Displaying 101 - 111 of 111
-
Stolz, C. (1996). Suggestions for field research on dimensional expressions. In S. C. Levinson (
Ed. ), Manual for the 1996 Field Season (pp. 32-45). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3003382.Abstract
The aim of this task is to explore the linguistic expression of “dimensions” — e.g., the height, width or depth — of objects in the world around us. In a dimensional expression, one symmetric axis of a 1D, 2D, or 3D object is singled out and described (e.g., That man is tall). Dimensional expressions in different languages show a range of different combinatorial and extensional uses. This document guides the researcher through some spatial situations where contrastive features of dimensional expressions are likely to be observable. -
Sumer, B., & Ozyurek, A. (2016). İşitme Engelli Çocukların Dil Edinimi [Sign language acquisition by deaf children]. In C. Aydin, T. Goksun, A. Kuntay, & D. Tahiroglu (
Eds. ), Aklın Çocuk Hali: Zihin Gelişimi Araştırmaları [Research on Cognitive Development] (pp. 365-388). Istanbul: Koc University Press. -
Sumer, B. (2016). Scene-setting and reference introduction in sign and spoken languages: What does modality tell us? In B. Haznedar, & F. N. Ketrez (
Eds. ), The acquisition of Turkish in childhood (pp. 193-220). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Abstract
Previous studies show that children do not become adult-like in learning to set the scene and introduce referents in their narrations until 9 years of age and even beyond. However, they investigated spoken languages, thus we do not know much about how these skills are acquired in sign languages, where events are expressed in visually similar ways to the real world events, unlike in spoken languages. The results of the current study demonstrate that deaf children (3;5–9;10 years) acquiring Turkish Sign Language, and hearing children (3;8–9;11 years) acquiring spoken Turkish both acquire scene-setting and referent introduction skills at similar ages. Thus the modality of the language being acquired does not have facilitating or hindering effects in the development of these skills. -
Sumer, B., Zwitserlood, I., Perniss, P., & Ozyurek, A. (2016). Yer Bildiren İfadelerin Türkçe ve Türk İşaret Dili’nde (TİD) Çocuklar Tarafından Edinimi [The acqusition of spatial relations by children in Turkish and Turkish Sign Language (TID)]. In E. Arik (
Ed. ), Ellerle Konuşmak: Türk İşaret Dili Araştırmaları [Speaking with hands: Studies on Turkish Sign Language] (pp. 157-182). Istanbul: Koç University Press. -
Suppes, P., Böttner, M., & Liang, L. (1998). Machine Learning of Physics Word Problems: A Preliminary Report. In A. Aliseda, R. van Glabbeek, & D. Westerståhl (
Eds. ), Computing Natural Language (pp. 141-154). Stanford, CA, USA: CSLI Publications.Files private
Request files -
Thomassen, A., & Kempen, G. (1976). Geheugen. In J. A. Michon, E. Eijkman, & L. F. De Klerk (
Eds. ), Handboek der Psychonomie (pp. 354-387). Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus. -
Van Valin Jr., R. D. (2016). An overview of information structure in three Amazonian languages. In M. Fernandez-Vest, & R. D. Van Valin Jr. (
Eds. ), Information structure and spoken language from a cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 77-92). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Van Wijk, C., & Kempen, G. (1982). Kost zinsbouw echt tijd? In R. Stuip, & W. Zwanenberg (
Eds. ), Handelingen van het zevenendertigste Nederlands Filologencongres (pp. 223-231). Amsterdam: APA-Holland University Press. -
Van Geenhoven, V. (1998). On the Argument Structure of some Noun Incorporating Verbs in West Greenlandic. In M. Butt, & W. Geuder (
Eds. ), The Projection of Arguments - Lexical and Compositional Factors (pp. 225-263). Stanford, CA, USA: CSLI Publications.Files private
Request files -
Van Valin Jr., R. D. (1998). The acquisition of WH-questions and the mechanisms of language acquisition. In M. Tomasello (
Ed. ), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (pp. 221-249). Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum. -
Van Berkum, J. J. A. (1996). The linguistics of gender. In The psycholinguistics of grammatical gender: Studies in language comprehension and production (pp. 14-44). Nijmegen University Press.
Abstract
This chapter explores grammatical gender as a linguistic phenomenon. First, I define gender in terms of agreement, and look at the parts of speech that can take gender agreement. Because it relates to assumptions underlying much psycholinguistic gender research, I also examine the reasons why gender systems are thought to emerge, change, and disappear. Then, I describe the gender system of Dutch. The frequent confusion about the number of genders in Dutch will be resolved by looking at the history of the system, and the role of pronominal reference therein. In addition, I report on three lexical- statistical analyses of the distribution of genders in the language. After having dealt with Dutch, I look at whether the genders of Dutch and other languages are more or less randomly assigned, or whether there is some system to it. In contrast to what many people think, regularities do indeed exist. Native speakers could in principle exploit such regularities to compute rather than memorize gender, at least in part. Although this should be taken into account as a possibility, I will also argue that it is by no means a necessary implication.
Share this page