Price publication: 0
Number of purchasers: 0, views: 1365
Readers community rating: votes 0
1. Dragoi 2006 — Dragoi O. V. The resolution of syntactic ambiguity: Rules and possibilities. Voprosy jazykoznanija. 2006. No. 6. Pp. 44—61.
2. Kasevich 1988 — Kasevich V. B. Semantika. Sintaksis. Morfologiya [Semantics. Syntax. Morphology]. Leningrad: Nauka, 1988.
3. Mustaioki 2015 — Mustaioki A. Communicative failures from the perspective of the speaker’s needs. Yazyk i mysl’: sovremennaya kognitivnaya lingvistika. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoi Kul’tury, 2015. Pp. 543—559.
4. NKRYa — Natsional’nyi korpus russkogo yazyka [Russian National Corpus]. Available at: http://www.ruscorpora.ru.
5. Peshkovskii 1956 — Peshkovskii A. M. Russkii sintaksis v nauchnom osveshchenii [The Russian syntax in scientific presentation]. Moscow: Uchpedgiz, 1956.
6. Rusakova 2013 — Rusakova M. V. Elementy antropotsentricheskoi grammatiki russkogo yazyka [Elements of the Russian anthropocentric grammar]. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskoi Kul’tury, 2013.
7. Sekerina 1997 — Sekerina I. A. Psycholinguistics. Fundamental’nye napravleniya sovremennoi amerikanskoi lingvistiki. Kibrik A. A., Kobozeva I. M., Sekerina I. A. (eds.). Moscow: URSS, 1997.
8. Fedorova, Yanovich 2004 — Fedorova O. V., Yanovich I. S. On a certain type of syntactic ambiguity, or Who stood on the balcony. «Komp’yuternaya lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii»: Trudy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii «Dialog’2004». Moscow: Nauka, 2004. Pp. 644—649.
9. Fedorova, Yanovich 2005 — Fedorova O. V., Yanovich I. S.The resolution of syntactic ambiguity in Russian: The role of length and structure of the subordinate clause. Komp’yuternaya lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii: Trudy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii «Dialog’2005». Moscow: Nauka, 2005. Pp. 487—490.
10. Chernigovskaya 2013 — Chernigovskaya T. V. Cheshirskaya ulybka kota Shredingera: yazyk i soznanie [The Cheshire smile of Schrödinger’s cat: Language and consciousness]. Moscow: Yazyki Slavyanskikh Kul’tur, 2013.
11. Chernova 2015 — Chernova D. A. Interpretation of syntactically ambiguous structures in Russian: Adjunct complex nominal group. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki. 2015. No. 11(53). Pp. 189—194.
12. Yudina 2006 — Yudina M. V. Understanding and generation of statements with syntactic ambiguity (as exemplified by relative clauses in Russian). «Komp’yuternaya lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii»: Trudy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii «Dialog’2006». Moscow: Nauka, 2006. Pp. 578—582.
13. Yudina et al. 2007 — Yudina M. V., Fedorova O. V., Yanovich I. S. Syntactic ambiguity in the experiment and in life. «Komp’uternaya lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii»: Trudy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii «Dialog’2007». Moscow: Nauka, 2007. Pp. 605— 610.
14. Bock, Warren 1985 — Bock J. K., Warren R. K. Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition. 1985. Vol. 21. Pp. 47—67.
15. Chernova 2014 — Chernova D. Animacy effect in attachment ambiguity resolution // Шестая международная конференция по когнитивной науке: тезисы докладов. Калининград: МАКИ Калининград, 2014. C. 43—44.
16. Fedorova, Yanovich 2006 — Fedorova O., Yanovich I. Early preferences in RC-attachment in Russian: The effect of working memory differences. Proceedings of FASL 14. Lavine J., Franks S., Tasseva-Kurktchieva M., Filip H.(eds.). Ann Arbor (MI): Michigan Slavic Publications, 2006. Pp. 113—128.
17. Fodor 1998 — Fodor J. D. Learning to parse? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 1998. Vol. 27. Pp. 285—319.
18. Fodor 2002 — Fodor J. D. Prosodic disambiguation in silent reading. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society, 32. Amherst: GSLA, Univ. of Massachusetts, 2002. Pp. 113—132.
19. Gibson et al. 1996 — Gibson E., Schütze C., Salomon A. The relationship between the frequency and the complexity of linguistic structure. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 1996. Vol. 25. Pp. 59—92.
20. Grillo, Costa 2014 — Grillo N., Costa A. A novel argument for the universality of parsing principles. Cognition. 2014. Vol. 133. No. 1. Pp. 156—187.
21. Konieczny, Hemforth 2000 — Konieczny L., Hemforth B. Modifier attachment in German. Relative clauses and prepositional phrases. Reading as a perceptual process. Kennedy A., Radach R., Heller D., Pynte J. (eds.). Oxford: Elsevier, 2000. Pp. 517—526.
22. Mitchell et al. 1995 — Mitchell D. C., Cuetos F., Corley M. M. B., Brysbaert M. Exposure-based models of human parsing: Evidence for the use of coarse-grained (non-lexical) statistical records. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 1995. Vol. 24. No. 6. Pp. 469—488.
23. Sekerina 2003 — Sekerina I. The late closure principle in processing of ambiguous Russian sentences. The proceedings of the Second European conference on formal description of Slavic languages. Potsdam: Universität Potsdam, 2003. Pp. 1—17.
24. Traxler et al. 1998 — Traxler M., Pickering M., Clifton C. Adjunct attachment is not a form of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language. 1998. Vol. 39. Pp. 558—592.