/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) syntactic (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística
1) Candidate: syntactic
Is in goldstandard
1
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt189 - : Carrell states that, "Although Goodman did not characterize his theory as top - down model, and continues to resist this characterization himself (Goodman 1981), several other reading experts (Anderson 1978; Cziko 1978) have recently characterized it basically as a concept-driven, top - down pattern in which 'higher level processes interact with, and direct theflow of information through, lower- level processes' (Stanovich 1980:34). In any event, the impact that Goodman's psycholinguistic theory had on both first or native language reading, and later on, on second or foreign language reading, was to make the reader an active participant in the reading process, making and confirming predictions, primarily from his or her background knowledge of the various linguistic levels (graphophonic, syntactic, and semantic) in the broadest sense of these terms (Carrell, 1990:3 )".
2
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt284 - : Syntactic development in adolescents: possible social influence
3
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt317 - : This study examines the active and productive process of word classes changing in Mapudungun through derivation processes; that word formation process consists of a verbal lexeme, noun, adjective, or adverb linked to a derivational suffix. This is a descriptive study which follows the typological perspective of word class formation. The hypothesis establishes that words in mapuche language, mainly the open classes, under go certain morphological and syntactic processes that enable the change of word classes in either three ways: the intervention of some derivational suffix, polysemic properties of derivational suffixes, or the change of word order . While the most productive processes of word formation often are composition and derivation; due to length reasons this article will focus on the derivation process only.
4
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt601 - : This paper characterizes and contrasts the lexical and syntactic structures that name the diversity of referents in sports newspaper articles in five languages: Spanish, French, English, Italian, and German . Firstly, we detect each article's main referents, identifying the structures, particularly noun phrases (including pronouns), used in the corpus that allude to the referents. Secondly, we determine how regularly journalists mention each referent. Finally, we compare the syntactic configuration of the structures. With this study, we find that the structures to name the referents help with the text's cohesion, expediting its reading and avoiding the repetition of the referents.
5
paper CL_LiteraturayLingüísticatxt168 - : In this article, we focus on nominalizations, which are an important lexical resource used in written specialized discourse. Our purpose is to describe the occurrence and syntactic functions of nominalizations identified by derivational suffixes in a corpus of technical manuals belonging to three different areas of specialization: maritime, industrial and commerce . By means of computational tools following corpus linguistic methodologies, nominalizations occurring specifically in each area were determined. Through this process, we intend to identify lexical units with a specialized meaning, belonging to specialized vocabulary of each area of knowledge. The results confirm the idea that the comparatively relevant presence of nominalizations is a prototypical feature of technical discourse. Concerning the derivational suffixes, the evidence provided confirms the high occurrence of the suffixes –ción/-sión in all the three areas. The most common syntactic function is as head of nominal group
6
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt127 - : Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms, en T. Shopen (ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Volume III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon: 57-149 . Cambridge, U.K. CUP. Disponible en [75]http://http://dingo/sbs.arizona.edu/~hharley/courses/PDF/TalmyLexi-calizationPatterns.pdf [ [76]Links ]
7
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt53 - : flexible. It allows syntactic structures such as:
8
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt53 - : In line with the literature reviewed above and having the previous two research questions in mind, the focus of this analysis was twofold. First, at the syntactic level, three main issues were at the core: Word order ; Subject use; and Present Continuous Tense use. Second, at the lexical level Celaya and Torras' classification (2001) was taken and adapted by considering also Ringbom's (2001) distinction between transfer of form and transfer of meaning. Thus, at the level of lexical transfer of form misspellings, borrowing and coinages were at the core while the use or presence of calques was the main element to analyze with regards lexical transfer of meaning. [30]Table 2 shows a brief description of the elements considered as the basis for the analysis of data in this small-scale exploratory study:
9
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt53 - : The results also suggest that syntactic transfer regarding word-order and subject use may not appear in isolation, instead, they can be seen together in only one clause as in the following example (3):
10
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt74 - : Such types of language are all vital during the learning stages, however linguistic knowledge is crucial as it deals with the knowledge of the written code: orthography, spelling, punctuation and formating conventions; the knowledge of phonology and morphology: sound/letter correspondences, syllables and morpheme structure; vocabulary: interpersonal words and phrases, academic and pedagogical words and phrases, formal and technical words and phrases, topic-specific words and phrases and non-literal and metaphorical language; and syntactic/ structural knowledge: basic syntactic patterns, preferred formal writing structures, and figures of expression, metaphors and similes (as cited in Weigle, 2002 ).
11
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt232 - : This article describes two syntactic mechanisms to transform written into oral content: changes to clause structure and modifications to heavy NPs . It will be demonstrated below that these mechanisms generally serve to distinguish high and low levels of performance. Some sub-mechanisms, however, do not clearly indicate whether a student is performing successfully or not.
12
paper CO_ColombianAppliedLinguisticsJournaltxt232 - : ^1This article is a partial report of a study that I conducted as part of my studies in the PhD Program in Applied Linguistics and English Language at the University of Birmingham. This study was also presented as a paper entitled Syntactic Mechanisms in the Transition from Academic Written to Oral Discourses: Performance Differences in a Colombian PhD-level EAP course at the 2016 AAAL (American Association for Applied Linguistics ) Annual conference in Orlando, Florida.
13
paper CO_CuadernosdeLingüísticaHispánicatxt152 - : After ^[71]Chomsky's (1993) proposal of the Government-Binding Theory (GB Theory), linguists used the feature checking process to explain code-switching derivations as well. ^[72]Belazi, Rubin and Toribio (1994) suggest two universal syntactic constraints on intrasentential CS: (i ) the Functional Head Constraint (FHC) that posits language as a feature and (ii) the Word-Grammar Integrity Corollary that requires all words of a language to obey that language's grammar in code-switching contexts. In principle, they adopt ^[73]Abney's (1987) f-selection to explain that words/morphemes bear a language feature that needs to be checked.
14
paper CO_CuadernosdeLingüísticaHispánicatxt122 - : Sleeman, P. & Brito, A. M. (2010). Nominalization, Event, Aspect and Argument Structure: A Syntactic Approach. In M. Duguine, S. Huidobro & N. Madariaga (Eds.) Argument Structure and Syntactic Relations: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective (pp . 113-132). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. [ [95]Links ]
15
paper CO_CuadernosdeLingüísticaHispánicatxt42 - : This research project is aimed at describing the uses of verb "traer" in imperfective events in Mexican Spanish, based on the Gramática de Construcciones de Goldberg (1995) and a previous study by Rábago and Alarcón (2012) regarding the stative "traer". A series of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic aspects is explored, regarding the relationships among participants: Subject, Object and their Complements . Examples from two oral register corpora are analyzed: the Sociolinguistic Corpus of Ciudad de México, and the Speech Corpus of Monterrey. The following tendency is shown: alienable objects are used with predicative complements, while inalienable objects combine the preferred structure with adverbial complements or secondary predicates which enable and sometimes strengthen the discursive setting.
16
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt275 - : The article describes the syntactic and semantic behavior of two very common verbal forms in Peruvian Spanish: parar+gerund and pasarse+gerund . It is very interesting that, despite being almost homophonous, these forms display different syntactic structures. The former is a raising verb, and the latter a control verb. However, their common frequentative value produces a plurality reading of the accompanying verbal complement: whereas parar functions as an auxiliary operator of the verb, pasar coerces or forces a plural reading because of its lexical content. On the other hand, we will show that both verbal forms are in a process of grammaticalization i.e. loss of lexical content and gain of functional features, although, in its auxiliary function, parar has advanced more in this process.
17
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt239 - : It is difficult to see how a subset of conjunctions, adverbials, and prepositional phrases could be cobbled together to form a syntactic category, particularly since their individual syntactic patterning follows their obvious syntactic lineage: conjunctions patterns like conjunctions, and so forth . (^[34]Fraser, 1999, p. 994)
18
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt259 - : SYNTACTIC COMPLEXITY: MULTIVERBAL CONSTRUCTIONS IN TEHUELCHE
19
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt171 - : Méndez Vallejo, D. C. (2011). Syntactic variation in Colombian Spanish: The case of the Focalizing ser (FS ) structure. En S. Colina, A. Olarrea, & A. M. Carvalho (Eds.), Romance linguistics 2009: Selected papers from the 39th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL) (pp. 169-186). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [ [67]Links ]
20
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:
21
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.
