Publications

Displaying 1 - 64 of 64
  • Atlas, J. D., & Levinson, S. C. (1981). It-clefts, informativeness and logical form: Radical pragmatics (revised standard version). In P. Cole (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 1-62). New York: Academic Press.
  • Becker, A., Dittmar, N., Gutmann, M., Klein, W., Rieck, B.-O., Senft, G., Senft, I., Steckner, W., & Thielecke, E. (1977). Heidelberger Forschungsprojekt 'Pidgin-Deutsch spanischer und italienischer Arbeiter in der Bundesrepublik': Die ungesteuerte Erlernung des Deutschen durch spanische und italienische Arbeiter; eine soziolinguistische Untersuchung. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie, Beihefte 2. Osnabrück: Universität Osnabrück.
  • Bowerman, M. (1981). Beyond communicative adequacy: From piecemeal knowledge to an integrated system in the child's acquisition of language. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 20, 1-24.

    Abstract

    This study investigates the onset at periodic intervals in the age range of about two to five years of various kinds of recurrent and systematic errors in word choice and/or syntactic structure. Acquisitional processes and their implications are outlined. Sections address: (1) the kinds of processes that can be inferred to underlie errors ("late errors") that do not set in until after a period of correct usage; (2) the currently dominant model of how linguistic forms, meaning, and communication are interrelated in the acquisition of language; (3) challenging problems for this model; (4) a suggestion that the notion of "meaning" in language must be reconceptualized before the problems can be solved; and (5) evidence from several types of late errors that supports the arguments. The error types discussed show the ways in which the relationship between form and meanings can change in the course of language development. These changes occur after the child would ordinarily already be credited with having "acquired" the forms in question. This indicates that achieving fluent, productive use of a form and achieving adult-like knowledge of its structure are not necessarily isomorphic.
  • Bowerman, M. (1981). Language development. In H. Triandis, & A. Heron (Eds.), Handbook of cross cultural psychology, Vol. 4: Developmental Psychology (pp. 93-185). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Bowerman, M. (1977). The acquisition of rules governing ‘possible lexical items’: Evidence from spontaneous speech errors. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 13, 148-156.
  • Bowerman, M. (1977). The acquisition of word meaning: An investigation of some current concepts. In P. Johnson Laird, & P. Wason (Eds.), Thinking: Readings in cognitive science (pp. 239-253). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Bowerman, M. (1981). The child's expression of meaning: Expanding relationships among lexicon, syntax, and morphology. In H. Winitz (Ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition (pp. 172-189). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
  • Brown, P., Macintyre, M., Morpeth, R., & Prendergast, S. (1981). A daughter: A thing to be given away. In Cambridge Women's Studies Group (Ed.), Women in society: Interdisciplinary essays (pp. 127-145). London: Virago.
  • Brown, P., & Jordanova, L. (1981). Oppressive dichotomies: The nature/culture debate. In Cambridge Women's Studies Group (Ed.), Women in society: Interdisciplinary essays (pp. 224-241). London: Virago.
  • Brown, P. (1981). Universals and particulars in the position of women. In Cambridge Women's Studies Group (Ed.), Women in society: Interdisciplinary essays (pp. 242-256). London: Virago.
  • Cambridge Women's Studies Group, & Brown, P. (Eds.). (1981). Women in society: Interdisciplinary essays. London: Virago.
  • Cutler, A., & Foss, D. (1977). On the role of sentence stress in sentence processing. Language and Speech, 20, 1-10.
  • Cutler, A., & Darwin, C. J. (1981). Phoneme-monitoring reaction time and preceding prosody: Effects of stop closure duration and of fundamental frequency. Perception and Psychophysics, 29, 217-224. Retrieved from http://www.psychonomic.org/search/view.cgi?id=12660.

