Displaying 201 - 300 of 409
-
Klein, W. (1998). Assertion and finiteness. In N. Dittmar, & Z. Penner (
Eds. ), Issues in the theory of language acquisition: Essays in honor of Jürgen Weissenborn (pp. 225-245). Bern: Peter Lang. -
Klein, W., & Musan, R. (2002). (A)Symmetry in language: seit and bis, and others. In C. Maienborn (
Ed. ), (A)Symmetrien - (A)Symmetry. Beiträge zu Ehren von Ewald Lang - Papers in Honor of Ewald Lang (pp. 283-295). Tübingen: Stauffenburg. -
Klein, W. (2001). Lexicology and lexicography. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences: Vol. 13 (pp. 8764-8768). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. -
Klein, W. (2001). Second language acquisition. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences: Vol. 20 (pp. 13768-13771). Amsterdam: Elsevier science. -
Klein, W., & Vater, H. (1998). The perfect in English and German. In L. Kulikov, & H. Vater (
Eds. ), Typology of verbal categories: Papers presented to Vladimir Nedjalkov on the occasion of his 70th birthday (pp. 215-235). Tübingen: Niemeyer. -
Klein, W. (2001). Time and again. In C. Féry, & W. Sternefeld (
Eds. ), Audiatur vox sapientiae: A festschrift for Arnim von Stechow (pp. 267-286). Berlin: Akademie Verlag. -
Klein, W. (2001). Typen und Konzepte des Spracherwerbs. In L. Götze, G. Helbig, G. Henrici, & H. Krumm (
Eds. ), Deutsch als Fremdsprache (pp. 604-616). Berlin: de Gruyter. -
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. -
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. -
Kopecka, A. (2006). The semantic structure of motion verbs in French: Typological perspectives. In M. Hickmann, & Roberts S. (
Eds. ), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp. 83-102). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Krott, A., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2002). Analogical hierarchy: Exemplar-based modeling of linkers in Dutch noun-noun compounds. In R. Skousen (
Ed. ), Analogical modeling: An exemplar-based approach to language (pp. 181-206). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Kuijpers, C. T., Coolen, R., Houston, D., & Cutler, A. (1998). Using the head-turning technique to explore cross-linguistic performance differences. In C. Rovee-Collier, L. Lipsitt, & H. Hayne (
Eds. ), Advances in infancy research: Vol. 12 (pp. 205-220). Stamford: Ablex. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2002). Phonological encoding in speech production: Comments on Jurafsky et al., Schiller et al., and van Heuven & Haan. In C. Gussenhoven, & N. Warner (
Eds. ), Laboratory phonology VII (pp. 87-99). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2001). The architecture of normal spoken language use. In G. Gupta (
Ed. ), Cognitive science: Issues and perspectives (pp. 457-473). New Delhi: Icon Publications. -
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (2002). A theory of lexical access in speech production. In G. T. Altmann (
Ed. ), Psycholinguistics: critical concepts in psychology (pp. 278-377). London: Routledge. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1999). Language. In G. Adelman, & B. H. Smith (
Eds. ), Elsevier's encyclopedia of neuroscience (2nd enlarged and revised edition) (pp. 1005-1008). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2006). Met het oog op de tijd. Nijmegen: Thieme Media Center.
