Диссертация (1100579), страница 28
Текст из файла (страница 28)
A. (1987). Rhetorical structure theory: A theory of textorganization: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Institute.McDonald, J. L., & MacWhinney, B. (1995). The time course of anaphor resolution: Effects ofimplicit verb causality and gender. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(4), 543-566.Moens, M., & Steedman, M. (1988).
Temporal ontology and temporal reference. ComputationalLinguistics, 14(2), 15-28.Münte, T. F., Schiltz, K., & Kutas, M. (1998). When temporal terms belie conceptual order. Nature,395(6697), 71-73.Myers, J. L., & O'Brien, E. J. (1998). Accessing the discourse representation during reading.Discourse Processes, 26(2-3), 131-157.Newman, A.
J., Ullman, M. T., Pancheva, R., Waligura, D. L., & Neville, H. J. (2007). An ERPstudy of regular and irregular English past tense inflection. Neuroimage, 34(1), 435-445.Nieuwland, M. S. (2014). “Who’s he?” Event-related brain potentials and unbound pronouns. Journal of Memory and Language, 76, 1-28.Nieuwland, M. S., Otten, M., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2007).
Who are you talking about? Trackingdiscourse-level referential processing with event-related brain potentials. Journal ofcognitive neuroscience, 19(2), 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(3), 9931004.Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J.
J. A. (2006). Individual differences and contextual bias inpronoun resolution: evidence from ERPs. Brain Research, 1118(1), 155-167.Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2008a). The interplay between semantic and referentialaspects of anaphoric noun phrase resolution: Evidence from ERPs. Brain and Language,106(2), 119-131.Nieuwland, M.
S., & Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2008b). The neurocognition of referential ambiguity inlanguage comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2(4), 603-630.Osterhout, L. (1997). On the brain responses to syntactic anomalies: manipulations of word positionand word class reveal individual differences. Brain and Language, 59, 494-522.124Osterhout, L., Bersick, M., & McLaughlin, J. (1997). Brain potentials reflect violations of genderstereotypes. Memory and Cognition, 25(3), 273-285.Osterhout, L., & Holcomb, P.
J. (1992). Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntacticanomaly. Journal of Memory and Language, 31(6), 785-806.Osterhout, L., Holcomb, P. J., & Swinney, D. A. (1994). Brain potentials elicited by garden-pathsentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. Journal ofexperimental psychology.
Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 786-803.Osterhout, L., & Mobley, L. A. (1995). Event-related brain potentials elicited by failure to agree.Journal of Memory and Language, 34(6), 739-773.Osterhout, L., & Nicole, J. (1999). On the distinctiveness, independence, and time course of thebrain responses to syntactic and semantic anomalies. Language and Cognitive Processes,14(3), 283-317.Polanyi, L.
(1988). A formal model of the structure of discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 601638.Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research.Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(8), 1457-1506.Ridderinkhof, K.
R., Nieuwenhuis, S., & Braver, T. S. (2007). Medial frontal cortex function: Anintroduction and overview. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(4), 261265.Rohde, H., Kehler, A., & Elman, J. L. (2006). Event structure and discourse coherence biases inpronoun interpretation. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conferenceof the Cognitive Science Society.Rossi, S., Gugler, M. F., Friederici, A. D., & Hahne, A. (2006). The impact of proficiency onsyntactic second-language processing of German and Italian: Evidence from event-relatedpotentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(12), 2030-2048.Rossi, S., Gugler, M.
F., Hahne, A., & Friederici, A. D. (2005). When word category informationencounters morphosyntax: An ERP study. Neuroscience Letters, 384, 228-233.Ruchkin, D. S., Johnson, J. R., Grafman, J., Canoune, H., & Ritter, W. (1992). Distinctions andsimilarities among working memory processes: An event-related potential study.
CognitiveBrain Research, 1(1), 53-66.Sabourin, L., & Stowe, L. A. (2004). Memory effects in syntactic ERP tasks. Brain and Cognition,55, 392-395.125Schendan, H. E., & Kutas, M. (2002). Neurophysiological evidence for two processing times forvisual object identification. Neuropsychologia, 40(7), 931-945.Schendan, H. E., & Maher, S. M. (2009). Object knowledge during entry-level categorization isactivated and modified by implicit memory after 200 ms. Neuroimage, 44(4), 1423-1438.Smyth, R.
