Диссертация (Experimental study of several core concepts of theoretical morphology (on the material of russian) - regularity, syncretism, markedness), страница 14

“On learning the past tenses of Englishverbs,” in Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure ofCognition, Psychological and Biological Models, Vol. 2. eds D. Rumelhart andJ. McClelland (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), 216–271.Sach, M., Seitz, R., and Indefrey, P. (2004). Unified inflectional processingof regular and irregular verbs: a PET study. Neuroreport 15, 533–537. doi:10.1097/01.wnr.00001Sahin, N., Pinker, S., and Halgren, E. (2006). Abstract grammatical processing ofnouns and verbs in Broca’s area: evidence from fMRI. Cortex 42, 540–562. doi:10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70394-0Slioussar, N., Kireev, M.

V., Chernigovskaya, T. V., Kataeva, G. V., Korotkov, A. D., andMedvedev, S. V. (2014). An ER-fMRI study of Russian inflectional morphology.Brain Lang. 130, 33–41. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2014.01.006Stamatakis, E. A., Marslen-Wilson, W. D., Tyler, L. K., and Fletcher, P. C. (2005).Cingulate control of fronto-temporal integration reflects linguistic demands: athree-way interaction in functional connectivity. Neuroimage 28, 115–121. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.06.012Svistunova, T. (2008). Organizacija Mental’nogo Leksikona.

Formirovanie i Raspad Glagol’noj Slovoizmenitel’noj Morfologii: Eksperimental’noe Issledovanie naFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceMaterial Russkogo Jazyka (‘Mental Lexicon Structure. Development and Decay ofthe Verbal Inflectional Morphology: An Experimental Study of Russian’). Thesis, St.Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg.Szlachta, Z., Bozic, M., Jelowicka, A., and Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2012). Neurocognitive dimensions of lexical complexity in Polish. Brain.

Lang. 121, 219–225. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2012.02.007Townsend, C. E. (1975). Russian Word Formation. Cambridge, MA: Slavica.Tyler, L. K., Stamatakis, E. A., Post, B., Randall, B., and Marslen-Wilson,W. D. (2005). Temporal and frontal systems in speech comprehension: anfMRI study of past tense processing. Neuropsychologia 43, 1963–1974. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.03.008Ullman, M.

T. (2004). Contributions of memory circuits to language:the declarative/procedural model. Cognition 92, 231–270. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.008Ullman, M. T., Bergida, R., and O’Craven, K. (1997). Distinct fMRI activationpatterns for regular and irregular past tense. Neuroimage 5, S549.Westerhausen, R., Moosmann, M., Alho, K., Belsby, S., Hämäläinen, H., Medvedev,S., et al. (2010).

Identification of attention and cognitive control networksin a parametric auditory fMRI study. Neuropsychologia 48, 2075–2081. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.03.028Yang, C. D. (2002). Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conductedin the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construedas a potential conflict of interest.Received: 17 September 2014; accepted: 14 January 2015; published online: 18 February2015.Citation: Kireev M, Slioussar N, Korotkov AD, Chernigovskaya TV and Medvedev SV(2015) Changes in functional connectivity within the fronto-temporal brain networkinduced by regular and irregular Russian verb production.

Front. Hum. Neurosci. 9:36.doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00036This article was submitted to the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience.Copyright © 2015 Kireev, Slioussar, Korotkov, Chernigovskaya and Medvedev. This isan open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons AttributionLicense (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted,provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.

No use,distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.www.frontiersin.org36February 2015 | Volume 9 | Article 36 | 10Appendix C.Paper “Forms and features: the role of syncretism in number agreementattraction”Slioussar, N. (2018). Forms and features: the role of syncretism in number agreementattraction.JournalofMemoryandLanguage,101,51–63.DOI10.1016/j.jml.2018.03.006.AbstractMany experiments have studied attraction errors in number agreement (e.g. ‘The key tothe cabinets were rusty’). It has been noted that singular heads with plural dependents(attractors) trigger larger attraction effects than plural heads with singular attractors, andthat in languages with morphological case, morphologically ambiguous attractors triggerlarger effects (accusative plural forms coinciding with nominative plural were comparedto unambiguous case forms).

In Russian, the nominative plural forms of some nounscoincide not only with their accusative plural forms but also with the genitive singular.In one production and two comprehension experiments, such genitive singular formswere found to trigger larger attraction effects than morphologically unambiguous genitiveplural forms. Accusative plural forms coinciding with the nominative plural were shownto be the most effective attractors. These results have implications for different models ofattraction and for other discussions in morphology concerning ambiguity processing,different approaches to syncretism and the problem of lexical insertion.The link on the publisher’s websiteThis is not an open access paper, so according to the publisher’s policy it cannot bereproduced. It can be accessed on the publisher’s website:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X1830030537Appendix D.Paper 4. “Gender agreement attraction in Russian: production andcomprehension evidence”Slioussar, N., & Malko, A.

(2016). Gender agreement attraction in Russian: productionandcomprehensionevidence.Frontiers10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01651.38inPsychology,7,1651.DOIORIGINAL RESEARCHpublished: 04 November 2016doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01651Gender Agreement Attraction inRussian: Production andComprehension EvidenceNatalia Slioussar 1, 2* and Anton Malko 31School of Linguistics, Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia, 2 Faculty of Liberal Arts and Sciences,Saint-Petersburg State University, Saint-Petersburg, Russia, 3 Department of Linguistics, University of Maryland, CollegePark, MD, USAEdited by:Matthew Wagers,University of California, Santa Cruz,USAReviewed by:Yulia Esaulova,University of Potsdam, GermanyFranc Marusic,University of Nova Gorica, Slovenia*Correspondence:Natalia Slioussarslioussar@gmail.comSpecialty section:This article was submitted toLanguage Sciences,a section of the journalFrontiers in PsychologyReceived: 21 August 2015Accepted: 10 October 2016Published: 04 November 2016Citation:Slioussar N and Malko A (2016)Gender Agreement Attraction inRussian: Production andComprehension Evidence.Front.

Psychol. 7:1651.doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01651Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.orgAgreement attraction errors (such as the number error in the example “The key to thecabinets are rusty”) have been the object of many studies in the last 20 years. So far,almost all production experiments and all comprehension experiments looked at binaryfeatures (primarily at number in Germanic, Romance, and some other languages, inseveral cases at gender in Romance languages). Among other things, it was notedthat both in production and in comprehension, attraction effects are much stronger forsome feature combinations than for the others: they can be observed in the sentenceswith singular heads and plural dependent nouns (e.g.,“The key to the cabinets...”),but not in the sentences with plural heads and singular dependent nouns (e.g., “Thekeys to the cabinet...”).

Almost all proposed explanations of this asymmetry appeal tofeature markedness, but existing findings do not allow teasing different approachesto markedness apart. We report the results of four experiments (one on productionand three on comprehension) studying subject-verb gender agreement in Russian, alanguage with three genders. Firstly, we found attraction effects both in production andin comprehension, but, unlike in the case of number agreement, they were not parallel (inproduction, feminine gender triggered strongest effects, while neuter triggered weakesteffects, while in comprehension, masculine triggered weakest effects).

Secondly, in thecomprehension experiments attraction was observed for all dependent noun genders,but only for a subset of head noun genders. This goes against the traditional assumptionthat the features of the dependent noun are crucial for attraction, showing the featuresof the head are more important. We demonstrate that this approach can be extendedto previous findings on attraction and that there exists other evidence for it.