Additional information
full text via Radboud Repository -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2014). A history of psycholinguistics: The pre-Chomskyan era. Updated paperback ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
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. (1962). Motion breaking and the perception of causality. In A. Michotte (
Ed. ), Causalité, permanence et réalité phénoménales: Etudes de psychologie expérimentale (pp. 244-258). Louvain: Publications Universitaires. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1999). Producing spoken language: A blueprint of the speaker. In C. M. Brown, & P. Hagoort (
Eds. ), The neurocognition of language (pp. 83-122). Oxford University Press. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2001). Relations between speech production and speech perception: Some behavioral and neurological observations. In E. Dupoux (
Ed. ), Language, brain and cognitive development: Essays in honour of Jacques Mehler (pp. 241-256). Cambridge, MA: MIT 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. (2002). Pragmatics [Chinese translation]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Levinson, S. C., & Wilkins, D. P. (2006). Patterns in the data: Towards a semantic typology of spatial description. In S. C. Levinson, & D. P. Wilkins (
Eds. ), Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity (pp. 512-552). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C., & Wilkins, D. P. (2006). The background to the study of the language of space. In S. C. Levinson, & D. P. Wilkins (
Eds. ), Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity (pp. 1-23). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2006). The language of space in Yélî Dnye. In S. C. Levinson, & D. P. Wilkins (
Eds. ), Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity (pp. 157-203). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Motion Verb Stimulus (Moverb) version 2. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 9-13). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3513706.Abstract
How do languages express ideas of movement, and how do they package different components of this domain, such as manner and path of motion? This task uses one large set of stimuli to gain knowledge of certain key aspects of motion verb meanings in the target language, and expands the investigation beyond simple verbs (e.g., go) to include the semantics of motion predications complete with adjuncts (e.g., go across something). Consultants are asked to view and briefly describe 96 animations of a few seconds each. The task is designed to get linguistic elicitations of motion predications under contrastive comparison with other animations in the same set. Unlike earlier tasks, the stimuli focus on inanimate moving items or “figures” (in this case, a ball).Additional information
2001_Motion_verb_stimulus_version_2.zip -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Covariation between spatial language and cognition. In M. Bowerman, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 566-588). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (1999). Deixis. In K. Brown, & J. Miller (
Eds. ), Concise encyclopedia of grammatical categories (pp. 132-136). Oxford: Elsevier. -
Levinson, S. C. (1998). Deixis. In J. L. Mey (
Ed. ), Concise encyclopedia of pragmatics (pp. 200-204). Amsterdam: Elsevier. -
Levinson, S. C. (1999). Deixis and Demonstratives. In D. Wilkins (
Ed. ), Manual for the 1999 Field Season (pp. 29-40). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.2573810.Abstract
Demonstratives are key items in understanding how a language constructs and interprets spatial relationships. They are also multi-functional, with applications to non-spatial deictic fields such as time, perception, person and discourse, and uses in anaphora and affect marking. This item consists of an overview of theoretical distinctions in demonstrative systems, followed by a set of practical queries and elicitation suggestions for demonstratives in “table top” space, wider spatial fields, and naturalistic data. -
Levinson, S. C., Kita, S., & Ozyurek, A. (2001). Demonstratives in context: Comparative handicrafts. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 52-54). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874663.Abstract
Demonstratives (e.g., words such as this and that in English) pivot on relationships between the item being talked about, and features of the speech act situation (e.g., where the speaker and addressee are standing or looking). However, they are only rarely investigated multi-modally, in natural language contexts. This task is designed to build a video corpus of cross-linguistically comparable discourse data for the study of “deixis in action”, while simultaneously supporting the investigation of joint attention as a factor in speaker selection of demonstratives. In the task, two or more speakers are asked to discuss and evaluate a group of similar items (e.g., examples of local handicrafts, tools, produce) that are placed within a relatively defined space (e.g., on a table). The task can additionally provide material for comparison of pointing gesture practices. -
Levinson, S. C. (2002). Appendix to the 2002 Supplement, version 1, for the “Manual” for the field season 2001. In S. Kita (
Ed. ), 2002 Supplement (version 3) for the “Manual” for the field season 2001 (pp. 62-64). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Levinson, S. C., Bohnemeyer, J., & Enfield, N. J. (2001). “Time and space” questionnaire for “space in thinking” subproject. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 14-20). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Abstract
