@phdthesis{Zaccarella2015, author = {Zaccarella, Emiliano}, title = {Breaking down complexity}, series = {MPI series human cognitive and brain sciences ; 175}, journal = {MPI series human cognitive and brain sciences ; 175}, publisher = {Max-Planck-Institute}, address = {Leipzig}, isbn = {978-3-941504-60-8}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {217}, year = {2015}, abstract = {The unbounded expressive capacity of human language cannot boil down to an infinite list of sentences stored in a finite brain. Our linguistic knowledge is rather grounded around a rule-based universal syntactic computation—called Merge—which takes categorized units in input (e.g. this and ship), and generates structures by binding words recursively into more complex hierarchies of any length (e.g. this ship; this ship sinks…). Here we present data from different fMRI datasets probing the cortical implementation of this fundamental process. We first pushed complexity down to a three-word level, to explore how Merge creates minimally hierarchical phrases and sentences. We then moved to the most fundamental two-word level, to directly assess the universal invariant nature of Merge, when no additive mechanisms are involved. Our most general finding is that Merge as the basic syntactic operation is primarily performed by confined area, namely BA 44 in the IFG. Activity reduces to its most ventral-anterior portion at the most fundamental level, following fine-grained sub-anatomical parcellation proposed for the region. The deep frontal operculum/anterior-dorsal insula (FOP/adINS), a phylogenetically older and less specialized region, rather appears to support word-accumulation processing in which the categorical information of the word is first accessed based on its lexical status, and then maintained on hold before further processing takes place. The present data confirm the general notion of BA 44 being activated as a function of complex structural hierarchy, but they go beyond this view by proposing that structural sensitivity in BA 44 is already appreciated at the lowest levels of complexity during which minimal phrase-structures are build up, and syntactic Merge is assessed. Further, they call for a redefinition of BA 44 from multimodal area to a macro-region with internal localizable functional profiles}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Grubic2015, author = {Grubic, Mira}, title = {Focus and alternative sensitivity in Ngamo (West-Chadic)}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-81666}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2015}, abstract = {The main research question of this thesis concerns the relation between focus interpretation, focus realization, and association with focus in the West Chadic language Ngamo. Concerning the relation between focus realization and interpretation, this thesis contributes to the question, cross-linguistically, what factors influence a marked realization of the focus/background distinction. There is background-marking rather than focus-marking in Ngamo, and the background marker is related to the definite determiner in the language. Using original fieldwork data as a basis, a formal semantic analysis of the background marker as a definite determiner of situations is proposed. Concerning the relation between focus and association with focus, the thesis adds to the growing body of crosslinguistic evidence that not all so-called focus-sensitive operators always associate with focus. The thesis shows that while the exclusive particle yak('i) (= "only") in Ngamo conventionally associates with focus, the particles har('i) (= "even, as far as, until, already"), and ke('e) (= "also, and") do not. The thesis provides an analysis of these phenomena in a situation semantic framework.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{BaerHenney2015, author = {Baer-Henney, Dinah}, title = {Learners' Little Helper}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {135}, year = {2015}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Gerth2015, author = {Gerth, Sabrina}, title = {Memory limitations in sentence comprehension}, isbn = {978-3-86956-321-3}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-71554}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xviii, 157}, year = {2015}, abstract = {This dissertation addresses the question of how linguistic structures can be represented in working memory. We propose a memory-based computational model that derives offline and online complexity profiles in terms of a top-down parser for minimalist grammars (Stabler, 2011). The complexity metric reflects the amount of time an item is stored in memory. The presented architecture links grammatical representations stored in memory directly to the cognitive behavior by deriving predictions about sentence processing difficulty. Results from five different sentence comprehension experiments were used to evaluate the model's assumptions about memory limitations. The predictions of the complexity metric were compared to the locality (integration and storage) cost metric of Dependency Locality Theory (Gibson, 2000). Both metrics make comparable offline and online predictions for four of the five phenomena. The key difference between the two metrics is that the proposed complexity metric accounts for the structural complexity of intervening material. In contrast, DLT's integration cost metric considers the number of discourse referents, not the syntactic structural complexity. We conclude that the syntactic analysis plays a significant role in memory requirements of parsing. An incremental top-down parser based on a grammar formalism easily computes offline and online complexity profiles, which can be used to derive predictions about sentence processing difficulty.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Bosch2015, author = {Bosch, Sina}, title = {Morphosyntactic feature structure in the native and non-native mental lexicon}, pages = {VI, 166}, year = {2015}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Heyer2015, author = {Heyer, Vera}, title = {Native and non-native processing of derived forms}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {318}, year = {2015}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Nimz2015, author = {Nimz, Katharina}, title = {Sound perception and production in a foreign language}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-361-9}, issn = {2190-4545}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-88794}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xix, 236}, year = {2015}, abstract = {The present study addresses the question of how German vowels are perceived and produced by Polish learners of German as a Foreign Language. It comprises three main experiments: a discrimination experiment, a production experiment, and an identification experiment. With the exception of the discrimination task, the experiments further investigated the influence of orthographic marking on the perception and production of German vowel length. It was assumed that explicit markings such as the Dehnungs-h ("lengthening h") could help Polish GFL learners in perceiving and producing German words more correctly. The discrimination experiment with manipulated nonce words showed that Polish GFL learners detect pure length differences in German vowels less accurately than German native speakers, while this was not the case for pure quality differences. The results of the identification experiment contrast with the results of the discrimination task in that Polish GFL learners were better at judging incorrect vowel length than incorrect vowel quality in manipulated real words. However, orthographic marking did not turn out to be the driving factor and it is suggested that metalinguistic awareness can explain the asymmetry between the two perception experiments. The production experiment supported the results of the identification task in that lengthening h did not help Polish learners in producing German vowel length more correctly. Yet, as far as vowel quality productions are concerned, it is argued that orthography does influence L2 sound productions because Polish learners seem to be negatively influenced by their native grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences. It is concluded that it is important to differentiate between the influence of the L1 and L2 orthographic system. On the one hand, the investigation of the influence of orthographic vowel length markers in German suggests that Polish GFL learners do not make use of length information provided by the L2 orthographic system. On the other hand, the vowel quality data suggest that the L1 orthographic system plays a crucial role in the acquisition of a foreign language. It is therefore proposed that orthography influences the acquisition of foreign sounds, but not in the way it was originally assumed.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Mucha2015, author = {Mucha, Anne}, title = {Temporal interpretation and cross-linguistic variation}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-85935}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {x, 249}, year = {2015}, abstract = {This thesis investigates temporal and aspectual reference in the typologically unrelated African languages Hausa (Chadic, Afro-Asiatic) and Medumba (Grassfields Bantu). It argues that Hausa is a genuinely tenseless language and compares the interpretation of temporally unmarked sentences in Hausa to that of morphologically tenseless sentences in Medumba, where tense marking is optional and graded. The empirical behavior of the optional temporal morphemes in Medumba motivates an analysis as existential quantifiers over times and thus provides new evidence suggesting that languages vary in whether their (past) tense is pronominal or quantificational (see also Sharvit 2014). The thesis proposes for both Hausa and Medumba that the alleged future tense marker is a modal element that obligatorily combines with a prospective future shifter (which is covert in Medumba). Cross-linguistic variation in whether or not a future marker is compatible with non-future interpretation is proposed to be predictable from the aspectual architecture of the given language.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Geckin2015, author = {Geckin, Vasfiye}, title = {The interpretation of logical connections by monolingual and bilingual children}, pages = {ix, 181}, year = {2015}, language = {en} }