Displaying 101 - 200 of 298
-
Gullberg, M. (2003). Eye movements and gestures in human face-to-face interaction. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (
Eds. ), The mind's eyes: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movements (pp. 685-703). Oxford: Elsevier.Abstract
Gestures are visuospatial events, meaning carriers, and social interactional phenomena. As such they constitute a particularly favourable area for investigating visual attention in a complex everyday situation under conditions of competitive processing. This chapter discusses visual attention to spontaneous gestures in human face-to-face interaction as explored with eye-tracking. Some basic fixation patterns are described, live and video-based settings are compared, and preliminary results on the relationship between fixations and information processing are outlined. -
Gullberg, M., & Kita, S. (2003). Das Beachten von Gesten: Eine Studie zu Blickverhalten und Integration gestisch ausgedrückter Informationen. In Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (
Ed. ), Jahrbuch der Max Planck Gesellschaft 2003 (pp. 949-953). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. -
Gullberg, M. (2003). Gestures, referents, and anaphoric linkage in learner varieties. In C. Dimroth, & M. Starren (
Eds. ), Information structure, linguistic structure and the dynamics of language acquisition. (pp. 311-328). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Abstract
This paper discusses how the gestural modality can contribute to our understanding of anaphoric linkage in learner varieties, focusing on gestural anaphoric linkage marking the introduction, maintenance, and shift of reference in story retellings by learners of French and Swedish. The comparison of gestural anaphoric linkage in native and non-native varieties reveals what appears to be a particular learner variety of gestural cohesion, which closely reflects the characteristics of anaphoric linkage in learners' speech. Specifically, particular forms co-occur with anaphoric gestures depending on the information organisation in discourse. The typical nominal over-marking of maintained referents or topic elements in speech is mirrored by gestural (over-)marking of the same items. The paper discusses two ways in which this finding may further the understanding of anaphoric over-explicitness of learner varieties. An addressee-based communicative perspective on anaphoric linkage highlights how over-marking in gesture and speech may be related to issues of hyper-clarity and ambiguity. An alternative speaker-based perspective is also explored in which anaphoric over-marking is seen as related to L2 speech planning. -
Gumperz, J. J., & Levinson, S. C. (1996). Introduction to part I. In J. J. Gumperz, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 21-36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Gumperz, J. J., & Levinson, S. C. (1996). Introduction to part III. In J. J. Gumperz, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 225-231). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Gumperz, J. J., & Levinson, S. C. (1996). Introduction: Linguistic relativity re-examined. In J. J. Gumperz, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 1-20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Hagoort, P. (2003). De verloving tussen neurowetenschap en psychologie. In K. Hilberdink (
Ed. ), Interdisciplinariteit in de geesteswetenschappen (pp. 73-81). Amsterdam: KNAW. -
Hagoort, P. (2003). Die einzigartige, grösstenteils aber unbewusste Fähigkeit der Menschen zu sprachlicher Kommunikation. In G. Kaiser (
Ed. ), Jahrbuch 2002-2003 / Wissenschaftszentrum Nordrhein-Westfalen (pp. 33-46). Düsseldorf: Wissenschaftszentrum Nordrhein-Westfalen. -
Hagoort, P. (2003). Functional brain imaging. In W. J. Frawley (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of linguistics (pp. 142-145). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Hagoort, P. (2014). Introduction to section on language and abstract thought. In M. S. Gazzaniga, & G. R. Mangun (
Eds. ), The cognitive neurosciences (5th ed., pp. 615-618). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. -
Hagoort, P., & Levinson, S. C. (2014). Neuropragmatics. In M. S. Gazzaniga, & G. R. Mangun (
Eds. ), The cognitive neurosciences (5th ed., pp. 667-674). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. -
Hammarström, H. (2014). Basic vocabulary comparison in South American languages. In P. Muysken, & L. O'Connor (
Eds. ), Language contact in South America (pp. 56-72). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Hammarström, H. (2014). Papuan languages. In M. Aronoff (
Ed. ), Oxford bibliographies in linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/OBO/9780199772810-0165. -
Hammond, J. (2014). Switch-reference antecedence and subordination in Whitesands (Oceanic). In R. van Gijn, J. Hammond, D. Matić, S. van Putten, & A. V. Galucio (
Eds. ), Information structure and reference tracking in complex sentences. (pp. 263-290). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Abstract
