@article{AllefeldFrischSchlesewsky2005,
  author    = {Allefeld, Carsten and Frisch, Stefan and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Detection of early cognitive processing by event-related phase synchronization analysis},
  issn      = {0959-4965},
  year      = {2005},
  abstract  = {In order to investigate the temporal characteristics of cognitive processing, we apply multivariate phase synchronization analysis to event-related potentials. The experimental design combines a semantic incongruity in a sentence context with a physical mismatch (color change). In the ERP average, these result in an N400 component and a P300-like positivity, respectively. Synchronization analysis shows an effect of global desynchronization in the theta band around 288 ms after stimulus presentation for the semantic incongruity, while the physical mismatch elicits an increase of global synchronization in the alpha band around 204 ms. Both of these effects clearly precede those in the ERP aver-age. Moreover, the delay between synchronization effect and ERP component correlates with the complexity Of the cognitive processes. (C) 2005 Lippincott Williams Wilkins},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{AllefeldFrischSchlesewsky2005,
  author    = {Allefeld, Carsten and Frisch, Stefan and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Detection of early cognitive processing by event-related phase synchronization analysis},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-20126},
  year      = {2005},
  abstract  = {In order to investigate the temporal characteristics of cognitive processing, we apply multivariate phase synchronization analysis to event-related potentials. The experimental design combines a semantic incongruity in a sentence context with a physical mismatch (color change). In the ERP average, these result in an N400 component and a P300-like positivity, respectively. The synchronization analysis shows an effect of global desynchronization in the theta band around 288ms after stimulus presentation for the semantic incongruity, while the physical mismatch elicits an increase of global synchronization in the alpha band around 204ms. Both of these effects clearly precede those in the ERP average. Moreover, the delay between synchronization effect and ERP component correlates with the complexity of the cognitive processes.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BeimGrabenSaddySchlesewskyetal.2000,
  author    = {Beim Graben, Peter and Saddy, Douglas and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Kurths, J{\"u}rgen},
  title     = {Symbolic dynamics of event-related brain potentials},
  year      = {2000},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BornkesselSchlesewskySchlesewsky2019,
  author    = {Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina D. and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Is it a bird? Is it a mammal?},
  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-43253},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-432534},
  pages     = {275 -- 286},
  year      = {2019},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{FanselowFerySchlesewskyetal.2006,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and F{\´e}ry, Caroline and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Vogel, Ralf},
  title     = {Gradience in grammar : generative perspectives},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  address   = {Oxford, New York},
  isbn      = {0-19-927479-7},
  pages     = {416 S.},
  year      = {2006},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FanselowKlieglSchlesewsky1999,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Kliegl, Reinhold and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Processing difficulty and principles of grammar},
  year      = {1999},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FanselowKlieglSchlesewsky2008,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Kliegl, Reinhold and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Syntactic variation in German wh-questions},
  year      = {2008},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{FanselowSchlesewskyCavaretal.1999,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Cavar, Damir and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Optimal parsing: syntactic parsing preferences and optimality theory},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-57164},
  year      = {1999},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FanselowSchlesewskyVogeletal.2011,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Vogel, Ralf and Weskott, Thomas},
  title     = {Animacy effects on crossing wh-movement in German},
  series = {Linguistics : an interdisciplinary journal of the language sciences},
  volume    = {49},
  journal   = {Linguistics : an interdisciplinary journal of the language sciences},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {De Gruyter Mouton},
  address   = {Berlin},
  issn      = {0024-3949},
  doi       = {10.1515/LING.2011.021},
  pages     = {657 -- 683},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {This article presents several acceptability rating experiments concerned with crossing wh-movement in German multiple questions. Our results show that there is no general superiority effect in German, thus refuting claims to the contrary by Featherston (2005). However, acceptability is reduced when a wh-phrase crosses a wh-subject with which it agrees in animacy. We explain this finding in terms of the availability of different sorting keys for the answers to the multiple questions.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{FranselowSchlesewskyVogeletal.2011,
  author    = {Franselow, Gisbert and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Vogel, Ralf and Weskott, Thomas},
  title     = {Animacy effects on crossing wh-movement in German},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-93630},