22
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt13 - : A Chapter in the History of Syntactic Ideas in Portugal:
23
paper CO_FormayFuncióntxt170 - : Do the FTA on record without redressive action, baldly: When this strategy is used, nothing is done to minimize the threat to the hearer's face. As a result, the speakers' intentions are unambiguous and direct, thus satisfying Grice's maxims of conversation (Grice, 1975). The speakers normally choose to do the FTA in this way, with the direct imperative as the most common bald-on-record syntactic form both in Spanish and English, due to low D, P or R, as in the following request from husband to wife, which does not entail a great sacrifice for the hearer:
24
paper CO_Lenguajetxt150 - : The interlingual category is described by Corder (as cited in ^[44]Sari, 2016). It is described as an interference with the mother tongue. Interlingual errors are caused when the learners prevent to acquire the rules of a second language. ^[45]Kaweera (2013) in the study makes a detailed revision of the interlingual interference naming three aspects: (1) lexical interference: learners make errors on syntax, lexis, morphology, and orthography. Two semantic errors are described based on lexis: the confusion of sense relation which is related to a wrong meaning used by learners. For example, the use of “touch the guitar” instead of “play the guitar”. The collocational error which is related to an unnecessary placement of words in a sentence. For example, the use of “to” in the phrase “near to my house. (2) Syntactic interference: learners use the mother tongue to translate directly to the target language . These errors imply subject-verb agreement, wrong structure, and difficulties with word
25
paper CO_Lenguajetxt137 - : Aikhenvald, A. (2007). Typological distinctions in word-formation. En Timothy Shopen (Ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Second edition, Volume III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon (pp . 1-64). Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo: Cambridge University Press. doi: [136]https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618437.001 [ [137]Links ]
26
paper CO_Íkalatxt127 - : Among the syntactic mitigating devices the RP group used, the formal pronoun/verb form and aspect were the most frequently used, followed by the conditional tense:
27
paper CO_Íkalatxt137 - : values underlying Tense, Agreement, Number, and Determiner. However, they exhibit variability with respect to inflectional morphology either through omission or making inappropriate substitution of one kind of inflection for another. The underlying syntactic representations are correct, however, the resulting surface functional morphology is not target-like due to surface mapping problems (Slabakova 2009: 280 ). In other words failure to produce consistent inflection is attributed to difficulties in accessing the relevant lexical items by which inflection is realized particularly in oral production due to communicative pressure.
28
paper CO_Íkalatxt260 - : ^1In this article, I make a partial report of a study carried out to meet the requirements of the first year in the PhD Program in Applied Linguistics and English Language at the University of Birmingham. The study, Syntactic Mechanisms in the Transition from Academic Written to Oral Discourses: Performance Differences in an EAP Course, was part of the evaluation process and has been partially published . In the original manuscript, four mechanisms—modifications to clauses, reduction of noun phrases, transitions in the expression of modality, and inclusion of code glosses—were reported. The first two mechanisms have been published in Nausa (2017). The other two (modalization and code glosses) are the subject matter of this article. The complete study has also been presented as a paper in several conferences, including the 2015 ASOCOPI Conference in Medellín and the 2016 AAAL (American Association for Applied Linguistics) annual conference in Orlando, Florida.
29
paper CO_Íkalatxt101 - : From the perspective of morphosyntax, the Calabar variety exhibits the presence of tense but also predominant loss of inflectional and derivational morphology which is a feature of pidgin languages. The most striking syntactic peculiarity of this variety is that some speakers use the objective singular personal pronoun me for both the subjective and objective positions as well as the objective plural personal pronoun we for both the subjective and objective positions as we can see in 10:
30
paper CO_Íkalatxt101 - : From the evidence in 16, it is established that say is a complementizer. It mainly subcategories for verbs of cognition and not verbs of perception. From the above analysis, we can propose the syntactic behaviour of say as a complementizer as follows:
31
paper MX_ElAnuariodeLetrastxt52 - : Previous typological studies have shown that temporal clauses, unlike other adverbial clauses, can occur before or after the main clause, and this order variation has been observed across languages and within the same language. In the case of Spanish, some studies have found that temporal clauses tend to occur at the beginning of the clause. In this paper, we extend the assumptions of typological studies into the analysis of temporal clauses introduced by cuando ‘when’. Based in used data, we found that the initial position is preferred in oral data, while both positions are equally common in writing data. We examine some semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic motivations that, together, may explain this order variation: the semantic nature of cuando, sequential iconicity, length, and syntactic complexity, as well as pragmatic order .
32
paper PE_Lexistxt39 - : I postulate an unitary syntactic structure for constructions with a-…-ar and en-…-ar parasynthetic verbs through four hypothesis: both patterns have a common basic syntactic structure regarding vP and VP, whose heads are CAUSE and BECOME, respectively ; the difference between the patterns lies on, within a scale of affectedness (Beavers 2011), the fact that a-…-ar assigns (compositionally) a result state to the theme, while this does not happen with en-…-ar. I claim that affectedness is a binary operator located higher than vP that quantizes the event determining the specificity of the result state for the object; and the morphological form of the operator is a- (if its value is positive) or en- (if its value is negative).
33
paper PE_Lexistxt88 - : Aikhenvald, Alexandra 2007 "Typological distinctions in word-formation". En Language typology and syntactic description, volume 3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon . Ed., Timothy Shopen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1-65. [26]https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618437.001. [ [27]Links ]
34
paper PE_Lexistxt114 - : Estrada-Fernández, Z. (2019). Syntactic nominalizations in Pima Bajo: Diachronic diversity . En: Diverse Scenarios of Syntactic Complexity. Eds., Albert Alvarez Gonzalez, Zarina Estrada-Fernández y Claudine Chamoreau. (pp. 167-189). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.126.07est. [ [108]Links ]
35
paper UY_ALFALtxt54 - : In this paper, I describe and compare processes that add a causative event to a predicate, i.e., the ways in which the verbs are causativized in Spanish. My hypothesis is that causativization in Spanish, as a syntactic process, results in two configurations: one analytic (e .g., El mago hizo desaparecer al conejo.) and the other synthetic (e.g., El mago desapareció al conejo.), both active and productive in the language. In turn, these two configurations differ from other processes that increase the number of the verb’s syntactic arguments, such as transitivization (e.g. A Juan lo caminaron), not only in their dialectal distribution but also in the structural position of the added argument ([27]Zdrojewski 2007). The differences between these two forms of causativization are accounted here, following [28]Pylkkänen (2008), by determining the type of causative morpheme active in Spanish.
36
paper UY_ALFALtxt49 - : [253]von[254] Heusinger, Klaus y Georg A. Kaiser. 2003. Animacity, Specificity, and Defineteness in Spanish, en von K. Heusinger y G.A. Kayser (eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop “Semantic and Syntactic aspects of Specificity in Romance Languages”, Arbeitspapier 113, Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Konstanz: 41-65 .
37
paper UY_ALFALtxt16 - : [49]Flynn S. y G. Martohardjono. [50]1994. Mapping from the initial state to the final state: the separation of universal principles and language specific principles, en B. Lust, M. Suñer and J. Whitman (eds.), Syntactic theory and first language acquisition: cross-linguistic perspectives . Vol. 1: Heads, projections and learnability Hillsdate, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum: 319-335.
38
paper UY_ALFALtxt82 - : This paper argues that African languages spoken by the slaves brought to Brazil played a significant role in the emergence of some of the grammatical properties of Brazilian Portuguese. Exploring mentalist assumptions, the study deals with morpho-syntactic parallelisms between Brazilian and African Portuguese, as well as between such Portuguese varieties and Bantu languages, in order to propose that the acquisition of Portuguese as second language by Africans produced two types of changes: (i ) changes linked to the transfer of syntactic properties from their native languages to emerging Portuguese varieties in Brazil, and (ii) changes linked to grammatical restructuring triggered by difficulties in learning morpho-syntactic features of Portuguese.
39
paper VE_BoletindeLinguisticatxt128 - : 34. Waltereit, Richard y Ulrich Detges. 2008. Syntactic change from within and from without syntax: A usage-based analysis . En Richard Waltereit y Ulrich Detges (eds.), The paradox of grammatical change: perspectives from Romance, 13-30. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [ [69]Links ]
40
paper VE_BoletindeLinguisticatxt84 - : This diachronic-contrastive study focuses on the syntactic-semantic combinations of donde and PAR (Preposition + (Article) + Relative) structures in XVI-XVIII century Spanish of America and Spain. The linguistic parameters proposed are: i. semantic:Type and function of the antecedent (ANT), meaning of the relative form, type of verb in the main and subordinate clauses; and ii. syntactic: Presence or absence of preposition in ANT, syntactic category and function of ANT, syntactic function of the relative and type of relative construction . The results show that donde and PAR are not totally equivalent. Instead, the relative forms combine with others linguistic elements according to theirs semantic and syntactic characteristics.
41
paper VE_BoletindeLinguisticatxt136 - : 7. Demonte, Violeta y Olga Fernández Soriano. 2004. [En línea] Features in comp and syntactic variation: The case of (de )queísmo in Spanish. Lingua. 115. 1063-1082. Disponible en [31]http://www.uam.es/[32]personal_pdi/filoyletras/vdemonte/deque.pdf [Consulta: 10 de octubre de 2012]. [ [33]Links ]
42
paper VE_BoletindeLinguisticatxt112 - : From all the syntactic phenomena that relative clauses entail, there is one that has resisted every attempt of systematic grammatical explanation: the asymmetries in the use of the definite article in the head of restrictive prepositional relative clauses . We have identified the importance of two combined features [-human] and [+specific] in referential antecedents that allow the alternance of the definite article. Our semantic-pragmatic hypothesis is more descriptively accurate than the ones found in traditional grammars, as it can correctly predict the optionality of the definite article in the head PAR (Preposition+Article+Relative) even for some cases in which the antecedents are modified by an indefinite article.
43
paper VE_BoletindeLinguisticatxt20 - : This paper examines the prepositional construction with the Spanish verb mirar "to look". The high frequency of the intransitive construction "mirar + locative prepositional phrase (PP)" evidences the affinity between mirar and the semantic field of motion verbs. On the basis of an empirical analysis of authentic text material, light is shed upon the hybrid statute of the locative PPS that occur with mirar. It is shown that, depending on their meaning, these locative PPs take on different syntactic functions. Three semantic categories, which display their own syntactic behaviour, can be distinguished: i ) the dynamic locative PPS that indicate the object of perception or percept (prepositional complement); ii) the dynamic PPs that denote the trajectory or path of gaze (prepositional complement or adjunct) and iii) the static PPS that help localize the perceiver or the percept (adjunct).
