Grammatical constraints on focus alternatives? : the case of gender in Czech

Akhutina, Tatiana – Kurgansky, Andrei – Polinsky, Maria – Bates, Elizabeth. 1999. Processing of grammatical gender in a three-gender system: Experimental evidence from Russian. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28(6): 695–713. | DOI 10.1023/a:1023225129058

Bader, Markus – Häussler, Jana. 2010. Toward a model of grammaticality judgments. Journal of Linguistics 46(2): 273–330. | DOI 10.1017/s0022226709990260

Bates, Elizabeth – Devescovi, Antonella – Hernandez, Arturo – Pizzamiglio, Luigi. 1996. Gender priming in Italian. Perception – Psychophysics 58(7): 992–1004. | DOI 10.3758/bf03206827

Braun, Bettina – Tagliapietra, Lara. 2010. The role of contrastive intonation contours in the retrieval of contextual alternatives. Language and Cognitive Processes 25(7–9): 1024–1043. | DOI 10.1080/01690960903036836

Büring, Daniel. 2009. Towards a typology of focus realization. In: Zimmermann, Malte – Féry, Caroline (eds.), Information structure, 177–205. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chafe, Wallace L. 1976. Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics and Points of View. In: Li, Charles N. (ed.) Subject and Topic, 25–55. New York: Academic Press. | DOI 10.4324/9781003766667-2

Calhoun, Sasha – Yan, Mengzhou – White, Hannah. 2025. Examining focus and alternative priming: Effects of grammatical role and breadth of the alternative set. Journal of Memory and Language 140: 104580. | DOI 10.1016/j.jml.2024.104580

Chomsky, Noam. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.

Daneš, František. 1957. Intonace a věta ve spisovné češtině. Praha: ČSAV.

Drummond, Alex. 2011. IbexFarm (version 0.3.9) [Computer software]. URL: https://spellout.net/ibexfarm/.

Erteschik-Shir, Nomi. 2007. Information structure: The syntax-discourse interface. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Firbas, Jan. 1972. On the concept of communicative dynamism in the theory of functional sentence perspective. Sborník prací Filozofické fakulty brněnské univerzity A, Řada jazykovědná 20(A19): 135–144.

Firbas, Jan. 1992. Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fox, Danny. 2007. Free choice and the theory of scalar implicatures. In: Krifka, Manfred – Sauerland, Uli – Stateva, Panka (eds.), Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics, 71–120. London: Palgrave Macmillan. | DOI 10.1057/9780230210752_4

Fox, Danny – Katzir, Roni. 2011. On the characterization of alternatives. Natural Language Semantics 19(1): 87–107. | DOI 10.1007/s11050-010-9065-3

Gernsbacher, Morton – Jescheniak, Jörg. 1995. Cataphoric devices in spoken discourse. Cognitive psychology 29(1): 24–58. | DOI 10.1006/cogp.1995.1011

Gotzner, Nicole – Spalek, Katharina – Wartenburger, Isabell. 2013. How pitch accents and focus particles affect the recognition of contextual alternatives. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 35: 2434–2439.

Gotzner, Nicole – Wartenburger, Isabell – Spalek, Katharina. 2016. The impact of focus particles on the recognition and rejection of contrastive alternatives. Language and Cognition 8(1): 59–95. | DOI 10.1017/langcog.2015.25

Gotzner, Nicole – Spalek, Katharine. 2019. The life and times of focus alternatives: Tracing the activation of alternatives to a focused constituent in language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass 13(2): e12310. | DOI 10.1111/lnc3.12310

Gotzner, Nicole – Romoli, Jacopo. 2022. Meaning and alternatives. Annual Review of Linguistics 8: 213–234. | DOI 10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031220-012013

Groeben, Lena – Šimík, Radek – Kügler, Frank. 2017. Stress shift, focus, and givenness in Czech. Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics (FASL) 24: 180–199.

Gussenhoven, Carlos. 2007. Types of focus in English. In Lee, Chungmin – Gordon, Matthew – Büring, Daniel (eds.), Topic and Focus: Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Meaning and Intonation, 83–100. Dordrecht: Springer.