Whitesands is an Oceanic language of the southern Vanuatu subgroup. Like the related languages of southern Vanuatu, Whitesands has developed a clause-linkage system which monitors referent continuity on new clauses – typically contrasting with the previous clause. In this chapter I address how the construction interacts with topic continuity in discourse. I outline the morphosyntactic form of this anaphoric co-reference device. From a functionalist perspective, I show how the system is used in natural discourse and discuss its restrictions with respect to relative and complement clauses. I conclude with a discussion on its interactions with theoretical notions of information structure – in particular the nature of presupposed versus asserted clauses, information back- and foregrounding and how these affect the use of the switch-reference system -
Haun, D. B. M., & Waller, D. (2003). Alignment task. In N. J. Enfield (
Ed. ), Field research manual 2003, part I: Multimodal interaction, space, event representation (pp. 39-48). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Haun, D. B. M. (2003). Path integration. In N. J. Enfield (
Ed. ), Field research manual 2003, part I: Multimodal interaction, space, event representation (pp. 33-38). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.877644. -
Haun, D. B. M. (2003). Spatial updating. In N. J. Enfield (
Ed. ), Field research manual 2003, part I: Multimodal interaction, space, event representation (pp. 49-56). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Hellwig, B. (2003). The grammatical coding of postural semantics in Goemai (a West Chadic language of Nigeria). PhD Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen. doi:10.17617/2.58463.
Additional information
full text via Radboud Repository -
Holler, J. (2014). Experimental methods in co-speech gesture research. In C. Mueller, A. Cienki, D. McNeill, & E. Fricke (
Eds. ), Body -language – communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction. Volume 1 (pp. 837-856). Berlin: De Gruyter. -
Huettig, F. (2014). Role of prediction in language learning. In P. J. Brooks, & V. Kempe (
Eds. ), Encyclopedia of language development (pp. 479-481). London: Sage Publications. -
De Jong, N. H., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2003). Morphological resonance in the mental lexicon. In R. Baayen, & R. Schreuder (
Eds. ), Morphological structure in language processing (pp. 65-88). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Jordens, P. (2003). Constraints on the shape of second language learner varieties. In G. Rickheit, T. Herrmann, & W. Deutsch (
Eds. ), Psycholinguistik/Psycholinguistics: Ein internationales Handbuch. [An International Handbook] (pp. 819-833). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Kashima, Y., Kashima, E. S., & Kidd, E. (2014). Language and culture. In T. M. Holtgraves (
Ed. ), The Oxford Handbook of Language and Social Psychology (pp. 46-61). Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Keating, P., Cho, T., Fougeron, C., & Hsu, C.-S. (2003). Domain-initial strengthening in four languages. In J. Local, R. Ogden, & R. Temple (
Eds. ), Laboratory phonology VI: Phonetic interpretation (pp. 145-163). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Kempen, G., & Vosse, T. (1992). A language-sensitive text editor for Dutch. In P. O’Brian Holt, & N. Williams (
Eds. ), Computers and writing: State of the art (pp. 68-77). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Abstract
Modern word processors begin to offer a range of facilities for spelling, grammar and style checking in English. For the Dutch language hardly anything is available as yet. Many commercial word processing packages do include a hyphenation routine and a lexicon-based spelling checker but the practical usefulness of these tools is limited due to certain properties of Dutch orthography, as we will explain below. In this chapter we describe a text editor which incorporates a great deal of lexical, morphological and syntactic knowledge of Dutch and monitors the orthographical quality of Dutch texts. Section 1 deals with those aspects of Dutch orthography which pose problems to human authors as well as to computational language sensitive text editing tools. In section 2 we describe the design and the implementation of the text editor we have built. Section 3 is mainly devoted to a provisional evaluation of the system. -
Kempen, G. (1996). Computational models of syntactic processing in human language comprehension. In T. Dijkstra, & K. De Smedt (
Eds. ), Computational psycholinguistics: Symbolic and subsymbolic models of language processing (pp. 192-220). London: Taylor & Francis. -
Kempen, G. (1996). "De zwoele groei van den zinsbouw": De wonderlijke levende grammatica van Jac. van Ginneken uit De Roman van een Kleuter (1917). Bezorgd en van een nawoord voorzien door Gerard Kempen. In A. Foolen, & J. Noordegraaf (
Eds. ), De taal is kennis van de ziel: Opstellen over Jac. van Ginneken (1877-1945) (pp. 173-216). Münster: Nodus Publikationen. -
Kempen, G., & Harbusch, K. (2003). Dutch and German verb clusters in performance grammar. In P. A. Seuren, & G. Kempen (
