The persistence of optional complementizer production: Why saying “that” is not saying “that” at all

By Victor S. Ferreira. 2003

204 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1d2442b3eee6216dc7fc41861c8d2c0cc845a6b6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

The use of lexical and syntactic information in language production: Evidence from the priming of noun-phrase structure (2003, background): “Additionally, there is good evidence against explanations of syntactic priming in terms of repetition of closed-class words (Bock, 1989; Bock & Loebell, 1990; Pickering et al., 2002) and ‘‘that’’ in particular ( Ferreira, 2003 ).”
Structural facilitation: Mere exposure effects for grammatical acceptability as evidence for syntactic priming in comprehension (2005, background): “Syntactic priming for spoken and written sentence production has been demonstrated for at least the following types of constructions in English: active versus passive, prepositional versus double object dative, and optional complementizer production (e.g., Bock, 1989; Ferreira, 2003; Pickering & Bra”
The logic of syntactic priming and acceptability judgments (2016, unknown): “Ferreira (2003) found priming for the presence versus absence of the complementizer that (e.g., the mechanic mentioned the car could use a tune-up vs. the mechanic mentioned that the car could use a tune-up).”
The representation of lexical and syntactic information in bilinguals: Evidence from syntactic priming (2007, unknown): “Since Bock’s (1986) original study, many researchers have found syntactic priming with different tasks (Branigan, Pickering, & Cleland, 2000; Pickering & Branigan, 1998; Potter & Lombardi, 1998), different types of constructions (Ferreira, 2003; Hartsuiker, Kolk, & Huiskamp, 1999; Hartsuiker & Weste”
Investigating locality effects and surprisal in written English syntactic choice phenomena. (2016, unknown): “…account for production phenomena either via constraints or processes inherent to the production system (speaker-internal as in Arnold et al. 2000, Ferreira 2003) or resorting to explanations where constraints on comprehension influence language production (listener-oriented as in Branigan,…”
Cross-linguistic structural priming in multilinguals: further evidence for shared syntax (2016, background): “production of optional “that” (Ferreira, 2003), and low- or high attachment of relative clauses in a complex noun phrase (Scheepers, 2003).”
Redundancy and reduction: Speakers manage syntactic information density (2010, background): “…Temperley, 2003), and dependency processing accounts (Elsness, 1984; Hawkins, 2001, 2004), while controlling for syntactic persistence (Bock, 1986; Ferreira, 2003), social effects (Adamson, 1992; Fries, 1940), and effects of grammaticalization (Thompson & Mulac, 1991b; Torres Cacoullos & Walker,…”
Children's use of gender and order-of-mention during pronoun comprehension (2007, background): “Indeed, production evidence shows that adult speakers place information that is more accessible to them early in the sentence (Arnold et al., 2000b; Bock, 1982, 1986; Bock & Irwin, 1980; Ferreira & Dell, 2000; Ferreira, 2003).”
Structural priming: a critical review. (2008, background): “V. S. Ferreira (2003) found priming of whether speakers produced the mechanic mentioned the car could use a tune-up or the mechanic mentioned that the car could use a tune-up , and he further showed that relative to a neutral baseline, the absence of the complementizer that primed more than the…”
Reference production: Production-internal and addressee-oriented processes (2008, unknown): “Ferreira, V. S., & Firato, C. E. (2002). Proactive interference effects on sentence production.”
Becoming syntactic. (2006, background): “It has been noted (e.g., Bock & Griffin, 2000; Ferreira, 2003; Hartsuiker & Kolk, 1998; Hartsuiker, Kolk, & Huiskamp, 1999; Hartsuiker & Westenberg, 2000; Scheepers, 2003) that prime structures that are less common are more effective primes than those that are more common.”