44
paper VE_Letrastxt192 - : The aim of this work is to analyze the issue of the utterance in the Spanish of Venezuela, in order to explain how this issue is integrated or related to the syntactic functions. Theoretically, the study is supported on functional syntax and on the syntax of spoken language. Regarding the methodology, it follows the functional discursive approach (Halliday 1967, 1985). The corpus studied was the Corpus del Laboratorio de Fonética de la Universidad de Los Andes, from which eight informants were selected. The sample gathered 450 utterances with conversation themes encoded in the nominal group. As a result, we find that the topic as thematic structure is expressed through syntactic structures such as: subject (53,7% ), direct object (21,6%), indirect object (14,3%) and nominal attribute (10,4%). The sentence utterances show pre-position or post-position of the theme with a function of direct or indirect object. The functions fulfilled by this thematized group are those of topicalization (Top)
45
paper VE_Letrastxt106 - : regional television, and where the pronoun tú is used as a norm. Finally, from an intralinguistic perspective, the choice of treatment pronouns is associated with the syntactic function of the noun phrase where it occurs: the tuteo is favored by a verb with no pronominal subject, a pronoun with objective function and discourse markers ; the pronoun choice is restricted by the verbal forms conjugated and collocated with a pronominal subject and possessive structures.
46
paper VE_Núcleotxt80 - : This empirical study focuses on the cross-linguistic influence of previously known languages on the acquisition of the syntax of Spanish as a foreign language. The central objective is to observe if acquired languages promote the acquisition of Spanish syntax as a third or fourth language. The subjects in this study are French-speaking students of Spanish in a university environment at the undergraduate level in an exchange program. The instrument used was a Grammatical Judgment Test to control certain syntactic structures of three languages: French (students native language ), English (foreign language) and Spanish (target language). The analysis focuses on data from two study groups: those for whom Spanish is the L3 and those for whom Spanish is the L4. Results showed a major transfer from French (L1) than English (L2) in both language groups due to typological similarities and both groups performed similarly; this is partially consistent with a similar study in the acquisition of French
47
paper VE_Núcleotxt80 - : 48. Rothman, J. (en prensa). L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The Typological Primacy Model [artículo en línea] . Second Language Research. Disponible: [79]http://www.uiowa.edu/~slalab/Publications/Jason%27s_SLR_L3%20updated%20done.pdf [Consulta: enero de 2010] [ [80]Links ]
48
paper corpusRLAtxt167 - : Accuracy can be defined as the absence of deviations from a particular linguistic norm, it is "the ability to be free from errors while using language to communicate in either writing or speech" (^[26]Wolfe-Quintero, Inagaki & Kim, 1998:33). On the other hand, grammatical complexity means that a wide variety of basic and sophisticated structures are available and can be accessed quickly (Wolfe-Quintero et al., 1998). Grammatical complexity is important ''because of the assumption that language development entails, among other processes, the growth of an L2 learner's syntactic repertoire and her or his ability to use that repertoire appropriately in a variety of situations'' (^[27]Ortega, 2003: 492 ). This means that learners have both basic and sophisticated structures at their disposal as their grammatical abil ity and proficiency increase, and that (it is assumed) L2 writers can then choose the structure that best fits the context and the purpose of the communicative situation
49
paper corpusRLAtxt167 - : ^[53]Knoch et al. (2014) examined students' ESL writing proficiency following a year's study in an Australian university. The study used a longitudinal design (one year) and investigated writing development using global writing scores, as well as measures of accuracy, fluency, grammatical and lexical complexity. The results of the study showed that global scores of writing showed no change over time. The only significant improvement participants in the current study showed was in their fluency (measured via text length). That is, they could write longer texts in the time allowed. There were no observed gains in accuracy, syntactic and lexical complexity (2014: 8-10 ).
50
paper corpusRLAtxt167 - : Errors were analysed and scored as syntactic and morphological following ^[75]Bardovi-Harlig and Bofman (1989:21 ). Thus, syntactic errors consisted of errors of word order, errors resulting from the absence of constituents, and errors in combining sentences. Word-order errors included errors in the order of major constituents (such as pragmatically unacceptable deviations from SVO) and minor constituents (such as adverb placement). Errors resulting from the absence of constituents included deletion of a major constituent (subject, verb, or object), and sentence fragments that lacked finite verbs. Errors in sentence combining in cluded errors in complementation, relativization, or coordination. Morphological errors included errors in nominal morphology (plural, number agreement, uncountable nouns, and compounds), errors in verbal morphology (tense, subject-verb agreement, and passive formation), errors in determiners and articles, errors in prepositions, and errors in derivational morphology
51
paper corpusRLAtxt167 - : [80]Table IV gives the distribution of syntactic errors for both groups. Group A exhibits a lower percentage of each type of syntactic errors with one exception: word order . That is, although syntactic errors show a developmental pattern with the number of errors decreasing as proficiency increases, there is a case of regression.
52
paper corpusRLAtxt86 - : En el área de adquisición de segundas lenguas en Lingüística Aplicada, las investigadoras brasileñas Kyria Finardi y Mailce Borges Mota, de la Universidad Federal del Espíritu Santo y de la Universidad Federal de Santa Catarina, presentan el artículo "The acquisition of a syntactic structure in L2 speech: The role of working memory capacity" . Sobre la base de la Teoría del Procesamiento de Información, se investiga la relación entre la capacidad de memoria operacional y la adquisición de una estructura sintáctica en el habla del L2. Los resultados evidencian el aporte lingüístico del procesamiento en L2 para complementar y explicar la adquisición de algunas estructuras sintácticas. Además se analiza la discusión entre el procesamiento de la forma versus el significado, la adquisición de estructuras basadas en reglas, las variaciones lingüísticas en L1 y L2 y las limitaciones de la producción oral en L2.
53
paper corpusRLAtxt90 - : Syntactic performance on children with Attention Deficit Disorder and Hyperactivity: A comparative and ontogenetic perspective
54
paper corpusRLAtxt124 - : of its constituents". 'Phraseological unit' is another term that is increasingly used in phraseological research to denote a stable combination of words with a fully or partially figurative meaning (Kunin: 1970: 210), or a lexicalized, reproducible bilexemic or polylexemic word group in common use, which has relative syntactic and semantic stability, may be idiomatized, may carry connotations, and may have an emphatic or intensifying function in a text (Gláser, 1998: 125 ). According to Gláser (1984: 348), phraseological unit is used in some Slavonic and German linguistic traditions as a superordinate term for multi-word lexical items. 'Phraseme' is also used as a superordinate term (e.g., in Mel'cuk, 1995, but also in Slovene phraseological research, e.g, Krzisnik, 2010: 84), though not in the Anglo-American tradition. Other terms also encountered in the phraseological literature are multi-word lexical unit (Cowie, 1992), fixed expression (Moon, 1992a, Svensson, 2008), fixed phrase
55
paper corpusRLAtxt125 - : Tyler, L. K., Shafto, M. A., Randall, B., Wright, P., Marslen-Wilson, W. y Stamatakis, E. (2010). Preserving syntactic processing across the adult life span: The modulation of the frontotemporal language system in the context of age-related atrophy . Cerebral Cortex, 20, 352-364. [ [108]Links ]
56
paper corpusRLAtxt91 - : The acquisition of a syntactic structure in L2 speech: the role of working memory capacity
57
paper corpusRLAtxt73 - : Computational modelling of the effects of aging on syntactic processing in Spanish: a study using neural networks
58
paper corpusRLAtxt111 - : In order to use the two copulas correctly the child needs to know the basic syntactic and semantic/pragmatic properties of each copula but also the following general distributional facts of the schema ser/estar + Adj as the sentences in (2) illustrate:
59
paper corpusRLAtxt111 - : 3) a. Syntactic: Use of ser with an exclusively estar adjective (*María es embarazada . 'M. ser pregnant) or use estar + an exclusively ser adjective (*María está honesta 'M. is (estar) honest').
60
paper corpusRLAtxt111 - : As we saw in the introduction, in order to use the two copulas correctly in the adjectival domain, Spanish-speaking children need to know the syntax, semantics, pragmatics of the copulas but also how they are used with different types of adjectives; In order to disentangle what factors, distributional, syntactic, semantic/ pragmatic and frequency information influence the acquisition of ser and estar with adjectives, we considered the following hypotheses:
61
paper corpusRLAtxt227 - : Shahidipour, V., y Alibabaee, A. (2017). Syntactic structures and rhetorical functions of electrical engineering, psychiatry, and linguistics research article titles in English and Persian: a cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study . Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 36, 1, 145-175. [325]https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2017.4066 [ [326]Links ]
62
paper corpusSignostxt517 - : Rojas Nieto, C. (en prensa). Constructional grounding in emerging constructions in Spanish acquisition complexity: Early. En C. C. Z. Estrada & A. Álvarez (Ed.), Diachronic aspects of syntactic complexity: Inter and intra-typological diversity (pp . 1-31). Ámsterdam: John Benjamins . [ [119]Links ]
63
paper corpusSignostxt577 - : To explore syntactic complexity in relation to phrase structures, the verb phrases of dependent clauses were coded and categorized into the following subtypes: VPs formed by non-finite (to+inf ., -ing, -ed) clauses and VPs of finite dependent clauses (relative, complement, adverbial and comparative). This categorization was expected to provide information on the structural constituency of the phrasal post-modifiers of noun phrases and the syntactic complexity of the verbal predicates. Other constructs that measure syntactic complexity and elaboration, namely, average mean of words per sentence (sentence length) ([95]Table 1) were also considered for interpreting the functional associations of the grammatical features identified in the coded material.
