Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Journals
  4. Content listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2100157 results in Journals

Page 399 of 105008

  • LAN volume 76 issue 4-Part1 Cover and Back matter

  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 76 / Issue 4-Part1 / December 2000
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    19 February 2026, pp. b1-b14
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • Cognitive and Linguistic Factors Affecting Subject/Object Asymmetry: An Eye-Tracking Study of Prenominal Relative Clauses in Korean

  • Nayoung Kwon, Peter C. Gordon, Yoonhyoung Lee, Robert Kluender, Maria Polinsky
  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 86 / Issue 3 / September 2010
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    19 February 2026, pp. 546-582

  • Object relatives (ORs) have been reported to cause heavier processing loads than subject relatives (SRs) in both pre- and postnominal position (prenominal relatives: Miyamoto & Nakamura 2003, Kwon 2008, Ueno & Garnsey 2008; postnominal relatives: King & Just 1991, King & Kutas 1995, Traxler et al. 2002). In this article, we report the results of two eye-tracking studies of Korean prenominal relative clauses that confirm a processing advantage for subject relatives both with and without supporting context. These results are shown to be compatible with accounts involving the accessibility hierarchy (Keenan & Comrie 1977), phrase-structural complexity (O'Grady 1997), and probabilistic structural disambiguation (Mitchell et al. 1995, Hale 2006), partially compatible with similarity-based interference (Gordon et al. 2001), but incompatible with linear/temporal analyses of filler-gap dependencies (Gibson 1998, 2000, Lewis & Vasishth 2005, Lewis et al. 2006).

  • Split Intransitivity in Japanese and the Unaccusative Hypothesis

  • Hideki Kishimoto
  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 72 / Issue 2 / June 1996
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    19 February 2026, pp. 248-286

  • It has been a locus of debate in the literature whether the so-called unergative-unaccusative split among intransitive verbs is syntactically or semantically based. Previously unnoticed data in Japanese show that the distinction between unergatives and unaccusatives is fully determined on the basis of verbs' inherent lexical meanings. In order to make the contrast, it is not sufficient to postulate that subjects of unaccusatives are derived syntactically from underlying direct objects.

Page 399 of 105008