@article{Alexiadou2019, author = {Alexiadou, Artemis}, title = {A form-function mismatch?}, series = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, journal = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-457-9}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43223}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-432235}, pages = {107 -- 117}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Atasoy2022, author = {Atasoy, Atilla}, title = {Production, perception, and processing of focus in Turkish}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-54815}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-548156}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xxiii, 267}, year = {2022}, abstract = {The main goal of this dissertation is to experimentally investigate how focus is realised, perceived, and processed by native Turkish speakers, independent of preconceived notions of positional restrictions. Crucially, there are various issues and scientific debates surrounding focus in the Turkish language in the existing literature (chapter 1). It is argued in this dissertation that two factors led to the stagnant literature on focus in Turkish: the lack of clearly defined, modern understandings of information structure and its fundamental notion of focus, and the ongoing and ill-defined debate surrounding the question of whether there is an immediately preverbal focus position in Turkish. These issues gave rise to specific research questions addressed across this dissertation. Specifically, we were interested in how the focus dimensions such as focus size (comparing narrow constituent and broad sentence focus), focus target (comparing narrow subject and narrow object focus), and focus type (comparing new-information and contrastive focus) affect Turkish focus realisation and, in turn, focus comprehension when speakers are provided syntactic freedom to position focus as they see fit. To provide data on these core goals, we presented three behavioural experiments based on a systematic framework of information structure and its notions (chapter 2): (i) a production task with trigger wh-questions and contextual animations manipulated to elicit the focus dimensions of interest (chapter 3), (ii) a timed acceptability judgment task in listening to the recorded answers in our production task (chapter 4), and (iii) a self-paced reading task to gather on-line processing data (chapter 5). Based on the results of the conducted experiments, multiple conclusions are made in this dissertation (chapter 6). Firstly, this dissertation demonstrated empirically that there is no focus position in Turkish, neither in the sense of a strict focus position language nor as a focally loaded position facilitating focus perception and/or processing. While focus is, in fact, syntactically variable in the Turkish preverbal area, this is a consequence of movement triggered by other IS aspects like topicalisation and backgrounding, and the observational markedness of narrow subject focus compared to narrow object focus. As for focus type in Turkish, this dimension is not associated with word order in production, perception, or processing. Significant acoustic correlates of focus size (broad sentence focus vs narrow constituent focus) and focus target (narrow subject focus vs narrow object focus) were observed in fundamental frequency and intensity, representing focal boost, (postfocal) deaccentuation, and the presence or absence of a phrase-final rise in the prenucleus, while the perceivability of these effects remains to be investigated. In contrast, no acoustic correlates of focus type in simple, three-word transitive structures were observed, with focus types being interchangeable in mismatched question-answer pairs. Overall, the findings of this dissertation highlight the need for experimental investigations regarding focus in Turkish, as theoretical predictions do not necessarily align with experimental data. As such, the fallacy of implying causation from correlation should be strictly kept in mind, especially when constructions coincide with canonical structures, such as the immediately preverbal position in narrow object foci. Finally, numerous open questions remain to be explored, especially as focus and word order in Turkish are multifaceted. As shown, givenness is a confounding factor when investigating focus types, while thematic role assignment potentially confounds word order preferences. Further research based on established, modern information structure frameworks is needed, with chapter 5 concluding with specific recommendations for such future research.}, language = {en} } @article{BrownSchmidtWierzba2019, author = {Brown, Jessica M. M. and Schmidt, Andreas and Wierzba, Marta}, title = {Preface}, series = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, journal = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-457-9}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43057}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-430575}, pages = {xiii -- xvi}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Burmester2019, author = {Burmester, Juliane}, title = {Linguistic and visual salience in sentence comprehension}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-44315}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-443155}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {XI, 165}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Interlocutors typically link their utterances to the discourse environment and enrich communication by linguistic (e.g., information packaging) and extra-linguistic (e.g., eye gaze, gestures) means to optimize information transfer. Psycholinguistic studies underline that ‒for meaning computation‒ listeners profit from linguistic and visual cues that draw their focus of attention to salient information. This dissertation is the first work that examines how linguistic compared to visual salience cues influence sentence comprehension using the very same experimental paradigms and materials, that is, German subject-before-object (SO) and object-before-subject (OS) sentences, across the two cue modalities. Linguistic salience was induced by indicating a referent as the aboutness topic. Visual salience was induced by implicit (i.e., unconscious) or explicit (i.e., shared) manipulations of listeners' attention to a depicted referent. In Study 1, a selective, facilitative impact of linguistic salience on the context-sensitive OS word order was found using offline comprehensibility judgments. More precisely, during online sentence processing, this impact was characterized by a reduced sentence-initial Late positivity which reflects reduced processing costs for updating the current mental representation of discourse. This facilitative impact of linguistic salience was not replicated by means of an implicit visual cue (Study 2) shown to modulate word order preferences during sentence production. However, a gaze shift to a depicted referent as an indicator of shared attention eased sentence-initial processing similar to linguistic salience as revealed by reduced reading times (Study 3). Yet, this cue did not modulate the strong subject-antecedent preference during later pronoun resolution like linguistic salience. Taken together, these findings suggest a significant impact of linguistic and visual salience cues on sentence comprehension, which substantiates that both the information delivered via language and via the visual environment is integrated into the mental representation of the discourse; but, the way how salience is induced is crucial to its impact.