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
×

2100844 results in Journals

Page 474 of 105043

  • Projecting the End of a Speaker's Turn: A Cognitive Cornerstone of Conversation

  • J. P. de Ruiter, Holger Mitterer, N. J. Enfield
  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 82 / Issue 3 / September 2006
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    19 February 2026, pp. 515-535

  • A key mechanism in the organization of turns at talk in conversation is the ability to anticipate or PROJECT the moment of completion of a current speaker's turn. Some authors suggest that this is achieved via lexicosyntactic cues, while others argue that projection is based on intonational contours. We tested these hypotheses in an on-line experiment, manipulating the presence of symbolic (lexicosyntactic) content and intonational contour of utterances recorded in natural conversations. When hearing the original recordings, subjects can anticipate turn endings with the same degree of accuracy attested in real conversation. With intonational contour entirely removed (leaving intact words and syntax, with a completely flat pitch), there is no change in subjects' accuracy of end-of-turn projection. But in the opposite case (with original intonational contour intact, but with no recognizable words), subjects' performance deteriorates significantly. These results establish that the symbolic (i.e. lexicosyntactic) content of an utterance is necessary (and possibly sufficient) for projecting the moment of its completion, and thus for regulating conversational turn-taking. By contrast, and perhaps surprisingly, intonational contour is neither necessary nor sufficient for end-of-turn projection.

  • Resumptive Restrictive Relatives: A Crosslinguistic Perspective

  • Margarita Suñer
  • Journal:
    Language / Volume 74 / Issue 2 / June 1998
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    19 February 2026, pp. 335-364

  • One of the aims of linguistic theory is to account for language variation. This article contributes to that objective by examining resumptive restrictive relative clauses crosslinguistically. The major claims are (1) the core-grammar distinction between conventional and resumptive restrictive relatives is due to the feature composition of the relative complementizer; (2) the prohibition against pied-piping that some languages adhere to correlates with the lack of lexical relative pronouns; (3) particular grammars need to accommodate language-specific properties such as preferences for which elements may, must, or cannot acquire a phonological matrix; and (4) resumptive pronouns which appear in relatives in the absence of an island are inserted at PF for other than interpretive reasons.

Page 474 of 105043