Uni-Tübingen

A7

Focus and Extraction in Complex Constructions and Islands

The project investigated the role of focus and givenness in extraction out of island configurations (ICs) and other complex constructions (CCs), which are frequently judged to be marked or ungrammatical (Freezing Effect). In project phases I and II, the project investigated extraction from focus constructions and identified factors that play a role in resistance to extraction, and information-structurally (InfS) controlled contexts that improve these constructions. Based on these results, we extended its empirical coverage to ICs and CCs and investigated the InfS conditions on extraction and the degree of context adaptivity determined by the specific weight of construction-specific and InfS complexity factors.

Publications

  • Remmele, B., Schopper, S., Hörnig, R. & Winkler, S. (in press). (Non)strategic production planning and ambiguity: Experimental evidence. In M. Bauer & A. Zirker (Eds.), Strategies of Ambiguity. Routledge.
  • Varaschin, G., Culicover, P. & Winkler, S. (accepted). In pursuit of Condition C. In A. Konietzko & S. Winkler (Eds.), Information Structure and Discourse in Generative Grammar: Mechanisms and Processes. SGG 146. Boston, MA/Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
  • Cortés Rodríguez, Á. (submitted). Which linguist which structure: An experimental investigation of multiple sluicing in English. In A. Konietzko & S. Winkler (Eds.), Information Structure and Discourse in Generative Grammar. Mechanisms and Processes. SGG 146. Boston, MA/Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
  • Culicover, P. & Winkler, S. (submitted). Parasitic gaps aren't parasitic: The case of the uninvited guest. The Linguistic Review.
  • Fortmann, C., Konietzko, A. & Winkler, S. (submitted). Fragmentary subordinate clauses. Studia Linguistica.
  • Konietzko, A. (submitted). PP extraction from subject islands in German. Ms., University of Tübingen.
  • Konietzko, A. & Seitz, A. (submitted). Ambiguity resolution in coordinate structures. Ms., University of Tübingen.
  • Culicover, P. & Winkler, S. (2022). Parasitic gaps aren’t parasitic or, the case of the uninvited guest. The Linguistic Review 39, 1-35.
  • Jäger, M. (2020). Focus Particles and Extraction: An Experimental Investigation of German and English Focus Particles with Leftward Association. Tübingen: Universitätsbibliothek Tübingen/TOBIAS-lib.
  • Culicover, P. & Winkler, S. (2019). Why topicalize VP? In V. Molnár, V. Egerland & S. Winkler (Eds.), Architecture of Topic and Topicalization (pp. 173-202). Studies in Generative Grammar. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • De Kuthy, K. & Konietzko, A. (2019). Information structural constraints on PP topicalization from NPs. In V. Molnár, V. Egerland & S. Winkler (Eds.), Architecture of Topic (pp. 203-222). Studies in Generative Grammar. Berlin: De Gruyter. 
  • Featherston, S., Hörnig, R., von Wietersheim, S. & Winkler, S. (Eds.) (2019). Experiments in Focus. Information Structure and Semantic Processing. Linguistische Arbeiten. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • Hartmann, J. M. (2019). Focus and prosody in nominal copula clauses. In S. Featherston, R. Hörnig, S. von Wietersheim & S. Winkler (Eds.), Information Structure and Semantic Processing (pp. 71-104). Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • Hörnig, R., Featherston, S., von Wietersheim, S. & Winkler S. (2019). Markedness in context: An approach to licensing. In S. Featherston, R. Hörnig, S. von Wietersheim & S. Winkler (Eds.), Experiments in Focus. Information Structure and Semantic Processing (pp. 1-16). Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • Konietzko, A. & Lidzba, K. (2019). The processing of argument structure: A comparison between patients with early left-hemispheric brain lesions and healthy controls. In S. Featherston, R. Hörnig, S. von Wietersheim & S. Winkler (Eds.), Experiments in Focus. Information Structure and Semantic Processing (pp. 279-304). Berlin: De Gruyter. 
  • Konietzko, A., Radó, R. & Winkler, S. (2019). Focus constraints on relative clause antecedents in sluicing. In S. Featherston, R. Hörnig, S. von Wietersheim & S. Winkler (Eds.), Experiments in Focus. Information Structure and Semantic Processing (pp. 105-128). Berlin: De Gruyter. 
  • Molnár, V., Egerland, V. & Winkler, S. (2019). Exploring the architecture of topic at the interface of grammar and discourse. In V. Molnár, V. Egerland & S. Winkler (Eds.), Architecture of Topic and Topicalization (pp. 1-44). Studies in Generative Grammar. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • Remmele, B. (2019). The Prosody of Sluicing: Production Studies on Prosodic Disambiguation. Tübingen: Universitätsbibliothek Tübingen/TOBIAS-lib.
  • Winkler, S. (2019). Chapter 15: Ellipsis and prosody. In J. van Craenenbroeck & T. Temmerman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ellipsis (pp. 357-386). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
