@misc{FelserCunningsBatterhametal.2012,
  author    = {Felser, Claudia and Cunnings, Ian and Batterham, Claire and Clahsen, Harald},
  title     = {The timing of island effects in nonnative sentence processing},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-41517},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-415179},
  pages     = {32},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Using the eye-movement monitoring technique in two reading comprehension experiments, this study investigated the timing of constraints on wh-dependencies (so-called island constraints) in first- and second-language (L1 and L2) sentence processing. The results show that both L1 and L2 speakers of English are sensitive to extraction islands during processing, suggesting that memory storage limitations affect L1 and L2 comprehenders in essentially the same way. Furthermore, these results show that the timing of island effects in L1 compared to L2 sentence comprehension is affected differently by the type of cue (semantic fit versus filled gaps) signaling whether dependency formation is possible at a potential gap site. Even though L1 English speakers showed immediate sensitivity to filled gaps but not to lack of semantic fit, proficient German-speaking learners of English as a L2 showed the opposite sensitivity pattern. This indicates that initial wh-dependency formation in L2 processing is based on semantic feature matching rather than being structurally mediated as in L1 comprehension.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BoxellFelserCunnings2017,
  author    = {Boxell, Oliver and Felser, Claudia and Cunnings, Ian},
  title     = {Antecedent contained deletions in native and non-native sentence processing},
  series = {Linguistic approaches to bilingualism},
  volume    = {7},
  journal   = {Linguistic approaches to bilingualism},
  number    = {5},
  publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Co.},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {1879-9264},
  doi       = {10.1075/lab.15006.box},
  pages     = {554 -- 582},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {We report the results from an eye-movement monitoring study investigating native (L1) and non-native (L2) speakers' real-time processing of antecedent-contained deletion (ACD), a type of verb phrase ellipsis in which the ellipsis gap forms part of its own antecedent. The resulting interpretation problem is traditionally thought to be solved by quantifier raising, a covert scope-shifting operation that serves to remove the gap from within its antecedent. Our L2 group comprised advanced, native German-speaking L2 learners of English. The analysis of the eye-movement data showed that both L1 and L2 English speakers tried to recover the missing verb phrase after encountering the gap. Only the native speakers showed evidence of ellipsis resolution being affected by quantification, however. No effects of quantification following gap detection were found in the L2 group, by contrast, indicating that recovery of the elided material was accomplished independently from the object's quantificational status in this group.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{FelserPattersonCunnings2015,
  author    = {Felser, Claudia and Patterson, Clare and Cunnings, Ian},
  title     = {Structural constraints on pronoun binding and coreference: Evidence from eye movements during reading},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-78650},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {A number of recent studies have investigated how syntactic and non-syntactic constraints combine to cue memory retrieval during anaphora resolution. In this paper we investigate how syntactic constraints and gender congruence interact to guide memory retrieval during the resolution of subject pronouns. Subject pronouns are always technically ambiguous, and the application of syntactic constraints on their interpretation depends on properties of the antecedent that is to be retrieved. While pronouns can freely corefer with non-quantified referential antecedents, linking a pronoun to a quantified antecedent is only possible in certain syntactic configurations via variable binding. We report the results from a judgment task and three online reading comprehension experiments investigating pronoun resolution with quantified and non-quantified antecedents. Results from both the judgment task and participants' eye movements during reading indicate that comprehenders freely allow pronouns to corefer with non-quantified antecedents, but that retrieval of quantified antecedents is restricted to specific syntactic environments. We interpret our findings as indicating that syntactic constraints constitute highly weighted cues to memory retrieval during anaphora resolution.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{CunningsPattersonFelser2015,
  author    = {Cunnings, Ian and Patterson, Clare and Felser, Claudia},
  title     = {Structural constraints on pronoun binding and coreference: evidence from eye movements during reading},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00840},
