[Aldama García, N., 2016. Pseudo-relatives complement of perception predicates. Master’s Thesis. Universidad del País Vasco /Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, Spain.]Search in Google Scholar
[Angelopoulos, N., 2015. Explorations of (Greek) pseudo-relatives. Master’s Thesis. University of California, USA.]Search in Google Scholar
[Augurzky, P., 2005. Attaching relative clauses in German: The role of implicit and explicit prosody in sentence processing. PhD Dissertation. Universität Leipzig, Germany.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. and Walker, S., 2018. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 1.1-17. [Accessed 13 May 2018]. Available at: http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html.]Search in Google Scholar
[Brito, A. M., 1995. Sobre algumas construções pseudorelativas em português. Revista da Faculdade de Letras: Línguas e Literaturas, no. 12, pp. 25-54.]Search in Google Scholar
[Brysbaert, M. and D. C. Mitchell., 1996. Modifier attachment in sentence parsing: Evidence from Dutch. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, no. 49A, pp. 664-695.10.1080/027249896392540]Search in Google Scholar
[Carreiras, M. and C. Clifton., 1993. Relative clause interpretation preferences in Spanish and English. Language and Speech, no. 36, pp. 353-372.10.1177/002383099303600401]Search in Google Scholar
[Carreiras, M. and C. Clifton., 1999. Another word on parsing relative clauses: Eye-tracking evidence from Spanish and English. Memory and Cognition, no. 27, pp. 826-833.10.3758/BF03198535]Search in Google Scholar
[Carreiras, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., Vergara, M., de la Cruz Pavía, I. and Laka, I., 2010. Subject relative Clauses are not universally easier to process: Evidence from Basque. Cognition, no. 115, pp. 79-92.10.1016/j.cognition.2009.11.012]Search in Google Scholar
[Cinque, G., 1992. The pseudo-relative and ACC-ing constructions after verbs of perception. In: G. Cinque, ed. Italian syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: CUP, pp. 244-275.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cuetos, F. and D. C. Mitchell., 1988. Cross-linguistic differences in parsing. Cognition, no. 30, pp. 73-105.10.1016/0010-0277(88)90004-2]Search in Google Scholar
[De Vincenzi, M. and Job, R., 1993. Some observations on the universality of the late closure strategy. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, no. 22, pp. 189-206.10.1007/BF01067830]Search in Google Scholar
[Ehrlich, K., Fernández, E., Fodor, J. D., StenshoeL, E. and Vinereanu, M., 1999. Low attachment of relative clauses: New data from Swedish, Norwegian and Romanian. Poster presented at the 12th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing. The City University of New York, USA, 18-20 March.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fodor, J. D., 2002. Prosodic disambiguation in silent Reading. In: M. Hirotani, ed. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 32. Amherst, MA: GLSA, pp. 113-132.]Search in Google Scholar
[Fraga, I., García-orza, J. and Acuña Fariña, J. C., 2005. La desambiguación de oraciones de relativo en gallego: Nueva evidencia de adjunción alta en lenguas romances. Psicológica, no. 26, pp. 243-260.]Search in Google Scholar
[Frazier, L., 1978. On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. PhD Dissertation. University of Connecticut, USA.]Search in Google Scholar
[Frazier, L. and C. Clifton., 1996. Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Gibson, E., 1998. Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, no. 68, pp. 1-6.10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1]Search in Google Scholar
[Gibson, E, Pearlmutter, N., Canseco-González, E. and Hickok, G., 1996. Recency preference in the human sentence processing mechanism. Cognition, no. 59, pp. 23-59.10.1016/0010-0277(95)00687-7]Search in Google Scholar
[Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N., and Torrens, V., 1999. Recency and lexical preferences in Spanish. Memory & Cognition, no. 27, pp. 603-611.10.3758/BF03211554]Search in Google Scholar
[Gibson, E., Desmet, T., Grodner, D., Watson, D. and Ko, K., 2005. Reading relative clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 313-353.10.1515/cogl.2005.16.2.313]Search in Google Scholar
[Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R. and Johnson, M., 2001. Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, no. 27, pp. 1411-1423.10.1037/0278-7393.27.6.1411]Search in Google Scholar
[Gordon, P. C., Hendrick, R. and Johnson, M., 2004. Effects of noun phrase type on sentence complexity. Journal of Memory and Language, no. 51, pp. 97-114.10.1016/j.jml.2004.02.003]Search in Google Scholar
[Grillo, N. and Costa, J., 2014. A novel argument for the Universality of Parsing principles. Cognition, no. 133, pp. 156-187.10.1016/j.cognition.2014.05.019]Search in Google Scholar
[Grillo, N., Costa, J., Fernandes, B. and Santi, A., 2015. Highs and Lows in English Attachment. Cognition, no. 144, pp. 116-122.10.1016/j.cognition.2015.07.018]Search in Google Scholar
[Grillo, N. and Moulton, K., 2016. Event Kinds and the Pseudo Relative. In: B. Prickett and C. Hammerly, eds. Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistics Society 2. Amherst, MA: GLSA, pp. 11-20.]Search in Google Scholar
[Guasti, M. T., 1988. La pseudorelative et les phénomènes d’accord. Rivista Di Grammatica Generativa, no. 13, pp. 35-57.]Search in Google Scholar