    Abstract

    In an earlier study, it was shown that listeners can use prosodic cues that predict where sentence stress will fall; phoneme-monitoring RTs are faster when the preceding prosody indicates that the word bearing the target will be stressed. Two experiments which further investigate this effect are described. In the first, it is shown that the duration of the closure preceding the release of the target stop consonant burst does not affect the RT advantage for stressed words. In the second, it is shown that fundamental frequency variation is not a necessary component of the prosodic variation that produces the predicted-stress effect. It is argued that sentence processing involves a very flexible use of prosodic information.
  • Cutler, A. (1981). Making up materials is a confounded nuisance, or: Will we able to run any psycholinguistic experiments at all in 1990? Cognition, 10, 65-70. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(81)90026-3.
  • Cutler, A. (1981). Degrees of transparency in word formation. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 26, 73-77.
  • Cutler, A. (1981). The cognitive reality of suprasegmental phonology. In T. Myers, J. Laver, & J. Anderson (Eds.), The cognitive representation of speech (pp. 399-400). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
  • Cutler, A. (1977). The context-dependence of "intonational meanings". In W. Beach, S. Fox, & S. Philosoph (Eds.), Papers from the Thirteenth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society (pp. 104-115). Chicago, Ill.: CLS.
  • Cutler, A. (1977). The psychological reality of word formation and lexical stress rules. In E. Fischer-Jørgensen, J. Rischel, & N. Thorsen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Phonetic Sciences: Vol. 2 (pp. 79-85). Copenhagen: Institute of Phonetics, University of Copenhagen.
  • Cutler, A. (1981). The reliability of speech error data. Linguistics, 19, 561-582.
  • Fay, D., & Cutler, A. (1977). Malapropisms and the structure of the mental lexicon. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 505-520. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4177997.
  • Fodor, J. A., & Cutler, A. (1981). Semantic focus and sentence comprehension. Cognition, 7, 49-59. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(79)90010-6.

    Abstract

    Reaction time to detect a phoneme target in a sentence was found to be faster when the word in which the target occurred formed part of the semantic focus of the sentence. Focus was determined by asking a question before the sentence; that part of the sentence which comprised the answer to the sentence was assumed to be focussed. This procedure made it possible to vary position offocus within the sentence while holding all acoustic aspects of the sentence itself constant. It is argued that sentence understanding is facilitated by rapid identification of focussed information. Since focussed words are usually accented, it is further argued that the active search for accented words demonstrated in previous research should be interpreted as a search for semantic focus.
  • Garnham, A., Shillcock, R. C., Brown, G. D. A., Mill, A. I. D., & Cutler, A. (1981). Slips of the tongue in the London-Lund corpus of spontaneous conversation. Linguistics, 19, 805-817.
  • Hickmann, M., & Weissenborn, J. (Eds.). (1981). Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics: Annual Report Nr.2 1981. Nijmegen: MPI for Psycholinguistics.
  • Kempen, G. (1977). [Review of the book Explorations in cognition by D. Norman, D. Rumelhart and the LNR Research Group]. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 6(2), 184-186. doi:10.1007/BF01074377.
  • Kempen, G. (1977). Building a psychologically plausible sentence generator. In P. A. M. Seuren (Ed.), Symposium on semantic theory: held at Nijmegen, March 14-18, 1977 / Volume 9 (pp. 107-117 ). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.

    Abstract

    The psychological process of translating semantic into syntactic structures has dynamic properties such as the following. (1) The speaker is able to start pronouncing an utterance before having worked out the semantic content he wishes to express. Selection of semantic content and construction of syntactic form proceed partially in parallel. (2) The human sentence generator takes as input not only a specification of semantic content but also some indication of desired syntactic shape. Such indications, if present, do not complicate the generation process but make it easier. (3) Certain regularities of speech errors suggest a two-stage generation process. Stage I constructs the “syntactic skeleton” of an utterance; stage II provides the skeleton with morpho- honological information. An outline is given of the type of grammar which is used by a sentence generation system embodying these characteristics. The system is being implemented on a computer.
  • Kempen, G. (1977). Onder woorden brengen: Psychologische aspecten van expressief taalgebruik [Inaugural lecture]. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.