Husband, E. Matthew – Ferreira, Fernanda. 2016. The role of selection in the comprehension of focus alternatives. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 31(2): 217–235. | DOI 10.1080/23273798.2015.1083113

Kim, Christina – Gunlogson, Christine – Tanenhaus, Michael – Runner, Jeffrey. 2015. Context-driven expectations about focus alternatives. Cognition 139: 28–49. | DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.009

Křen, Michal – Cvrček, Václav – Čapka, Tomáš – Čermáková, Anna – Hnátková, Milena, Chlumská, Lucie – Jelínek, Tomáš – Kováříková, Dominika – Petkevič, Vladimír – Procházka, Pavel – Skoumalová, Hana – Škrabal, Michal – Truneček, Petr – Vondřiška, Pavel – Zasina, Adrian Jan. 2016. SYN2015: Representative corpus of contemporary written Czech. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 2522–2528. | DOI 10.63317/39we3j4t4hi9

Krifka, Manfred. 2008. Basic notions of information structure. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55(3–4): 243–276. | DOI 10.1556/aling.55.2008.3-4.2

Lacina, Radim – Sturt, Patrick – Gotzner, Nicole. 2024. The comprehension of broad focus: Probing alternatives to verb phrases. In Lemke, Robin – Schäfer, Lisa – Reich, Ingo (eds.), Information structure and information theory, 23–53. Berlin: Language Science Press.

Lacina, Radim – Šimík, Radek – Gotzner, Nicole. 2023. 'Czech' the alternatives: A probe recognition study of focus and word order. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 27: 365–380.

Lambrecht, Knud. 1996. Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mathesius, Vilém. 1936. Pokus o teorii strukturální mluvnice. Slovo a slovesnost 2: 47–54.

Mathesius, Vilém. 1941. Základní funkce pořádku slov v češtině. Slovo a slovesnost 7(4): 169–180.

Nakanishi, Kimiko. 2001. Prosody and information structure in Japanese: A case study of topic marker wa. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 10: 434–447.

Onea, Edgar – von Heusinger, Klaus. 2009. Grammatical and contextual restrictions on focal alternatives. In Dufter, Andreas – Jacob, Daniel (eds.), Focus and Background in Romance Languages 281–308. | DOI 10.1075/slcs.112.10one

Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association with focus. Amherst: University of Massachusetts.

Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural language semantics 1(1): 75–116.

Sauerland, Uli. 2003. A new semantics for number. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 13: 258–275. | DOI 10.3765/salt.v13i0.2898

Sgall, Petr – Hajičová, Eva – Panevová, Jarmila. 1986. The meaning of the sentence in its semantic and pragmatic aspects. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

Short, David. 2009. Czech and Slovak. In Comrie, Bernard (ed.), The World's Major Languages. London: Routledge.

Šimík, Radek – Wierzba, Marta. 2015. The role of givenness, presupposition, and prosody in Czech word order: An experimental study. Semantics and Pragmatics 8: 1–103. | DOI 10.3765/sp.8.3

Šimík, Radek – Wierzba, Marta. 2017. Expression of information structure in West Slavic: Modeling the impact of prosodic and word-order factors. Language 93(3): 671–709. | DOI 10.1353/lan.2017.0040

Spalek, Katharina – Gotzner, Nicole – Wartenburger, Isabell. 2014. Not only the apples: Focus sensitive particles improve memory for information-structural alternatives. Journal of Memory and Language 70: 68–84. | DOI 10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.001

Sprouse, Jon. 2011. A test of the cognitive assumptions of magnitude estimation: Commutativity does not hold for acceptability judgments. Language 87(2): 274–288. | DOI 10.1353/lan.2011.0028

Tuller, Laurice. 1992. The syntax of postverbal focus constructions in Chadic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10: 303–34. | DOI 10.1007/bf00133815

Whaley, Charles. 1978. Word-nonword classification time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 17: 143–154. | DOI 10.1016/s0022-5371(78)90110-x

Zimmermann, Malte – Onea, Edgar. 2011. Focus marking and focus interpretation. Lingua 121(11): 1651–1670. | DOI 10.1016/j.lingua.2011.06.002