This entry contains: 1. An invitation to think about to what extent the grammar of space and time share lexical and morphosyntactic resources − the suggestions here are only prompts, since it would take a long questionnaire to fully explore this; 2. A suggestion about how to collect gestural data that might show us to what extent the spatial and temporal domains, have a psychological continuity. This is really the goal − but you need to do the linguistic work first or in addition. The goal of this task is to explore the extent to which time is conceptualised on a spatial basis.Additional information
http://fieldmanuals.mpi.nl/volumes/2001/time-and-space-questionnaire-2/ -
Levinson, S. C., & Jaisson, P. (
Eds. ). (2006). Evolution and culture: A Fyssen Foundation Symposium. Cambridge: MIT Press. -
Levinson, S. C., & Wilkins, D. P. (
Eds. ). (2006). Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2006). Introduction: The evolution of culture in a microcosm. In S. C. Levinson, & P. Jaisson (
Eds. ), Evolution and culture: A Fyssen Foundation Symposium (pp. 1-41). Cambridge: MIT Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (1999). General Questions About Topological Relations in Adpositions and Cases. In D. Wilkins (
Ed. ), Manual for the 1999 Field Season (pp. 57-68). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.2615829.Abstract
The world’s languages encode a diverse range of topological relations. However, cross-linguistic investigation suggests that the relations IN, AT and ON are especially fundamental to the grammaticised expression of space. The purpose of this questionnaire is to collect information about adpositions, case markers, and spatial nominals that are involved in the expression of core IN/AT/ON meanings. The task explores the more general parts of a language’s topological system, with a view to testing certain hypotheses about the packaging of spatial concepts. The questionnaire consists of target translation sentences that focus on a number of dimensions including animacy, caused location and motion. -
Levinson, S. C. (1999). Hypotheses concerning basic locative constructions and the verbal elements within them. In D. Wilkins (
Ed. ), Manual for the 1999 Field Season (pp. 55-56). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3002711.Abstract
Languages differ widely in terms of how they encode the fundamental concepts of location and position. For some languages, verbs have an important role to play in describing situations (e.g., whether a bottle is standing or lying on the table); for others, verbs are not used in describing location at all. This item outlines certain hypotheses concerning four “types” of languages: those that have verbless basic locatives; those that use a single verb; those that have several verbs available to express location; and those that use positional verbs. The document was originally published as an appendix to the 'Picture series for positional verbs' (https://doi.org/10.17617/2.2573831). -
Levinson, S. C., & Enfield, N. J. (
Eds. ). (2001). Manual for the field season 2001. Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Additional information
http://fieldmanuals.mpi.nl/volumes/2001/ -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Maxim. In S. Duranti (
Ed. ), Key terms in language and culture (pp. 139-142). Oxford: Blackwell. -
Levinson, S. C. (1998). Minimization and conversational inference. In A. Kasher (
Ed. ), Pragmatics: Vol. 4 Presupposition, implicature and indirect speech acts (pp. 545-612). London: Routledge. -
Levinson, S. C., Enfield, N. J., & Senft, G. (2001). Kinship domain for 'space in thinking' subproject. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 85-88). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874655. -
Levinson, S. C. (2002). Landscape terms and place names in Yélî Dnye, the language of Rossel Island, PNG. In S. Kita (
Ed. ), 2002 Supplement (version 3) for the “Manual” for the field season 2001 (pp. 8-13). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Levinson, S. C. (1999). Language and culture. In R. Wilson, & F. Keil (
Eds. ), MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences (pp. 438-440). Cambridge: MIT press. -
Levinson, S. C., & Wittenburg, P. (2001). Language as cultural heritage - Promoting research and public awareness on the Internet. In J. Renn (
Ed. ), ECHO - An Infrastructure to Bring European Cultural Heritage Online (pp. 104-111). Berlin: Max Planck Institute for the History of Science.Abstract
The ECHO proposal aims to bring to life the cultural heritage of Europe, through internet technology that encourages collaboration across the Humanities disciplines which interpret it – at the same time making all this scholarship accessible to the citizens of Europe. An essential part of the cultural heritage of Europe is the diverse set of languages used on the continent, in their historical, literary and spoken forms. Amongst these are the ‘hidden languages’ used by minorities but of wide interest to the general public. We take the 18 Sign Languages of the EEC – the natural languages of the deaf - as an example. Little comparative information about these is available, despite their special scientific importance, the widespread public interest and the policy implications. We propose a research project on these languages based on placing fully annotated digitized moving images of each of these languages on the internet. This requires significant development of multi-media technology which would allow distributed annotation of a central corpus, together with the development of special search techniques. The technology would have widespread application to all cultural performances recorded as sound plus moving images. Such a project captures in microcosm the essence of the ECHO proposal: cultural heritage is nothing without the humanities research which contextualizes and gives it comparative assessment; by marrying information technology to humanities research, we can bring these materials to a wider public while simultaneously boosting Europe as a research area. -
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. (2017). Living with Manny's dangerous idea. In G. Raymond, G. H. Lerner, & J. Heritage (
