Anderson, S. (1992). A-morphous Morphology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Anstatt, T., Gattnar, A., & Clasmeier, C., eds. (2016). Slavic Languages in Psycholinguistics: Chances and Challenges for Empirical and Experimental Research, Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.Google Scholar

Armon-Lotem, S., Haman, E., Jensen de López, K., Smoczyńska, M., Yatsushiro, K., Szczerbiński, M., van Hout, A., Dabašinskienė, I., Gavarró, A., Hobbs, E., Kamandulytė-Merfeldienė, L., Katsos, N., Kunnari, S., Nitsiou, C., Sundahl Olsen, L., Parramon, X., Sauerland, U., Torn-Leesik, R., & van der Lely, H. (2016). A large-scale cross-linguistic investigation of the acquisition of passive. Language Acquisition, 23(1), 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2015.1047095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Avetisyan, S., Lago, S., & Vasishth, S. (2020). Does case marking affect agreement attraction in comprehension? Journal of Memory and Language, 112, 104087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Badecker, W. & Kuminiak, F. (2007). Morphology, agreement and working memory retrieval in sentence production: Evidence from gender and case in Slovak. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bailyn, J. (2012). The Syntax of Russian, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Baltova, P., Eftimova, A., Lipovska, A., & Petrova, K. (2003). Bălgarski asociativen rečnik. Prav i obraten, Sofia: Sofia University Press.Google Scholar

Błaszczak, J., & Domke, J. (2019). Can tense be subject to grammatical illusion? A design of an ERP study on the processing of tense and aspect mismatches in compound future constructions in Polish. Studies in Polish Linguistics, 14(4), 149–170. https://doi.org/10.4467/23005920SPL.19.018.11336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bott, O. & Gattnar, A. (2015). The cross-linguistic processing of aspect: An eyetracking study on the time course of aspectual interpretation in Russian and German. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(7), 877–898. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1029499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cherepovskaia, N., Slioussar, N., & Denissenko Denissenko, A. (2021). Acquisition of the nominal case system in Russian as a second language. Second Language Research, 38(3), 555–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658320988058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cho, J. & Slabakova, R. (2017). A feature-based contrastive approach to the L2 acquisition of specificity. Applied Linguistics, 38(3), 318–339. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv029.Google Scholar

Corbett, G. (1991). Gender, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dbrowska, E. (2005). Productivity and beyond: Mastering the Polish genitive inflection. Journal of Child Language, 32(1), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000904006609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Da̧browska, E. & Szczerbiński, M. (2006). Polish children’s productivity with case marking: The role of regularity, type frequency, and phonological diversity. Journal of Child Language, 33(3), 559–597. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000906007471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Eberhard, K. M., Cutting, J. C., & Bock, K. (2005). Making syntax of sense: Number agreement in sentence production. Psychological Review, 112(3), 531–559. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.3.531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Foryś-Nogala, M., Haman, E., Katsos, N., Krajewski, G., & Schulz, P. (2017). Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic correlates of the acquisition of exhaustivity in wh-questions: A study of Polish monolingual children. Language Acquisition, 24(1), 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2016.1179744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Franks, S. (2017). Syntax and Spell-out in Slavic, Bloomington, IN: Slavica.Google Scholar

Franks, S. (2021). Microvariation in the South Slavic Noun Phrase, Bloomington, IN: Slavica.Google Scholar

Fuchs, Z., Polinsky, M., & Scontras, G. (2015). The differential representation of number and gender in Spanish. Linguistic Review, 32(4), 703–737. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2015-0008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gatarić, I., Srdanović, S., & Šarić, A. (2019). Do morphological features affect the cognitive processing of deverbal nominals in Serbian? Primenjena Psihologija, 12(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.19090/pp.2019.2.139-156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