    Abstract

    Rede, uitgesproken bij de aanvaarding van het ambt van lector in de taalpsychologie aan de Katholieke Universiteit te Nijmegen op Vrijdag 10 juni 1977
  • Kempen, G., & Van Wijk, C. (1981). Leren formuleren: Hoe uit opstellen een objektieve index voor formuleervaardigheid afgeleid kan worden. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 3, 32-44.
  • Kempen, G. (1977). Man's sentence generator: Aspects of its control structure. In M. De Mey, R. Pinxten, M. Poriau, & E. Vandamme (Eds.), International workshop on the cognitive viewpoint. Ghent: University of Ghent, Communication & Cognition.
  • Kempen, G. (1981). De architectuur van het spreken. TTT: Interdisciplinair Tijdschrift voor Taal & Tekstwetenschap, 1, 110-123.
  • Kempen, G. (1977). Conceptualizing and formulating in sentence production. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Sentence production: Developments in research and theory (pp. 259-274). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Kempen, G., & Maassen, B. (1977). The time course of conceptualizing and formulating processes during the production of simple sentences. In Proceedings of The Third Prague Conference on the Psychology of Human Learning and Development. Prague: Institute of Psychology.

    Abstract

    The psychological process of producing sentences includes conceptualization (selecting to-beexpressed conceptual content) and formulation (translating conceptual content into syntactic structures of a language). There is ample evidence, both intuitive and experimental, that the conceptualizing and formulating processes often proceed concurrently, not strictly serially. James Lindsley (Cognitive Psych.,1975, 7, 1-19; J.Psycholinguistic Res., 1976, 5, 331-354) has developed a concurrent model which proved succesful in an experimental situation where simple English Subject-Verb (SV) sentences such as “The boy is greeting”,”The girl is kicking” were produced as descriptions of pictures which showed actor and action. The measurements were reaction times defined as the interval between the moment a picture appeared on a screen and the onset of the vocal utterance by the speaker. Lindsley could show, among other things, that the formulation process for an SV sentence doesn’t start immediately after the actor of a picture (that is, the conceptual content underlying the surface Subject phrase) has been identified, but is somewhat delayed. The delay was needed, according to Lindsley, in order to prevent dysfluencies (hesitations) between surface Subject and verb. We replicated Lindsley’s data for Dutch. However, his model proved inadequate when we added Dutch Verb-Subject (VS) constructions which are obligatory in certain syntactic contexts but synonymous with their SV counterparts. A sentence production theory which is being developed by the first author is able to provide an accurate account of the data. The abovementioned delay is attributed to certain precautions the sentence generator has to take in case of SV but not of VS sentences. These precautions are related to the goal of attaining syntactic coherence of the utterance as a whole, not to the prevention of dysfluencies.
  • Kempen, G. (1977). Wat is psycholinguistiek? In B. T. M. Tervoort (Ed.), Wetenschap en taal: Het verschijnsel taal van verschillende zijden benaderd (pp. 86-99 ). Muiderberg: Coutinho.
  • Kempen, G. (1981). Taalpsychologie. In H. Duijker, & P. Vroon (Eds.), Codex Psychologicus (pp. 205-221). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  • Kempen, G., & Fokkema, S. (1981). Ten geleide. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden, 36, 345-346.
  • Klein, W., & Rath, R. (1981). Automatische Lemmatisierung deutscher Flexionsformen. In R. Herzog (Ed.), Computer in der Übersetzungswissenschaft (pp. 94-142). Framkfurt am Main, Bern: Verlag Peter Lang.
  • Klein, W. (Ed.). (1977). Methoden der Textanalyse. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer.
  • Klein, W. (1977). Organisation des Wissens durch Sprache: Konsequenzen für die maschinelle Sprachanalyse. IBM Nachrichten, 27(234), 11-17.
  • Klein, W. (1981). Knowing a language and knowing to communicate: A case study in foreign workers' communication. In A. Vermeer (Ed.), Language problems of minority groups (pp. 75-95). Tilburg: Tilburg University.
  • Klein, W. (1981). L'acquisition des pronoms personnels allemands par des travailleurs espagnols et italiens. GRECO, 13, 19-31.
  • Klein, W. (1981). Logik der Argumentation. In Institut für deutsche Sprache (Ed.), Dialogforschung: Jahrbuch 1980 des Instituts für deutsche Sprache (pp. 226-264). Düsseldorf: Schwann.
  • Klein, W., & Levelt, W. J. M. (Eds.). (1981). Crossing the boundaries in linguistics: Studies presented to Manfred Bierwisch. Dordrecht: Reidel.
  • Klein, W. (1977). Die Wissenschaft der Interpretation. In W. Klein (Ed.), Methoden der Textanalyse (pp. 1-23). Heidelberg: Quelle und Meyer.
  • Klein, W. (1981). Eine kommentierte Bibliographie zur Computerlinguistik. In R. Herzog (Ed.), Computer in der Übersetzungswissenschaft (pp. 95-142). Frankfurt am Main: Lang.
  • Klein, W. (1981). Forschungsprojekt "Zweitspracherwerb ausländischer Arbeiter". Studium Linguistik, 11, 84-89.
  • Klein, W. (1977). Transitional grammars in the acquisition of German by Spanish and Italian workers. In J. Meisel (Ed.), Langues en contact - Pidgins - Creoles - Languages in contact (pp. 167-183). Tübingen: Narr.
  • Klein, W. (1981). Some rules of regular ellipsis in German. In W. Klein, & W. J. M. Levelt (Eds.), Crossing the boundaries in linguistics: Studies presented to Manfred Bierwisch (pp. 51-78). Dordrecht: Reidel.
  • Levelt, W. J. M., Mills, A., & Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1981). Child language research in ESF Countries: An inventory. Strasbourg: European Science Foundation.
  • Levelt, W. J. M., Van Gent, J., Haans, A., & Meijers, A. (1977). Grammaticality, paraphrase, and imagery. In S. Greenbaum (Ed.), Acceptability in language (pp. 87-101). The Hague: Mouton.
  • Levelt, W. J. M., & Maassen, B. (1981). Lexical search and order of mention in sentence production. In W. Klein, & W. J. M. Levelt (Eds.), Crossing the boundaries in linguistics (pp. 221-252). Dordrecht: Reidel.
  • Levelt, W. J. M. (1981). Déjà vu? Cognition, 10, 187-192. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(81)90044-5.
  • Levelt, W. J. M. (1981). The speaker's linearization problem [and Discussion]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 295, 305-315. doi:10.1098/rstb.1981.0142.