Eds. ), Verb constructions in German and Dutch (pp. 185-221). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Kempen, G. (2003). Language generation. In W. Frawley (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of linguistics (pp. 362-364). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Kempen, G. (1992). Generation. In W. Bright (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of linguistics (pp. 59-61). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Kempen, G. (1989). Informatiegedragskunde: Pijler van de moderne informatieverzorging. In A. F. Marks (
Ed. ), Sociaal-wetenschappelijke informatie en kennisvorming in onderzoek, onderzoeksbeleid en beroep (pp. 31-35). Amsterdam: SWIDOC. -
Kempen, G. (1989). Language generation systems. In I. S. Bátori, W. Lenders, & W. Putschke (
Eds. ), Computational linguistics: An international handbook on computer oriented language research and applications (pp. 471-480). Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. -
Kempen, G. (1992). Language technology and language instruction: Computational diagnosis of word level errors. In M. Swartz, & M. Yazdani (
Eds. ), Intelligent tutoring systems for foreign language learning: The bridge to international communication (pp. 191-198). Berlin: Springer. -
Kempen, G. (1992). Second language acquisition as a hybrid learning process. In F. Engel, D. Bouwhuis, T. Bösser, & G. d'Ydewalle (
Eds. ), Cognitive modelling and interactive environments in language learning (pp. 139-144). Berlin: Springer. -
Kempen, G., & Harbusch, K. (2003). Word order scrambling as a consequence of incremental sentence production. In H. Härtl, & H. Tappe (
Eds. ), Mediating between concepts and grammar (pp. 141-164). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Kendrick, K. H., & Drew, P. (2014). The putative preference for offers over requests. In P. Drew, & E. Couper-Kuhlen (
Eds. ), Requesting in Social Interaction (pp. 87-113). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Abstract
Requesting and offering are closely related, insofar as they are activities associated with someone’s need for assistance. It has been supposed (e.g., Schegloff 2007) that requests and offers are not equivalent actions – specifically that offers are preferred actions and requests are dispreferred. We review the evidence for this claim across a corpus of requests and offers and demonstrate that the empirical evidence does not support the claim for a putative preference for offers over requests. Further consideration of the often symbiotic relationships between requesting and offering, particularly in face-to-face interactions, reveals a more complex picture of the ways in which people recruit others to help, or in which others are mobilized to help. -
Kidd, E. (2003). An investigation of children’s sentence processing: A developmental perspective. PhD Thesis, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Australia.
-
Kita, S. (2003). Pointing: A foundational building block in human communication. In S. Kita (
Ed. ), Pointing: Where language, culture, and cognition meet (pp. 1-8). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Kita, S. (2003). Interplay of gaze, hand, torso orientation and language in pointing. In S. Kita (
Ed. ), Pointing: Where language, culture, and cognition meet (pp. 307-328). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Kita, S., & Essegbey, J. (2003). Left-hand taboo on direction-indicating gestures in Ghana: When and why people still use left-hand gestures. In M. Rector, I. Poggi, & N. Trigo (
Eds. ), Gesture: Meaning and use (pp. 301-306). Oporto: Edições Universidade Fernando Pessoa, Fundação Fernado Pessoa. -
Kita, S., & Enfield, N. J. (2003). Recording recommendations for video research. In N. J. Enfield (
Ed. ), Field research manual 2003, part I: Multimodal interaction, space, event representation (pp. 8-9). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Klein, W. (1984). Bühler Ellipse. In C. F. Graumann, & T. Herrmann (
Eds. ), Karl Bühlers Axiomatik: Fünfzig Jahre Axiomatik der Sprachwissenschaften (pp. 117-141). Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann. -
Klein, W. (1992). Der Fall Horten gegen Delius, oder: Der Laie, der Fachmann und das Recht. In G. Grewendorf (
Ed. ), Rechtskultur als Sprachkultur: Zur forensischen Funktion der Sprachanalyse (pp. 284-313). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. -
Klein, W. (1976). Der Prozeß des Zweitspracherwerbs und seine Beschreibung. In R. Dietrich (
Ed. ), Aspekte des Fremdsprachenerwerbs (pp. 100-118). Kronberg/Ts.: Athenäum. -
Klein, W. (1996). Essentially social: On the origin of linguistic knowledge in the individual. In P. Baltes, & U. Staudinger (
Eds. ), Interactive minds (pp. 88-107). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Klein, W., & Dimroth, C. (2003). Der ungesteuerte Zweitspracherwerb Erwachsener: Ein Überblick über den Forschungsstand. In U. Maas, & U. Mehlem (
Eds. ), Qualitätsanforderungen für die Sprachförderung im Rahmen der Integration von Zuwanderern (Heft 21) (pp. 127-161). Osnabrück: IMIS. -
Klein, W., & Franceschini, R. (
Eds. ). (2003). Einfache Sprache [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 131. -
Klein, W., & Klein, W. (1971). Formale Poetik und Linguistik. In Beiträge zu den Sommerkursen des Goethe-Instituts München (pp. 190-195).