González Alonso, J., Cunnings, I., Fujita, H., Miller, D., & Rothman, J. (2021). Gender attraction in sentence comprehension. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 6(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gor, K. (2017). The mental lexicon of L2 learners of Russian: Phonology and morphology in lexical storage and access. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 277–302. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gor, K., Chrabaszcz, A., & Cook, S. (2017). Processing of native and nonnative inflected words: Beyond affix stripping. Journal of Memory and Language, 93, 315–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.06.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gor, K., Chrabaszcz, A., & Cook, S. (2019). A case for agreement: Processing of case inflection by early and late learners. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 9(1), 6–41. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.16017.gor.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Granlund, S., Kolak, J., Vihman, V., Engelmann, F., Lieven, E. V. M., Pine, J. M., Theakston, A. L., & Ambridge, B. (2019). Language-general and language-specific phenomena in the acquisition of inflectional noun morphology: A cross-linguistic elicited-production study of Polish, Finnish and Estonian. Journal of Memory and Language, 107, 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2019.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Grebenyova, L. (2011). Acquisition of multiple questions in English, Russian, and Malayalam. Language Acquisition, 18(3), 139–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2011.580672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Harizanov, B. (2014). Clitic doubling at the syntax-morphophonology interface: A-movement and morphological merger in Bulgarian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 32, 1033–1088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9249-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ionin, T. & Radeva-Bork, T. (2017). The state of the art of first language acquisition research on Slavic languages. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 337–366. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ivanov, I. (2009). Second Language Acquisition of Bulgarian Object Clitics: A Test Case for the Interface Hypothesis. Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa. DOI: 10.17077/etd.077u4o4q.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ivanova-Sullivan, T. & Sekerina, I. A. (2019). Distributional regularity of suffixes facilitates gender acquisition: A contrastive study of two closely related languages. In Brown, M. & Dailey, B., eds., Proceedings of the 43rd Boston University Conference on Language Development, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 311–323.Google Scholar

Ivanova-Sullivan, T., Meir, N., & Sekerina, I.A. (in press). Fine-grained differences in gender-cue strength affect predictive processing in children: Cross-linguistic evidence from Russian and Bulgarian. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.Google Scholar

Janda, L. A. & Reynolds, R. J. (2019). Construal vs. redundancy: Russian aspect in context. Cognitive Linguistics, 30(3), 467–497. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2017-0084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kędzierska, H., Witkowski, W., Błaszczak, J., Klimek-Jankowska, D., & Gulgowski, P. (2018). On the relevance of the syntactic flexibility of an idiom for its recognition: Experimental evidence from Polish. Anglica Wratislaviensia, 56(3836), 179–204. https://doi.org/10.19195/0301-7966.56.13.Google Scholar

Klimek-Jankowska, D. & Błaszczak, J. (2020). How incremental is the processing of perfective and imperfective aspect in Polish? An exploratory Event-Related Potential study. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 28(1), 23–69. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2020.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Koring, L., Mak, P., Mulders, I., & Reuland, E. (2018). Processing intransitive verbs: How do children differ from adults? Language Learning and Development, 14(1), 72–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2017.1380528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laleko, O. (2019). Gender agreement in heritage and L2 Russian. Heritage Language Journal, 16(2), 151–182. https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.16.2.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laurinavichyute, A., Jäger, L. A., Akinina, Y., Roß, J., & Dragoy, O. (2017). Retrieval and encoding interference: Cross-linguistic evidence from anaphor processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00965.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Laurinavichyute, A. K., Sekerina, I. A., Alexeeva, S., Bagdasaryan, K., & Kliegl, R. (2019). Russian sentence corpus: Benchmark measures of eye movements in reading in Russian. Behavior Research Methods, 51(3), 1161–1178. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1051-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Leal, T. & Shea, C. (2018). Psycholinguistic approaches to Hispanic linguistics. In Geeslin, K. L., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Spanish Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 95–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316779194.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lemmerth, N. & Hopp, H. (2019). Gender processing in simultaneous and successive bilingual children: Cross-linguistic lexical and syntactic influences. Language Acquisition, 26(1), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2017.1391815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Levy, R., Fedorenko, E., & Gibson, E. (2013). The syntactic complexity of Russian relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(4), 461–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.10.005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lew, R., Grzelak, M., & Leszkowicz, M. (2013). How dictionary users choose senses in bilingual dictionary entries: An eye-tracking study. Lexikos, 23, 228–254. https://doi.org/10.5788/23-1-1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lewis, S. & Phillips, C. (2014). Aligning grammatical theories and language processing models. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 44(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9329-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lohndal, T., Rothman, J., Kupisch, T., & Westergaard, M. (2019). Heritage language acquisition: What it reveals and why it is important for formal linguistic theories. Language and Linguistics Compass, 13(12), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mak, P., Lomako, J., Gagarina, N., Abrosova, E., & Tribushinina, E. (2020). Keeping two languages apart: Connective processing in both languages of Russian-German bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(3), 532–541. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Martí, L. & Ionin, T. (2019). Wide scope indefinites in Russian: An experimental investigation. Glossa, 4(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mateu, V. E. (2015). Object clitic omission in child Spanish: Evaluating representational and processing accounts. Language Acquisition, 22(3), 240–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.962232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meir, N., Parshina, O., & Sekerina, I. A. (2020). The interaction of morphological cues in bilingual sentence processing: An eye-tracking study. In Brown, M. & Kohut, A., eds., Proceedings of the 44th Boston University Conference on Language Development, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 376–389.Google Scholar