    Abstract

    The process of speaking is traditionally regarded as a mapping of thoughts (intentions, feelings, etc.) onto language. One requirement that this mapping has to meet is that the units of information to be expressed be strictly ordered. The channel of speech largely prohibits the simultaneous expression of multiple propositions: the speaker has a linearization problem - that is, a linear order has to be determined over any knowledge structure to be formulated. This may be relatively simple if the informational structure has itself an intrinsic linear arrangement, as often occurs with event structures, but it requires special procedures if the structure is more complex, as is often the case in two- or three-dimensional spatial patterns. How, for instance, does a speaker proceed in describing his home, or the layout of his town? Two powerful constraints on linearization derive, on the one hand, from 'mutual knowledge' and, on the other, from working memory limitations. Mutual knowledge may play a role in that the listener can be expected to derive different implicatures from different orderings (compare 'she married and became pregnant' with 'she became pregnant and married'). Mutual knowledge determinants of linearization are essentially pragmatic and cultural, and dependent on the content of discourse. Working memory limitations affect linearization in that a speaker's linearization strategy will minimize memory load during the process of formulating. A multidimensional structure is broken up in such a way that the number of 'return addresses' to be kept in memory will be minimized. This is attained by maximizing the connectivity of the discourse, and by backtracking to stored addresses in a first-in-last-out fashion. These memory determinants of linearization are presumably biological, and independent of the domain of discourse. An important question is whether the linearization requirement is enforced by the oral modality of speech or whether it is a deeper modality-independent property of language use.
  • Levinson, S. C. (1981). The essential inadequacies of speech act models of dialogue. In H. Parret, M. Sbisà, & J. Verscheuren (Eds.), Possibilities and limitations of pragmatics: Proceedings of the Conference on Pragmatics, Urbino, July 8–14, 1979 (pp. 473-492). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Levinson, S. C. (1977). Social deixis in a Tamil village. PhD Thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
  • Levinson, S. C. (1981). Some pre-observations on the modelling of dialogue. Discourse Processes, 4(2), 93-116. doi:10.1080/01638538109544510.

