Reference production: Production-internal and addressee-oriented processes

By Jennifer E. Arnold. 2008

247 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Language and Linguistics, Literature and Literary Theory, Cognitive Science & Psychology, Linguistics

How researchers see this paper

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

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Language and Linguistics

In Literature and Literary Theory

In Cognitive Science & Psychology

In Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

Toward Gender-Inclusive Coreference Resolution (2019, background): “This speaker may use aer’s assumption of the listener to determine that “her” is sufficiently unambiguous in this case as to be an acceptable reference (trading off brevity and specificity; see, for instance [Arnold 2008; Frank and Goodman 2012; Orita et al. 2015]).”
Why reduce? Phonological neighborhood density and phonetic reduction in spontaneous speech (2012, background): “…research studying situations in which speakers’ and listeners’ needs are pitted against each other suggests limits of intelligibility-based behavior (Arnold, 2008; Bard & Aylett, 2005; Ferreira, 2008; Ferreira & Dell, 2000), partly as a function of demands on attention and working memory (Wardlow…”
Typicality and Object Reference (2013, background): “This is equally true for psycholinguistic 1http://m-mitchell.com/corpora/typicality corpus/ work (Arnold, 2008) and for work on computational models of reference (Dale & Reiter, 1995; Krahmer, van Erk, & Verleg, 2003; Krahmer & van Deemter, 2012).”
Prosody in context: a review (2015, background): “…which show evidence from eye-tracking experiments that an initial assignment of referent to a word can be misguided by inappropriate accentuation (Arnold, 2008; Dahan et al., 2002; Ito & Speer, 2008), and with evidence from eventrelated potentials (ERPs) for difficulty in semantic integration…”
The communicative function of ambiguity in language. (2011, unknown): “but allow for greater ease of communication by being short and frequent, and potentially less difficult for syntactic systems (Marslen-Wilson, Levy, & Tyler, 1982; Ariel, 1990; Gundel, Hedberg, & Zacharski, 1993; Warren & Gibson, 2002; Arnold, 2008; Tily & Piantadosi, 2009).”
Why discourse affects speakers’ choice of referring expressions (2015, background): “A number of grammatical, semantic, and distributional factors related to salience have been found to influence choices of referring expressions (Arnold, 2008).”
Experimental and theoretical advances in prosody: A review (2010, background): “In addition, Fowler and Housum (1987) found that repeated words tend to be reduced, and more recent work by Bard and Aylett (1999) found that this reduction is not always the result of de-accenting, suggesting that it may be the result of something other than marking information for the listener.”
Investigating locality effects and surprisal in written English syntactic choice phenomena. (2016, unknown): “As Arnold (2011) notes, previous studies have indicated that first person pronouns like I and we are very accessible compared to definite NPs (the cyclist, for example).”