Termout.org logo/LING


Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled.

Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) sentence (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística

1) Candidate: sentence


Is in goldstandard

1
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt190 - : • When revising your argument, to help you focus on and recognize the ground, complete this sentence: "I want my audience to believe that ... [the claim] because... [list the ground]."

2
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt71 - : Literature is an interesting field of linguistic analysis, even though it takes us away from the contents we usually study during any course in semantics, to the extent that in literature, language plays a different role. If we have studied language during our academic years, exploring its semantic potential at the sentence and utterance level and so on, in literature we shall see that language plays the function of triggering or creating new worlds: the worlds of fiction .

3
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt71 - : The first level of meaning can be appreciated through the following sentence taken from Meaning in The Eye of the Beholder, as an example: He returned to the store . In this example, the linguistic sign functions as a symbol: its meaning is stable and subject to «centripetal» deciphering, that is, proceeding or acting in a direction towards a center or axis.

4
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt71 - : Rather than presenting expressions which demonstrate its symbolic character as sentence, such as: «He returned to the store», «She returned to the store» and «He went back to the store», we could present it with other sentences that direct the attention to its meaning potential as representation, as for: «He returned to the store . The assistant did not recognize him. He took out his gun. Then, he pointed his gun at everyone in the store.»

5
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt71 - : According to [32]Widdowson (1987:10) , signification can be specified in a sentence by indicating how the linguistic sign which functions as a symbol enters into sense relations, thus arguing that its meaning is stable and subject to 'centripetal' deciphering. Thus given a particular sentence from the text: «He was very pleased» .

6
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt101 - : In order to see the practical use of these marks, let us look at an example as in the sentence:

7
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt138 - : The third category established was: Project work can facilitate the expression of feelings, likes, advice, concerns, and necessities. This category refers to the opportunity that project work offers students for writing with a purpose. They had more to say and more to write because they could express their feelings toward nature and animals, give advice, and write about their concerns. It was also a valuable opportunity for writing critically because the students were able to analyze, apply and finally, create sentences according to their interests. In the first sentence students expressed necessity: "The plants need sun and rain", in the second sentence students expressed obligation or advice: "We should feed plants with water" and in the third sentence they gave advice: "We should protect plants and animals ." In this case, students could express their feelings and thoughts about the necessity of taking care of plants. The development of the project allowed the students to interact,

8
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt178 - : The idea above would have been more effectively achieved by changing the order of 'a lot' in the syntactical organization of the sentence (before, women used dresses a lot) as in the following examples from the COCA corpus which refer to frequency: 'My brother has moved a lot,' 'I travel a lot,' 'I smoked a lot,' 'I ask a lot,' etc . (COCA).

9
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt178 - : Degree boosters create referents of diverse natures establishing various types of relationships with each sentence component: Sometimes they depict direct proportionality, inverse proportionality, cause and effect, and so on . Losing track of such referents altogether can denote the wrong relationship or result in a half-finished idea. Similarly, semantic operations can be misrepresented and lose meaning as a result of the wrong word choice, awkward or erroneous syntactical organization, the usage of the wrong part of speech, the pairing of the wrong words, and/or a combination of words creating ambiguity.

10
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt11 - : The teacher in the previous anecdote, a native-like speaker of English, was not only proclaiming his authenticity of the language but also imposing it on his learners. His short sentence: "OK, Let's speak American" was sending waves against their won authenticity as classroom participants of an EFL class and most of all as members of a national society .

11
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt107 - : T: I have some sentences that we are going to distinguish (...)hope so; so, just on the right you have these sentences, ok?...so, that's it, the first sentence is: "I can't stop loving you ." Do you understand it? You understand it?

12
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt144 - : Fish analyses the sentence by first raising two slots: "they did perceive" and "they didn't perceive" . He evoked the rule of the double negative but he found that the internal logic of the grammatical utterance opposes the logic of reading experience. His method took him to see the sentence as an occurrence which has meaning to be found by the reader's mental analysis and that meaning is not put in the sentence as such. Turning the sentence from the interrogative "did they or didn't they" into the affirmative state "they did and they didn't" widens the reader's analysis into two senses of perceive: they perceive the physical situation and they do not do so with the moral situation as they do not perceive the evil plight.

13
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt30 - : In [33]Extract 5, as the interaction took place while the students were at the board, the teacher read part of the sentence that he had asked the students to dictate to him. In line 6, the teacher read the first part of the sentence in the text, and in lines 7 and 8, two students read the verb, although a student repeated the auxiliary verb the teacher had already read (line 7). As in other instances in this lesson, the focus was on grammar and complete sentences were often not read aloud. Students often bid for answers to identify, and read aloud. [34]Extract 6 below shows them bidding to read aloud sentences incorporating the present perfect tense:

14
paper CO_CuadernosdeLingüísticaHispánicatxt152 - : Code-switching is language-mixing where individuals who speak two languages switch from one to another, often mid-sentence: "Code-switching is the alternation of two languages within a single discourse, sentence or constituent" (^[34]Poplack 1980, p . 583): Code-switching typically happens in situations where both the speaker and the listener are highly bilingual in both of the languages. However, it is important to acknowledge that it can sometimes be hard to distinguish between code-switching and lexical borrowing. Lexical borrowing refers to a situation where a single word or frozen phrase from language X is used in language Y (the speaker's native language), typically assimilates phonologically to language Y, and fully assimilates into the grammatical system of language Y (e.g. ^[35]Poplack, 1980; ^[36]Pfaff, 1979, ^[37]Gumperz 1977). Unlike CS, lexical borrowing can happen in contexts where the speaker is not proficient in language Y.

15
paper CO_CuadernosdeLingüísticaHispánicatxt10 - : In this segment Nicol led the correction of the activity by saying the imperative sentence: «corregimos, rápido, rápido, rápido» (lets correct, hurry, hurry, hurry! ). From the beginning of the correction part she expressed enthusiasm and eagerness for working and finishing the activity as fast as possible. Mary and Rita expressed they do not know how to correct the sentences. Nicol explained them how to do it and then asked her peers to hurry. After the explanation, Nicol said something that makes us think she was interested in something else than finishing the task quickly. Her final words: «apure que ya terminaron ellos. ¡Apuren!» (hurry, those boys are done! Hurry!) shows that in some sense, she was comparing her assertiveness as language learner with another group composed by boys. Her enthusiasm to work fast and finish the task is implicit in a race she was having with boys. Catañeda (2008) says that races in the SIX classroom take place because the teacher organizes them; or second,