Mikhaylova, A. (2019). What we know about the acquisition of Russian aspect as a first, second and heritage language: State of the art. Heritage Language Journal, 16(2), 183–210. https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.16.2.4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mykhaylyk, R. & Sopata, A. (2016). Object pronouns, clitics, and omissions in child Polish and Ukrainian. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(5), 1051–1082. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nedashkivska, A. (2011). The metropolis of Slavic linguistics in North America and its development over the past two decades. Canadian Slavonic Papers, 53(2–4), 485–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/00085006.2011.11092686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Paolieri, D., Cubelli, R., Macizo, P., Bajo, T., Lotto, L., & Job, R. (2010). Grammatical gender processing in Italian and Spanish bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(8), 1631–1645. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210903511210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Paolieri, D., Padilla, F., Koreneva, O., Morales, L., & Macizo, P. (2019). Gender congruency effects in Russian-Spanish and Italian-Spanish bilinguals: The role of language proximity and concreteness of words. Bilingualism, 22(1), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728917000591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Parshina, O., Laurinavichyute, A. K., & Sekerina, I. A. (2021). Eye-movement benchmarks in heritage language reading. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 24(1), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672892000019X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pavlenko, A., Jarvis, S., Melnyk, S., & Sorokina, A. (2017). Communicative relevance: Color references in bilingual and trilingual speakers. Bilingualism, 20(4), 853–866. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728916000535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Peeters-Podgaevskaja, A. V., Janssen, B. E., & Baker, A. E. (2020). The acquisition of relative clauses in Russian and Polish in monolingual and bilingual children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 10(2), 216–248. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.17031.peeCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M., & Roberge, Y. (2017). Direct Objects and Language Acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Perovic, A., Vuksanović, J., Petrović, B., & Avramović-Ilić, I. (2014). The acquisition of passives in Serbian. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pertsova, K. & Kuznetsova, J. (2015). Experimental evidence for lexical conservatism in Russian : Defective verbs revisited. In Oseki, Y., Esipova, M., & Harves, S., eds., Proceedings of the 24th meeting of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications, pp. 301–320.Google Scholar

Polinsky, M. (2018). Heritage Languages and Their Speakers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107252349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Polinsky, M. & Scontras, G. (2020). Understanding heritage languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 4–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Potsdam, E. & Polinsky, M. (2011). Against covert a-movement in Russian unaccusatives. Linguistic Inquiry, 42(2), 345–355. https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Price, I. K. & Witzel, J. (2017). Sources of relative clause processing difficulty: Evidence from Russian. Journal of Memory and Language, 97, 208–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.07.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Putnam, M. T., Carlson, M., & Reitter, D. (2018). Integrated, not isolated: Defining typological proximity in an integrated multilingual architecture. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Radeva-Bork, T. (2012). Single and Double Clitics in Adult and Child Grammar, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rodina, Y. (2008). Semantics and Morphology : The Acquisition of Grammatical Gender in Russian. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tromsø. https://hdl.handle.net/10037/2247.Google Scholar