64
paper corpusSignostxt192 - : Tree Diagram 3 is an enhanced version of Diagram 2 used by RedACTe as a more perspicuous way to represent CLG output and the realization relationship between context of culture categories and language categories (cf. §2 below). It introduces two new nodes into the original CLG syntactic representations: a node labeled sign and a node labeled with a complete selection expression (SEn ). Notice that the part of Diagram 3 headed by the topmost sign is no longer a syntactic representation but a linguistic representation, for the sign is a pair made up of a semantic structure and its associated syntactic structure[26]^2.
65
paper corpusSignostxt192 - : Castel (2004) proposes a text grammar which (a) treats field properties as belonging to a stratum lower than the genre stratum but higher than the lexicogrammatical stratum, and (b) defines field preferences that alter semantic feature probabilities in SNRs. This text grammar associates, with each terminal genre feature, a pair made up of a selection expression headed by the feature [field_entity], and a linguistic structure as in Diagram 10, where SU is a variable ranging over syntactic units:
66
paper corpusSignostxt373 - : Assessment of syntactic awareness: Effects of plausibility in solving tasks and in its relation to sentence comprehension
67
paper corpusSignostxt329 - : Tanenhaus, M., Spyvey-Knowlton, M. & Hanna, J. (2000). Modeling thematic and discourse context effects on syntactic ambiguity resolution within a multiple constraints framework: Implications for the architecture of the language processing system . En M. Pickering, C. Clifton & M. Crocker (Eds.), Architecture and mechanism of the language processing system (pp. 90-118). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [ [67]Links ]
68
paper corpusSignostxt319 - : In order to account for these facts and for the interpretation of other indefinites, Diesing (1992) and Kratzer (1995) propose that the semantic IL/SL distinction follows from differences in argument structure. Specifically, Kratzer (1995) argues that Diesing´s (1992) proposal that subjects of ILPs and SLPs may be in different syntactic positions is a consequence of a difference in argument structure: SLPs have an extra argument position for events or spatio-temporal locations while ILPs do not . They both assume Heim´s (1982) proposal that i) indefinites are open formulas that contain a free variable that undergoes an operation of existential closure and ii) that sentences are mapped to a tripartite Logical Form that consists of a quantifier, a restrictive clause and a nuclear scope. For Diesing (1992) material from the VP is mapped into the nuclear scope where the variable undergoes existential closure while the material from the IP is mapped into a restrictive clause and, if there is not
69
paper corpusSignostxt319 - : (15a) is not acceptable because ´When´ does not have anything to quantify over (there is not a Davidsonian argument to bind since ´know´ is an IL head). (15b) on the other hand is acceptable because ´When´ binds the indefinite ´a Moroccan´ that is also a variable. (15c) is also acceptable since the predicate headed by ´speak´ is SL and has a Davidsonian argument. However, a problem for the syntactic account is that in the same way as SLPs can have IL readings, in (16), typical ILPs can be assigned SL readings, in (17) (Manninen, 2001):
70
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:
71
paper corpusSignostxt463 - : This paper is part of a comprehensive study on the psycholinguistic processing of causality and counter-causality in discourse. The particular aim is to analyze the articulation between the semantic and syntactic information during this process. That is, how the syntactic complexity is related to the processing complexity when readers have to understand pieces of discourse that express particular semantic relationships: causal and counter-causal . One of the main objectives will be to study how the performance pattern changes when the possibility / impossibility to involve world knowledge conditions the process. We present a psycholinguistic experiment, which aims at analyzing the comprehension of causal and counter-causal relations, expressed by sentences with different syntactic structure -coordinates and subordinates- and in two conditions regarding the type of information: every-day items -the speaker may involve their world knowledge- and technical items -this intervention of previous
72
paper corpusSignostxt463 - : world knowledge is not possible-. Results show that this factor determines the processing pattern and significantly modifies the articulation between syntactic complexity and processing complexity: only in the absence of prior knowledge, syntactic complexity is reflected directly in processing complexity .
73
paper corpusSignostxt382 - : In Romanian, a pro-drop language, the syntactic position of subject may be occupied by a full pronoun (eu, tú, etc. I, you, etc.), but most often the pronoun is omitted since the category of subject is rendered by the verb form (vorbesc, vorbeşti etc. I speak, you speak, etc.). If a full pronoun is used in the syntactic position of subject, it may have pragmatic meanings: the speaker either wants to emphasize his/ her position while uttering the words or the speaker wants to differentiate him/ herself from the interlocutor .
74
paper corpusSignostxt161 - : Syntactic emphasis in written chilean Spanish:
75
paper corpusSignostxt416 - : Another category comprises Open IE methods based on relation extraction heuristics or rules. According to the classification of Open IE methods given by Gamallo (2014), it can be divided into two sub-categories. Methods of the first subcategory apply rules over deep syntactic parsing: ClausIE (Del Corro & Gemulla, 2013 ), CSD-IE (Bast & Haussmann, 2013), KrakeN (Akbik & Loser, 2012), DepOE (Gamallo, García & Fernández-Lanza, 2012), and FES (Aguilar, 2012). These methods are prone to slow performance (Aguilar, 2012), are less robust to grammar errors in texts due to the nature of automatic syntactic parsing, and their implementation is not easily available for many languages -again, due to the limited availability of syntactic parsers, especially for commercial use.
76
paper corpusSignostxt488 - : than ever. The technologies we considered cutting-edge only fifteen years ago are now obsolete, replaced by newer ones with their corresponding jargon. How do slow-changing morphological components evolve in order to keep pace with a fast-moving lexical element such as technology-related borrowings? What are the factors influencing these changes? These are the questions we aim to answer as we focus on a syntactic category closely interconnected with lexis: grammatical gender .
77
paper corpusSignostxt313 - : We found, instead, the use of certain translations of English expressions which are not well-formed in Romanian. The resulting phrases are syntactic calques that affect the subcategorization pattern of the verb: a face diferenta (Engl . to make the difference); or determines changes in the valency grill of the verb: a suna înapoi (Engl. to call back).
Evaluando al candidato syntactic:
2) errors: 26 (*)
5) semantic: 18 (*)
6) lexical: 16 (*)
7) complexity: 15 (*)
9) verb: 14 (*)
10) grammatical: 14 (*)
12) structures: 12
16) sentence: 10 (*)
17) linguistic: 10 (*)
18) clauses: 10 (*)
19) relative: 10
syntactic
Lengua: eng
Frec: 959
Docs: 380
Nombre propio: 17 / 959 = 1%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 9
Puntaje: 9.760 = (9 + (1+7.28540221886225) / (1+9.90689059560852)));
Rechazado: muy disperso;
Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término
(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)| syntactic |
: King, J. & Just, A. 1991. Individual Differences in Syntactic Processing: The Role of Working Memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 580-602. : 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 ] : ----. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structures in lexical forms. Language typology and syntactic description, 3(99), 36-149. : 1. Arce Arenales, Manuel. 1989. Semantic structure and syntactic function: The case of Spanish "se". Tesis doctoral. Boulder, CO: Universidad de Colorado. : 1. Beaman, K. (1994). Coordination and subordination revisited: Syntactic complexity in spoken and written narrative discourse. En D. Tannen (Comp.), Coherence in spoken and written discourse (Vol. XII, pp. 45-80). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. : 10. Francescina, Florencia. 2001. Morphological or syntactic deficits in near-native speakers? An assessment of some current proposal. Second Language Research 17. 213-247. : 12. Klima, Edward y Ursula Bellugi. 1966. Syntactic regularities in the speech of children. En John Lyons y Robert Wales (eds.), Psycholinguistics papers, 183-219. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. : 14. Juarros Daussà, Eva. 2001. The syntactic operator "se" in Spanish. Trabajo inédito. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts. : 14.Thompson, Sandra; Robert Longacre y Shin Ja Hwang. 2007. Adverbial clauses. En Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Vol. 2. 237-300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. : 18. O´Grady, William. 1997. Syntactic development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. : 18. Radford, A. (1997). Syntactic theory and the structure of English: a minimalist approach. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. : 2. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. London, Großbritannien etc.: Mouton. : 20. Radford, Andrew. 1990. Syntactic theory and the acquisition of English syntax: The nature of early child grammars of English. Oxford: Basil Black well. : 24. Romaine, Suzanne. 1981. On the problem of syntactic variation: A reply to Beatriz Lavandera and William Labov. Texas Working Papers in Sociolinguistc 82. 2-38. : 27. Romaine, Suzanne. 1984. On the problem of syntactic variation and pragmatic meaning in sociolinguistic theory. Folia Lingüística 18. 409-437. : 28. Sankoff, David. 1988. Sociolinguistics and syntactic variation. En Frederick Newmeyer (ed.), Language: The sociocultural context, 140-161. Londres: Cambridge University Press. : 43. Silva-Corvalán, Carmen. 