16
paper CO_CuadernosdeLingüísticaHispánicatxt164 - : In turn 47, the student tries with other possible answer (is big) but it is again incorrect, so the teacher in the next turn (48), first, repeats the student's answer with a low intonation to make her hesitate of her answer and then turns to a common strategy when teaching: body language, showing the student two fingers, while saying the word "because". Here, the teacher tries to help the student understand better the situation, showing with her fingers a possible hint for the student to correctly answer the question. Evidently, the teacher gets the student to be engaged with the communication, even though the student knows there is a problem of meaning and proper use of the language. It is also seen that the teacher tries to reorganize and paraphrase the sentence, using once again a pedagogical movement ( is::: ↓ because:::((showing the student two fingers )) because probably the "stretching" seen in the turn makes the student understand that there is something wrong. Because, even though

17
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt220 - : All Spanish renderings (A, B, and C) are in fact «translations» proper as they have followed DEP. They also share the Translational Norm that relates the translated text to the original and reproduces it as faithfully as possible. A even claims to be a «literal» rendering and B states that it has not maintained the original punctuation marks. The translations were published in different parts of the Spanish speaking world: A in Colombia, B in Argentina and C in Spain. However no dialectal marks could be identified in the different versions. On the other hand, the Translation Range (TR) can be easily verified when comparing the translation of the first sentence in the first paragraph:

18
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt220 - : The Equivalence Range of the lexical unit Wenigsten includes a literal rendering in Spanish that evokes a very unusual meaning a los menos; it presents a narrowing of meaning in Russian to a few, not to the very few as the original says. French and English translations activate the implicit semantic feature of «rare» people, the «chosen ones. Another interesting example appears in the next sentence:

19
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt288 - : There are two ways of forming commands in Kamsá: either through the verbal imperative marker, or by using a second person future form of the verb. In example 14a, the verb «jatbana» ‘collect’ is marked with the second singular marker «ko-» followed by the future prefix «ch-. The sentence in example 14b shows both strategies of command: the morphological imperative «mo-lempia» ‘Clean!’ and the future-as-imperative with «kochjase» ‘Eat!’ . 14c shows the morphological imperative with a native Kamsá word, «jasan» ‘eat’.

20
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt52 - : As for Venuti's contribution to translation studies, Pym (1998, p. 74) begins by revising the way figures are presented by Venuti in his 1995 The Translators' Invisibility. A History of Translation and he maintains that "no statistical distribution of translations, be it across time or space, is entirely neutral", and points out that, when presenting some data on the publishing industry of originals and translations, Venuti "is not above producing strangely manipulative sentences" (ibid, p. 72). As an illustration of this, Pym cites the following sentence by Venuti:

21
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt260 - : The Munduruku people live in the states of Pará and Amazonas, including a handful of residents in Mato Grosso, in Brazil. My research about the language takes place within the Munduruku population of Pará. It is a language of the Tupi stock, that belongs to the Munduruku family. It is of head-marking type. The most common constituent order is s(O)V. The arguments do not receive morphologic marks, usually occurring in noun phrases. The verb receives person marks, which indicate/co-refer subject and direct object. Our objective here is to present the inventory of the postpositions, in order to discuss the properties they share; what their structural and functional features are; and their participation in the passive voice, causative, subordination, modality, source of information, and locative and possessive predication. We also approach the isomorphism among postpositions, nouns and verbs; the syntactic relation that establishes the postpositional phrase with the rest of the sentence:

22
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt260 - : Our objective here is to present the inventory of postpositions, in order to discuss the properties they share; what their structural and functional features are; and their participation in the passive voice, causative, subordination, modality, source of information, and locative and possessive predication. We also approach the isomorphism among postpositions, nouns and verbs; the syntactic relation that establishes the postpositional phrase (PP) with the rest of the sentence: whether argument or adjunct . And we will also reflect upon its typology.

23
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt260 - : The verb «ũm» 'to give' requires, morphosyntatically, two arguments as we can see in the example 2f, namely: a subject («ẽn» 'You') and a direct object («kise» 'knife'). These two arguments keep a grammatical relation with the verb, morphologically, as they are retaken or identified in it by means of pronominal indexes: «e=» 2s and «g̃-» 3o. The beneficiary of the action («ayacat pe» 'for the woman') does not find space in the verbal morphology and occurs in a pp, typically in the final position in the sentence:

24
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt260 - : In the example 8a, the PP «[i-kug̃]» 'in him' provides the information that the sand fleas were in contact with the person's body. In this same sentence, right after the use of «kug̃», two other locative postpositions were used: «be» 'punctual locative' («[[jei] be] » 'in the foot' ) and «tag̃» 'diffuse locative' («[[soat] tag̃]» 'everywhere', «[[ijebit] tag̃]» 'in his whole body'). Let us see another example with «kug̃» :

25
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt260 - : The last three postpositions presented previously inflect with the 3^rd person prefix «i-»: «ibima, ibuje, ibuye. This occurs when the clauses correlated by them are not in the same sentence, and the postposition is not in the same clause it refers to:

26
paper CO_Lenguajetxt150 - : up/my roommate was sleeping. We didn’t want to wake her up). A run-on sentence occurs when two sentences are incorrectly connected: the end of one sentence and the beginning of the next sentence are not properly marked by a period and a capital letter .

27
paper CO_Lenguajetxt150 - : can fall into an incorrect conceptualization due to a lack of comprehension among the distinct elements of language. For example, the verb “is” could be considered as a mark of the simple present tense which may cause its use in every sentence of that tense: Carlos is works in a company .

28
paper CO_Lenguajetxt191 - : A. Topic Sentence:

29
paper CO_Lenguajetxt191 - : A. Topic Sentence:

30
paper CO_Lenguajetxt191 - : A. Topic Sentence:

31
paper CO_Lenguajetxt191 - : A. Topic Sentence:

32
paper CO_Lenguajetxt191 - : A. Topic Sentence:

33
paper CO_Lenguajetxt144 - : ● Within-sentence commutators: Besides negations, other words are also considered polarity commutators . Although the rules for these commutators do not always apply, due to the unpredictable and dynamic nature of language, we did observe trends that we tried to capture. Within-sentence commutators commutate the sentiment of all the syntactic patterns found in the sentence. The commutators considered in this category are pese a (despite), poco, (little), ningún (none), nunca (never), and pero (but).

34
paper CO_Lenguajetxt144 - : ● Out-of-sentence commutators: These commutators change the polarity of the preceding sentence . Automatically determining the scope of a polarity commutator is not a trivial task (^[97]Liu, 2015, pp. 122-123). Sometimes, having a negation nearby a sequence does not require a sentiment change. This is why the assigned sentiment value of a sequence is not always right. However, we used a simple strategy that proved to be useful for out- of-sentence commutators. The sentiment value of a sequence was inverted if it preceded a commutator such as sin embargo (however/notwithstanding) and aunque (although).

35
paper CO_Lenguajetxt194 - : Moreover, students pointed out not only that the idea in the last sentence should have been elaborated on in another paragraph, but also that this second paragraph seems to paraphrase the first, as Kyra stated: “if we think (it ) as a whole he did it again here but with other words” (Workshop audio recordings, April 20, 2017). The analysis and discussion of model texts during the writing workshops helped students focus on the function that each paragraph plays in the problem statement section and how these paragraphs are connected.