Roettger, T. (2019). Preregistration in linguistic research : Applications, challenges, and limitations. Linguistics, 59(5), 1227–1249. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2019-0048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rojczyk, A. (2019). Nonnative perception of allophonic cues to word boundaries: Lou spills versus loose pills for speakers of Polish. Language Acquisition, 26(1), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2018.1433672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rothman, J., González Alonso, J., & Miller, D. (2018). The acquisition of second language Spanish morphosyntax. In Geeslin, K. L., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Spanish Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 689–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sekerina, I. A. (2017). Slavic psycholinguistics in the 21st century. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 463–487. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Sims, A. (2015). Inflectional Defectiveness, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Slabakova, R. (2016). Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Slabakova, R., Leal, T., Dudley, A., & Stack, M. (2020). Generative Second Language Acquisition [Elements in Second Language Acquisition], Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108762380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Slavkov, N. (2015). Long-distance wh-movement and long-distance wh-movement avoidance in L2 English: Evidence from French and Bulgarian speakers. Second Language Research, 31(2), 179–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658314554939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Slioussar, N. (2018). Forms and features: The role of syncretism in number agreement attraction. Journal of Memory and Language, 101, 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.03.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Slioussar, N. & Malko, A. (2016). Gender agreement attraction in Russian: Production and comprehension evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Steriopolo, O. (2008). Form and Function of Expressive Morphology: A Case Study of Russian. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia. https://dx.doi.org/10.14288/1.0066282.Google Scholar

Tomas, E., Van De Vijver, R., Demuth, K., & Petocz, P. (2017). Acquisition of nominal morphophonological alternations in Russian. First Language, 37(5), 453–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723717698839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ufimceva, N., Cherkasova, G., Karaulov, J., & Tarasov, E. (2004). Slavjanskij asociativnyj slovar‘, Moscow: Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar

Varlokosta, S., Belletti, A., Costa, J., Friedmann, N., Gavarró, A., Grohmann, K. K., Guasti, M. T., Tuller, L., Lobo, M., Anđelković, D., Argemí, N., Avram, L., Berends, S., Brunetto, V., Delage, H., Ezeizabarrena, M. J., Fattal, I., Haman, E., van Hout, A., … Yatsushiro, K. (2016). A cross-linguistic study of the acquisition of clitic and pronoun production. Language Acquisition, 23(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2015.1028628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Velnić, M. (2020). Acquisition of a transparent gender system: A comparison of Italian and Croatian. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.571674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Willer-Gold, J., Arsenijević, B., Batinić, M., Becker, M., Čordalija, N., Kresić, M., Leko, N., Marušič, F. L., Milićev, T., Milićević, N., Mitíc, I., Peti-Stantić, A., Stanković, B., Šuligoj, T., Tušek, J., & Nevins, A. (2018). When linearity prevails over hierarchy in syntax. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(3), 495–500. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1712729115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Woodman, G. F. (2010). A brief introduction to the use of event-related potentials in studies of perception and attention. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 72(8), 2031–2046. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yang, C. (2016). The Price of Linguistic Productivity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Yurchenko, A., Lopukhina, A., & Dragoy, O. (2020). Metaphor is between metonymy and homonymy: Evidence from event-related potentials. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Zeller, J. P. & Clasmeier, C. (2020). Každyj den’ turist *otdoxnul na pljaže. An event-related potentials study on the processing of aspectual violation in Russian iterative sentences. Russian Linguistics, 44(3), 297–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-020-09230-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Azarova, I., Mitrofanova, O., Sinopalnikova, A., Yavorskaya, M., & Oparin, I. (2002). RussNet: Building a Lexical Database for the Russian Language. Proceedings of the LREC Workshop on WordNet Structures and Standardization, and How These Affect Wordnet Applications and Evaluation, Las Palmas, 60–64.Google Scholar

