Introduction: Agreement Phenomena in Slavic Languages

Arsenijević, Boban; Kresić, Marijana; Leko, Nedžad; Nevins, Andrew; Willer-Gold, Jana

doi:10.1353/jsl.2016.0002

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides attraction errors, gender and number agreement in production has been the focus of experimental research in Bulgarian (Andonova et al 2004), Czech (Bordag and Pechmann 2009), and Serbian (Mirković and Mac-Donald 2013). The Journal of Slavic Linguistics (2016, 24.1) has recently published a special issue on agreement in Slavic languages that contains six experimental articles on conjunct, object-clitic, and RC-internal agreement in Slovenian, Bosnian/Serbian/Croatian, and Polish (Arsenijević et al 2016). Psychophonology and prosody were studied in production experiments of Bulgarian acoustic cues of narrow and wide focus (Andreeva, Koleman, and Barry 2014), Slovenian irregular verbs (Petrič and Stemberger, 2014), and Serbian pitch accents (Zsiga and Zec 2013).…”

Section: Agreement Attraction Errors In Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Slavic professional organization, the Slavic Linguistics Society (SLS), founded in 2004, that convenes its own annual conference, has made the premier publication venue for Slavic linguistics, the Journal of Slavic Linguistics, its official journal, and more Slavic psycholinguistic articles now appear there. Psycholinguistic coverage in JSL is still modest, but a recent issue, 24(1), contains a collection of six articles dedicated to experimental investigations of agreement in South Slavic (Arsenijević et al 2016).…”

Section: Slavic Psycholinguistics In the Eastern European Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Slavic Psycholinguistics in the 21st Century

Sekerina¹

2017

Journal of Slavic Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides an update on research in Slavic psycholinguistics since 2000 following my first review (Sekerina 2006), published as a position paper for the workshop The Future of Slavic Linguistics in America (SLING2K). The focus remains on formal experimental psycholinguistics understood in the narrow sense, i.e., experimental studies conducted with monolingual healthy adults. I review five dimensions characteristic of Slavic psycholinguistics-populations, methods, domains, theoretical approaches, and specific languages-and summarize the experimental data from Slavic languages published in general non-Slavic psycholinguistic journals and proceedings from the leading two conferences on Slavic linguistics, FASL and FDSL, since 2000. I argue that the current research trends in Slavic psycholinguistics are (1) a shift from adult monolingual participants to special population groups, such as children, people with aphasia, and bilingual learners, (2) a continuing move in the direction of cognitive neuroscience, with more emphasis on online experimental techniques, such as eye-tracking and neuroimaging, and (3) a focus on Slavic-specific phenomena that contribute to the ongoing debates in general psycholinguistics. The current infrastructural trends are (1) development of psycholinguistic databases and resources for Slavic languages and (2) a rise of psycholinguistic research conducted in Eastern European countries and disseminated in Slavic languages. * I wish to thank two anonymous reviewers and Catherine Rudin for their helpful comments and especially suggestions regarding additional sources. All the mistakes are, of course, mine.

show abstract