36
paper CO_Íkalatxt51 - : The meaning of a word cannot be expressed in one sentence: The meaning of terminology for technical communication and the translation of technical texts .

37
paper CO_Íkalatxt50 - : [2]vol.15 número25 [3]Recursos de contenido basados en estándares: un prerrequisito para la integración de contenido e interoperabilidad de contenido [4]The meaning of a word cannot be expressed in one sentence: The meaning of terminology for technical communication and the translation of technical texts [5] índice de autores [6]índice de materia [7]búsqueda de artículos [8]Home Page [9]lista alfabética de revistas

38
paper CO_Íkalatxt101 - : In addition to functioning as a future tense marker, go can also function as a coordinator in a sentence, usually imperative order:

39
paper CO_Íkalatxt101 - : In 28(a), the preposition for clearly functions as a past auxiliary element which characteristically precedes the main verbs. Here, for is a modal auxiliary which gives the same grammatical information as represented on the verb. In 28 (b), the sentence has a perfect aspect, which refers to a completed action. This is marked by the use of for which is realised as an auxiliary marker + a perfective aspect. In other words, it is a combination of modal auxiliary and aspectual auxiliary. The examples in 28 obey the subject- auxiliary order in declarative sentences but not auxiliary-subject order in yes-no questions:

40
paper CO_Íkalatxt210 - : As pre-writing activities, some of the participants also pointed out that they considered paragraph structure, indicating that they had to activate prior knowledge concerning the main components of a basic paragraph (topic sentences and supporting details) and how it is written. One of the students acknowledged, "First, you have to write a sentence that includes the general idea of the text. This helps to give context. Then, I write three sentences including details" (Participant 04 07:07 ). Another interviewee reported a similar perspective: "I think about all the information I will put in the text. First, you need a title, then the first general sentence, and afterward three sentences with details" (Participant 05 07:07).

41
paper PE_Lexistxt119 - : Elvira, Javier (2014) “Left forever: subject datives and clitic doubling in Old Spanish. En Left Sentence Peripheries in Spanish: diachronic, variationist and typological perspectives . Eds., Andreas Dufter y Álvaro S. Octavio de Toledo y Huerta. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins, 77-97. [ [150]Links ]

42
paper PE_Lexistxt74 - : We speak in linear order; in a sentence, we say some words earlier and others later. Since speaking is correlated with time and time is metaphorically conceptualised in terms of space, it is natural for us to conceptualize language metaphorically in terms of space. Our writing system reinforces this conceptualization (…). We know which word occupies the first position in the sentence, whether two words are close to each other or far apart, whether a word is relatively long or short (2003: 126 ).

43
paper UY_ALFALtxt40 - : [...] discourse deictic demonstratives focus the hearer’s attention on aspects of meaning, expressed by a clause, a sentence, a paragraph, or an entire story (Diessel 1999: 101 ).

44
paper VE_BoletindeLinguisticatxt68 - : 1. “A generalizad Phrase-marker MD is the deep structure underlying the sentence S, with the surface structure MS, just in case the tranformational rules generate MS from MD” (Chomsky 1965: 138 ).

45
paper corpusRLAtxt88 - : Holcomb, P. J, Kounios, J., Anderson, J. E. y West, W. C. 1999. "Dual-coding, context-availability, and concreteness effects in sentence comprehension: An electrophysiological investigation", en Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 25 (3 ), pp. 721-742. [ [78]Links ]

46
paper corpusRLAtxt58 - : To further test whether the low or high frequencies of the antecedent sentence had an effect on the identification of the tone words, the data was divided in three stimuli subsets: a ) One group was composed of the three sentence stimuli of higher frequencies than that of the naturally produced sentence (stimuli 1, 2 and 3, labeled as 'stim<4'); b) A second group formed by the sentence stimuli of lower frequencies than that of the naturally produced sentence (stimuli 5, 6 and 7, labeled as 'stim>4'), and c) A singleton representing the naturally spoken sentence ('stim 4' in the table). The counts, percentages of correct and incorrect identification of H and L tones and the corresponding significance levéis are summarized in [30]Table I. Just like in the overall results, there was no significant effect of the prompt sentence stimuli in the distribution of correct/incorrect responses, ñor there was an interaction with the tone of the word. Instead, an effect of the tone of the word was

47
paper corpusRLAtxt35 - : Smith, M. y Wheeldon, L. 2001. "Syntactic priming in spoken sentence production: An online study" . En Cognition, 78, 123-164. [ [81]Links ]

48
paper corpusRLAtxt125 - : Payne, B., Gao, X., Noh, S. R., Anderson, C. J. y Stine-Morrow, E. A. (2012). The effects of print exposure on sentence processing and memory in older adults: Evidence for efficiency and reserve . Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition. A Journal on Normal and Dysfunctional Development, 19(1-2): 122-149. [ [93]Links ]

49
paper corpusRLAtxt230 - : Molinaro, Nicola. (2020). "Words and emotions in sentence context": a commentary on Hinojosa, Moreno and Ferré (2019 ). Language, Cognition and Neuro-science, 35(7), pp. 862-864. [ [156]Links ]

50
paper corpusSignostxt455 - : For example, consider the following sentence: “The banker deposits money in my father’s accounts” . To perform WSD on the word ‘deposits’, employing the ABWSD max type method, we perform the following steps:

51
paper corpusSignostxt574 - : We present an investigation on syntactic parsing by means of eye tracking techniques, which is framed around the debate of the restriction-based models of connectionist nature. The objective is to determine if gender stereotypes, as shared beliefs, influence syntactic parsing. The participants were 35 university students, who read sentences in which, in one condition, gender stereotypes were fulfilled and in the other condition, they were violated. All the sentences had the structure: subject (S ) + verb (V) + direct object (DO) + indirect object (IO) + adjunct (El padre le compró un vestido a su hija/o para su cumpleaños). The DO corresponds to a noun phrase that, in conjunction with S, suggest a gender stereotype. In IO, the addressee varied in grammatical gender in each case, thus, fulfilling or violating the gender stereotype. Significant differences were found in the total fixation duration of each type of sentence. In addition, there were significant differences in regressions from IO

52
paper corpusSignostxt217 - : In sum, at least three aspects of meaning cannot be explained in terms of truth-conditional semantics. One concerns the illocutionary force of the utterance. The sentences presented in (1a-e) have different meanings in particular circumstances, despite the fact that their abstract sentence meaning (propositional content) is the same. This extra-linguistic information is not captured by propositions. Secondly, implicatures cannot be accounted for in truth-conditional semantics. For instance, in case of a customer asking whether the barman has any white wine, this concerns a request rather than an informative question. The barman will infer that the customer would like to have a glass of wine, whereas a simple answer “I do” (without any subsequent actions) will not have the desired effect. Or take the following sentences:

53
paper corpusSignostxt217 - : coherence relations, are difficult to represent in ψ-propositions. They can be represented in situations. Except for the parts in bold, the examples (22-25) are identical. The parts in bold make the representations unique to the particular sentence: they specify the event . The overlap between the sentences points out the possible different interpretations.