Babych, B., Kanishcheva, O., Nakov, P., Piskorski, J., Pivovarova, L., Starko, V., Steinberger, J. Yangarber, R., Marcińczuk, M., Pollak, S., Přibáň, P., & Robnik-Šikonja, M., eds. (2021). Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Balto-Slavic Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/2021.bsnlp-1.Google Scholar

Bojar, O. & Hajič, J. (2008). Phrase-based and deep syntactic English-to-Czech statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, pp. 143–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, P. F., Cocke, J., Della Pietra, S., Della Pietra, V., Jelinek, F., Mercer, R. L., & Roossin, P. S. (1988). A statistical approach to language translation. Coling’88. Association for Computational Linguistics, 1, 71–76.Google Scholar

Church, K. & Liberman, M. (2021). The future of Computational Linguistics: On beyond alchemy. In Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2021.625341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dobrovoljc, K., Krek, S., & Erjavec, T. (2017). The Sloleks morphological lexicon and its future development. In Gorjanc, V. et al., eds., Dictionary of Modern Slovenian: Problems and Solutions, Ljubljana: Ljubljana University Press, pp. 42–63.Google Scholar

Džeroski, S., Erjavec, T., & Zavrel, J. (2000). Morphosyntactic tagging of Slovenian: Evaluating taggers and tagsets. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Athens, Greece, 31 May–2 June 2000, pp. 1099–1104. https://aclanthology.org/L00-1108/.Google Scholar

Erjavec, T. (2012). MULTEXT-East: Morphosyntactic resources for Central and Eastern European languages. Language Resources and Evaluation, 46(1), 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Erjavec, T. (2015). The IMP historical Slovenian language resources. Language Resources and Evaluation, 49(3), 753–775. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-015-9294-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Erjavec, T. & Džeroski, S. (2004). Machine learning of morphosyntactic structure: Lemmatizing unknown Slovenian words. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 18, 17–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Erjavec, T., Piskorski, J., Pivovarova, L., Šnajder, J., Steinberger, J., & Yangarber, R., eds., (2017). Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Balto-Slavic Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/W17–1400.Google Scholar

Firth, J. R. (1957). A synopsis of linguistic theory 1930–1955. In Studies in Linguistic Analysis, pp. 1–32 [reprinted in Palmer, F. R., ed. (1968), Selected Papers of J.R. Firth 1952–1959, London: Longman].Google Scholar

Fišer, D. & Sagot, B. (2015). Constructing a poor man’s wordnet in a resource-rich world. Language Resources and Evaluation, 49, 601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-015-9295-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fucíková, E., Hajič, J., Šindlerová, J., & Uresová, Z. (2015). Czech-English bilingual valency lexicon online. In 14th International Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories (TLT 2015), pp. 61–71.Google Scholar

Hajič, J., Bejček, E., Hlaváčová, J., Mikulová, M., Straka, M., Štěpánek, J., & Štěpánková, B. (2020). Prague Dependency Treebank – Consolidated 1.0. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2020), European Language Resources Association (ELRA), pp. 5208–5218.Google Scholar

Hajič, J., Ciaramita, M., Johansson, R., Kawahara, D., Martí, M. A., Màrquez, L., Meyers, A., Nivre, J., Padó, S., Štěpánek, J., Straňák, P., Surdeanu, M., Xue, N., & Zhang, Y. (2009). The CoNLL-2009 shared task: Syntactic and semantic dependencies in multiple languages. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL 2009): Shared Task. ACL.Google Scholar

Hajič, J., Hajičová, E., Mikulová, M., & Mírovský, J. (2017). Prague dependency treebank. In Handbook of Linguistic Annotation, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 555–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hajič, J., & Hladká, B. (1998). Tagging inflective languages: Prediction of morphological categories for a rich, structured tagset. In COLING 1998 Volume 1: The 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/C98-1077/.Google Scholar

