160126 SE Seminar in Psycho-, Patho- or Neurolinguistics (2015S)
Psycholinguistik
Continuous assessment of course work
Labels
Registration/Deregistration
Note: The time of your registration within the registration period has no effect on the allocation of places (no first come, first served).
- Registration is open from Su 18.01.2015 09:00 to Su 01.03.2015 23:59
- Deregistration possible until Su 15.03.2015 23:59
Details
max. 30 participants
Language: German
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
- Thursday 05.03. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 19.03. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 26.03. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 16.04. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 23.04. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 30.04. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 07.05. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 21.05. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 28.05. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 11.06. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 18.06. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
- Thursday 25.06. 13:15 - 14:45 Seminarraum 8 Sensengasse 3a 5.OG
Information
Aims, contents and method of the course
This seminar on psycholinguistics will focus on sentence processing, which examines the combinatorial processes that follow word identification (syntactic analysis, semantic interpretation and pragmatic processing). Special attention will be paid to parsing complexity and (local and global) ambiguities and their resolution, but also to language comprehension theories (architectural issues and models) and various methods used in this field. The discussion of the topics spanned by the selected literature listed below will be further detailed in class.
Assessment and permitted materials
Students are expected to do the readings before coming to class, come to class, participate actively, take turns in protocoling the sessions, make a presentation with a handout, and write a paper analyzing some topic discussed in the seminar and giving arguments for preferring a proposed analysis or construal to alternatives from the literature. Details will be discussed in class.
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
To deepen, consolidate and advance students' knowledge on foundational matters in psycholinguistics, as well as to encourage students to engage in and carry out independent research.
Examination topics
Handouts, slides, frontal teaching, discussion sections
Reading list
Selected literature:
Almor et al. 2001. Comprehension of long distance number agreement in probable Alzheimer's disease. Language and Cognitive Processes. Volume 16(1): 35-63.
Altmann, G. 1998. Ambiguity in sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Science 2 (4): 146151.
Jun, Sun-Ah. 2003. Prosodic phrasing and attachment preferences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32:3.
Gibson, E. 1998. Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68(1): 1-76.
Koenig, J.-P. et al. 2003. Arguments for adjuncts. Cognition 89:2, 67-103.
MacDonald, M. 1993. The interaction of lexical and syntactic ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language 32: 692-715.
Pickering, M. et al. 2000. Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing: Evidence against frequency-based accounts. Journal of Memory and Language 43(3): 447-475.
Snedeker, J. 2013. Childrens sentence processing. In van Gompel (ed) Sentence Processing. New York, New York: Psychology Press. 189-220.
Spivey, M. et al. 2002. Eye movements and spoken language comprehension: Effects of visual context on syntactic ambiguity resolution. Cognitive Psychology 45(4): 447-481.
Townsend, D. and T. Bever. Sentence Comprehension: The Integration of Habits and Rules. MIT Press. (Chapter 4.)
Traxler, M.J., Seely, R.E. & Morris, R.K. 2002. Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from eye-movements. Journal of Memory and Language 47: 69-90.
Kintsch, W. 2001. Predication. Cognitive Science 25(2): 173-202.
Almor et al. 2001. Comprehension of long distance number agreement in probable Alzheimer's disease. Language and Cognitive Processes. Volume 16(1): 35-63.
Altmann, G. 1998. Ambiguity in sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Science 2 (4): 146151.
Jun, Sun-Ah. 2003. Prosodic phrasing and attachment preferences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32:3.
Gibson, E. 1998. Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68(1): 1-76.
Koenig, J.-P. et al. 2003. Arguments for adjuncts. Cognition 89:2, 67-103.
MacDonald, M. 1993. The interaction of lexical and syntactic ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language 32: 692-715.
Pickering, M. et al. 2000. Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing: Evidence against frequency-based accounts. Journal of Memory and Language 43(3): 447-475.
Snedeker, J. 2013. Childrens sentence processing. In van Gompel (ed) Sentence Processing. New York, New York: Psychology Press. 189-220.
Spivey, M. et al. 2002. Eye movements and spoken language comprehension: Effects of visual context on syntactic ambiguity resolution. Cognitive Psychology 45(4): 447-481.
Townsend, D. and T. Bever. Sentence Comprehension: The Integration of Habits and Rules. MIT Press. (Chapter 4.)
Traxler, M.J., Seely, R.E. & Morris, R.K. 2002. Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from eye-movements. Journal of Memory and Language 47: 69-90.
Kintsch, W. 2001. Predication. Cognitive Science 25(2): 173-202.
Association in the course directory
Master Allgemeine Linguistik: MA1-APM4A
Last modified: Mo 07.09.2020 15:35