}, language = {en} } @article{ChenHoehle2018, author = {Chen, Aoju and H{\"o}hle, Barbara}, title = {Four- to five-year-old' use of word order and prosody in focus marking in Dutch}, series = {Linguistics Vanguard}, volume = {4}, journal = {Linguistics Vanguard}, publisher = {De Gruyter}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {2199-174X}, doi = {10.1515/lingvan-2016-0101}, pages = {9}, year = {2018}, abstract = {This study investigated Dutch-speaking four- to five-year-olds' use of word order and prosody in distinguishing focus types (broad focus, narrow focus, and contrastive narrow focus) via an interactive answer-reconstruction game. We have found an overall preference for the unmarked word order SVO and no evidence for the use of OVS to distinguish focus types. But the children used pitch and duration in the subject-nouns to distinguish focus types in SVO sentences. These findings show that Dutch-speaking four- to five-year-olds differ from their German- and Finnish-speaking peers, who show evidence of varying choice of word order to mark specific focus types, and use prosody to distinguish focus types in subject and object nouns in both SVO and OVS sentences. These comparisons suggest that typological differences in the relative importance between word order and prosody can lead to differences in children's use of word order and prosody in unmarked and marked word orders. A more equal role of word order and prosody in the ambient language can stimulate more extensive use of prosody in the marked word order, whereas a more limited role of word order can restrict the use of prosody in the unmarked word order.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Chen2022, author = {Chen, Hui Ching}, title = {Acquisition of focus - in a cross-linguistic perspective}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-55345}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-553458}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xiii, 130}, year = {2022}, abstract = {In dieser Dissertation untersuchen wir, wie chinesischen Muttersprachler und deutschen Muttersprachler, sowohl die Erwachsenen als auch die Kinder, verschiedene linguistische Mittel, wie z. B. Wortstellungsinformationen, prosodische und lexikalische Mittel im Sprachverst{\"a}ndnis korrekt interpretieren.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Engels2004, author = {Engels, Eva}, title = {Adverb placement : an optimality theoretic approach}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-2453}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2004}, abstract = {Adverb positioning is guided by syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic considerations and is subject to cross-linguistic as well as language-specific variation. The goal of the thesis is to identify the factors that determine adverb placement in general (Part I) as well as in constructions in which the adverb's sister constituent is deprived of its phonetic material by movement or ellipsis (gap constructions, Part II) and to provide an Optimality Theoretic approach to the contrasts in the effects of these factors on the distribution of adverbs in English, French, and German. In Optimality Theory (Prince \& Smolensky 1993), grammaticality is defined as optimal satisfaction of a hierarchy of violable constraints: for a given input, a set of output candidates are produced out of which that candidate is selected as grammatical output which optimally satisfies the constraint hierarchy. Since grammaticality crucially relies on the hierarchic relations of the constraints, cross-linguistic variation can be traced back to differences in the language-specific constraint rankings. Part I shows how diverse phenomena of adverb placement can be captured by corresponding constraints and their relative rankings: - contrasts in the linearization of adverbs and verbs/auxiliaries in English and French - verb placement in German and the filling of the prefield position - placement of focus-sensitive adverbs - fronting of topical arguments and adverbs Part II extends the analysis to a particular phenomenon of adverb positioning: the avoidance of adverb attachment to a phonetically empty constituent (gap). English and French are similar in that the acceptability of pre-gap adverb placement depends on the type of adverb, its scope, and the syntactic construction (English: wh-movement vs. topicalization / VP Fronting / VP Ellipsis, inverted vs. non-inverted clauses; French: CLLD vs. Cleft, simple vs. periphrastic tense). Yet, the two languages differ in which strategies a specific type of adverb may pursue to escape placement in front of a certain type of gap. In contrast to English and French, placement of an adverb in front of a gap never gives rise to ungrammaticality in German. Rather, word ordering has to obey the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic principles discussed in Part I; whether or not it results in adverb attachment to a phonetically empty constituent seems to be irrelevant: though constraints are active in every language, the emergence of a visible effect of their requirements in a given language depends on their relative ranking. The complex interaction of the diverse factors as well as their divergent effects on adverb placement in the various languages are accounted for by the universal constraints and their language-specific hierarchic relations in the OT framework.}, subject = {Adverb}, language = {en} } @article{FominyamTran2019, author = {Fominyam, Henry and Tran, Thuan}, title = {Beware of 'discourse markers'}, series = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, journal = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-457-9}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43252}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-432524}, pages = {257 -- 272}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{Gafos2019, author = {Gafos, Adamantios I.}, title = {Multistability in speech and other activities}, series = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, journal = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-457-9}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43258}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-432580}, pages = {343 -- 360}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{Georgi2019, author = {Georgi, Doreen}, title = {Intermediate reflexes of movement}, series = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, journal = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-457-9}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43221}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-432217}, pages = {77 -- 93}, year = {2019}, language = {en} }