  pages     = {657 -- 683},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {This article presents several acceptability rating experiments concerned with crossing wh-movement in German multiple questions. Our results show that there is no general superiority effect in German, thus refuting claims to the contrary by Featherston (2005). However, acceptability is reduced when a whphrase crosses a wh-subject with which it agrees in animacy. We explain this finding in terms of the availability of different sorting keys for the answers to the multiple questions.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FrischBeimGrabenSchlesewsky2004,
  author    = {Frisch, Stefan and Beim Graben, Peter and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Parallelizing grammatical functions : P600 and P345 reflect different cost of reanalysis},
  issn      = {0218-1274},
  year      = {2004},
  abstract  = {It is well-known from psycholinguistic literature that the human language processing system exhibits preferences when sentence constituents are ambiguous with respect to their grammatical function. Generally, many theories assume that an interpretation towards the subject is preferred in such cases. Later disambiguations which contradict such a preference induce enhanced processing difficulty (i.e. reanalysis) which reflects itself in late positive deflections (P345/P600) in event-related brain potentials (ERPs). In the case of phoric elements such as pronouns, a second strategy is known according to which an ambiguous pronoun preferentially receives the grammatical function that its antecedent has (parallel function strategy). In an ERP study, we show that this strategy can in principle override the general subject preference strategy (known for both pronominal and nonpronominal constituents) and induce an object preference, in case that the pronoun's antecedent is itself an object. Interestingly, the revision of a subject preference leads to a P600 component, whereas the revision of an object preference induces an earlier positivity (P345). In order to show that the latter component is indeed a positivity and not an N400-like negativity in the same time range, we apply an additional analysis based on symbolic dynamics which allows to determine the polarity of an ERP effect on purely methodological grounds. With respect to the two positivities, we argue that the latency differences reflect qualitative differences in the reanalysis processes},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FrischSchlesewsky2005,
  author    = {Frisch, Stefan and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {The resolution of case conflicts from a neurophysiological perspective},
  year      = {2005},
  abstract  = {We present two ERP experiments examining the resolution of language processing conflicts involving the multidimensional linguistic feature case, which determines processing in both syntactic and interpretive respects. Ungrammatical German structures with two identically case-marked arguments (double subject or double object constructions) were tested. In earlier studies, double subject constructions have been shown to elicit a biphasic pattern consisting of an N400 effect (a marker of thematic integration problems) followed by a P600 effect (a marker of syntactic ill-formedness). Here, we compare double nominative (subject case) constructions with double datives (indirect object case; Experiment 1) and double accusatives (direct object case; Experiment 2). All types of double case ungrammaticalities elicited a biphasic N400-P600 response. However, double datives differed from double nominatives in that they elicited a larger P600, suggesting that the ill-formedness is more salient in structures with two dative arguments. Double accusatives, by contrast, elicited a stronger N400 in comparison to double nominatives, suggesting that they induce more severe semantic-thematic integration problems. The results demonstrate that the human language comprehension system is sensitive to fine grained linguistic distinctions between different cases and utilizes these in its attempts to solve processing conflicts. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FrischSchlesewskyWegner2005,
  author    = {Frisch, Stefan and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Wegner, H.},
  title     = {The interaction of morphological case and word order constraints : Cross-linguistic ERP evidence from German, Russian and Finnish},
  year      = {2005},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{OlsenStiebelsBierwischetal.2019,
  author    = {Olsen, Susan and Stiebels, Barbara and Bierwisch, Manfred and Zimmermann, Ilse and Cavar, Damir and Georgi, Doreen and Bacskai-Atkari, Julia and Alexiadou, Artemis and Błaszczak, Joanna and M{\"u}ller, Gereon and Šim{\´i}k, Radek and Meinunger, Andr{\´e} and Thiersch, Craig and Arnhold, Anja and F{\´e}ry, Caroline and Bayer, Josef and Titov, Elena and Fominyam, Henry and Tran, Thuan and Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina D. and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Zimmermann, Malte and H{\"a}ussler, Jana and Mucha, Anne and Schmidt, Andreas and Weskott, Thomas and Wierzba, Marta and Stede, Manfred and Skopeteas, Stavros and Gafos, Adamantios I. and Haider, Hubert and Wunderlich, Dieter and Staudacher, Peter and Rauh, Gisa},
  title     = {Of Trees and Birds},
  editor    = {Brown, Jessica M. M. and Schmidt, Andreas and Wierzba, Marta},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-457-9},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-42654},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-426542},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {xvi, 435},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Gisbert Fanselow's work has been invaluable and inspiring to many ­researchers working on syntax, morphology, and information ­structure, both from a ­theoretical and from an experimental perspective. This ­volume comprises a collection of articles dedicated to Gisbert on the occasion of his 60th birthday, covering a range of topics from these areas and beyond. The contributions have in ­common that in a broad sense they have to do with language structures (and thus trees), and that in a more specific sense they have to do with birds. They thus cover two of Gisbert's major interests in- and outside of the linguistic world (and ­perhaps even at the interface).},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SaddyBeimGrabenSchlesewsky1999,
