
Tetreault, J. R. (2001). A corpus-based evaluation of centering and pronoun resolution. Computational Linguistics, 27, 507-520.
Thornton, R., Gil, M., & MacDonald, M. C. (1998). Accounting for crosslinguistic variation: A constraint-based perspective. In D. Hillert (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 31, pp. 211-225). San Diego: Academic Press.
Thornton, R. & MacDonald, M. C. (2003). Plausibility and grammatical agreement. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 740-759.
Thornton, R., MacDonald, M. C., & Arnold, J. E. (2000). The concomitant effects of phrase length and informational content in sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 195-203.
Thornton, R., MacDonald, M. C., & Gil, M. (1999). Pragmatic constraints on the interpretations of complex noun phrases in Spanish and English. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, memory, and Cognition, 25, 1347-1365.
Toole, J. (1996). The effect of genre on referential choice. In T. Fretheim & J. K. Gundel (Eds.), Reference and referent accessibility (pp. 263-290). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Traxler, M. J. (2005). Plausibility and verb subcategorization in temporarily ambiguous sentences: Evidence from self-paced reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34, 1-30.
Traxler, M. J., Pickering, M. J., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1998). Adjunct attachment is not a form of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 558-592.
Trueswell, J. C. (1996). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 566-585.
Trueswell, J. C., Sekerina, I. A., Hill, N. M., & Logrip, M. L. (1999). The kindergarten-path effect: Studying on-line sentence processing in young children. Cognition, 73, 89-134.
Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285-318.
Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preferences from Garden-Paths. Journal of Experimental psychology: Learning, memory, and Cognition, 19, 528-553.
Tyler, L. K. & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1982). Processing utterrances in discourse contexts: On-line resolution of anaphors. Journal of Semantics, 1, 297-314.
Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1999a). Early referential context effects in sentence processing: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 147-182.
Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1999b). When does gender constrain parsing? Evidence from ERPs. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28, 565-571.
Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., Hagoort, P., & Szwitserlood, P. (2003). Event-related brain potentials reflect discourse-referential ambiguity in spoken language comprehension. Psychophysiology, 40, 235-248.
Van Berkum, J. J. A., Koornneef, A. W., Otten, M., & Nieuwland, M. S. (2007). Establishing reference in language comprehension: An electrophysiological perspective. Brain Research, 1146, 158-171.
van den Broek, P. (1994). Comprehension and memory of narrative texts. Inferences and coherence. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 539-588). Sand Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Van der Henst, J.-B. (2002). La perspective pragmatique dans l’étude du raisonnement et de la rationalité. L’Année Psychologique, 102, 65-108.
van Gompel, R. P. G. & Majid, A. (2004). Antecedent frequency effects during the processing of pronouns. Cognition, 90, 255-264.
van Gompel, R. P. G. & Pickering, M. J. (2001). Lexical guidance in sentence processing: A note on Adams, Clifton, and Mitchell (1998). Psychological Bulletin & Review, 8, 851-857.
van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Evidence against competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 284-307.
van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (2000). Unrestricted race: A new model of syntactic ambiguity resolution. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process (pp. 621-648). Oxford: Elsevier.
van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (2001). Reanalysis in sentence processing: Evidence against current constraint-based and two-stage models. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 225-258.
van Hoek, K. (1995). Conceptual reference points: A cognitive grammar account of pronominal anaphora constraints. Language, 71, 310-340.
Vigliocco, G. (2000). The anatomy of meaning and syntax. Current Biology, 10(2), R78-80.
Virtue, S., Haberman, J., Clancy, Z., Parrish, T., & Beeman, M. J. (2006). Neural activity of inferences during story comprehension. Brain Research, 1084, 104-114.
Vonk, W., Hustinx, L. G. M. M., & Simons, W. H. G. (1992). The use of referential expressions in structuring disourse. Language and Cognitive Processes, 7, 301-333.
Vosse, T. & Kempen, G. (2000). Syntactic structure assembly in human parsing: A computational model based on competitive inhibition and a lexicalist grammar. Cognition, 75, 105-143.
Walker, C. H. & Yekovitch, F. R. (1987). Activation and use of script-based antecedents in anaphoric reference. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 673-691.
Walker, M. A. (1998). Centering, anaphora resolution, and discourse structure. In M. A. Walker, A. K. Joshi & E. F. Prince (Eds.), Centering in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walker, M. A., Iida, M., & Cote, S. (1994). Japanese discourse and the process of centering. Computational Linguistics, 20, 193-232.
Walker, M. A., Joshi, A. K., & Prince, E. F. (1998). Centering in naturally-occurring discourse: An overview. In M. A. Walker, A. K. Joshi & E. F. Prince (Eds.), Centering in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walker, M. A. & Prince, E. F. (1996). A bilateral approach to Givenness: A hearer-status algorithm and a Centering algorithm. In J. K. Gundel & T. Fretheim (Eds.), Referent and reference accessibility (pp. 291-306). Amsterdam, Ph.: John Benjamins.
Warren, T. & Gibson, E. (2002). The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. Cognition, 85, 79-112.
Wilson, D. (1998). Discourse, coherence and relevance: A reply to Rachel Giora. Journal of Pragmatics, 29, 57-74.
Wilson, D. & Matsui, T. (1998). Recent approaches to bridging: Truth, coherence, relevance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 10, 173-200.
Wolf, F., Gibson, E., & Desmet, T. (2004). Discourse coherence and pronoun resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 665-675.
Yang, C. L., Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R., & Wu, J. T. (1999). Comprehension of referring expressions in Chinese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 715-743.
Yekovitch, F. R. & Walker, C. H. (1978). Identifying and using referents in sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 265-277.
Yule, G. (1979). Pragmatically controlled anaphora. Lingua, 49, 127-135.
Yule, G. (1981). New, current and displaced entity reference. Lingua, 55, 41-52.
Zagar, D., Pynte, J., & Rativeau, S. (1997). Evidence for early-closure attachment on first-pass reading times in French. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 421-438.