Hajič, J., Hric, J., & Kuboň, V. (2000). Machine translation of very close languages. In Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing (ANLC ’00), pp. 7–12. https://doi.org/10.3115/974147.974149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hajič, J., Panevová, J., Uresová, Z., Bémová, A., Kolárová, V., & Pajas, P. (2003). PDT-VALLEX: Creating a large-coverage valency lexicon for treebank annotation. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories, Vol. 9, pp. 57–68.Google Scholar

Hutchins, J. (2001). Machine Translation over fifty years. Histoire Épistémologie Langage, 23(1), 7–31. https://doi.org/10.3406/hel.2001.2815CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hutchins, J. & Lovtskii, E. (2000). Petr Petrovich Troyanskii (1894–1950): A forgotten pioneer of Mechanical Translation. Machine Translation 15(3), 187–221. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011653602669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jurish, B. (2011). Finite-State Canonicalization Techniques for Historical German. PhD thesis, University of Potsdam.Google Scholar

Kilgarriff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2014). The Sketch Engine: ten years on. Lexicography ASIALEX, 1, 7–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kilgarriff, A., Husák, M., McAdam, K., Rundell, M., & Rychlý, P. (2008). GDEX: Automatically finding good dictionary examples in a corpus. In Proceedings of the 13th EURALEX International Congress. Spain, July 2008, pp. 425–432.Google Scholar

Kilgarriff, A., Kovář, V., Krek, S., Srdanović, I., & Tiberius, C. (2010). A quantitative evaluation of word sketches. In Proceedings of the 14th EURALEX International Congress, Fryske Akademy, pp. 372–379.Google Scholar

Kobyliński, K. (2014). PoliTa: A multitagger for Polish. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14). https://aclanthology.org/L14-1014/.Google Scholar

Kosem, I., Husák, M., & McCarthy, D. (2011). GDEX for Slovene. In Proceedings of eLex 2011: Electronic Lexicography in the 21st Century: New Applications for New Users, Ljubljana: Trojina, Institute for Applied Slovene Studies, pp. 150–159.Google Scholar

Krek, S., Erjavec, T., Dobrovoljc, K., Gantar, P., Holdt, S. A., Čibej, J., & Brank, J. (2020). The ssj500k training corpus for Slovenian language processing. In Proceedings of the Conference on Language Technologies and Digital Humanities. http://nl.ijs.si/jtdh20/pdf/JT-DH_2020_Krek-et-al_The-ssj500k-Training-Corpus-for-Slovenian-Language-Processing.pdf.Google Scholar

Krstev, C. & Vitas, D. (2007). Extending the Serbian E-dictionary by using lexical transducers. In Koeva, S. et al., eds., Formaliser les langues avec l’ordinateur: de INTEX à NooJ, Besançon: Presses universitaires de Franche-Comté, pp. 147–168. http://books.openedition.org/pufc/27079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kulagina, O. S. & Mel‘čuk, I. A. (1967). Automatic translation: some theoretical aspects and the design of a translation system. In Nirenburg, S. et al., eds., Readings in Machine Translation, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 157–175.Google Scholar

Ljubešić, N., Agić, Z., Batanović, V., & Erjavec, T. (2018). hr500k – a reference training corpus of Croatian. In Proceedings of the Conference on Language Technologies and Digital Humanities, pp. 154–161. www.sdjt.si/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/JTDH-2018_Ljubesic-et-al_hr500k-A-Reference-Training-Corpus-of-Croatian.pdf.Google Scholar

Ljubešić, N. & Dobrovoljc, K. (2019). What does neural bring? Analysing improvements in morphosyntactic annotation and lemmatisation of Slovenian, Croatian and Serbian. In Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Balto-Slavic Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 29–34. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-3704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ljubešić, N., Klubička, F., Agić, A., & Jazbec, I. P. (2016a). New inflectional lexicons and training corpora for improved morphosyntactic annotation of Croatian and Serbian. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’16), Portorož, Slovenia.Google Scholar

Ljubešić, N., Zupan, K., Fišer, D., & Erjavec, T. (2016b). Normalising Slovenian data: Historical texts vs. user-generated content. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference on Natural Language Processing (KONVENS), September 19–21, 2016, Bochum, Germany, pp. 146–155. www.linguistics.rub.de/konvens16/pub/19_konvensproc.pdf.Google Scholar