54
paper corpusSignostxt319 - : In (34a) the verb eat cannot be perfective because the use of ´when(ever)´ forces the clause to be interpreted as distributed over time. Notice that the type of predicate (SL) is entirely irrelevant in the presence of the adverbial. What is crucial in this case is that the same sentence is acceptable if the aspect is imperfective. By arguing that the adverb when(ever) is sensitive to the aspect of the clause it interacts with, Schmitt´s (1996) analysis can easily account for sentence (35) that is problematic for Kratzer´s (1995) syntactic account:

55
paper corpusSignostxt421 - : With regards to the written text, the slogan of the campaign “Real Plan, Better Future” appears on the left. This is followed by the web page of the party. Just like in [28]Figure 1 and [29]2, white is also the colour chosen for the written text in order to contrast with the candidate’s jacket. The words ‘real’ and ‘better’ are in bold capital letters. This poster is also different from the previous ones because the written message is not linked to the candidate and what he has done. There is no sense of continuity but aims of improving a social political situation that had not been properly planned and was not realistic. There are some examples of ellipsis in the slogan as a way of making it catchy and clear since the complete sentence could be something like: we/I have a real plan in order to have a better future .

56
paper corpusSignostxt493 - : En “The development of narrative discourse in french by 5 to 10 years old children: some insights from a Conversational Interaction Method”, Edy Veneziano estudia si niños pequeños pueden producir textos narrativos más complejos y orientados a aspectos mentales, tras participar en una conversación en torno a las causas de los eventos de la historia. Los resultados muestran que, tras tomar parte en este método, los niños produjeron textos más coherentes y orientados a la mente, mejora que no se encontró en el grupo control. En la misma línea, “The Relationships Between Oral and Written Sentence Generation in English Speaking Children: The Role of Language and Literacy Skills”, por Julie E . Dockrell y Vincent Connelly, aborda la interacción entre oraciones escritas y orales producidas por niños en dos sesiones diferentes. Si bien el desempeño en ambas modalidades mejoró, el progreso en la prueba oral fue considerablemente mayor y se determinó que el desempeño en la oralidad

57
paper corpusSignostxt89 - : Bransford, J. D., Barclays, J. R. y Franks, J. J. (1972) Sentence memory: a constructive versus interpretative approach . Cognitive Psychology, 3, 193209. [ [29]Links ]

58
paper corpusSignostxt594 - : With the students’ increased knowledge of SFL, they seemed to more easily comprehend the teacher-written feedback they had received, which also further enhanced their knowledge of SFL and helped improve their writing (the third expository essay). That is, the students expanded their knowledge of SFL through the teacher-written feedback they had received, and improved their writing by learning and applying the meaning-making process, which is expected in expository writing. To illustrate this, in the latter half of the semester, the students, in line with the teacher-written feedback they had received, carefully molded the tone of their essays. Based on the teacher-written feedback she had received (i.e., Do you think you are too assertive?), Elizabeth replaced her lexical choice ‘totally’ with ‘majorly’ in the following sentence she originally wrote: ‘The high school course arrangement is totally different from that in university .’ The students also added cohesive devices in their

59
paper corpusSignostxt334 - : experiment, the AJT, participants judged whether the ser/estar experimental sentence was acceptable in three different conditions that controlled for the kind of information provided: syntactic, semantic and discursive-pragmatic .The children performed unlike adults in all three conditions but performed worst in the condition that controlled for discursive- pragmatic information. Like in the PMT, the children were more willing to accept estar in ser appropriate contexts than vice-versa suggesting that children overuse estar.

60
paper corpusSignostxt278 - : The aim of this paper is to analyze one of the court sentences that has had a great impact on Spanish History: the sentence on the case of the terrorist attacks of March 11, 2004, in Madrid . The linguistic interest of this sentence is that its author was especially aware that the text would be widely disseminated not only in the legal field but also in the mass media. Our hypothesis is that due to this exceptional context, the M11 court sentence is an example of a real attempt to write a legal text comprehensible to a non-expert audience. Our study of this court sentence focuses on the quantitative and qualitative analysis of a linguistic aspect that clearly shows the effort made by the judge pronouncing the sentence to ensure clarity: the use of anaphoric demonstrative expressions ('this', 'this phenomenon'...). The analysis of this mechanism of reference in the M11 court sentence is contrasted with the same mechanism in six other sentences passed by the same court, the Audiencia Nacional

61
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : Additionally, if a noun is followed by a participle clause that ends in another noun, the participle phrase is also converted into a relation tuple. Consider the following sentence:

62
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : Incorrect relation phrase. This type comprises errors resulting in incorrectly detected relation phrase. For example, consider the sentence:

63
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : The relation detected in this sentence by ExtrHech is:

64
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : Correct relation phrase, incorrect argument(s). This type of errors is introduced to better understand when errors in arguments are not provoked by the reasons causing incorrect relation phrase detection. Consider the sentence:

65
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : Incorrect order of arguments. In the sentence:

66
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : 1) Underspecified noun phrase. For the sentence:

67
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : 2) Overspecified verb phrase. Consider the sentence:

68
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : Non-binary relations are another source of extraction errors, that is, the relations that connect more than two entities. For example, in the sentence:

69
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : 5) Conditional subordinate clause or an adverb that affect the semantics of the original sentence. Consider the sentence:

70
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : 9) Incorrect POS-tagging. This issue occurs at the preprocessing stage and results in errors in extractions at a later stage. For example, in the sentence:

71
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : 10) Grammatical errors. Grammatical errors in the original text, mainly in syntax and punctuation, also lead to incorrect extractions generated by our system. For example, the sentence:

72
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : 11) Others: idioms, relations involving adjectives, etc. About 7.5% of errors were caused by issues that were classified neither into one of the above classes nor into specially introduced classes, because of their low frequency. For example, in the sentence:

73
paper corpusSignostxt474 - : Politeness is not an automatic result of certain formulas. Let us look at the subject of a student who sent three messages. In the first two she requests information that she is refused, but she is told where she can look it up, given that there is a virtual platform online that is used for the subject, as well as having been provided in class. It is also suggested to her to go to a tutorial. The student does not attend classes even though they are compulsory, nor is she able to go to a tutorial. Her reaction to the teacher’s reply is to be upset at not receiving what she asked for and how she asked for it, so that in her last message she uses the formal greeting with the correct punctuation, but the entire message is ironic. Thus she utilizes another type of fallacy: Ad hominem (false reasoning used to attack the interlocutor or opponent). In the first sentence of the email there is this ironic ad hominem attack: Gracias por su comprensiva respuesta ‘Thank you for your understanding