-
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (1992). Framework. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 11-59). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Klein, W. (1976). Maschinelle Analyse des Sprachwandels. In P. Eisenberg (
Ed. ), Maschinelle Sprachanalyse (pp. 137-166). Berlin: de Gruyter. -
Klein, W. (
Ed. ). (1989). Kindersprache [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (73). -
Klein, W. (1989). La variation linguistique. In P. Cadiot, & N. Dittmar (
Eds. ), La sociolinguistique en pays de langue allemande (pp. 101-124). Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille. -
Klein, W. (1996). Language acquisition at different ages. In D. Magnusson (
Ed. ), Individual development over the lifespan: Biological and psychosocial perspectives (pp. 88-108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Klein, W. (
Ed. ). (1976). Psycholinguistik [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (23/24). -
Klein, W. (
Ed. ). (1992). Textlinguistik [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (86). -
Klein, W. (
Ed. ). (1984). Textverständlichkeit - Textverstehen [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (55). -
Klein, W., & Carroll, M. (1992). The acquisition of German. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 123-188). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Klein, W., & Schlieben-Lange, B. (
Eds. ). (1996). Sprache und Subjektivität I [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (101). -
Klein, W., & Schlieben-Lange, B. (
Eds. ). (1996). Sprache und Subjektivität II [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (102). -
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (1989). The learner's problem of arranging words. In B. MacWhinney, & E. Bates (
Eds. ), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 292-327). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Klein, W. (
Ed. ). (1996). Zweitspracherwerb [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (104). -
Kockelman, P., Enfield, N. J., & Sidnell, J. (2014). Process and formation. In N. J. Enfield, P. Kockelman, & J. Sidnell (
Eds. ), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic anthropology (pp. 183-186). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Kok, P. (2014). On the role of expectation in visual perception: A top-down view of early visual cortex. PhD Thesis, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen.
-
Konopka, A. E., & Brown-Schmidt, S. (2014). Message encoding. In V. Ferreira, M. Goldrick, & M. Miozzo (
Eds. ), The Oxford handbook of language production (pp. 3-20). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Kösem, A. (2014). Cortical oscillations as temporal reference frames for perception. PhD Thesis, Université Pierre et Marie Curie-Paris VI, Paris.