Loukachevitch, N. V., Lashevich, G., Gerasimova, A. A., Ivanov, V. V., & Dobrov, B. V. (2016). Creating Russian WordNet by conversion. In Proceedings of Conference on Computational Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies Dialog-2016, Moscow: RSUH, pp. 405–415.Google Scholar

McDonald, R., Pereira, F., Ribarov, K., & Hajič, J. (2005). Non-projective dependency parsing using spanning tree algorithms. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 523–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mel‘čuk, I. A. (2001). Communicative Organization in Natural Language: The Semantic-Communicative Structure of Sentences, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nivre, J., de Marneffe, M. C., Ginter, F., Hajič, J., Manning, C. D., Pyysalo, S., Schuster, S., Tyers, F., & Zeman, D. (2020). Universal dependencies v2: An evergrowing multilingual treebank collection. In Proceedings of the 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference LREC. www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.lrec-1.497.Google Scholar

Piasecki, M., Szpakowicz, S., & Broda, B. (2009). A Wordnet from the Ground Up, Wrocław: Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wroclawskiej.Google Scholar

Piskorski, J., Laskova, L., Marcińczuk, M., Pivovarova, L., Přibáň, P., Steinberger, J., & Yangarber, R., eds. (2019). The Second Cross-Lingual Challenge on Recognition, Normalization, Classification, and Linking of Named Entities across Slavic Languages. In Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Balto-Slavic Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 63–74. www.aclweb.org/anthology/W19-3709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pollak, S., Repar, A., Martinc, M., & Podpečan, V. (2019). Karst Exploration: Extracting terms and definitions from Karst Domain Corpus. In Proceedings of the eLex 2019 Conference: Electronic Lexicography in the 21st Century, Brno: Lexical Computing CZ. https://elex.link/elex2019/proceedings-download/.Google Scholar

Pomikálek, J. (2011). Removing Boilerplate and Duplicate Content from Web Corpora. PhD thesis, Masaryk University, Brno.Google Scholar

Przepiórkowski, A., Górski, R. L., Łaziński, M., & Pęzik, P. (2010). Recent developments in the National Corpus of Polish. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2010), Valetta, Malta.Google Scholar

Przepiórkowski, A., Hajnicz, E., Patejuk, A., Woliński, M., Skwarski, F., & Świdziński, M. (2014). Walenty: Towards a comprehensive valence dictionary of Polish. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2014, Reykjavík: European Language Resources Association (ELRA), pp. 2785–2792.Google Scholar

Qi, P., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Bolton, J., & Manning, C. D. (2020). Stanza: A Python natural language processing toolkit for many human languages. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) System Demonstrations.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ramírez-Sánchez, G., Sánchez-Martínez, F., Ortiz-Rojas, S., Pérez-Ortiz, J. A., & Forcada, M. L. (2006). Opentrad Apertium open-source machine translation system: An opportunity for business and research. In Proceedings of Translating and the Computer 28 Conference, London, November 16–17, 2006.Google Scholar

Rehm, G. & Uszkoreit, H., eds. (2013). META-NET Strategic Research Agenda for Multilingual Europe 2020, Dordrecht: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36348-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savary, A., Candito, M., Mititelu, V. B., Bejček, E., Cap, F., Čéplö, S., Cordeiro, S. R., Eryiğit, G., Giouli, V., van Gompel, M., HaCohen-Kerner, Y., Kovalevskaitė, J., Krek, S., Liebeskind, C., Monti, J., Escartín, C. P., van der Plas, L., QasemiZadeh, B., Ramisch, C., Sangati, F., Stoyanova, I., & Vincze, V. (2018). PARSEME multilingual corpus of verbal multiword expressions. In Markantonatou, S., Ramisch, C., Savary, A., & Vincze, V., eds., Multiword Expressions at Length and In Depth: Extended Papers from the MWE2017 Workshop, Berlin: Language Science Press, pp. 87–147. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1471591.Google Scholar