  • Culicover, P. & Winkler, S. (2018). Freezing: Between grammar and processing. In J. M. Hartmann, M. Jäger, A. Kehl, A. Konietzko & S. Winkler (Eds.), Freezing: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Domains (pp. 353-386). Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton. 
  • Hartmann, J. M. (2018). A focus analysis of apparent predicational clefts. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 32, 121-143.
  • Hartmann, J. M. (2018). Freezing in it-clefts: The role of the focus phrase. In J. M. Hartmann, M. Jäger, A. Kehl, A. Konietzko & S. Winkler (Eds.), Freezing: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Domains (pp. 195-224). Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter. 
  • Hartmann, J. M., Jäger, M., Kehl, A., Konietzko, A. & Winkler, S. (Eds.) (2018). Freezing: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Domains. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Hartmann, J. M., Jäger, M., Kehl, A., Konietzko, A. & Winkler, S. (2018). Exploring the concepts of freezing: Theoretical and empirical perspectives. In J. M. Hartmann, M. Jäger, A. Kehl, A. Konietzko & S. Winkler (Eds.), Freezing: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Domains (pp. 1-25). Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton.
  • Jäger, M. (2018). An experimental study on freezing and topicalization in English. In J. M. Hartmann, M. Jäger, A. Kehl, A. Konietzko & S. Winkler (Eds.), Freezing: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Domains (pp. 430-450). Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter. 
  • Konietzko, A. (2018). Heavy NP shift in context: On the interaction of information structure and extraction from shifted constituents. In J. M. Hartmann, M. Jäger, A. Kehl, A. Konietzko & S. Winkler (Eds.), Freezing: Theoretical Approaches and Empirical Domains (pp. 387-402). Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter. 
  • Konietzko, A., Winkler, S. & Culicover, P. (2018). Heavy NP shift does not cause freezing. Canadian Journal of Linguistics / Revue Canadienne de Linguistique 63(2), 454-464.
  • Radó J., Konietzko, A. & Sternefeld, W. (2018). Telescoping in eelative clauses: Experimental evidence. In M. Krifka & M. Schenner (Eds.), Reconstruction Effects in Relative Clauses (pp. 405-426). Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter. 
  • Hartmann, J. M. & Heycock, C. (2017). Variation in copular agreement in insular Scandinavian. In H. Thráinsson, C. Heycock, Z. Svabo Hansen & H. Petersen (Eds.), Syntactic Variation in Insular Scandinavian. Studies in German Linguistics. John Benjamins.
  • Hohaus, V. & Konietzko, A. (2017). (Pseudo-)extraction from VP-proforms: The case of the comparative clause. In E. A. Bar-Asher Siegal (Ed.), Proceedings of IATL 31 (pp. 53-65). MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 82.
  • Hartmann, J. M. & Heycock, C. (2016). Evading agreement: A new perspective on low nominative agreement in Icelandic. In C. Hammerly & B. Prickett (Eds.), NELS 46: Proceedings of the Forty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (Volume 2) (pp. 67-80). Amherst: GLSA. 
  • Hartmann, J., Konietzko, A. & Salzmann, M. (2016). On the limits of non-parallelism in ATB movement. In S. Featherston & Y. Versley (Eds.), Firm Foundations: Quantitative Approaches to Grammar and Grammatical Change (pp. 51-83). Trends in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs [TiLSM]. Berlin/Boston, MA: De Gruyter.
  • Kehl, A. (2016). The Restriction on Predicative Codas in Existential There-Clauses: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives. University of Tübingen: M.A. thesis. dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-13504.
  • Konietzko, A. (2016). Bare Argument Ellipsis and Focus: Theory and Experimentation. Linguistik Aktuell/ Linguistics Today 233. Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
  • Schopper, S. (2016). A Classification of Right Node Raising: Are some Instances of Right Node Raising Parentheticals? University of Tübingen: M.A. thesis. http://dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-12226.
  • Winkler, S. (2016). Current issues of information structure Chapter 18: Ellipsis and information structure. In C. Féry & S. Ishihara (Eds.), The (Oxford) Handbook of Information Structure (pp. 359-382). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Winkler, S., Radó, J. & Gutscher, M. (2016). What determines 'freezing' effects in was-für split constructions? In S. Featherston & Y. Versley (Eds.), Firm Foundations: Quantitative Approaches to Grammar and Grammatical Change (pp. 207-231). Trends in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs [TiLSM]. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. 