-
Kreuzer, H. (
Ed. ). (1971). Methodische Perspektiven [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, (1/2). -
De León, L., & Levinson, S. C. (
Eds. ). (1992). Space in Mesoamerican languages [Special Issue]. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung, 45(6). -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1996). Preface. In W. J. M. Levelt (
Ed. ), Advanced psycholinguistics: A bressanone perspective for Giovanni B. Flores d'Arcais (pp. VII-IX). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). De connectionistische mode: Symbolische en subsymbolische modellen van het menselijk gedrag. In C. M. Brown, P. Hagoort, & T. Meijering (
Eds. ), Vensters op de geest: Cognitie op het snijvlak van filosofie en psychologie (pp. 202-219). Utrecht: Stichting Grafiet. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1996). Foreword. In T. Dijkstra, & K. De Smedt (
Eds. ), Computational psycholinguistics (pp. ix-xi). London: Taylor & Francis. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1976). Formal grammars and the natural language user: A review. In A. Marzollo (
Ed. ), Topics in artificial intelligence (pp. 226-290). Vienna: Springer. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2014). From Rousseau to Suppes: On diaries and probabilistic grammars. In C. E. Crangle, A. García de la Sienra, & H. E. Longino (
Eds. ), Foundations and methods from mathematics to neuroscience: Essays inspired by Patrick Suppes (pp. 149-156). Stanford, CA: CSLI publications. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1984). Geesteswetenschappelijke theorie als kompas voor de gangbare mening. In S. Dresden, & D. Van de Kaa (
Eds. ), Wetenschap ten goede en ten kwade (pp. 42-52). Amsterdam: North Holland. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1996). Linguistic intuitions and beyond. In W. J. M. Levelt (
Ed. ), Advanced psycholinguistics: A Bressanone retrospective for Giovanni B. Floris d'Arcais (pp. 31-35). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1996). Perspective taking and ellipsis in spatial descriptions. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (
Eds. ), Language and space (pp. 77-107). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1992). Psycholinguistics: An overview. In W. Bright (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of linguistics (Vol. 3) (pp. 290-294). Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1984). Some perceptual limitations on talking about space. In A. J. Van Doorn, W. A. Van de Grind, & J. J. Koenderink (
Eds. ), Limits in perception (pp. 323-358). Utrecht: VNU Science Press. -
Levelt, W. J. M., & Kempen, G. (1976). Taal. In J. Michon, E. Eijkman, & L. De Klerk (
Eds. ), Handboek der Psychonomie (pp. 492-523). Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Working models of perception: Five general issues. In B. A. Elsendoorn, & H. Bouma (
Eds. ), Working models of perception (pp. 489-503). London: Academic Press. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2014). Über Sprachtätigkeit - Untersuchungen zum Sprechvorgang. In Orden pour le mérite für Wissenschaft und Künste (
Ed. ), Reden und Gedenkworte. Band 2012-2013 (pp. 37-62). Berlin: Wallstein Verlag. -
Levinson, S. C. (2003). Spatial language. In L. Nadel (
Ed. ), Encyclopedia of cognitive science (pp. 131-137). London: Nature Publishing Group. -
Levinson, S. C. (1992). Space in Australian Languages Questionnaire. In S. C. Levinson (
Ed. ), Space stimuli kit 1.2 (pp. 29-40). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Abstract
This questionnaire is designed to explore how spatial relations are encoded in Australian language, but may be of interest to researchers further afield. -
Levinson, S. C. (1992). Space in Australian Languages Questionnaire. In S. C. Levinson (
Ed. ), Space stimuli kit 1.2 (pp. 29-40). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3512641.Abstract
This questionnaire is designed to explore how spatial relations are encoded in Australian language, but may be of interest to researchers further afield. -
Levinson, S. C. (1992). Activity types and language. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (
Eds. ), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 66-100). Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (1989). Conversation. In E. Barnouw (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of communications (pp. 407-410). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2003). Contextualizing 'contextualization cues'. In S. Eerdmans, C. Prevignano, & P. Thibault (
Eds. ), Language and interaction: Discussions with John J. Gumperz (pp. 31-39). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. -
Levinson, S. C. (2003). Language and cognition. In W. Frawley (
Ed. ), International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (pp. 459-463). Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2003). Language and mind: Let's get the issues straight! In D. Gentner, & S. Goldin-Meadow (
Eds. ), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and cognition (pp. 25-46). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (1996). Frames of reference and Molyneux's question: Cross-linguistic evidence. In P. Bloom, M. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. Garrett (
Eds. ), Language and space (pp. 109-169). Cambridge, MA: MIT press. -
Levinson, S. C., Brown, P., Danzinger, E., De León, L., Haviland, J. B., Pederson, E., & Senft, G. (1992). Man and Tree & Space Games. In S. C. Levinson (
Ed. ), Space stimuli kit 1.2 (pp. 7-14). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.2458804.Abstract
These classic tasks can be used to explore spatial reference in field settings. They provide a language-independent metric for eliciting spatial language, using a “director-matcher” paradigm. The Man and Tree task deals with location on the horizontal plane with both featured (man) and non-featured (e.g., tree) objects. The Space Games depict various objects (e.g. bananas, lemons) and elicit spatial contrasts not obviously lexicalisable in English.Additional information