74
paper corpusSignostxt494 - : All of the 50 stem sentences presented to participants in the experiment were structured as neutral definitions (Mosquitoes are____). For each of these stem sentences, two critical words were selected: a word that would make the whole sentence literally congruous (‘Mosquitoes are insects’ ) and a word that would make the sentence literally incongruous but metaphorically congruous (‘Mosquitoes are vampires’). Both sets of critical words (literal and metaphorical) presented the same frequency of use (t(98) = 0.58; p = 0.68) in a corpus of Chilean Spanish (^[76]Sadowsky & Martínez, 2012). As for the length, different word-lengths were equally represented in the compared conditions (Literal, M = 2.82, SD = 0.87 vs Metaphorical, M = 2.52, SD = 0.68), with no statistical differences (t(98) = 1.92; p = 0.58). This generated 100 sentences belonging to two conditions, a literal one and a metaphorical one. Two other conditions were implemented to encourage participants to face linguistic stimuli from

75
paper corpusSignostxt494 - : Nieuwland, M. S. (2015a). Quantification, prediction, and the online impact of sentence truth- value: Evidence from event-related potentials . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42(2), 316. [ [167]Links ]

76
paper corpusSignostxt400 - : Pronominal clitics and verb endings play a distinguishing role in Spanish verb morphology. Spanish pronominal clitics are units intermediate between independent words and bound morphemes. They can fulfill independent grammatical functions (e.g., as direct or indirect objects), but they have no phonological autonomy (i.e., they are always unstressed and are typically pronounced in the same tone group as the verb). For their part, Spanish verb endings are verb desinences which necessarily express ‘person’ and ‘number’ and which, optionally, may also express ‘mood’, ‘tense’, and ‘aspect’. These two sets of features may be realized by a single morpheme (García, 1975, 2009). Consider the sentence in bold within the following text –this and all following examples are real texts taken from the Real Academia Española’s Corpus de referencia del español actual (CREA):

77
paper corpusSignostxt203 - : The most relevant issue has been that Linguistics has gone beyond the sentence bound-ary. We now know a lot more about the ways in which sentences can be connected into text or discourse than in the year when the first issue of Revista Signos was published. It has to be said that in the beginning we were too optimistic about ‘text grammars’ (a misleading metaphor). There is much more freedom in combining sentences than in link-ing constituents: coherence is not only semantically based, but also pragmatically . The most important issue nowadays is how to combine referential cohesion, like phoricity and ‘nymic’ relations, and relational coherence, like elaboration, causation and ‘presenta-tional’ relations. A major step forward can be made if we succeed in articulating a theory that leads to a classification model with descriptive adequacy, that explains why readers interpret discourse relations as they do, and that predicts at any point in a discourse the most plausible discourse

78
paper corpusSignostxt424 - : Finally, for a sentence to be considered reciprocal, we must find coindexation of arguments in the two actions: the Initiator of one of the actions must be the Endpoint of the other and the Endpoint of the first must be the Initiator of the second . This condition is only fulfilled in (3′′′). In (3′′) this requirement is not met at all and in (3′) we have a double reflexive structure and, thus, coindexation of arguments falls within the scope of each single action.

79
paper corpusSignostxt424 - : * In (a) and (b) a maximum of only two parameters may change while in (c) the three parameters may be different at the same time. Sentence (12) exemplifies this case: the pairs that exchange information by email are varied, and the different events can be carried out at different moments and in different places .

Evaluando al candidato sentence:


6) verb: 15 (*)
15) teacher: 10
18) relation: 9
20) incorrect: 9

sentence
Lengua: eng
Frec: 803
Docs: 297
Nombre propio: 9 / 803 = 1%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 1
Puntaje: 1.606 = (1 + (1+5.4594316186373) / (1+9.65105169117893)));
Rechazado: muy disperso;

Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término

(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)
sentence
: Fedorenko, E., Gibson, E. & Rohde, D. 2006. The Nature of Working Memory Capacity in Sentence Comprehension: Evidence again Domain-Specific Working Memory Resources. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 541-553.
: Waters, G. y Caplan, D. 2001. Age, Working Memory, and On-Line Syntactic Processing in Sentence Comprehension. Psychology and Aging. Vol. 16, Nº1, 128-144. [ [67]Links ]
: reality assigned to a sentence. Several moods are to be distinguished, the three basic types being indicative, imperative and subjunctive.” (^[35]Gotti & Dossena, 2001: 10)
: 2. Phrasing (Skehan, 2009) relates to any frequently repeated or memorable group of words, usually shorter than a sentence in length and complexity.
: 10. DaneŠ, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. En F. DaneŠ (ed.). Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective, 106-128. Mouton: The Hague.
: 10. Hoque, M. (2008). An empirical framework for translating of phrasal verbs of English sentence into Bangla. CUET Journal, 2(8), 43-49.
: 13.Romero-Figueroa, Andrés. 1997. Basic word order and sentence types in Kari’ña.München: Lincom Europa.
: 14. Firbas, Jan (1966) On defining the theme in functional sentence analysis. Philologica praguensia. Nro. 8, 239-256.
: 15. Villalba, Xavier. 2003. An exceptional exclamative sentence type in Romance. Lingua 113. 713-745.
: 18. Romero Figueroa, A. (2000). Basic word order and sentence types in Kariña (Colección Languages of the World, Vol. 18). Munich: LINCOM EUROPA.
: 6. Just, M. A., Newman, S. D., Keller, T. A., McEleney, A., & Carpenter, P. A. (2004). Imagery in sentence comprehension: An fmri study. NeuroImage, 21(1), 112-124.
: 88. Romero-Figueroa, Andrés. 2000. Basic word order and sentence types in Kari’ña. Languages of the world, Vol.18. Munich: Lincom Europa.
: Aihara, S. & Parkes, G. (1992) Strategies for reading Japanese: A rational approach to the Japanese sentence. Tokyo: Japan Publications Trading Company.
: Altmann, G. & Steedman, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30(3), 191-238.
: Altmann, G., Garnham, A. & Henstra, J. (1994). Effects of syntax in human sentence parsing: Evidence against a structure-based proposal mechanism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20(1), 209-216.
: Bartek, Brian, Lewis, Richard, Vasishth, Shravan y Smith, Mason. 2011. In search of on-line locality effects in sentence comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(5), 1178-1198. [184]https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024194
: Barzilay, R. & McKeown, K. R. (2005). Sentence fusion for multidocument news summarization. Computational Linguistics, 31(3), 297-328.
: Barzilay, Regina y Elhadad, Noemie. (2003). Sentence Alignment for Monolingual Comparable Corpora. En Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Empirical methods in natural language processing, 25-32.
: Bast, H. & Haussmann. E. (2013). Open Information Extraction via contextual sentence decomposition. Proceedings of the ICSC 2013, 154-159.
: Bates, E. y MacWhinney, B. 1989. "Functionalism and the competition model". En B. MacWhinney y E. Bates (Eds.) The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing . Cambridge : University Press.
: Becker, I., & Aharonson, V. (2010). Last but definitely not Least: On the Role of the Last Sentence in Automatic Polarity-Classification. In Proceedings of the ACL 2010 Conference Short Papers (pp. 331-335). Retrieved from [127]https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P/P10/P10-2061.pdf.
: Blozis, S.A. y Traxler, M. J. (2007). Analyzing individual differences in sentence processing performance using multilevel models. Behavior Research Methods, 39(1), 31-38.
: Blühdorn, H. (2008). Subordination and coordination in syntax, semantics and discourse: Evidence from the Study of connectives. En C. Fabricius-Hansen & W. Ramm (Eds.), Subordination versus Coordination in Sentence and Text (pp. 59-85). Ámsterdam: John Benjamins.
: Bock, K. 1989. "Closed-class immanence in sentence production". En Cognition, 31, 163-186.
: Bolinger, D. L. (1954). 'Englishprosodic stress and Spanish sentence accent'. Hispania, 37, 152-6.
: Bransford, J., Barclay, J. & Franks, J. (1972). Sentence memory: A constructive versus interpretive approach. Cognitive Psychology 3. 193-209.
: Buchweitz, A. (2009) Japanese and English sentence reading comprehension and writing systems: An fMRI study of first and second language effects on brain activation. Biling, 12, 141-151.
: Bultena, S., Dijkstra, T., y Van Hell, J. G. (2015). Language switch costs in sentence comprehension depend on language dominance: Evidence from self-paced reading. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(03), 453-469.
: Caplan, D. & Waters, G. 1999. "Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension", en Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, pp. 77-126.
: Caplan, D., Hildebrandt, N. & Waters, G. S. (1994). Interaction of verb selectional restrictions, noun animacy and syntactic form in sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9(4), 549-585.
: Caplan, D., Waters, G. y Alpert, N. (2003). Effects of age and speed of processing on rCBF correlates of syntactic processing in sentence comprehension. Human Brain Mapping, 19, 112-131.
: Carreiras, M. & Clifton, C. (Eds.) (2004). On the on-line study of Sentence comprehension: eyetracking, ERP, and beyond. Nueva York: Psychology Press.
: Carreiras, M., Igoa, J. M. & Meseguer, E. (1997). On the use of minimal attachment strategy in spanish: An eyetracking study. En Poster presentado en la 10th annual CUNY sentence processing conference. Los Angeles, CA, USA.
: Chang, F., Dell, G. S., Bock, K. y Griffin, Z. M. 2000. "Structural priming as implicit learning: A comparison of models of sentence production". En Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29 (2), 217-229.
: Chomsky, N. (2012). Some core contested concepts. Actas de la 25th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing (pp. 1-18).
: Clifton, C. y Ferreira, F. (1987). Modularity in sentence comprehension. En J. Garfield, (Ed.) Modularity in knowledge representation and natural language processing, (pp. 277-290). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
: Cohn, T. & Lapata, M. (2009). Sentence compression as tree transduction. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 34, 637-674.
: Colman, K., Koerts, J., Van Beilen, M., Leenders, K. L., & Bastiaanse, R. (2006). The role of cognitive mechanisms in sentence comprehension in Dutch speaking Parkinson’s disease patients: Preliminary data. Brain and Language, 99(1-2), 120-121.
: Corley, M. M. B. y Scheepers, C. 2002. "Syntactic priming in English sentence production: Categorical and latency evidence from an internet-based study". En Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9 (1) 126-131.
: Cutler, A., & Foss, D. J. (1977). On the role of sentence stress in sentence processing. Language and Speech, 20(1), 1-10.
: Danes, F. (1974). Papers on functional sentence perspective. Praga: Academia Checoslovaca de Ciencias.
: Daneš, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organisation of the text. In F. Danes (Ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective (106-128). Prague: Academia.
: Demestre, J. & García-Albea, J. (2004). The on-line resolution of the sentence complement/relative clause ambiguity: Evidence from Spanish. Experimental Psychology, 51(1), 59-71.
: Dufter, A. y Octavio de Toledo y Huerta, Á. S. (2014). Introduction. En: Left Sentence Peripheries in Spanish: Diachronic, Variationist and Comparative Perspectives.. Eds., Andreas Dufter y Álvaro S. Octavio de Toledo y Huerta. (pp. 1-20) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
: Elordieta, Gorka. (2007b). A constraint-based analysis of the intonational realization of focus in Northerm Bizkaian Basque. In T. Riad., & C. Gussenhoven (eds.), Tones and Tunes: Volume I, Typological Studies in Word and Sentence Prosody. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Fayol, M. (1991). From sentence production to text production: Investigating fundamental processes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 6(2), 101-119.
: Federmeier, K. D., McLennan, D. B., De Ochoa, E. & Kutas, M. 2002. "The impact of semantic memory organization and sentence context in spoken language processing by younger and older adults: An ERP study". En Psychophysiology, 39, pp. 133-146.
: Firbas J. (1964). On defining the theme in functional sentence analysis. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague, 1, 267-280.
: Firbas, Jan 1974 "Some aspects of the Czechoslovak approach to problems of functional sentence perspective". En Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Ed., Frantisek Daneš. Prague: Academia.