Eds. ), Enabling human conduct: Studies of talk-in-interaction in honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff (pp. 327-349). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Levinson, S. C., Kita, S., & Enfield, N. J. (2001). Locally-anchored narrative. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 147). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874660.Abstract
As for 'Locally-anchored spatial gestures task, version 2', a major goal of this task is to elicit locally-anchored spatial gestures across different cultures. “Locally-anchored spatial gestures” are gestures that are roughly oriented to the actual geographical direction of referents. Rather than set up an interview situation, this task involves recording informal, animated narrative delivered to a native-speaker interlocutor. Locally-anchored gestures produced in such narrative are roughly comparable to those collected in the interview task. The data collected can also be used to investigate a wide range of other topics. -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Space: Linguistic expression. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences: Vol. 22 (pp. 14749-14752). Oxford: Pergamon. -
Levinson, S. C. (2017). Speech acts. In Y. Huang (
Ed. ), Oxford handbook of pragmatics (pp. 199-216). Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199697960.013.22.Abstract
The essential insight of speech act theory was that when we use language, we perform actions—in a more modern parlance, core language use in interaction is a form of joint action. Over the last thirty years, speech acts have been relatively neglected in linguistic pragmatics, although important work has been done especially in conversation analysis. Here we review the core issues—the identifying characteristics, the degree of universality, the problem of multiple functions, and the puzzle of speech act recognition. Special attention is drawn to the role of conversation structure, probabilistic linguistic cues, and plan or sequence inference in speech act recognition, and to the centrality of deep recursive structures in sequences of speech acts in conversationFiles private
Request files -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Place and space in the sculpture of Anthony Gormley - An anthropological perspective. In S. D. McElroy (
Ed. ), Some of the facts (pp. 68-109). St Ives: Tate Gallery. -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Pragmatics. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences: Vol. 17 (pp. 11948-11954). Oxford: Pergamon. -
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., & Enfield, N. J. (2001). Preface and priorities. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 3). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Liszkowski, U. (2006). Infant pointing at twelve months: Communicative goals, motives, and social-cognitive abilities. In N. J. Enfield, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Roots of human sociality: culture, cognition and interaction (pp. 153-178). New York: Berg. -
Liszkowski, U. (2014). Pointing. In P. Brooks, & V. Kempe (
Eds. ), Encyclopedia of language development (Vol. 15) (pp. 471-473). London: Sage. -
Majid, A., & Enfield, N. J. (2017). Body. In H. Burkhardt, J. Seibt, G. Imaguire, & S. Gerogiorgakis (
Eds. ), Handbook of mereology (pp. 100-103). Munich: Philosophia. -
Majid, A., Manko, P., & De Valk, J. (2017). Language of the senses. In S. Dekker (
Ed. ), Scientific breakthroughs in the classroom! (pp. 40-76). Nijmegen: Science Education Hub Radboud University.Abstract
The project that we describe in this chapter has the theme ‘Language of the senses’. This theme is
based on the research of Asifa Majid and her team regarding the influence of language and culture on
sensory perception. The chapter consists of two sections. Section 2.1 describes how different sensory
perceptions are spoken of in different languages. Teachers can use this section as substantive preparation
before they launch this theme in the classroom. Section 2.2 describes how teachers can handle
this theme in accordance with the seven phases of inquiry-based learning. Chapter 1, in which the
general guideline of the seven phases is described, forms the basis for this. We therefore recommend
the use of chapter 1 as the starting point for the execution of a project in the classroom. This chapter
provides the thematic additions.Additional information
Materials Language of the senses -
Majid, A., Manko, P., & de Valk, J. (2017). Taal der Zintuigen. In S. Dekker, & J. Van Baren-Nawrocka (
Eds. ), Wetenschappelijke doorbraken de klas in! Molecuulbotsingen, Stress en Taal der Zintuigen (pp. 128-166). Nijmegen: Wetenschapsknooppunt Radboud Universiteit.Abstract
Taal der zintuigen gaat over de invloed van taal en cultuur op zintuiglijke waarnemingen. Hoe omschrijf je wat je ziet, voelt, proeft of ruikt? In sommige culturen zijn er veel verschillende woorden voor kleur, in andere culturen juist weer heel weinig. Worden we geboren met deze verschillende kleurgroepen? En bepaalt hoe je ergens over praat ook wat je waarneemt?Additional information
https://www.wetenschapdeklasin.nl/uploads/boeken/Boek%206/Hoofdstuk%204/PDF%20B… -
Martin, A., & Van Turennout, M. (2002). Searching for the neural correlates of object priming. In L. R. Squire, & D. L. Schacter (
Eds. ), The Neuropsychology of Memory (pp. 239-247). New York: Guilford Press. -
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. -
Matic, D. (2014). Clues to information structure in field data. In D. El Zarka, & S. Heidinger (
Eds. ), Methodological Issues in the Study of Information Structure (pp. 25-42). Graz: Graz University Press. -
Matić, D., Van Gijn, R., & Van Valin Jr., R. D. (2014). Information structure and reference tracking in complex sentences: An overview. In R. van Gijn, J. Hammond, D. Matić, S. van Putten, & A. Galucio (
Eds. ), Information structure and reference tracking in complex sentences. (pp. 1-42). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Abstract
