Processing reflexes of the Feature Hierarchy (Person > Number > Gender) and implications for linguistic theory

By Maria Nella Carminati. 2005

164 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Language and Linguistics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2bbceac025a7ecfed23e7832406e8f4332ce33d9

How researchers see this paper

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

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism (2011, background): “Carminati (2002, 2005) for Italian (and later Alonso-Ovalle, Clifton, Frazier and Férnandez-Solera, 2005 for Spanish) proposes the Position of Antecedent Strategy (PAS) as a processing constraint on anaphora resolution.”
ONLINE PRONOUN RESOLUTION IN L2 DISCOURSE: L1 Influence and General Learner Effects (2008, background): “…subjects suggests that they show more flexibility in their interpretation of overt pronouns in comparison to null pronouns ~ e + g +, Alonso-Ovalle , Fernández-Solera , Frazier , & Clifton , 2002 ; Carminati , 2002 , 2005 ; see also the native Romanian speakers in Diaconescu & Goodluck , 2004 !”
The syntax–discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance* (2009, background): “Covert anaphoric pronouns preferentially take the intrasentential subject or topic as their antecedents (e.g. Carminati, 2005), whereas overt pronouns preferentially resolve to extrasentential antecedents, hence indicating contrast or topic shift (2).”
Bilingual children's sensitivity to specificity and genericity: Evidence from metalinguistic awareness* (2009, result): “See Carminati (2002, 2005) for a study of these tendencies in the processing of pronominal subjects by native Italian speakers. likely to narrow over time, so that older bilingual children behave more like their monolingual peers than do younger bilinguals, as we have observed in other research…”
Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: Beyond structural overlap (2009, background): “The use of the appropriate anaphor will require the evaluation of the discourse pragmatic status of the antecedent and the suppression of the competing anaphor, a costly operation that might not always result in the optimal choice, especially when ambiguity is not at stake (Carminati, 2002, 2005).”
Contrasting intrusion profiles for agreement and anaphora: Experimental and modeling evidence (2013, background): “It may be that these different features have qualitatively different representations, or that they are differentially attended to during the processing of long-distance dependencies (see, e.g., Barber & Carreiras, 2005; Carminati, 2005; Nevins, Dillon, Malhotra & Phillips, 2007).”
Discourse conditions on subject pronoun realization: Testing the linguistic intuitions of older bilingual children (2009, background): “Carminati (2002, 2005) and Alonso-Ovalle et al. (2002) propose that the division of labour between null and overt pronouns in intersentential two-referent contexts is based on a ‘‘Position of Antecedent Strategy’’ that assigns pronouns to antedecents in particular syntactic positions: null pronouns…”
Cross-linguistic influence in the interpretation of anaphoric and cataphoric pronouns in English–Italian bilingual children (2007, background): “The availability of overt and null subjects is syntactically licensed, their distribution is pragmatically governed, and co-reference between pronouns and their antecedent complies with a well-specified processing strategy (Carminati, 2002, 2005).”
Understanding heritage languages (2019, background): “The other option splits number and gender features such that they get projected independently (Antón-Méndez, Nicol & Garrett, 2002; Carminati, 2005; Picallo, 1991).”