@article{SticherCzepluchMaetzeneretal.2011, author = {Sticher, Heike and Czepluch, Christine and M{\"a}tzener, Flurina and Wilmes, Stefanie and Hadert, Sandra and Frank, Ulrike and M{\"a}der, Mark}, title = {Dekan{\"u}lierungsmanagement bei Patienten mit respiratorischen Beeintr{\"a}chtigungen und Dysphagie}, series = {Spektrum Patholinguistik}, journal = {Spektrum Patholinguistik}, number = {4}, issn = {1869-3822}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-54277}, pages = {141 -- 142}, year = {2011}, language = {de} } @article{Tomioka2007, author = {Tomioka, Satoshi}, title = {Intervention effects in focus}, series = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, volume = {9}, journal = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, editor = {Ishihara, Shinichiro and Petrova, Svetlana and Schwarz, Anne}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1866-4725}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24502}, pages = {97 -- 118}, year = {2007}, abstract = {The most recent trend in the studies of LF intervention effects makes crucial reference to focusing effects on the interveners, and this paper critically examines the representative analyses of the focus-based approach. While each analysis has its own merits and shortcomings, I argue that a pragmatic analysis that does not make appeal to syntactic configurations is better equipped to deal with many of the complex and delicate facts surrounding intervention effects.}, language = {en} } @article{Kubozono2007, author = {Kubozono, Haruo}, title = {Focus and intonation in Japanese}, series = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, volume = {9}, journal = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, editor = {Ishihara, Shinichiro and Petrova, Svetlana and Schwarz, Anne}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1866-4725}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24472}, pages = {1 -- 27}, year = {2007}, abstract = {This paper discusses how focus changes prosodic structure in Tokyo Japanese. It is generally believed that focus blocks the intonational process of downstep and causes a pitch reset. This paper presents experimental evidence against this traditional view by looking at the prosodic behavior of Wh words, which receive focus lexically in Japanese as in other languages. It is demonstrated, specifically, that the focused Wh element does not block downstep although it receives a much higher pitch than its preceding element. This suggests that presence of lexical focus does not trigger pitch reset in Japanese.}, language = {en} } @article{DueringLubitzSchnelleetal.2022, author = {D{\"u}ring, Sarah and Lubitz, Anika and Schnelle, Kirsten and Klitsch, Julia and Netzebandt, Jonka and Fritzsche, Tom}, title = {Interdisziplin{\"a}re Zusammenarbeit}, series = {Spektrum Patholinguistik 15}, journal = {Spektrum Patholinguistik 15}, number = {15}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-542-2}, issn = {1866-9433}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-57238}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-572386}, pages = {87 -- 106}, year = {2022}, language = {de} } @article{EndrissHinterwimmer2004, author = {Endriss, Cornelia and Hinterwimmer, Stefan}, title = {The influence of tense in adverbial quantification}, series = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, journal = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, number = {1}, issn = {1866-4725}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-8409}, pages = {121 -- 151}, year = {2004}, abstract = {We argue that there is a crucial difference between determiner and adverbial quantification. Following Herburger [2000] and von Fintel [1994], we assume that determiner quantifiers quantify over individuals and adverbial quantifiers over eventualities. While it is usually assumed that the semantics of sentences with determiner quantifiers and those with adverbial quantifiers basically come out the same, we will show by way of new data that quantification over events is more restricted than quantification over individuals. This is because eventualities in contrast to individuals have to be located in time which is done using contextual information according to a pragmatic resolution strategy. If the contextual information and the tense information given in the respective sentence contradict each other, the sentence is uninterpretable. We conclude that this is the reason why in these cases adverbial quantification, i.e. quantification over eventualities, is impossible whereas quantification over individuals is fine.}, language = {en} } @article{SchmitzAntonischkiHeideNetzebandt2022, author = {Schmitz-Antonischki, Dorit and Heide, Judith and Netzebandt, Jonka}, title = {Therapie von Wortabrufst{\"o}rungen mit der App LingoTalk bei einer Patientin mit Aphasie}, series = {Spektrum Patholinguistik 15}, journal = {Spektrum Patholinguistik 15}, number = {15}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-542-2}, issn = {1866-9433}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-57243}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-572433}, pages = {157 -- 171}, year = {2022}, language = {de} }