This volume is dedicated to exploring the crossroads where complex sentences and information management – more specifically information structure (IS) and reference tracking (RT) – come together. Complex sentences are a highly relevant but understudied domain for studying notions of IS and RT. On the one hand, a complex sentence can be studied as a mini-unit of discourse consisting of two or more elements describing events, situations, or processes, with its own internal information-structural and referential organisation. On the other hand, complex sentences can be studied as parts of larger discourse structures, such as narratives or conversations, in terms of how their information-structural characteristics relate to this wider context.We first focus on the interrelatedness of IS and RT (Section 1) and then define and discuss the notion of complex sentences and their subtypes in Section 2. Section 3 surveys issues of IS in complex sentences, while Section 4 focuses on RT in complex sentences. Sections 5 and 6 briefly consider IS and RT in a wider discourse context. Section 5 discusses the interaction between IS, RT, and other discourse factors, and Section 6 focuses on ways in which a specific RT system, switch reference, can function as an RT device beyond the sentence. -
Matić, D. (2014). Questions and syntactic islands in Tundra Yukaghir. In R. van Gijn, J. Hammond, D. Matić, S. van Putten, & A. Galucio (
Eds. ), Information structure and reference tracking in complex sentences (pp. 127-162). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Abstract
No island effects are observable in Tundra Yukaghir questions, which are possible in virtually all syntactic environments. It is argued that this feature of Tundra Yukaghir relates to its capability of explicitly marking focus domains. If a question word occurs in a syntactic island, the whole island is morphologically treated as a focus domain. In order to take scope and function as question markers, question words must remain within the focus domain, i.e. in the island clause. This syntactic configuration is reflected in the semantics of question islands, which are used to inquire about the identity of the whole island, not merely the denotation of the question word. -
Mauner, G., Koenig, J.-P., Melinger, A., & Bienvenue, B. (2002). The lexical source of unexpressed participants and their role in sentence and discourse understanding. In P. Merlo, & S. Stevenson (
Eds. ), The Lexical Basis of Sentence Processing: Formal, Computational and Experimental Issues (pp. 233-254). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. -
McDonough, L., Choi, S., Bowerman, M., & Mandler, J. M. (1998). The use of preferential looking as a measure of semantic development. In C. Rovee-Collier, L. P. Lipsitt, & H. Hayne (
Eds. ), Advances in Infancy Research. Volume 12. (pp. 336-354). Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing. -
McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (1998). Morphology in word recognition. In A. M. Zwicky, & A. Spencer (
Eds. ), The handbook of morphology (pp. 406-427). Oxford: Blackwell. -
McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (
Eds. ). (2001). Spoken word access processes. Hove, UK: Psychology Press. -
Meira, S., & Levinson, S. C. (2001). Topological tasks: General introduction. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 29-51). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874665. -
Mickan, A., Schiefke, M., & Anatol, S. (2014). Key is a llave is a Schlüssel: A failure to replicate an experiment from Boroditsky et al. 2003. In M. Hilpert, & S. Flach (
Eds. ), Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association (pp. 39-50). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. doi:doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2014-0004.Abstract
In this paper, we present two attempts to replicate a widely-cited but never fully published experiment in which German and Spanish speakers were asked to associate adjectives with nouns of masculine and feminine grammati-cal gender (Boroditsky et al. 2003). The researchers claim that speakers associ-ated more stereotypically female adjectives with grammatically feminine nouns and more stereotypically male adjectives with grammatically masculine nouns. We were not able to replicate the results either in a word association task or in an analogous primed lexical decision task. This suggests that the results of the original experiment were either an artifact of some non-documented aspect of the experimental procedure or a statistical fluke. The question whether speakers assign sex-based interpretations to grammatical gender categories at all cannot be answered definitively, as the results in the published literature vary consider-ably. However, our experiments show that if such an effect exists, it is not strong enough to be measured indirectly via the priming of adjectives by nouns. -
Mitterer, H., & Cutler, A. (2006). Speech perception. In K. Brown (
Ed. ), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (vol. 11) (pp. 770-782). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Abstract
The goal of speech perception is understanding a speaker's message. To achieve this, listeners must recognize the words that comprise a spoken utterance. This in turn implies distinguishing these words from other minimally different words (e.g., word from bird, etc.), and this involves making phonemic distinctions. The article summarizes research on the perception of phonemic distinctions, on how listeners cope with the continuity and variability of speech signals, and on how phonemic information is mapped onto the representations of words. Particular attention is paid to theories of speech perception and word recognition. -
Mitterer, H., & Stivers, T. (2006). Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics: Annual Report 2006. Nijmegen: MPI for Psycholinguistics.