[Gutiérrez-Ziardegi, E., Carreiras, M. and Laka, I., 2004. Who was on the balcony? Bilingual sentence processing: Relative clause attachment in Basque and Spanish. Poster presented at the 17th CUNY Annual Conference on Language Processing. University of Maryland, USA, 25-27 March.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hemfort, B., Konieczny, L. and Scheepers, C., 1996. Syntactic and anaphoric processes in modifier attachment. Poster presented at the 9th CUNY Annual Conference on Language Processing. The City University of New York, USA, 21-23 March.]Search in Google Scholar
[Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A. and Wooley, J. D., 1982. Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 228-238.10.1037/0096-3445.111.2.228]Search in Google Scholar
[Kayne, R., 1975. French syntax: the transformational cycle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[King, J. and Just, M., 1991. Individual differences in syntactic processing: the role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, no. 30, pp. 580-602.10.1016/0749-596X(91)90027-H]Search in Google Scholar
[Lewis, S. and Phillips, C., 2015. Aligning Grammatical Theories and Language Processing Models. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research, no. 44, pp. 27-46.10.1007/s10936-014-9329-z]Search in Google Scholar
[Lovrić, N., 2003. Implicit prosody in silent reading: Relative clause attachment in Croatian. PhD Dissertation. The City University of New York, USA.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mitchell, D. C., Cuetos, F. and Zagar, D., 1990. Reading in different languages: Is there a universal mechanism for parsing sentences?. In: G. Flores d’Arcais and D. Balota, eds. Comprehension processes in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 285-302.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mitchell, D. C. and Cuetos, F., 1991. The origin of parsing strategies. In: C. Smith, ed. Current issues in natural language processing. Austin, TX: University of Texas, pp. 1-12.]Search in Google Scholar
[Mitchell, D. C., Brysbaert, M., Grondelaers, S. and Swanepoel, P., 2000. Modifier attachment in Dutch: Testing aspects of construal theory. In: A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller and J. Pynte, eds. Reading as a perceptual process. Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 493-516.10.1016/B978-008043642-5/50023-1]Search in Google Scholar
[Moulton, K. and Grillo, N., 2015. Pseudo Relative: Big and Direct. In: T. Bui and D. Özyıldız, eds. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society 2. Amherst, MA: GLSA, pp. 193-202.]Search in Google Scholar
[Moulton, K. and Grillo, N., under review. Sorting out Pseudo-Relatives: Clausal Determiners and Mediated Agree. [Accessed 29 April 2018]. Available at: http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/002738/current.pdf.]Search in Google Scholar
[Papadopoulou, D. and Clahsen, H., 2003. Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A study of relative clause attachment in Greek. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, no. 25, pp. 501-528.10.1017/S0272263103000214]Search in Google Scholar
[Pozniak, C., Hemforth, B., Haendler, Y., Santi, A. and Grillo, N., 2019. Seeing events vs. entities: The processing advantage of Pseudo Relatives over Relative Clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, no. 107, pp. 128-151.10.1016/j.jml.2019.04.001]Search in Google Scholar
[Rafel, J., 1999. La construcción pseudo-relativa en romance. Verba. Anuario Galego de Filoloxía, no. 26, pp. 165-192.]Search in Google Scholar
[Rizzi, L., 2000. Direct perception, government and thematic sharing. In: L. Rizzi, ed. Comparative Syntax and Language Acquisition. London: Routledge, pp. 189-210.]Search in Google Scholar
[Santi, A., Grillo, N., Grodzinsky, Y. and Wagner, M., 2011. Planned production and self-paced reading of relative clause attachment. Paper presented at the 24th CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing. Stanford University, USA, 24-26 March.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sekerina, I., 2002. The late closure principle vs. the balance principle: Evidence from on-line processing of ambiguous Russian sentences. In: P. Kosta and J. Frasek, eds. Current approaches to formal Slavic linguistics. Contributions of the 2nd European Conference on Formal Description of Slavic Languages. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp. 205-217.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sekerina, I., PetrovA, K. and Fernández. E., 2003. Relative clause attachment in Bulgarian. Paper presented at the 12th Annual Meeting on Formal Description of Slavic Languages. University of Ottawa, Canada.]Search in Google Scholar
[Shen, X., 2006. Late assignment of syntax theory: Evidence from Chinese and English. PhD Dissertation. University of Exeter, United Kingdom.]Search in Google Scholar
[Schmitt, C., 2000. Some Consequences of the Complement Analysis for Relative Clauses, Demonstratives and the Wrong Adjectives. In: A. Alexiadou, P. Law, A. Meinunger and C. Wilder, eds. The Syntax of Relative Clauses. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, pp. 309-348.10.1075/la.32.09sch]Search in Google Scholar
[Soares, A. P., Fraga, I., Comesaña, M. and Piñeiro, A., 2010. El papel de la animacidad en la resolución de ambigüedades sintácticas en portugués europeo: Evidencia en tareas de producción y comprensión. Psicothema, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 691-696.]Search in Google Scholar