  • Hofmeister, P., Culicover, P. & Winkler, S. (2015). Effects of processing on the acceptability of 'frozen' extraposed constituents. Syntax 18(4), 464-483.
  • Schmeh, K., Culicover, P., Hartmann, J. & Winkler, S. (2015). Discourse function ambuigity of fragments: A linguistic puzzle / Diskursfunktionenambiguitäten von Fragmenten: Ein linguistisches Rätsel. In S. Winkler (Ed.), Ambiguität: Sprache und Kommunikation / Ambiguity: Language and Communication (pp. 201-218). Berlin/New York, NY: Mounton de Gruyter. 
  • Wiedmann, N. & Winkler, S. (2015). The influence of prosody on children's processing of ambiguous sentences / Die Rolle der Prosodie für die Verarbeitung von ambigen Sätzen bei Kindern. In S. Winkler (Ed.), Amibguität: Sprache und Kommunikation / Ambiguity: Language and Communication (pp. 185-200). Berlin/New York, NY: de Gruyter. 185-200.
  • Winkler, S. (Ed.) (2015). Ambiguität: Sprache und Kommunikation / Ambiguity: Language and Communication. Berlin/New York, NY: Mounton de Gruyter.
  • Hartmann, J. M. (2013). Freezing in it-clefts. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 58(3), 487-496.
  • Hartmann, J. M. (2013). Apparent exceptions to the Definiteness Effect in English. Bucharest Working Papers in Linguistics XV, no. 2, 5-25.
  • Hartmann, J. M., Hegedűs, V. & Surányi, B. (2013). Pseudoclefts in Hungarian and German. In J. Brandtler, V. Molnár & C. Platzack (Eds.), Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 13: Papers from the 2011 Lund Conference (pp. 67-97). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
  • Hartmann, J. M., Radó, J. & Winkler, S. (Eds.) (2013). Information Structure Triggers: Effects in (De)Accentuation, Dislocation and Discourse Linking. Special Issue: Lingua 136.
  • Hartmann, J. M. & Winkler, S. (2013). Investigating the role of information structure triggers. Introduction. Lingua 136 [Special Issue on Information Structure Triggers], 1-15.
  • Winkler, S. (2013). Syntactic diagnostics for extraction of focus from ellipsis site. In L. Cheng & N. Corver (Eds.), Diagnosing Syntax (pp. 463-484). Oxford University Press. 
  • Gutscher, M., Holler, S., Radó, J. & Winkler, S. (2012). What determines freezing effects in was-für split construction? Pre-Proceedings of the International Conference on Linguistic Evidence (pp. 35-38). Tübingen.
  • Heim, J. (2012). Categorizing parasitic gaps: Which label did you use without expanding? Pre-Proceedings of the International Conference on Linguistic Evidence (pp. 221-226). Tübingen.
  • Holler, S. & Hartmann, J. M. (2012). Locative inversion in English: Implications of a rating study. In S. Featherston & B. Stolterfoht (Eds.), Empirical Approaches to Linguistic Theory (pp. 241-265). Berlin: de Gruyter. 
  • Radó, J. & Bott, O. (2012). Underspecified representations of scope ambiguity? In M. Aloni et al. (Eds.), Logic, Language and Meaning: Selected Papers of the 18th Amsterdam Colloquium (pp. 180-189). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. 
  • Winkler, S. (2012). The information structure of English. In M. Krifka & R. Musan (Eds.), The Expression of Information Structure (pp. 70-93). Berlin: de Gruyter. 
  • Winkler, S. (2012). Focus in reduced weil-clauses in German. In J. Brandtler et al. (Eds.), Discourse & Grammar: A Festschrift in Honor of Valéria Molnár (pp. 487-500). Lund: Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University. 
  • Bott, O., Featherston, S., Radó, J. & Stolterfoht, B. (2011). The application of experimental methods in semantics. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics. An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol. 1 (HSK 33.1) (pp. 303-319). Berlin: de Gruyter. 
  • Hartmann, J. M. (2011). Predicate inversion and English there-sentences. Acta Ling. Hungarica 3, 221-240.
  • Klein, W. & Winkler, S. (2010). Ambiguität. [Special Issue of LiLi 158].
  • Konietzko, A. & Winkler, S. (2010). Contrastive ellipsis: Mapping between syntax and information structure. Lingua 120, 1436-1457.
  • Molnár, V. & Winkler, S. (2010). Edges and gaps: Contrast at the interfaces. Lingua 120, 1392-1415.
  • Featherston, S. & Winkler, S. (2009). The Fruits of Empirical Linguistics,Vol. 1: Process. Berlin: de Gruyter.
  • Hartmann, J. M. & Milićević, N. (2009). Case alternations in Serbian existentials. In G. Zybatow, U. Junghanns, D. Lenertova & P. Biskup (Eds.), Studies in Formal Slavic Phonology, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics and Information Structure (pp. 131-142). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 
  • Konietzko, A. (2009). Parallelism and information structure: ATB-extraction from coordinate ellipsis. In S. Featherston & S. Winkler (Eds.), The Fruits of Empirical Linguistics. Vol. 2: Product (pp. 179-195). Berlin: de Gruyter. 
  • Culicover, P. W. & Winkler, S. (2008). English focus inversion. Journal of Linguistics 44, 625-658.
  • Hartmann, J. M. (2008). Expletives in Existentials: English there and German da. Utrecht: LOT Publications.