: Fischler, I., Bloom, P., Childers, D., Roucos, S. & Perry, N. (1983). Brain potentials related to stages of sentence verification. Psychophysiology, 20(4), 400-409.
: Frazier, L. & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 178-210.
: Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. En M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and Performance XII (pp. 561-587). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
: Goral, M., Clark-Cotton, M., Spiro, A., Obler, L. K, Verkuilen, J. y Albert, M. L. (2011). The contribution of set switching and working memory to sentence processing in older adults. Experimental Aging Research, 37(5), 516-538.
: Graesser, A. & Riha, J. (1984). An application of multiple regression techniques to sentence reading times. En D. Kieras & M. Just (Eds.). New methods in comprehension research. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
: Grossman, M., A. Cooke, Ch. DeVita, D. Alsop, J. Detre, W. Chen & J. Gee. 2002. "Age-related changes in working memory during sentence comprehension: An fMRI study". En NeuroImage, 15, pp. 302-317.
: Grossman, M., Carvell, S., Gollomp, S., Stern, M. B., Reivich, M., Morrison, D. & Hurtig, H. I. (1993). Cognitive and physiological substrates of impaired sentence processing in Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience , 5(4), 480-498.
: Grossman, M., Kalmanson, J., Bernhardt, N., Morris, J., Stern, M. B., & Hurtig, H. I. (2000). Cognitive resource limitations during sentence comprehension in Parkinson’s disease. Brain and Language, 73(1), 1-16.
: Gummersall, Dawn & Strong, Carol. 1999. Assessment of complex sentence production in narrative context. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 30, pp. 152-164.
: Hartsuiker, R.J. y Westenberg, C. 2000. "Word order priming in written and spoken sentence production." En Cognition, 75 (2), 27-39.
: Hartsuiker, R.J., Kolk, H.H.J. y Huiskamp, P. 1999. "Priming word order in sentence production". En Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 52A (1), 129-147.
: Hochstadt, J., Nakano, H., Lieberman, P., & Friedman, J. (2006). The roles of sequencing and verbal working memory in sentence comprehension deficits in Parkinson’s disease. Brain and language, 97(3), 243-257.
: Holcomb, P., Kounios, J., Anderson, J. & West, W. (1999). Dual–coding, context–availability, and concreteness effects in sentence comprehension: An electrophysiological investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition , 25, 721–742.
: Hovy, E. H. & Wanner, L. (1996). Managing Sentence Planning Requirements. Ponencia presentada en el Workshop on New Directions in Planning and Natural Language Generation at the 12th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hungría.
: Hunt, Kellog W. (1967). Sentence structures used by superior students in grades four and twelve, and by superior adults. Tallahassee [Fl]: Florida State University.
: Jordan, T. R., & Thomas, S. M. (2002). In search of perceptual influences of sentence context on word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 28, 34-45.
: Just, M. A., Newman, S. D., Keller, T. A., McEleney, A. y Carpenter, P. A. 2004. "Imagery in sentence comprehension: an fMRI study", en Neuroimage 21, pp. 112-124.
: Just, M., Cherkassky, V., Keller, T. & Minshew, N. (2004). Cortical activation and synchronization during sentence comprehension in high–functioning autism: Evidence of underconnectivity. Brain, 127, 1811–1821.
: Kamide, Y. (2008). Anticipatory processes in sentence processing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2(4), 647-670. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00072.x
: Kamide, Y., Altmann, G. & Haywood, S. (2003). The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye-movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 133-156.
: Kaschak, M. & Glenberg, A. (2000). Constructing meaning: The role of affordances and grammatical constructions in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory & Language, 43, 508–529.
: Kempen, G. 1977. "Conceptualizing and formulating in sentence production". En: Rosenbaum, S. (ed.) Sentence production: Developments in research and theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
: Kemper, S., Herman, R. E. & Liu, C. J. (2004). Sentence Production by Younger and Older Adults in Controlled Contexts. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 59(5), 220-224.
: Kim, Kitaek, Theres Grüter e Amy J. Schafer. 2013. Effects of event-structure and topic/focus-marking on pronoun reference in Korean. Poster presented at the 26th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Columbia, SC.
: Kintsch, W., Welsch, D., Schmalhofer, F. & Zimny, S. (1990). Sentence memory: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 133-159.
: Knight, K. & Marcu, D. (2000). Statistics-based summarization -Step one: Sentence compression. En R. Engelmore & H. Hirsh (Eds.), The 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 703-710). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
: LADD, D.R., (1979) . "Light and Shadow. A study of the syntax and semantics of sentence is English" , in WAUGH, LR- & VAN COETSEN, F. (EDS.), Contributions to Grammatical studies, Semantics and Syntax, Leiden: E. J. Brill.
: LAMBRECHT, K. (1994). Information Structure and Sentence Form. Topic, Focus and the Mental Representation of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
: Ladd, D.R. (1979). 'Light and Shadow: A study of the syntax and semantics of sentence in English', in Waugh, L.R. & Van Coetsen, F. (eds.), Contrihutions to grammatical studies semantics and syntax. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
: Lakoff, R. (2003a). Language, Gender, and Politics: Putting “Women” and “Power” in the Same Sentence. En J. Holmes y M. Meyerhoff (Eds.), The Handbook of Language and Gender (pp. 160-178). Doi: 10.1002/9780470756942.ch7.
: Lambrecht, K. (1994), Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus and the mental representations of discourse referents, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
: Lambrecht, K.(1995). lnformation structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
: Lambrecht, Knud (1994) Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
: MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. & Seidenberg, M. (1994b). Syntactic ambiguity resolution as lexical ambiguity resolution. En C. Clifton, L. Frazier & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp. 123-153). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
: Mason, R. A. & Just, M. A. (2007). Lexical ambiguity in sentence comprehension. Brain Research, 1146, 115-127.
: Mathesius, V. (1939). Functional sentence perspective. Prague: Academia.
: McRae, K. & Matzuki, K. (2013). Constraint-based models of sentence processing. En R. van Gompel (Ed.) Sentence Processing (pp. 51-67). Londres: Psychology Press.
: Miolo, G., Chapman, R. & Sindberg, H. (2005). Sentence comprehension in adolescents with Down syndrome and typically developing children. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 48(1), 172-188.
: Mitchell, D. (1994). Sentence parsing. En M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 375-409). San Diego: Academic Press.
: Mitchell, D. C. (2004). On-line methods in language processing: Introduction and historical review. En M. Carreiras & C. Clifton (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERPs and beyond (pp. 15-32). Nueva York: Psychology Press.
: Mitchell, D., Corley, M. & Garnham, A. (1992). Effects of context inhuman sentence parsing: Evidence against a discourse-based proposal mechanism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 18, 69-88.
: Mitchell, Don. 2004. On-line methods in language processing: introduction and historical review, em Manuel Carreiras e Charles Clifton Junior (eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: eyetracking, ERPs and beyond, New York, Psychology Press: 15-32.
: Molina, A., Torres-Moreno, J. M., SanJuan, E., da Cunha, I. & Sierra, G. (2013). Discursive sentence compression. En A. Gelbukh (Ed.), The 14th International Conference CICLing 2013 (pp. 394-407). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
: Morita, A., & Tamaoka, K. (2002). Phonological involvement in the processing of Japanese at the lexical and sentence levels. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal , 15, 633-651.
: Mur Dueñas, P. (2003). Analysing stance in American and Spanish Business Management RAs: The case of sentence initial retrospective labels. Journal of English Studies, 4, 137-154.
: Nagata, N. (2002).BANZAI: Computer Assisted Sentence Production Practice with Intelligent Feedback. Ponencia presentada en el Third International Conference on Computer- Assisted System for Teaching and Learning Japanese, San Diego, USA.