-
Moulin, C. A., Souchay, C., Bradley, R., Buchanan, S., Karadöller, D. Z., & Akan, M. (2014). Déjà vu in older adults. In B. L. Schwartz, & A. S. Brown (
Eds. ), Tip-of-the-tongue states and related phenomena (pp. 281-304). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Muysken, P., Hammarström, H., Birchall, J., Danielsen, S., Eriksen, L., Galucio, A. V., Van Gijn, R., Van de Kerke, S., Kolipakam, V., Krasnoukhova, O., Müller, N., & O'Connor, L. (2014). The languages of South America: Deep families, areal relationships, and language contact. In P. Muysken, & L. O'Connor (
Eds. ), Language contact in South America (pp. 299-323). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Nijhof, S., & Zwitserlood, I. (1999). Pluralization in Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT). In J. Don, & T. Sanders (
Eds. ), OTS Yearbook 1998-1999 (pp. 58-78). Utrecht: UiL OTS. -
Noordman, L. G., & Vonk, W. (1998). Discourse comprehension. In A. D. Friederici (
Ed. ), Language comprehension: a biological perspective (pp. 229-262). Berlin: Springer.Abstract
The human language processor is conceived as a system that consists of several interrelated subsystems. Each subsystem performs a specific task in the complex process of language comprehension and production. A subsystem receives a particular input, performs certain specific operations on this input and yields a particular output. The subsystems can be characterized in terms of the transformations that relate the input representations to the output representations. An important issue in describing the language processing system is to identify the subsystems and to specify the relations between the subsystems. These relations can be conceived in two different ways. In one conception the subsystems are autonomous. They are related to each other only by the input-output channels. The operations in one subsystem are not affected by another system. The subsystems are modular, that is they are independent. In the other conception, the different subsystems influence each other. A subsystem affects the processes in another subsystem. In this conception there is an interaction between the subsystems. -
Nordhoff, S., & Hammarström, H. (2014). Archiving grammatical descriptions. In P. K. Austin (
Ed. ), Language Documentation and Description. Vol. 12 (pp. 164-186). London: SOAS.Additional information
link to website -
O'Connor, L. (2006). Sobre los predicados complejos en el Chontal de la baja. In A. Oseguera (
Ed. ), Historia y etnografía entre los Chontales de Oaxaca (pp. 119-161). Oaxaca: Instituto Nacional de Antroplogía e Historia. -
O'Connor, L., & Kolipakam, V. (2014). Human migrations, dispersals, and contacts in South America. In L. O'Connor, & P. Muysken (
Eds. ), The native languages of South America: Origins, development, typology (pp. 29-55). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
O'Meara, C., & Majid, A. (2017). El léxico olfativo en la lengua seri. In A. L. M. D. Ruiz, & A. Z. Pérez (
Eds. ), La Dimensión Sensorial de la Cultura: Diez contribuciones al estudio de los sentidos en México. (pp. 101-118). Mexico City: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana. -
Ozyurek, A. (2017). Function and processing of gesture in the context of language. In R. B. Church, M. W. Alibali, & S. D. Kelly (
Eds. ), Why gesture? How the hands function in speaking, thinking and communicating (pp. 39-58). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. doi:10.1075/gs.7.03ozy.Abstract
Most research focuses function of gesture independent of its link to the speech it accompanies and the coexpressive functions it has together with speech. This chapter instead approaches gesture in relation to its communicative function in relation to speech, and demonstrates how it is shaped by the linguistic encoding of a speaker’s message. Drawing on crosslinguistic research with adults and children as well as bilinguals on iconic/pointing gesture production it shows that the specific language speakers use modulates the rate and the shape of the iconic gesture production of the same events. The findings challenge the claims aiming to understand gesture’s function for “thinking only” in adults and during development. -
Petersson, K. M., & Reis, A. (2006). Characteristics of illiterate and literate cognitive processing: Implications of brain- behavior co-constructivism. In P. B. Baltes, P. Reuter-Lorenz, & F. Rösler (
Eds. ), Lifespan development and the brain: The perspective of biocultural co-constructivism (pp. 279-305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Abstract
Literacy and education represent essential aspects of contemporary society and subserve important aspects of socialization and cultural transmission. The study of illiterate subjects represents one approach to investigate the interactions between neurobiological and cultural factors in cognitive development, individual learning, and their influence on the functional organization of the brain. In this chapter we review some recent cognitive, neuroanatomic, and functional neuroimaging results indicating that formal education influences important aspects of the human brain. Taken together this provides strong support for the idea that the brain is modulated by literacy and formal education, which in turn change the brains capacity to interact with its environment, including the individual's contemporary culture. In other words, the individual is able to participate in, interact with, and actively contribute to the process of cultural transmission in new ways through acquired cognitive skills. -
Poletiek, F. H. (2001). Hypothesis-testing behaviour. Hove: Psychology Press.