  author    = {Saddy, Douglas and Beim Graben, Peter and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Cortical Dynamics of Language Processes},
  year      = {1999},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SaddyBeimGrabenSchlesewsky1999,
  author    = {Saddy, Douglas and Beim Graben, Peter and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Measuring entropy during language processing},
  year      = {1999},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SaddySchlesewskyBeimGraben1999,
  author    = {Saddy, Douglas and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Beim Graben, Peter},
  title     = {Cylinder Entropies and Case resolution},
  year      = {1999},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchlesewskyFanselowFrisch2003,
  author    = {Schlesewsky, Matthias and Fanselow, Gisbert and Frisch, Stefan},
  title     = {Case as a trigger for reanalysis},
  series = {Linguistics in Potsdam},
  journal   = {Linguistics in Potsdam},
  number    = {21},
  issn      = {1616-7392},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32431},
  pages     = {31 -- 60},
  year      = {2003},
  abstract  = {In the recent literature there is a hypothesis that the human parser uses number and case information in different ways to resolve an initially incorrect case assignment. This paper investigates what role morphological case information plays during the parser's detection of an ungrammaticality or its recognition that a reanalysis is necessary. First, we compare double nominative with double accusative ungrammaticalities in a word by word, speeded grammaticality task and in this way show that only double nominatives lead to a so-called "illusion of grammaticality" (a low rate of ungrammaticality detection). This illusion was found to disappear when the second argument was realized by a pronoun rather than by a full definite determiner phrase, i.e. when the saliency of the second argument was increased. Thus, the accuracy in recognizing an ungrammaticality induced by the case feature of the second argument is dependent on the type of this argument. Furthermore, we found that the accuracy in detecting such case ungrammaticalities is distance sensitive insofar as a shorter distance leads to a higher accuracy. The results are taken as support for an "expectationdriven" parse strategy in which the way the parser uses the information of a current input item depends on the expectation resulting from the parse carried out so far. By contrast, "input-driven" parse strategies, such as the diagnosis model (Fodor \& Inoue, 1999) are unable to explain the data presented here.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchlesewskyFanselowKliegletal.2000,
  author    = {Schlesewsky, Matthias and Fanselow, Gisbert and Kliegl, Reinhold and Krems, J.},
  title     = {The subject preference in the processing of locally ambiguous Wh-questions in german},
  isbn      = {0-7923-6104- 0},
  year      = {2000},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchlesewskyFrisch2003,
  author    = {Schlesewsky, Matthias and Frisch, Stefan},
  title     = {Nominative case as a multidimensional default},
  series = {Linguistics in Potsdam},
  journal   = {Linguistics in Potsdam},
  number    = {21},
  issn      = {1616-7392},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32447},
  pages     = {61 -- 72},
  year      = {2003},
  abstract  = {The present paper addresses a current view in the psycholinguistic literature that case exhibits processing properties distinct from those of other morphological features such as number (cf. Fodor \& Inoue, 2000; Meng \& Bader, 2000a/b). In a speeded-acceptability judgement experiment, we show that the low performance previously found for case in contrast to number violations is limited to nominative case, whereas violations involving accusative and dative are judged more accurately. The data thus do not support the proposal that case per se is associated with special properties (in contrast to other features such as number) in reanalysis processes. Rather, there are significant judgement differences between the object cases accusative and dative on the one hand and the subject nominative case on the other. This may be explained by the fact that nominative has a specific status in German (and many other languages) as a default case.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchoknechtRoehmSchlesewskyetal.2022,
  author    = {Schoknecht, Pia and Roehm, Dietmar and Schlesewsky, Matthias and Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina},
  title     = {The interaction of predictive processing and similarity-based retrieval interference},
  series = {Language, cognition and neuroscience},
  volume    = {37},
  journal   = {Language, cognition and neuroscience},
  number    = {7},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {2327-3798},
  doi       = {10.1080/23273798.2022.2026421},
  pages     = {883 -- 901},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Language processing requires memory retrieval to integrate current input with previous context and making predictions about upcoming input. We propose that prediction and retrieval are two sides of the same coin, i.e. functionally the same, as they both activate memory representations. Under this assumption, memory retrieval and prediction should interact: Retrieval interference can only occur at a word that triggers retrieval and a fully predicted word would not do that. The present study investigated the proposed interaction with event-related potentials (ERPs) during the processing of sentence pairs in German. Predictability was measured via cloze probability. Memory retrieval was manipulated via the position of a distractor inducing proactive or retroactive similarity-based interference. Linear mixed model analyses provided evidence for the hypothesised interaction in a broadly distributed negativity, which we discuss in relation to the interference ERP literature. Our finding supports the proposal that memory retrieval and prediction are functionally the same.},
  language  = {en}
}