1991. On the problemofmeaning in sociolinguistic studies of syntactic variation. En Dieter Kastovsky y Aleksander Szewdek (eds.), Linguistics across historical and geographical boundaries, 111-123. Berlin: Mouton. : 45. Wang, Y. y Bai, Y. (2007). A corpus-based syntactic study of medical research article titles. System, 35, 38-399. : 49. Rothman, J. y Cabrelli, J. (2009). What variables condition syntactic transfer? A look at the L3 initial state. Second Language Research, 25(4), 1-30. : 7. Gries, T. (2001). A multifactorial analysis of syntactic variation: particle movement revisited. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 8(1), 33-50. : Aarts, B. (2007). Syntactic gradience. The nature of grammatical indeterminacy. New York: Oxford University Press. : Acedo-Matellán, V. & Mateu, J. (2013). Satellite-framed Latin vs. verb-framed Romance: A syntactic approach. Probus, 25, 1-39. : Aikhenvald, A. (2007). Typological dimensions in word-formation. En Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press: 1-65. : Andrews, A. D. (2007). Relative clauses. En T. Shopen (Ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description . Volume II: Complex Constructions (pp. 206-236). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. : Andrews, Avery (2007) The major functions of the noun phrase”. En Clause Structure, Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Vol. 1. Ed., Timothy Shopen. Segunda edición. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 132-223 : Ardila, A., Rosselli, M., Ostrosky-Solis, F., Marcos, J., Granda, G. & Soto, M. (2000). Syntactic comprehension, verbal memory, and calculation abilities in Spanish-English bilinguals. Applied Neuropsychology, 7, 3-16. : Arnott, W. L., Chenery, H. J., Murdoch, B. E., & Silburn, P. A. (2005). Morphosyntactic and syntactic priming: An investigation of underlying processing mechanisms and the effects of Parkinson’s disease. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 18(1), 1-28. : Baker, M. (2001). The Natures of Nonconfigurationality. Em M. Baltin, & C. Collins (Coords.), The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory (pp. 407-438). Massachusets & Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. [162]https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756416.ch13 : Baker, M. C. 2008. The macroparameter in a microparametric world, em Th. Biberauer (ed.), The Limits of Syntactic Variation, Amsterdam/Philadelfia, John Benjamin´s: 351-373. : Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Bofman, T. (1989). Attainment of syntactic and morphological accuracy by advanced language learners. SSLA, 11, 17-34. : Barnett, Marva A. (1986). Syntactic and lexical/semantic skill in foreign language reading: Importance and interaction. The Modern Language Journal,70 (4), 343-349. : Barry, Susan y Lazarte, Alejandro. (1995). Embedded clause effects on recall: Does high prior knowledge of content domain overcome syntactic complexity in students of Spanish? The Modern Language Journal, 79 (4), 491-504. : Bayley, R., Greer, K., & Holland, C. (2013). Lexical Frequency and Syntactic Variation: A Test of a Linguistic Hypothesis. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 19(2), 19-30. [285]https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol19/iss2/4. : Beers, S. & Nagy, W. (2011). Writing development in four genres from grades three to seven: Syntactic complexity and genre differentiation. Reading and Writing, 24, 183-202. : Beers, S. F. & Nagy, W. E. (2009). Syntactic complexity as a predictor of adolescent writing quality: Which measures? Which genre? Reading and Writing, 22(2), 185-200. DOI: 10.1007/s11145-007-9107-5 : Behrens, Heike e Ulrike Gut. 2005. The relationship between prosodic and syntactic organization in early multiword speech, Journal of Child Language, 32: 1-34. : Benedicto, E., Cvejanov, S., y Quer, J. (2007). Valency in classifier predicates: A syntactic analysis. Lingua, 117(7), 1202-1215. [198]https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.06.012 : Benítez Castro, M. A. (2013). Formal, syntactic, semantic and textual features of English shell nouns. Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Granada, Granada, España. : Berent, Gerald P. (1988). "An Assessment of Syntactic Capabilities", in Michael Strong (ed.). Language Learning and Deafness, Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 133-161. : Bernal, S.; Lidz, J.; Waxman, S.; Dutat, M. y Christophe, A. 2005. Role of syntactic cues in verb acquisition: results from 23-month old infants. Paper presented at the Xth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, Berlin, Allemagne. : Biberauer, Th. (ed.). 2008. Introduction, em Th. Biberauer (ed.), The Limits of Syntactic Variation, Amsterdam/Philadelfia, John Benjamin´s: 1-74. : Blackwell, S. (1998). Constraints on Spanish NP anaphora: The syntactic versus the pragmatic domain. Hispania, 81, 606-618. : Bock, J. K., Loebell, H. y Morey, R. 1992. "From conceptual roles to structural relations: Bridging the syntactic cleft". En Psychological Review, 99, 150-171. : Boeckx, C. (2012). Syntactic islands. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press . : Borer, H. (2003). Exo-skeletal vs. endo-skeletal explanations: Syntactic projections and the lexicon. En J. Moore & M. Polinsky (Eds.), The nature of explanation in linguistic theory (pp. 31-67). Stanford: CSLI Publications. : Bowerman, Melissa. 1973. Early syntactic development: A cross-linguistic study, with special reference to Finnish, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. : Bowey, J. A. (1986). Syntactic awareness in relation to reading skill and ongoing comprehension monitoring. Journal of Experimenal Child Psychology, 41, 282-299. : Branigan, H.P, Pickering, M.J, McLean, J.F. y Cleland, A.A. (2007). Participant role and syntactic alignment in dialogue. Cognition, 104, 163-197. : Bustos, A. (1974) A syntactic correlate of semantic andpragmatic relations: The subjunctive mood in Spanish. University of Illinois. : Cain, K. (2007). Syntactic awareness and reading ability: Is there any evidence for a special relationship? Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 679-694. : 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. : Carter-Thomas, S. (2005). Specialised syntax for specialised texts? An examination of the preferred syntactic patterns in 2 agnate scientific genres: Proceedings articles and conference presentations. Paper presented at Colloque GLAT Barcelone (2004). Barcelona, Spain, 3-18. : Carter-Thomas, S., & Rowley-Jolivet, E. (2001). Syntactic differences in oral and written scientific discourse: The role of information structure. ASp: La revue du GERAS, 31-33, 19-37. : Casado, P., Martín-Loeches, M., Muñoz, F. & Fernández-Frías, C. (2005). Are semantic and syntactic cues inducing the same processes in the identification of word order? Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 526–543. : Chang, F., Dell, G. S., & Bock, K. (2006). Becoming syntactic. Psychological review, 113(2), 234. : Checa, I. & Lozano, C. (2002). The syntactic maturity indexes by Hunt from several generative points of view. Interlingüística 13 (1) (pp. 337-358). : Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structure. London: Mouton. : Clifton, C. Jr., Traxler, M. J., Williams, R., Mohammed, M., Morris, R. K. & Rayner, K. (2003). The use of thematic role information in parsing: Syntactic processing autonomy revisited. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 317-334. : Collentine, J. (2000). The relationship between syntactic and morphological abilities in advanced FL learners of Spanish. En R. Leow & C. Sanz (Eds.), Spanish applied linguistics at the turn of the millennium (pp. 20-35). Medford, MA.: Cascadilla Press. : Comrie, B. (1978). Ergativity. En W. P. Lehmann (Ed.), Syntactic Typology (pp. 329-394). Sussex: Harvester Press. : Cooreman, A. & Sanford, A. (1996). Focus and syntactic subordination in discourse. Research paper nº R1-79. Edimburgo: University of Edinburgh, HCRC. : Cortés-Rodríguez, F. & Rodríguez-Juárez, C. (2018b). The syntactic parsing of ASD-STE100 adverbials in ARTEMIS. Paper presented at the 7^th International Conference on Meaning and Knowledge Representation, Institute of Technology Blanchardstown, Dublin, Germany. : Cowan, J. R. (1974). Lexical and syntactic research for the design of EFL reading materials. TESOL Quarterly, 8(4), 389-399. : Croft, W. (1991), Syntactic categories and gramatical relations. The cognitive organization of information, Chicago/Londres, University of Chicago Press. : Croft, W. (2001). Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. : Croft, William (1991a), Syntactic categories and grammatical relations. The cognitive organization of information, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. : Croft, William. 2001.Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective, Oxford, Oxford University. : Crowhurst, M. (1979). On the misinterpretation of syntactic complexity data. English Education, 11, 91-97. : Crowhurst, Marion y Piche, Gene. (1979). Audience and mode of discourse effects on syntactic complexity in writing at two grade levels. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 101-109. : Crowhurst, Marion. (1980). Syntactic complexity in narration and argument at three grade levels. Canadian Journal of Education, 5, 6-13. : Cutting, J. C. & Bock, K. (1997). That's the way the cookie bounces: Syntactic and semantic components of experimentally elicited idiom blends. Memory and Cognition, 25(1), 57-71. : Davidson, D., Zacks, R. T. & Ferreira, F. 2003. "Age preservation of the syntactic processor in production". En Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 5, pp. 541-566. : Demont, E. & Gombert, J. E. (1996). Phonological awareness as a predictor of recoding skills and syntactic awareness as a predictor of comprehension skills. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 315-332. : Demonte, V. & Fernández, O. (2005). Features in comp and syntactic variation: The case of '(de)queísmo' in Spanish. Lingua, 115(8), 1063-1082. : Dorgeloh, H. & Wanner, A. (2010). (Eds.) Syntactic variation and genre. Berlín: Mouton de Gruyter. : Dryer, M. (2007) Clause Types. En Shopen, T. (ed.), Language Typology and syntactic description (pp. 224-275). Cambridge University Press. [107]https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619427.004 : D’Imperio, Mariapaola, Gorka Elordieta, Sónia Frota, Pilar Prieto e Marina Vigário. 