Sgall, P., Goralciková, A., Nebesky, L., & Hajičová, E. (1969). A Functional Approach to Syntax in Generative Description of Language Mathematical Linguistics and Automatic Language Processing, New York, NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Silberztein, M. (1994). INTEX: A corpus processing system. In COLING ’94 Proceedings, Kyoto: COLING.Google Scholar

Simov, K., Osenova, P., Kolkovska, S., Balabanova, E., Doikoff, D., Ivanova, K., Simov, A., & Kouylekov, M. (2002). Building a linguistically interpreted corpus of Bulgarian: The BulTreeBank. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2002), Canary Islands, Spain, pp. 1729–1736.Google Scholar

Simov, K., Peev, Z., Kouylekov, M., Simov, A., Dimitrov, M., & Kiryakov, A. (2001). CLaRK – an XML-based system for corpora development. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2001 Conference, pp. 558–560.Google Scholar

Stanković, R., Krstev, C., Stijović, R., Gočanin, M., & Škorić, , M. (2021). Towards automatic definition extraction for Serbian. In Proceedings of XIX EURALEX Congress: Lexicography for Inclusion, Vol. II, Democritus University of Thrace, pp. 695–703. https://euralex2020.gr/proceedings-volume-2/.Google Scholar

Straka, M., Hajič, J., & Straková, J. (2016). UDPipe: Trainable pipeline for processing CoNLL-U files performing tokenization, morphological analysis, PoS tagging and parsing. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’16), 4290–4297. https://aclanthology.org/L16-1680/.Google Scholar

Straka, M. & Straková, J. (2017). Tokenizing, POS tagging, lemmatizing and parsing UD 2.0 with UDPipe. In Proceedings of the CoNLL 2017 Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies, Vancouver, Canada, August 2017. https://aclanthology.org/K17-3009/.Google Scholar

Šnajder, J. (2013). Models for predicting the inflectional paradigm of Croatian words. Slovenščina 2.0, 1(2), 1–34. www.trojina.org/slovenscina2.0/arhiv/2013/2/Slo2.0_2013_2_02.pdf.Google Scholar

Štěpánková, B., Mikulová, M., & Hajič, J. (2020). The MorfFlex Dictionary of Czech as a source of linguistic data. In Proceedings of XIX EURALEX Congress: Lexicography for Inclusion, Democritus University of Thrace, Thrace, pp. 387–392.Google Scholar

Tufiş, D., ed. (2000). BalkaNet: Design and Development of a Multilingual Balkan WordNet. Romanian Journal of Information Science and Technology Special Issue, 7 (1–2).Google Scholar

Vetulani, Z. (2000). Electronic language resources for POLISH: POLEX, CEGLEX and GRAMLEX. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC’2014, Athens, Greece, European Language Resources Association (ELRA), pp. 367–374.Google Scholar

Vetulani, Z., Kubis, M., & Obrębski, T. (2010). PolNet – Polish WordNet: Data and tools. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’10), European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar

Vitas, D. & Krstev, C. (2004). Intex and Slavonic morphology. In Muller, C., Royauté, J., & Silberztein, M., eds., INTEX pour la Linguistique et le traitement automatique des langues, Besançon: Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté, pp. 19–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zaliznjak, A. A. (1977). Grammatičeskij slovar’ russkogo jazyka (Grammatical Dictionary of the Russian Language), Moscow: Russkie Slovari.Google Scholar

Zeman, D., Hajič, J., Popel, M., Potthast, M., Straka, M., Ginter, F., Nivre, J., & Petrov, S. (2018). CoNLL 2018 shared task: Multilingual parsing from raw text to universal dependencies. In Proceedings of the CoNLL 2018 Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar

Žolkovskij, A. K. & Mel‘čuk, I. A. (1965). O vozmožnom metode i instrumentax semantičeskogo sinteza (On a possible method and instruments for semantic synthesis). Naučno-texničeskaja Informacija, 5, 23–28.Google Scholar