  pages     = {18},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {A number of recent studies have investigated how syntactic and non-syntactic constraints combine to cue memory retrieval during anaphora resolution. In this paper we investigate how syntactic constraints and gender congruence interact to guide memory retrieval during the resolution of subject pronouns. Subject pronouns are always technically ambiguous, and the application of syntactic constraints on their interpretation depends on properties of the antecedent that is to be retrieved. While pronouns can freely corefer with non-quantified referential antecedents, linking a pronoun to a quantified antecedent is only possible in certain syntactic configurations via variable binding. We report the results from a judgment task and three online reading comprehension experiments investigating pronoun resolution with quantified and non-quantified antecedents. Results from both the judgment task and participants' eye movements during reading indicate that comprehenders freely allow pronouns to corefer with non-quantified antecedents, but that retrieval of quantified antecedents is restricted to specific syntactic environments. We interpret our findings as indicating that syntactic constraints constitute highly weighted cues to memory retrieval during anaphora resolution.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{CunningsPattersonFelser2014,
  author    = {Cunnings, Ian and Patterson, Clare and Felser, Claudia},
  title     = {Variable binding and coreference in sentence comprehension: Evidence from eye movements},
  series = {Journal of memory and language},
  volume    = {71},
  journal   = {Journal of memory and language},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {San Diego},
  issn      = {0749-596X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jml.2013.10.001},
  pages     = {39 -- 56},
  year      = {2014},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FelserCunningsBatterhametal.2012,
  author    = {Felser, Claudia and Cunnings, Ian and Batterham, Claire and Clahsen, Harald},
  title     = {The timing of Island effects in nonnative sentence processing},
  series = {Studies in second language acquisition},
  volume    = {34},
  journal   = {Studies in second language acquisition},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
  address   = {Cambridge},
  issn      = {0272-2631},
  doi       = {10.1017/S0272263111000507},
  pages     = {67 -- 98},
  year      = {2012},
  abstract  = {Using the eye-movement monitoring technique in two reading comprehension experiments, this study investigated the timing of constraints on wh-dependencies (so-called island constraints) in first- and second-language (L1 and L2) sentence processing. The results show that both L1 and L2 speakers of English are sensitive to extraction islands during processing, suggesting that memory storage limitations affect L1 and L2 comprehenders in essentially the same way. Furthermore, these results show that the timing of island effects in L1 compared to L2 sentence comprehension is affected differently by the type of cue (semantic fit versus filled gaps) signaling whether dependency formation is possible at a potential gap site. Even though L1 English speakers showed immediate sensitivity to filled gaps but not to lack of semantic fit, proficient German-speaking learners of English as a L2 showed the opposite sensitivity pattern. This indicates that initial wh-dependency formation in L2 processing is based on semantic feature matching rather than being structurally mediated as in L1 comprehension.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{FelserPattersonCunnings2015,
  author    = {Felser, Claudia and Patterson, Clare and Cunnings, Ian},
  title     = {Structural constraints on pronoun binding and coreference: Evidence from eye movements during reading},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  number    = {840},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00840},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {A number of recent studies have investigated how syntactic and non-syntactic constraints combine to cue memory retrieval during anaphora resolution. In this paper we investigate how syntactic constraints and gender congruence interact to guide memory retrieval during the resolution of subject pronouns. Subject pronouns are always technically ambiguous, and the application of syntactic constraints on their interpretation depends on properties of the antecedent that is to be retrieved. While pronouns can freely corefer with non-quantified referential antecedents, linking a pronoun to a quantified antecedent is only possible in certain syntactic configurations via variable binding. We report the results from a judgment task and three online reading comprehension experiments investigating pronoun resolution with quantified and non-quantified antecedents. Results from both the judgment task and participants' eye movements during reading indicate that comprehenders freely allow pronouns to corefer with non-quantified antecedents, but that retrieval of quantified antecedents is restricted to specific syntactic environments. We interpret our findings as indicating that syntactic constraints constitute highly weighted cues to memory retrieval during anaphora resolution.},
  language  = {en}
}