@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}
}
@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{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}
}
@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{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}
}
@article{FanselowKlieglSchlesewsky2008,
  author    = {Fanselow, Gisbert and Kliegl, Reinhold and Schlesewsky, Matthias},
  title     = {Syntactic variation in German wh-questions},
  year      = {2008},
  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{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}
}
@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}
}
@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}
}