: Nieuwland, M. S. (2015b). The truth before and after: Brain potentials reveal automatic activation of event knowledge during sentence comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27(11), 2215-2228. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00856
: ORTIZ-LIRA, R., (1994). A contrastive analysis of English and Spanish sentence accent. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester.
: Ortiz Lira, H. (1998). "Word stress and sentence accent", Cuadernos de la Facultad 16, Santiago de Chile: Universidad Metropolitana de Ciencias de la Educación.
: Ortiz-Lira, H. (1994). A contrastive analysis of English and Spanish sentence accentuation. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, University of Manchester.
: Poplack, S. (1980) Sometimes I'll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en español: toward a typology of code-switching. Linguistics 18, 581-618.
: Reinhart, T. (1982). Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica, 27, 53-94.
: Riches, N., Loucas, T., Baird, G., Charman, T. & Simonov, E. (2010). Sentence repetition in adolescents with specific language impairment and autism: An investigation of complex syntax. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 45, 47-60.
: Richter, T. (2006). What is wrong with ANOVA and multiple regression? Analyzing sentence reading times with hierarchical linear models. Discourse Processes, 41(3), 221-250.
: Rogalsky, C. & Hickok, G. (2011). The Role of Broca's Area in Sentence Comprehension. Journal ofCognitive Neuroscience, 23(7), 1664-1680. doi:doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00044
: Rogalsky, C., Matchin, W. & Hickok, G. (2008). Broca's area, sentence comprehension, and working memory: an fMRI study. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2. doi:10.3389/neuro.09.014.2008
: Rohde, Hannah. 2008. Coherence-Driven Effects in Sentence and Discourse Processing. Tese de Doutorado. University of California, San Diego. Inédito
: Sanford, A. & Garrod, S. (1981). Understanding written language: Explorations in comprehension beyond the sentence. Chichester: Wiley.
: Scheepers, C. 2003. "Syntactic priming of relative clause attachments: Persistence of structural configuration in sentence production". En Cognition, 89, 179-205.
: Selkirk, E. (1986). On Derived Domains in Sentence Phonology. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 371-405.
: She notices, following Schmitt (1992), that when the context supports an agentive reinterpretation, the sentence improves:
: Shore, W. & Kempe, V. (1999). The role of sentence context in accessing partial knowledge of word meanings. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28 (2), 145-163.
: Singer, M. (1990) Psychology of language: an introduction to sentence and discourse processes. Hillsdale. New Jersey: Erlbaum.
: Slobin, Dan I. 1966. Grammatical transformations and sentence comprehension in childhood and adulthood, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5: 219-227.
: Slocum, Marianna 1980 "A Sketch of Bachajon Tzeltal Clause and Sentence Structure". SIL-Mexico Workpapers. 3, 79-92.
: Spivey-Knowlton, M. & Tanenhaus, M. (1994). Referential context and syntactic ambiguity resolution. En C. Clifton, L. Frazier & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp. 155-180). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
: Stine-Morrow, E. A. L., Shake, M. C., Miles, J. R. & Noh, S. R. 2006b. "Adult age differences in the effects of goals on self-regulated sentence processing". En Psychology and Aging, 21, 4, pp. 790-803.
: Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)con-sideration of context effects. Journal Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 18, 645-659.
: Sánchez, M. E., Sevilla, Y., & Bachrach, A. (2014). Agreement processing in control and raising structures. Evidence from sentence production in Spanish. Lingua, 177, 60-77. [132]https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.12.014
: Tabor, W., Juliano, C. & Tanenhaus, M. 1997. Parsing in a Dynamical System: An Attractor-based Account of the Interaction of Lexical and Structural Constraints in Sentence Processing. New York: University of Rochester, Rochester.
: Tanenhaus, M. K. & Trueswell, J. C. (1995). Sentence comprehension. En P. Eimas & J. Miller (Eds.), Handbook in Perception and Cognition, Volume 11: Speech, Language, and Communication (pp. 217-262). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
: Thordardottir, E., Chapman, R. & Wagner, L. (2002).Complex sentence production by adolescents with Down syndrome. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 163-183.
: Thorsen, N. 1983. "Standard Danish sentence intonation - Phonetic data and their representation". Folia Lingüística, 17, 187-220.
: Tian, Y. & Breheny, R. E. (2018). Pragmatics and negative sentence processing. Oxford University Press.
: Traxler, M., Hoversten, J. & Trevor, A. (2018). Sentence processing and interpretation in monolinguals and bilinguals: Classical and contemporary approaches. En E. Fernández & H. Smith (Eds.), The Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 325-349). Oxford: Wiley Blackwell.
: Trueswell, J. & Tanenhaus, M. (1994). Toward a lexicalist framework for constraint-based syntactic ambiguity resolution. En C. Clifton, L. Frazier & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp. 155-179). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
: Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K. & Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 528-553.
: Van Dijk, T. (1981). Sentence topic and discourse topic. En T. van Dijk, Studies in the pragmatics of discourse (pp. 177-193). París: Mouton.
: Waters, G. & Caplan, D. 1999. "Verbal working memory capacity and on-line sentence processing efficiency in the elderly". En S. Kemper & R. Kliegel (Eds). Constraints on language: Aging, grammar and memory. Boston: Academic Publishers, pp. 107-135.
: Waters, G. & Caplan, D. 2001. "Age, working memory and on-line syntactic processing in sentence comprehension". En Psychology and Aging, 16, pp. 128-144.
: Waters, G. y Caplan, D. (1999). Verbal working memory capacity and on-line sentence processing efficiency in the elderly. En S. Kemper y R. Kliegl (eds.), Constraints on Language. Aging, grammar and memory (pp. 107-136). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
: Waters, G. y Caplan, D. (2001). Age, working memory and on-line syntactic processing in sentence comprehension. Psychology and Aging, 16, 128-144.
: Waters, G., Caplan, D, Alpert, N. & Stanczak, L. 2003. "Individual differences in rCBF correlates of syntactic processing in sentence comprehension: effects of working memory and speed of processing". En NeuroImage, 19, pp. 101-112.
: Yang, C. L., Perfetti, C. A. & Schmalhofer, F. (2007). Event-related potential indicators of text integration across sentence boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 33(1), 55-89.
: Zeng, D., Li, J., Wang, F. & Zuo, W. (2009). Sentiment analysis of Chinese documents: From sentence to document level. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(12), 2474-2487.
: Zhong, H. F. 2016 "The relationship between receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge: A perspective from vocabulary use in sentence writing". The Language Learning Journal, 1-17. [111]https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2015.1127403.
: Zimny, S. (1987). Recognition memory for sentence from a discourse. Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Colorado, Boulder, Estados Unidos de Norteamérica.
: Zwaan, R. & Madden, C. (2005). Embodied sentence comprehension. En D. Pecher & R. Zwaan (Eds.), Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thought (pp. 224-245). New York: Cambridge University Press.
: [110]Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
: [140]Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. A theory of topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
: [161]Poplack[162], Shana. [163]1980. Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish Y TERMINO EN ESPAÑOL: Towards a typology of code-switching, Linguistics, 18:581-618.
: [165]Reinhart, Tanya. 1982. Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics, Philosophica, 27: 53-94.
: [229]Poplack[230], Shana. 1980. Sometimes I'll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en español, Linguistics, 581-618.
: [49]Pascual, Esther. 2006(a). Fictive interaction within the sentence: A communicative type of fictivity in grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 17(2): 245-267.
: van Herten, M., Chwilla, D. J. & Kolk, H. H. (2006). When heuristics clash with parsing routines: ERP evidence for conflict monitoring in sentence perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1181-1197.