-
Poletiek, F. H. (2006). Natural sampling of stimuli in (artificial) grammar learning. In K. Fiedler, & P. Juslin (
Eds. ), Information sampling and adaptive cognition (pp. 440-455). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Reesink, G. (2002). The Eastern bird's head languages. In G. Reesink (
Ed. ), Languages of the Eastern Bird's Head (pp. 1-44). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. -
Reesink, G. (2002). A grammar sketch of Sougb. In G. Reesink (
Ed. ), Languages of the Eastern Bird's Head (pp. 181-275). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. -
Reesink, G. (2002). Mansim, a lost language of the Bird's Head. In G. Reesink (
Ed. ), Languages of the Eastern Bird's Head (pp. 277-340). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. -
Reesink, G. (2014). Topic management and clause combination in the Papuan language Usan. In R. Van Gijn, J. Hammond, D. Matic, S. van Putten, & A.-V. Galucio (
Eds. ), Information Structure and Reference Tracking in Complex Sentences. (pp. 231-262). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Abstract
This chapter describes topic management in the Papuan language Usan. The notion of ‘topic’ is defined by its pre-theoretical meaning ‘what someone’s speech is about’. This notion cannot be restricted to simple clausal or sentential constructions, but requires the wider context of long stretches of natural text. The tracking of a topic is examined in its relationship to clause combining mechanisms. Coordinating clause chaining with its switch reference mechanism is contrasted with subordinating strategies called ‘domain-creating’ constructions. These different strategies are identified by language-specific signals, such as intonation and morphosyntactic cues like nominalizations and scope of negation and other modalities. -
Rietveld, T., & Chen, A. (2006). How to obtain and process perceptual judgements of intonational meaning. In S. Sudhoff, D. Lenertová, R. Meyer, S. Pappert, P. Augurzky, I. Mleinek, N. Richter, & J. Schliesser (
Eds. ), Methods in empirical prosody research (pp. 283-319). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Roberts, S. G. (2014). Monolingual Biases in Simulations of Cultural Transmission. In V. Dignum, & F. Dignum (
Eds. ), Perspectives on Culture and Agent-based Simulations (pp. 111-125). Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-01952-9_7.Abstract
Recent research suggests that the evolution of language is affected by the inductive biases of its learners. I suggest that there is an implicit assumption that one of these biases is to expect a single linguistic system in the input. Given the prevalence of bilingual cultures, this may not be a valid abstraction. This is illustrated by demonstrating that the ‘minimal naming game’ model, in which a shared lexicon evolves in a population of agents, includes an implicit mutual exclusivity bias. Since recent research suggests that children raised in bilingual cultures do not exhibit mutual exclusivity, the individual learning algorithm of the agents is not as abstract as it appears to be. A modification of this model demonstrates that communicative success can be achieved without mutual exclusivity. It is concluded that complex cultural phenomena, such as bilingualism, do not necessarily result from complex individual learning mechanisms. Rather, the cultural process itself can bring about this complexity. -
Roberts, S. G., & Quillinan, J. (2014). The Chimp Challenge: Working memory in chimps and humans. 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. 31-39). Tokyo: EvoLang9 Organising Committee.Abstract
Matsuzawa (2012) presented work at Evolang demonstrating the working memory abilities of chimpanzees. (Inoue & Matsuzawa, 2007) found that chimpanzees can correctly remember the location of 9 randomly arranged numerals displayed for 210ms - shorter than an average human eye saccade. Humans, however, perform poorly at this task. Matsuzawa suggests a semantic link hypothesis: while chimps have good visual, eidetic memory, humans are good at symbolic associations. The extra information in the semantic, linguistic links that humans possess increase the load on working memory and make this task difficult for them. We were interested to see if a wider search could find humans that matched the performance of the chimpanzees. We created an online version of the experiment and challenged people to play. We also attempted to run a non-semantic version of the task to see if this made the task easier. We found that, while humans can perform better than Inoue and Matsuzawa (2007) suggest, chimpanzees can perform better still. We also found no evidence to support the semantic link hypothesis. -
Roelofs, A. (2002). Storage and computation in spoken word production. In S. Nooteboom, F. Weerman, & F. Wijnen (