1992_Man_and_tree_and_space_games_stimuli.zip -
Levinson, S. C. (2014). Language evolution. In N. J. Enfield, P. Kockelman, & J. Sidnell (
Eds. ), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic anthropology (pp. 309-324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (1996). Introduction to part II. In J. J. Gumperz, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 133-144). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (1996). Relativity in spatial conception and description. In J. J. Gumperz, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 177-202). Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2014). Pragmatics as the origin of recursion. In F. Lowenthal, & L. Lefebvre (
Eds. ), Language and recursion (pp. 3-13). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-9414-0_1.Abstract
There has been a recent spate of work on recursion as a central design feature of language and specifically of syntax. This short report points out that there is little evidence that unlimited recursion, understood as centre embedding, is typical of natural language syntax. Nevertheless, embedded pragmatic construals seem available in every language. Further, much deeper centre embedding can be found in dialogue or conversation structure than can be found in syntax. Existing accounts for the ‘performance’ limitations on centre embedding are thus thrown in doubt. Dialogue materials suggest that centre embedding is perhaps a core part of the human interaction system and is for some reason much more highly restricted in syntax than in other aspects of cognition -
Levinson, S. C., & Annamalai, E. (1992). Why presuppositions aren't conventional. In R. N. Srivastava (
Ed. ), Language and text: Studies in honour of Ashok R. Kelkar (pp. 227-242). Dehli: Kalinga Publications. -
Levinson, S. C., & Senft, G. (1996). Zur Semantik der Verben INTRARE und EXIRE in verschieden Sprachen. In Jahrbuch der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft 1996 (pp. 340-344). München: Generalverwaltung der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft München.
-
Liszkowski, U., & Epps, P. (2003). Directing attention and pointing in infants: A cross-cultural approach. In N. J. Enfield (
Ed. ), Field research manual 2003, part I: Multimodal interaction, space, event representation (pp. 25-27). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.877649.Abstract
Recent research suggests that 12-month-old infants in German cultural settings have the motive of sharing their attention to and interest in various events with a social interlocutor. To do so, these preverbal infants predominantly use the pointing gesture (in this case the extended arm with or without extended index finger) as a means to direct another person’s attention. This task systematically investigates different types of motives underlying infants’ pointing. The occurrence of a protodeclarative (as opposed to protoimperative) motive is of particular interest because it requires an understanding of the recipient’s psychological states, such as attention and interest, that can be directed and accessed. -
Liszkowski, U. (2014). Pointing. In P. Brooks, & V. Kempe (
Eds. ), Encyclopedia of language development (Vol. 15) (pp. 471-473). London: Sage. -
Majid, A., & Bödeker, K. (2003). Folk theories of objects in motion. In N. J. Enfield (
Ed. ), Field research manual 2003, part I: Multimodal interaction, space, event representation (pp. 72-76). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.877654.Abstract
There are three main strands of research which have investigated people’s intuitive knowledge of objects in motion. (1) Knowledge of the trajectories of objects in motion; (2) knowledge of the causes of motion; and (3) the categorisation of motion as to whether it has been produced by something animate or inanimate. We provide a brief introduction to each of these areas. We then point to some linguistic and cultural differences which may have consequences for people’s knowledge of objects in motion. Finally, we describe two experimental tasks and an ethnographic task that will allow us to collect data in order to establish whether, indeed, there are interesting cross-linguistic/cross-cultural differences in lay theories of objects in motion. -
Martins, M., Raju, A., & Ravignani, A. (2014). Evaluating the role of quantitative modeling in language evolution. In L. McCrohon, B. Thompson, T. Verhoef, & H. Yamauchi (
Eds. ), The Past, Present and Future of Language Evolution Research: Student volume of the 9th International Conference on the Evolution of Language (pp. 84-93). Tokyo: EvoLang9 Organising Committee.Abstract
Models are a flourishing and indispensable area of research in language evolution. Here we
highlight critical issues in using and interpreting models, and suggest viable approaches. First,
contrasting models can explain the same data and similar modelling techniques can lead to
diverging conclusions. This should act as a reminder to use the extreme malleability of
modelling parsimoniously when interpreting results. Second, quantitative techniques similar to
those used in modelling language evolution have proven themselves inadequate in other
disciplines. Cross-disciplinary fertilization is crucial to avoid mistakes which have previously
occurred in other areas. Finally, experimental validation is necessary both to sharpen models'
hypotheses, and to support their conclusions. Our belief is that models should be interpreted as
quantitative demonstrations of logical possibilities, rather than as direct sources of evidence.
Only an integration of theoretical principles, quantitative proofs and empirical validation can
allow research in the evolution of language to progress.
Share this page