2005. Intonational phrasing in Romance: the role of syntactic and prosodic structure, em S. Frota, M. Vigário e M. J. Freitas (eds.), Prosodies, Berlin/New York, Mouton de Gruyter: 59-97. : Embick, D., Marantz, A., Miyashita, Y., O'Neil, W. & Sakai, K. L. (2000). A syntactic specialization for Broca's area. Procedures ofthe National Academic of Sciences, 97(11), 6150-6154. : Erker, D., & Guy, G. R. (2012). The Role of Lexical Frequency in Syntactic Variability: Variable Subject Personal Pronoun Expression in Spanish. Language, 88, 526-557. [134]https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2012.0050 : Feijóo, S. (2010). Learning from the input: Syntactic, semantic and phonological cues to the noun category in English. Doctoral dissertation, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain. : Ferreira, F. & Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348-368. : Finardi, K. (2009). Working memory capacity and the acquisition of a syntactic structure in L2 speech (Tesis de doctorado no publicada), Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Pos-Graduação em Letras /Inglés E Literatura Correspondente, Brasil. : Fine, Alex B., Tim Florian Jaeger, Thomas A. Farmer e Ting Qian. 2013. Rapid expectation adaptation during syntactic comprehension, PLoS ONE, 8, 10: e77661. : Fisher, C., Gertner, Y., Scott, R. M., & Yuan, S. (2010). Syntactic bootstrapping. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1(2), 143-149. [241]https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.17 : Flahive, Douglas E. y Snow, Beckie G. (1980). Measures of syntactic complexity in evaluating ESL compositions. En J. Oller y K. Perkings (eds.)Research in language testing. (171-176). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. : Foley, William (2007) “A Typology of Information Packing in the Clause”. En Clause Structure, Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Vol. 1. Ed., Timothy Shopen. Segunda edición. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , 362-446. : Forker, Diana 2013 "Microtypology and the Tsezic Languages: A Case Study of Syntactic Properties of Converbal Clauses". SKY Journal of Linguistics. 26, 21-40. : Franceschina, F. (2001). Morphological or syntactic deficit in near-native speakers? An assessment of some current proposals. Second Language Research, 17(3), 213-247. Doi: 10.1177/026765830101700301. : Frazier, L. (1987). Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language y Linguistic Theory, 5(4), 519-559. : Friederici, A. D., & Kotz, S. A. (2003). The brain basis of syntactic processes: functional imaging and lesion studies. Neuroimage, 20, S8-S17. : Friederici, A. D., Kotz, S. A., Werheid, K., Hein, G., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2003). Syntactic comprehension in Parkinson’s disease: Investigating early automatic and late integrational processes using event-related brain potentials. Neuropsychology, 17(1), 133. : Furrow, D., Nelson, K., & Benedict, H. (1979). Mothers’ speech to children and syntactic development: Some simple relationships. Journal of child language, 6(3), 423-442. [245]https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900002464 : Fábregas, A. (2007). The internal syntactic structure of relational adjectives. Probus 19, 135-170. : Gaies, Stephen. (1979). Linguistic input in formal second language learning: The issue of syntactic gradation and readability in ESL materials. TESOL Quarterly, 13 (1), 41-50. : García-Miguel, J. M., González Domínguez F. & Vaamonde G. (2010). ADESSE. A Database with Syntactic and Semantic Annotation of a Corpus of Spanish. Ponencia presentada en Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (pp. 1903-1910). Valletta, Malta. : Gayraud, F., Lee, H. R. & Barkat-Defradas, M. (2011). Syntactic and lexical context of pauses and hesitations in the discourse of Alzheimer patients and healthy elderly subjects. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 25(3), 198-209. : Genetti, C., Coupe, A., Bartee, E., Hildebrandt, K., & Lin, Y. J. (2008). Syntactic Aspects of Nominalization in Five Tibeto-Burman Languages of the Himalayan area. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area, 31(2), 97-142. [184]https://doi.org/10.15144/ltba-31.2.97 : Gibbs, R. & Nayak, N. (1989). Psycholinguistic studies on the syntactic behavior of idioms. Cognitive Psychology, 21(1), 100-138. : Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1-76. : Givón, T. (2009). The Genesis of Syntactic Complexity. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company . : Gombert, J. E. e Gaux, C. 1999. "Implicit and explicit syntactic knowledge and reading in pre-adolescents", em British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17, pp: 169-188. : Gottardo, A., Stanovich, K. E. & Siegel, L. (1996). The relationships between phonological sensitivity, syntactic processing, and verbal working memory in the reading performance of thirdgrade children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 63, 563-582. : Grodner, D., Gibson, E. & Watson, D. (2003). The influence of contextual on syntactic processing: Evidence for strong- interaction in sentences comprehension. Cognition, 95, 275-296. : Grodzinsky, Y., & Friederici, A. D. (2006). Neuroimaging of Syntax and Syntactic Processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 16, 240-246. : Gutiérrez-Clellen, V. & Hofstetter, R. (1994). Syntactic complexity in Spanish narratives: A developmental study. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 645-54. : Gutiérrez-Clellen, Vera. 1998. Syntactic skills of Spanish-speaking children with low school achievement. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 29, 207-220. : Hagoort, P., Brown, C. & Groothusen, J. (1993). The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 439-483. : Hale, K. & Keyser, S. (1993). On the argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. En K. Hale & S. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20^th (pp. 53-109). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. : Haspelmath, M. (2014). Arguments and Adjuncts as Language-particular Syntactic Categories and as Comparative Concepts. Linguistic Discovery, 12(2), 3-11. [167]https://doi.org/10.1349/ps1.1537-0852.a442 : Hasting, A. S., Kotz, S. A. & Friederici, A. D. (2007). Setting the stage for automatic syntax processing: The mismatch negativity as an indicator of syntactic priming. Journal of Cognitive neuroscience, 19(3), 386-400. : Heath, J. (1986). Syntactic and lexical aspects of nonconfigurationality in Nunggubuyu (Australia). Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 4, 375-408. [178]https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00133375 : Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R., & Naigles, L. (1996). Young children’s use of syntactic frames to derive meaning. En Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. (eds.), The origins of grammar (pp. 123-158). MIT Press. [249]https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.22.2.155 : Horn, G. (2003). Idioms, methphors and syntactic mobility. Journal of Linguistic, 39(2), 245-273. : Howkins, Angela Margaret 1977 Syntactic relations in San Martín Quechua. Tesis doctoral. St. Andrews: University of St. Andrews. Huayhua Pari, Felipe 2001 Gramática descriptiva de la lengua Aimara. Lima: Negocios Arco Iris SRL. [ [105]Links ] : Hunt, K. (1970). Recent measures in syntactic development. En M. Lester (Ed.), Reading in applied transformational grammar (pp. 179-192). Nueva York: Holt, Rinehart and Wiston. : Hunt, K. W. (1970). Syntactic maturity in schoolchildren and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development35(1), iii-67. : Hunt, Kellog W. (1970b). Recent measures in syntactic development. En M. Lester (ed.), Readings in applied transformational grammar (pp. 193-201). New York: Holt, Rinehart y Winston. : Jackendoff, R. (1975). Morphological and syntactic regularities in the lexicon. Language 51, 639-671. : Jaeger, F. T. & Snider, N. E. (2013). Alignment as a consequence of expectation adaptation: Syntactic priming is affected by the prime’s prediction error given both prior and recent experience. Cognition, 127, 57-83. : Jeong, Y.-K. (1987). The effect of syntactic simplification on Korean students' English reading comprehension. Tesis de magistratura. Seúl, Korea: Universidad Nacional de Seúl. : Jucker, Andreas H. 1992. Social Stylistics. Syntactic Variation in British Newspapers. Berlin/ NewYork: Mouton de Gruyter. : Karlsson, F. (2010). Syntactic recursion and iteration. En H. van der Hulst (Ed.), Recursion and human language (pp. 43-67), Berlín: De Gruyter Mouton. : Keenan, E. L. (1985). Relative clauses. En T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (pp. 141-170). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press . : Kemmer, L., Coulson, S., De Ochoa, E. y Kutas, M. (2004). Syntactic processing with aging: An event-related potencial study. Psychophysiology, 41, 372-384. : Kemper, S. & Kemptes, K. 1999. "Limitations on syntactic processing". En S. Kemper & R. Kliegl (eds.), Constraints on Language. Aging, Grammar and Memory . Norwell: Kluwer, pp. 79-106. : Kemper, S. (1987). Life-span changes in syntactic complexity. Journal of Gerontology, 42, 323-328. : Kemper, S. y Kemptes, K. (1999). Limitations on syntactic processing. En S. Kemper y R. Kliegl (eds.), Constraints on Language. Aging, grammar and memory (pp. 79-106). Norwell: Kluwer. : King, J. & Just, M. A. 1991. "Individual differences in syntactic processing. The rol of working memory". En Journal of memory and language, 30, pp. 580-602. : Kintsch, W. (1995). How readers construct situation models for stories: the role of syntactic cues and causal inferences. En M.A. Gernsbacher & T. Givón (Eds.), Coherence in spontaneous text (pp.139-160). Amsterdam: Benjamins. : Kirschner, C. (1996). Language attrition and the spanish-english bilingual: a case of syntactic reduction. Bilingual Review, 21 (2), 123-130. : Kotz, S. A., Gunter, T. C., & Wonneberger, S. (2005). The basal ganglia are receptive to rhythmic compensation during auditory syntactic processing: ERP patient data. Brain and Language, 95(1), 70-71. : Kowal, M. & Swain, M. (1997).From semantic to syntactic processing: How can we promote it in the immersion classroom? In R. K. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives (pp. 284-310). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press . : Langacker, Ronald (1977) “Syntactic reanalysis”. En Mechanisms of Syntactic Change. Ed., Charles N. Li. Austin: Texas University Press, 57-139. : Layton, A., Robinson, J. & Lawson, M. (1998). The relationship between syntactic awareness and reading performance. Journal of Research in Reading, 21(1), 5-23. : Lee, J. N., & Naigles, L. R. (2008). Mandarin learners use syntactic bootstrapping in verb acquisition. Cognition, 106(2), 1028-1037. [263]https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.004 : Lefrançois, P., & Armand, F. (2003). The role of phonological and syntactic awareness in second-language reading: The case of Spanish-speaking learners of French. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 219-246. : Lehmann, C., Shin, Y.-M., & Verhoeven, E. (2004). Person Prominence and Relation Prominence. On the typology of syntactic relations with special reference to Yucatec Maya. Munich: LINCOM Europa. : Leonetti, M. (2003). Specificity and object marking: The case of Spanish a. Ponencia presentada en el Congreso Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Specificity in Romance Languaje, Université Konstanz, Konstanz. : Levy, R. (2008). Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106, 1126-1177. : Liddell, S. K. (1977). An Investigation into the Syntactic Structure of American Sign Language. Tesis doctoral, University of California-San Diego. : Littlefield, Heather. (2006). Syntax and Acquisition in the Prepositional Domain: Evidence from English for Fine-Grained Syntactic Categories. Tesis de Doctorado en Applied Linguistics. Boston, Estados Unidos: Boston University Press. : Loar, J. K. (2011). Chinese Syntactic Grammar. Nueva York: Peter Lang. : Lobina, D., Demestre, J. & García-Albea, J. E. (en prensa). Disentangling perceptual and psycholinguistic factors in syntactic processing: Tone monitoring via ERPs. Behavior Research Methods. : Longacre, R. (2007). Sentences as combinations of clauses. En Shopen, T. (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (vol. 2, pp. 372-420). Cambridge University Press. [129]https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619434.007 : Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474-496. : Luraghi, S. & Parodi, C. (2008). Key terms in syntaxand syntactic theory. London: Continuum. : López-Astorga, M. (2015). The disjunction introduction rule: Syntactic and semantic considerations. Pragmalingüística, (23), 141-149. doi: [91]http://dx.doi.org/10.25267/Pragmalinguistica.2015.i23.08 : MacDonald, M. C. (1993). The interaction of lexical and syntactic ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 692-715. : MacDonald, M. C. (1994). Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 157-201. : MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. & Seidenberg, M. (1994a). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676-703. : Maratsos, M. y Chalkley, M. A. 1980. "The internal language of children's syntax: The nature and ontogenesis of syntactic categories". En K. Nelson (Ed.) Childrens' language . New York : Gardner . : McCune, L. (2008). Review of Anat Ninio ‘Language and the learning curve: A new theory of syntactic development’. Journal of Child Language, 35(4), 922-929. : McDonough, K. & Chaikitmongkol, W. (2010). Collaborative syntactic priming activities and EFL learners’ production of wh-questions. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(6), 817-841. : McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (2008). Syntactic primimg and question development. Studies in second language acquisition, 30(3), 31-47. : McDonough, K. (2006). Interaction and syntactic priming: English L2 speakers production of dative constructions. Studies in second language acquisition, 28(2), 179-207. : Melinger, A. y Dobel, C. 2005. "Lexically-driven syntactic priming". En Cognition, 98, B11-B20. : Mendelsohn, David J. (1983). The case for considering syntactic maturity in E.S.L. and E.F.L. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 21 (4), 299-311. : Miller, P. (2010). Phonological, orthographic, and syntactic awareness and their relation to reading comprehension in prelingually deaf individuals: What can we learn from skilled readers? J Dev Phys Disabil, 22, 549-580. : Moattarian, A., y Alibabaee, A. (2015). Syntactic structures in research article titles from three different disciplines: applied linguistics, civil engineering, and dentistry. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 34, 1, 27-50. [293]https://dx.doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2015.3530 : Moessner, L. (1997). Economy as a principle of syntactic change. In R. Hickey & S. Puppel (Eds.), Trends in linguistics: Language history and linguistic modelling (pp. 357-372). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter . : Méndez Vallejo, Dunia Catalina 2008 "Some Syntactic Considerations Regarding the Focalizing Ser (‘to be’) Construction in Colombian Spanish". En Proceedings of the 38th Western Conference on Linguistics. Eds., Michael Grosvald y Dionne Soares, 208-219. : Naro, A. 1976. The genesis of the reflexive impersonal in Portuguese: a study in syntactic change as a surfce phenomenon, Language, 52: 779-811. : Nation, K. & Snowling, M. J. (2000). Factors influencing syntactic awareness skills in normal readers and poor comprehenders. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 229-241. : Nausa, R. (2015). Syntactic Mechanisms in the Transition from Academic Written to Oral discourses: Performance Differences in an EAP course (Unpublished doctoral essay). University of Birmingham. : Nausa, R. (2017). Syntactic Mechanisms in the Transition from Academic Written to Oral Discourses. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 19(2), 234-249. : Nippold, M., Hesketh, L., Duthie, J. y Mansfield, T 2005. "Conversational versus expository discourse: A study syntactic development in children, adolescents and adults", en Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research 48, pp. 1048-1064. : Obler, L. K., Fein, D., Nicholas, M. y Albert, M. L. (1991). Auditory comprehension and aging: Decline in syntactic processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 12, 433-452. : Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492-518. : O’Grady, W. (2005). Syntactic Carpentry: An Emergentist Approach to Syntax. Lawrence Elrbaum Associates. : PERLMUTTER, D. M. (1982). Syntactic Representation, Syntactic Levels, and the Notion of Subject. En Jacobson, P. & Pullum, G. (Eds.) The Nature of Syntactic Representation. D. Reidel Publishing Company. : Pantcheva, M. (2010). The Syntactic Structure of Location, Goals and Sources. Linguistics 48(5), 1043-1081. : Payne, John (1985) “Negation. Language typology and syntactic description”. En Clause Structure . Ed., Timothy Shopen. Volumen. 1. Cambridge: CUP. : Perek, F. (2016). Using Distributional Semantics to Study Syntactic Productivity in Diachrony: A Case Study. Linguistics. 54(1), pp. 149-88. : Pickering, M. J. & Van Gompel, R. P. (2006). Syntactic parsing. En M. Traxler & M. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 455-503). San Diego: Academic Press . : Pickering, M. y Branigan, H. 1998. "The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production". En Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 633-651. : Pladevall, E. (2013). Adult L2 Spanish development of syntactic and discourse subject properties in an instructional setting. Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada, 12, 111-119. : Polio, C. & Yoon, H. J. (2018). The reliability and validity of automated tools for examining variation in syntactic complexity across genres. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 165-188. : Poplack, S. (1981). Syntactic Structure and Social Function of Codeswitching. Latino Language and Communicative Behavior, Norwood: Ablex, 169-184. : Quintero Ramírez, S. (2015). Syntactic Functions of Infinitives in English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 4(1), 182-190. : Ravid, D. y Levie, R. (2010). Adjectives in the development of text production: Lexical, morphological and syntactic analyses. First Language, (30), 27-55. [141]https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723709350529 : Rego, L. L. B. & Bryant, P. E. (1993). The connection between phonological, syntactic and semantic skills and children’s reading and spelling. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 8(3), 235-246. : Reinhart, Tanya. 1976 The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora. Tesis doctoral. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. : Reitter, E., Moore, J. & Keller, F. (2006). Priming of syntactic rules in task-oriented dialogue and spontaneous conversation. En Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 685-690. : Roberts, I. & A. Roussou (2003). Syntactic change: A minimalist approach to grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. : Rojas, C. (2009). Starting small: Effects in the acquisition of early relative constructions in Spanish. In 12th Rice University Symposium on Language: The Genesis of Syntactic Complexity. : Romaine, Suzanne (1981) “On the Problem of Syntactic Variation: A Reply to Beatriz Lavandera and William Labov”. Sociolinguistic Working Paper. 82, 3-40. : Savage, C., Lieven, E., Theakston, A. & Tomasello, M. (2003). Testing the abstractness of children's linguistic representations: Lexical and structural priming of syntactic constructions in young children. Developmental Science, 6(5), 557-567. : Schachter, P. (1985). Parts of Speech Systems. En T. Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description (vol. 1, pp. 3-61). Cambridge, London, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sydney: Cambridge University Press. : Serrano, M. J. & Aijón Oliva, M. A. (2011). Syntactic variation and communicative style. Language Sciences, 33, 138-153. : Shah, A. P., Baum, S. R., y Dwivedi, V. D. 2006. Neural substrates of linguistic prosody: Evidence from syntactic disambiguation in the productions of braindamaged patients. Brain and Language, 96, 1, 78-89. : Shopen, T. (2007). Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Second edition, Volume I: Clause Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. : Sidorov, G. (2014). Should syntactic N-grams contain names of syntactic relations? International Journal of Computational Linguistics and Applications, 5(1), 139-158. : Siewierska, A. (1993). Syntactic Weight vs. Information Structure and Word Order Variation in Polish. Journal of Linguistics, 29(2), 233-265. : Simpson, I., Moreno-Pérez, F., Rodríguez-Ortiz, I., Valdés-Coronel, M., y Saldaña, D. ( 2020). The Effects of morphological and syntactic knowledge on reading comprehension in Spanish speaking children. Reading and Writing , 33( 2), 329-348. doi: 10.1007/s11145-019-09964-5. : Skordos, D., & Papafragou, A. (2014). Lexical, syntactic, and semantic-geometric factors in the acquisition of motion predicates. Developmental Psychology, 50 (7), 1985-1988. : Snyder, W. (2001). On the Nature of Syntactic Variation: Evidence from Complex Predicates and Complex Word-formation", en Language, 77: 324-343. : Solomon, J. (1999). Phonological and Syntactic Variation in the Spanish of Valladolid, Yucatán (Ph.D. dissertation). Stanford University, United States of America. : Sotillo, S. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language learning & Technology 4(1), (pp. 82 -119). : 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. : Spivey-Knowlton, M., Trueswell, J. & Tanenhaus, M. (1993). Context effects in syntactic ambiguity resolution: Parsing reduced relative clauses. Canadian Journal of Psychology: Special Issue: Reading and Language Processing, 47(2), 276-309. : Stine-Morrow E. A. L., Ryan, S. y Leonard, J. S. (2000). Age differences in on-line syntactic processing. Experimental Aging Research, 26, 315-322. : Suzuki, T., & Kobayashi, T. (2016). Syntactic Cues for Inferences about Causality in Language Acquisition: Evidence from an Argument-Drop Language. Language Learning and Development, 13(1), 24-37. [311]https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2016.1193019 : Tabossi, P., Spivey-Knowlton, M., McRae, K. & Tanenhaus, M. (1994). Semantic effects on syntactic ambiguity resolution. En C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and Performance XV (pp. 589-615). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. : Talmy, L. (1985), “Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms”, en T. Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic descriptions, vol. 3, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 57-149. : Talmy, L. (2007). Lexical typologies. En T. Shopen (ed.). Language Typology and Syntactic Description Complex Constructions (pp. 66-168). Leiden: Cambridge University Press. : Talmy, Leonard (1985), “Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms”, en T. Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, vol. 3, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 57-149. : The lack of use of syntactic mitigation in the ND does not surprise us as previous studies have also noted a minimal use of internal mitigation in service encounter requests in Spain (Placencia & Marcera Rueda, 2011a; Placencia, 2005). : Thompson, S. A., Longacre, R. E., & Hwang, S. J. J . (1985). Adverbial clauses. En T. Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (vol. 2, pp. 171-234). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press . : Thompson, Sandra, Robert Longacre y Shin J. Hwang 2007 "Adverbial clauses". En Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Vol. II. 2nd Edition. Ed., Timothy Shopen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 237-300. : Timberlake, A. (1977). Reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change. En Charles N. L. (Ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change (pp. 141-177). Austin: University of Texas Press. : Tomalin, M. (2007). Reconsidering recursion in syntactic theory, Lingua, 117, 1784-1800. : Tomalin, M. (2011). Syntactic structures and recursive devices: A legacy of imprecision, Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 20, 297-315. : Tomasello, M. 2000. "Do young children have adult syntactic competence?" Cognition 74, 209-253. : 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. (1996). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 566-585. : Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K. & Garnsey, S. M. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 33(3), 285. : Tyler, L. K. & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1977). The on-line effects of semantic context on syntactic processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16(6), 683-692. : Tyler, L., Shafto, M., Randall, B., Wright, P., Marslen-Wilson, W. & Stamatakis, E. (2009). Preserving syntactic processing across the adult life span: the modulation of the frontotemporal language system in the context of age-related atrophy. Cerebral Cortex, 20(2), 352-364. : Tyler, L.K. & Marslen-Wilson, W. (1977). The on-line effects of semantic context on syntactic processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 683-692. : VERHAAR, J. (1983). Syntactic Ergativity in Contemporary Indonesian. Spokane: Gonzaga University, ms. : Van Valin & Lapolla (1997, p. 274) comparten la idea de no universalidad sobre la base de que: "only where the behavior patterns are not reducible to semantic or pragmatic relations can we say there is evidence of syntactic relations". : Van Valin, Robert D. y David P. Wilkins. 1993. Predicting syntactic structure from semantic representation: remember in English and its equivalents in Mparntwe Arrernte, en R. Van Valin (ed.), Advances in Role and Reference Grammar, Amsterdam, John Benjamins : 499-534. : Verstraete, J. C. (2004). Initial and Final Position for Adverbial Clauses in English: The Constructional Basis of the Discursive and Syntactic Differences. Linguistics, 42, 819-853. : Vidal, Alejandra y Harriet E. Klein 1998. Irrealis in Pilagá and Toba? Syntactic versus pragmatic coding. Anthropological Linguistics. 40, 2, 175-197. : Vos, S. H., Gunter, T. C., Kolk, H. H. J. y Mulder, G. (2001). Working memory constraints on syntactic processing: An electrophysiological investigation. Psychophysiology, 38, 41-63. : Wang, Y., y Bai, Y. (2007). A corpus-based syntactic study of medical research article titles. System, 35, 3, 388-399. [342]https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.01.005 : 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., 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. : Woolford, E. (1983). Bilingual Code-switching and Syntactic Theory. Lingusitic Inquiry, 14(3), 520-536. : Zhila, A. & Gelbukh, A. (2014). Open Information Extraction for Spanish language based on syntactic constraints. Proceedings of the ACL SRW 2014, 78-85. : [102]Gilquin Gaetanelle. 2002. Automatic retrieval of syntactic structures. The quest for the Holy Grail, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 7(2): 183-214. : [121]Hale, Ken & Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and lexical expression of syntactic relations, In: K. Hale. & J. S. Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20. Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, Cambridge, Mass., MIT. Press: 53-110. : [128]Alexiadou[129], Artemis & Elena Anagnostopoulou.[130] 1997. Toward a uniform account of scrambling and clitic doubling, en Werner Abraham &Elly van Gelderen (eds.). German: Syntactic Problems, Problematic Syntax?, Tübingen, Niemeyer: 143-161 : [133]Keenan, Edward. 1985. Relative clauses, em T. Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, v. 2: Complex Constructions, Cambridge, University Press: 141-70. : [134]Svenonius, Peter. 2010. Spatial P, In: G. Cinque & L. Rizzi (eds.), Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Oxford University Press: 127-160. : [136]Talmy, Leonard. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms, In: T. Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 57-149. : [145]Langacker, Ronald Wayne. 1977. Syntactic reanalysis, en Li, Ch. N. (ed.), Mechanisms of Syntactic Change, Austin, University of Texas: 57-139. : [147]Naro, Anthony. 1981. The social and structural dimensions of a syntactic change, Language, 57(1): 63-98. : [155]Naro[156], Anthony. 1976. The Genesis of the Reflexive Impersonal in Portuguese: A study in syntactic change as a surface phenomenon, Language 52: 779-811. : [155]Ritter, Elizabeth. 1995. On the syntactic category of pronouns and agreement, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 13(3): 405-443. : [158]Pintzuk, S.[159] 2003. Variationist approaches to syntactic change, em B. D. Joseph e R. Janda, (eds.) The handbook of historical linguistics, Oxford, Blackwell: 509-528. : [159]Croft, William. 2000. Radical Construction grammar: syntactic theory in typological perspective, Oxford, Oxford University Press. : [161]Talmy, Len. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms, en T. Shopen (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, 3: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, Cambridge, CUP: 57-149. : [170]Roberts, Ian y Anna Roussou.[171] 2003. Syntactic change. A minimalist approach to grammaticalization, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. : [218]Friedmann, Na’ama e Yosef Grodzinsky. 1997. Tense and agreement in agrammatic production: pruning in the syntactic tree, Brain and Language, 56: 397-425. : [259]Modesto, Marcello. 2008. Topic prominence and null subjects, em T. Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation, Amsterdam, John Benjamins: 375-409. : [50]Demonte, Violeta y Olga Fernández Soriano. [51]2005. Features in comp and syntactic variation: the case of ‘(de)queísmo’ in Spanish, Lingua, 115.8: 1.063-1.082 : ^7Citation/ Para citar este Artículo: Nausa R. (2017). Syntactic Mechanisms in the Transition from Academic Written to Oral Discourses. Colomb. appl. linguist. j., 19(2), pp. 234-249 : ___ (1970b). Syntactic maturity in schoolchildren and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 134(35). Hoboken - NY, USA: Wiley. : _______. (1985). Passive in the World´s Languages. En Shopen. T. (Ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic Description, 1 (pp. 243-282). Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press. : ________. (1978). Ergativity. En Lehmann, W. P. (Ed.) Syntactic Typology: Studies in the Phenomenology of Language (pp. 329-374). Austin: U. of Texas Press. : ________. 2006a. Zero in syntax, ten in pragmatics or subjectification as syntactic cancellation en A. Athanasiodou, C. Canakis y B. Cornillie (eds.), Subjectification: Various paths to subjectivity, Berlin-New York, Mouton de Gruyter: 375-398. : ___________. (1985). Inflectional Morphology. En Shopen, T. (Ed.) Language typology and syntactic description, 3 (pp.150-201). Cambridge, Cambridge: U. Press. : syntactic structure as it emerges in L2 speech, it still remains to be seen whether this capacity can be expanded (and if so how) and how it can be best measured (Juffs & Harrington, 2011). |