    Abstract

    Focuses on the pre-observations on the modeling of dialogue. Assumptions that underlie speech act models of dialogue; Identifiability of utterance units corresponding to unit acts; Capacity of the models to model the actual properties of natural dialogue.
  • Miller, M., & Klein, W. (1981). Moral argumentations among children: A case study. Linguistische Berichte, 74, 1-19.
  • Seuren, P. A. M. (1977). [Review of the book Wijsbegeerte en taal, twaalf studies by Gabriël Nuchelmans]. Forum de Letteren, 18(1), 57-60.
  • Seuren, P. A. M. (1977). Forme logique et forme sémantique: Un argument contre M. Geach. Logique et Analyse, 20(79), 338-347.
  • Seuren, P. A. M. (1977). Zwischen Sprache und Denken: ein Beitrag zur empirischen Begründung der Semantik. Wiesbaden: Athenaion.
  • Seuren, P. A. M. (1981). Taaluniversalia. In W. De Geest, R. Dirven, & Y. Putseys (Eds.), Twintig facetten van de taalwetenschap (pp. 112-126). Louvain: Acco.
  • Seuren, P. A. M. (1981). Taalvariatie en de variabele regel. Gramma, 5(1), 51-54.
  • Seuren, P. A. M. (1981). Tense and aspect in Sranan. Linguistics, 19(11/12), 1043-1076. doi:10.1515/ling.1981.19.11-12.1043.
  • Van Wijk, C., & Kempen, G. (1981). Het effect van sociale klasse en gesprekssituatie op het gebruik van connectieven in mondeling en schriftelijk taalgebruik. Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 3, 203-209.

    Abstract

    Van den Broeck (1977, 1980) heeft een pragmatische interpretatie voorgesteld voor de verschillende wijzen waarop leden van hogere en lagere sociaal-economische klassen hun taaluitingen syntaktisch struktureren. Ter ondersteuning hiervan presenteerde hij gegevens m.b.t. gemiddelde zinscomplexiteit bij sprekers uit twee sociaal- conomische klassen in formele en informele gesprekssituaties. Het in dit artikel gerapporteerde onderzoek slaagt er niet in van den Broeck's uitkomsten te repliceren. Waarschijnlijk berusten ze op een contaminatie van gesprekssituatie met taalkeuze (standaardtaal vs. lokaal dialekt). Mede op basis van de nieuwe gegevens wordt i.p.v. de pragmatische interpretatie een vaardigheidsinterpretatie voorgesteld. T.g.v. vooropleiding en beroep beschikken leden van verschillende sociaal- economische klassen over uiteenlopende vaardigheidsniveaus in verhalend (narrative) en verklarend (expository) taalgebruik. Dit uit zich in het gebruik van connectieven: funktiewoorden die logischsemantische relaties tussen proposities uitdrukken.
  • Weissenborn, J. (1981). L'acquisition des prepositions spatiales: problemes cognitifs et linguistiques. In C. Schwarze (Ed.), Analyse des prépositions: IIIme colloque franco-allemand de linguistique théorique du 2 au 4 février 1981 à Constance (pp. 251-285). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
  • Zwanenburg, W., Ouweneel, G. R. E., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1977). La frontière du mot en français. Studies in Language, 1, 209-221.

Share this page