EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 78 (2020) SHS Web Conf., 78 (2020) 10001 References
Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 78, 2020
7e Congrès Mondial de Linguistique Française
Article Number 10001
Number of page(s) 10
Section Psycholinguistique et acquisition
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20207810001
Published online 04 September 2020
  1. Arnold, J. E., Brown-Schmidt, S., & Trueswell, J. (2007). Children’s use of gender and order-of-mention during pronoun comprehension. Language and cognitive processes, 22(4),527-565. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Baayen, H., Davidson, D., &. Bates, D. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4). 390-412. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Barr, D., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3). 255-278. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1),1-48. [Google Scholar]
  5. Baumann, P., Konieczny, L., & Hemforth, B. (2014). Conversational implicatures in anaphora resolution: Alternative constructions and referring expressions. In B. Hemforth, B., Schmiedtovà, & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Psycholinguistic approaches to meaning and understanding across languages (pp. 197-212). Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics. Munich: Springer. [Google Scholar]
  6. Colonna, S., Schimke, S., & Hemforth, B. (2014). Information structure and pronoun resolution in German and French: Evidence from the visual-world paradigm. In B. Hemforth, B., Schmiedtovà, & C. Fabricius-Hansen (Eds.), Psycholinguistic approaches to meaning and understanding across languages (pp. 175-195). Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics. Munich: Springer. [Google Scholar]
  7. de la Fuente, I., Hemforth, B., Colonna, S., & Schimke, S. (2016). The role of syntax, semantics, and pragmatics in pronoun resolution: A cross-linguistic overview. In A. Holler & K. Suckow (Eds.), Experimental Perspectives on Anaphora Resolution, Linguistische Arbeiten 563 (pp. 11-31). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. [Google Scholar]
  8. Dink J., & Ferguson, B. (2018). eyetrackingR. R package version 0.1.8, http://www.eyetracking-R.com. [Google Scholar]
  9. Gerard, J., Lidz, J., Zuckerman, S., & Pinto, M. (2017). Similarity-Based Interference and the Acquisition of Adjunct Control. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1822. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01822 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gerard, J., Lidz, J., Zuckerman, S., & Pinto, M. (2018). The acquisition of adjunct control is colored by the task. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), 75. doi: 10.5334/gjgl.547 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  11. Hartshorne, J., Nappa, R., & Snedeker, J. (2014). Development of the First-Mention Bias. Journal of Child Language, 15, 1-24. [Google Scholar]
  12. Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., Scheepers, C., Colonna, S., Schimke, S., Baumann, P., & Pynte, J. (2010). Language specific preferences in anaphor resolution: Exposure or gricean maxims? In S. Ohlsson & R. Catarambone (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 2218-2223). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. [Google Scholar]
  13. Jaeger, F. (2011). More on random slopes and what it means if your effect is not longer significant after the inclusion of random slopes. Post to HLP/Jaeger lab blog. Consulté sur http://hlplab.wordpress.com/2011/06/25/more-on-random-slopes. [Google Scholar]
  14. Jarvikivi, J., Pyykkonen, P., Schimke, S., Colonna, S., & Hemforth, B. (2014). Information structure cues for 4 year olds and adults: Tracking eye-movements to visually presented anaphoric referents. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(7),877-892. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  15. Léger, E. (2017). Interprétation des pronoms clitiques objets chez les enfants avec TSA et chez les enfants avec TSL. Etude comparative en suivi du regard. Thèse de doctorat, Université de Tours, France. [Google Scholar]
  16. Pyykkonen, P., Matthews, D., & Jarvikivi, J. (2010). Three-year-olds are sensitive to semantic prominence during online language comprehension: A visual world study of pronoun resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 115-129. doi: 10.1080/01690960902944014 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. R Core Team (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/. [Google Scholar]
  18. Sekerina, I. A. (2015). Online evidence for children’s interpretation of personal pronouns. In L. Serratrice & S. E. Allen (Eds.), The acquisition of reference (pp. 213-239). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Schimke, S., de la Fuente, I., Hemforth, B., & Colonna S. (2018). First language influence on second language offline and online ambiguous pronoun resolution. Language Learning, 68(3),744-779. doi:10.1111/lang.12293 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. Schulz, M., Burnett, H., & Hemforth, B. (2019). A Rational Speech Act model of cross-linguistic differences in pronoun resolution preferences. Poster presented at CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Colorado Boulder. [Google Scholar]
  21. Snedeker, J., & Trueswell J. (2004). The developing constraints on parsing decisions: The role of lexical-biases and referential scenes in child and adult sentence processing. Cognitive Psychology, 49(3),238-299. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Song, H., & Fisher, C. (2005). Who’s “she”? Discourse prominence influences preschoolers’ comprehension of pronouns. Journal ofMemory & Language, 52(1),29-57. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.06.012 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. Song, H., & Fisher, C. (2007). Discourse prominence effects on 2.5-year-old children’s interpretation of pronouns. Lingua, 117, 1959-1987. doi: 10.1016/j. lingua.2006.11.011 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. Tuller, L., Delage, H., Monjauze, C., Piller, A.-G., & Barthez, M.-A. (2011). Clitic pronoun production as a measure of atypical language development in French. Lingua, 121. DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  25. van der Lely, H. K. J., & Stollwerck, L. (1997). Binding theory and grammatical specific language impairment in children. Cognition, 62(3), 245-290. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. Wang, C.-C., Vincent, C., Schimke, S., & Colonna, S. (2019). Interpretation strategies of anaphoric pronoun by second language learners. Manuscrit en préparation. [Google Scholar]
  27. Wykes, T. (1983). The role of inferences in children’s comprehension of pronouns. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 35, 180-193. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.