(1994). Grammatical determinants of ambiguous pronoun resolution. Journal ofPsycholinguistic Research, 23(3), 197-229.Steinhauer, K., & Drury, J. E. (2012). On the early left-anterior negativity (ELAN) in syntaxstudies. Brain and Language, 120(2), 135-162.Steinhauer, K., Drury, J. E., Portner, P., Walenski, M., & Ullman, M. T. (2010). Syntax, concepts,and logic in the temporal dynamics of language comprehension: evidence from event-relatedpotentials. Neuropsychologia, 48(6), 1525-1542.Stemmer, B., & Whitaker, H. A.
(2008). Handbook of the Neuroscience of Language. Amsterdam:Elsevier.Stevenson, R. J., Rosalind, A. C., & Kleinman, D. (1994). Thematic roles, focus and therepresentation of events. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 519-548.Stewart, A. J., Pickering, M. J., & Sanford, A. J. (2000).
The time course of the influence ofimplicit causality information: Focusing versus integration accounts. Journal of Memoryand Language, 42(3), 423-443.Streb, J., Hennighausen, E., & Rösler, F. (2004). Different anaphoric expressions are investigatedby event-related brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 33(3), 175-201.Stuss, D. T., Picton, T.
W., Cerri, A. M., Leech, E. E., & Stethem, L. L. (1992). Perceptual closureand object identification: Electrophysiological responses to incomplete pictures. Brain andCognition, 19(2), 253-266.Szewczyk, J. M., & Schriefers, H. (2011). Is animacy special? ERP correlates of semanticviolations and animacy violations in sentence processing. Brain Research, 1368, 208-221.Tanenhaus, M.
K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration ofvisual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268(5217),1632-1634.Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1999). Early referential context effects insentence processing: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Memory andLanguage, 41(2), 147-182.Van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., Hagoort, P., & Zwitserlood, P. (2003). Event‐related brainpotentials reflect discourse‐referential ambiguity in spoken language comprehension.Psychophysiology, 40(2), 235-248.126Van Berkum, J. J.
A., Hagoort, P., & Brown, C. M. (1999). Semantic integration in sentences anddiscourse: Evidence from the N400. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 11, 657-671.Van Berkum, J. J. A., Koornneef, A. W., Otten, M., & Nieuwland, M. S. (2007). Establishingreference in language comprehension: an electrophysiological perspective. Brain Research,1146, 158-171.Van Berkum, J. J. A., Zwitserlood, P., Bastiaansen, M. C.
M., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (2004).So who's "he" anyway? Differential ERP and ERSP effects of referential success, ambiguityand failure during spoken language comprehension. Supplement to the Journal of CognitiveNeuroscience, 16, 70.Van den Brink, D., & Hagoort, P. (2004). The influence of semantic and syntactic contextconstraints on lexical selection and integration in spoken-word comprehension as revealedby ERPs.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,, 16(6), 1068.Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequency inevent-related brain potentials. Memory and Cognition, 18, 380-393.Viggiano, M. P., & Kutas, M. (1998). The covert interplay between perception and memory: Eventrelated potential evidence. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/EvokedPotentials Section, 108(5), 435-439.Viggiano, M. P., & Kutas, M. (2000).
Overt and covert identification of fragmented objects inferredfrom performance and electrophysiological measures. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 129(1), 107-125.Wagner, A. D., Shannon, B. J., Kahn, I., & Buckner, R. L. (2005). Parietal lobe contributions toepisodic memory retrieval. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9(9), 445-453.Wolf, F., Gibson, E., & Desmet, T. (2004). Discourse coherence and pronoun resolution.
Languageand Cognitive Processes, 19(6), 665-675.Ye, Z., Luo, Y., Friederici, A. D., & Zhou, X. (2006). Semantic and syntactic processing in Chinesesentence comprehension: Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain Research, 1071,186-196.Yu, J., Zhang, Y., Boland, J. E., & Cai, L. (2015). The interplay between referential processing andlocal syntactic/semantic processing: ERPs to written Chinese discourse. Brain Research,1597, 139-158.Yurchenko, A. N., Dragoy, O. V., & Ailantova, S. V.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
