|
|
|
xi | |
|
|
|
xvii | |
|
|
|
xxiii | |
| Acknowledgments |
|
xxv | |
| Preface |
|
xxvii | |
|
|
|
3 | (30) |
|
Self-center embeddings and sentence processing |
|
|
4 | (5) |
|
Self-center embeddings in Hindi |
|
|
9 | (15) |
|
Some syntactic properties of self-center embeddings |
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
Semantics/pragmatics: Differential Object Marking in Hindi |
|
|
10 | (14) |
|
Case-marked objects are specific, but conversationally implicate definiteness |
|
|
24 | (2) |
|
Bare singular NPs really are indefinites |
|
|
26 | (7) |
|
Dayal's arguments against treating bare singular NPs as indefinites |
|
|
27 | (1) |
|
Alternative explanations for the Hindi facts |
|
|
28 | (5) |
|
Three models of sentence processing |
|
|
33 | (22) |
|
Hawkins' Early Immediate Constituents (1994, 1998) |
|
|
33 | (7) |
|
Gibson's Dependency Locality Theory (2000) |
|
|
40 | (3) |
|
Lewis' Retrieval Interference Theory |
|
|
43 | (12) |
|
Retrieval Interference Theory, 2001 (RIT-01) |
|
|
43 | (6) |
|
Retrieval Interference Theory, 2002 (RIT-02) |
|
|
49 | (6) |
|
The effect of identical case marking |
|
|
55 | (48) |
|
|
|
56 | (4) |
|
|
|
56 | (3) |
|
|
|
59 | (1) |
|
|
|
59 | (1) |
|
|
|
60 | (15) |
|
|
|
61 | (3) |
|
|
|
64 | (9) |
|
|
|
73 | (2) |
|
|
|
75 | (28) |
|
|
|
78 | (2) |
|
Results: The effect of definite -ko with no other ko-marked NPs present |
|
|
80 | (4) |
|
Results: The effect of definite -ko with a non-adjacent ko-marked indirect object present |
|
|
84 | (4) |
|
Results: The effect of adjacent se-marked NPs versus non-adjacent ko-marked NPs |
|
|
88 | (3) |
|
Results: The effect of multiple se-marking |
|
|
91 | (3) |
|
Results: The effect of adjaceny on positional similarity |
|
|
94 | (3) |
|
Results: The effect of adjacent, dative case-marked NPs |
|
|
97 | (3) |
|
|
|
100 | (3) |
|
Distance effects or similarity-based interference? |
|
|
103 | (44) |
|
|
|
106 | (3) |
|
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
|
|
107 | (1) |
|
|
|
108 | (1) |
|
Experiment 5: Indirect-object fronting |
|
|
109 | (20) |
|
|
|
111 | (1) |
|
Results: The effect of definiteness marking (canonical word order) |
|
|
112 | (4) |
|
Results: The effect of definiteness marking (fronted indirect objects) |
|
|
116 | (4) |
|
Results: The effect of increasing distance between a verb and its arguments (bare direct object) |
|
|
120 | (3) |
|
Results: The effect of increasing distance between a verb and its arguments (definite-marked direct object) |
|
|
123 | (3) |
|
|
|
126 | (3) |
|
Experiment 6: Direct-object fronting |
|
|
129 | (18) |
|
|
|
129 | (1) |
|
Results: The effect of definiteness marking (canonical order) |
|
|
130 | (5) |
|
Results: The effect of definiteness marking (direct object fronted) |
|
|
135 | (4) |
|
Results: The effect of direct-object fronting (bare direct object) |
|
|
139 | (2) |
|
Results: The effect of direct-object fronting (definite-marked direct object) |
|
|
141 | (2) |
|
|
|
143 | (4) |
|
Increasing distance can facilitate processing |
|
|
147 | (12) |
|
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
Results: Adverb insertion in single embeddings |
|
|
149 | (3) |
|
Results: Adverb insertion in double embeddings |
|
|
152 | (2) |
|
|
|
154 | (5) |
|
Word length, position, and reading time |
|
|
159 | (28) |
|
|
|
160 | (2) |
|
Does word length affect reading time in Hindi? |
|
|
162 | (8) |
|
Computing word length for Hindi |
|
|
162 | (1) |
|
Reading time and word length -- results from Experiment 2 |
|
|
163 | (6) |
|
Correcting for word length |
|
|
169 | (1) |
|
Does position affect reading time? |
|
|
170 | (17) |
|
Concluding remarks, and a new sentence processing model |
|
|
187 | (38) |
|
Multiple constraints in language processing: A summing up |
|
|
187 | (5) |
|
A model of sentence processing based on abductive inference |
|
|
192 | (28) |
|
The underlying competence grammar G |
|
|
193 | (1) |
|
The set H of hypothesis formers |
|
|
194 | (2) |
|
|
|
196 | (3) |
|
|
|
199 | (2) |
|
|
|
201 | (4) |
|
Computational properties of the abductive parser |
|
|
205 | (2) |
|
Empirical coverage of AIM |
|
|
207 | (12) |
|
The connection between the abduction-based model and the complexity metric; and integrating AIM, DLT, and RIT |
|
|
219 | (1) |
|
Some shortcomings of the present model |
|
|
220 | (5) |
|
|
|
225 | (18) |
|
|
|
226 | (2) |
|
|
|
228 | (2) |
|
|
|
230 | (6) |
|
|
|
236 | (1) |
|
|
|
237 | (2) |
|
|
|
239 | (4) |
| Index |
|
243 | (4) |
| References |
|
247 | |