Eds. ), Storage and computation in the language faculty (pp. 183-216). Dordrecht: Kluwer. -
Roelofs, A. (2002). Modeling of lexical access in speech production: A psycholinguistic perspective on the lexicon. In L. Behrens, & D. Zaefferer (
Eds. ), The lexicon in focus: Competition and convergence in current lexicology (pp. 75-92). Frankfurt am Main: Lang. -
Rojas-Berscia, L. M., & Shi, J. A. (2017). Hakka as spoken in Suriname. In K. Yakpo, & P. C. Muysken (
Eds. ), Boundaries and bridges: Language contact in multilingual ecologies (pp. 179-196). Berlin: De Gruyter. -
Rossi, G., & Zinken, J. (2017). Social agency and grammar. In N. J. Enfield, & P. Kockelman (
Eds. ), Distributed agency: The sharing of intention, cause, and accountability (pp. 79-86). New York: Oxford University Press.Abstract
One of the most conspicuous ways in which people distribute agency among each other is by asking another for help. Natural languages give people a range of forms to do this, the distinctions among which have consequences for how agency is distributed. Forms such as imperatives (e.g. ‘pass the salt’) and recurrent types of interrogatives (e.g. ‘can you pass the salt?’) designate another person as the doer of the action. In contrast to this, impersonal deontic statements (e.g. ‘it is necessary to get the salt’) express the need for an action without tying it to any particular individual. This can generate interactions in which the identity of the doer must be sorted out among participants, allowing us to observe the distribution of agency in vivo. The case of impersonal deontic statements demonstrates the importance of grammar as a resource for managing human action and sociality. -
Rossi, G. (2017). Secondary and deviant uses of the imperative for requesting in Italian. In M.-L. Sorjonen, L. Raevaara, & E. Couper-Kuhlen (
Eds. ), Imperative turns at talk: The design of directives in action (pp. 103-137). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Abstract
The use of the imperative for requesting has been mostly explained on the basis of estimations of social distance, relative power, and entitlement. More recent research, however, has identified other selection factors to do with the functional and sequential relation of the action requested to the trajectory of the ongoing interaction. In everyday activities among family and friends, the imperative is typically warranted by an earlier commitment of the requestee to a joint project or shared goal which the action requested contributes to. The chapter argues this to be the primary use of the imperative for requesting in Italian informal interaction, and distinguishes it from other uses of the imperative that do not conform to the predominant pattern. These other uses are of two kinds: (i) secondary, that is, less frequent and formally marked imperatives that still orient to social-interactional conditions supporting an expectation of compliance, and (ii) deviant, where the imperative is selected in deliberate violation of the social-interactional conditions that normally support it, attracting special attention and accomplishing more than just requesting. This study extends prior findings on the functional distribution of imperative requests and makes a point of relating and classifying distinct uses of a same form of action, offering new insights into more general aspects of language use such as markedness and normativity. -
Rossi, G. (2014). When do people not use language to make requests? In P. Drew, & E. Couper-Kuhlen (
Eds. ), Requesting in social interaction (pp. 301-332). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Abstract
In everyday joint activities (e.g. playing cards, preparing potatoes, collecting empty plates), participants often request others to pass, move or otherwise deploy objects. In order to get these objects to or from the requestee, requesters need to manipulate them, for example by holding them out, reaching for them, or placing them somewhere. As they perform these manual actions, requesters may or may not accompany them with language (e.g. Take this potato and cut it or Pass me your plate). This study shows that adding or omitting language in the design of a request is influenced in the first place by a criterion of recognition. When the requested action is projectable from the advancement of an activity, presenting a relevant object to the requestee is enough for them to understand what to do; when, on the other hand, the requested action is occasioned by a contingent development of the activity, requesters use language to specify what the requestee should do. This criterion operates alongside a perceptual criterion, to do with the affordances of the visual and auditory modality. When the requested action is projectable but the requestee is not visually attending to the requester’s manual behaviour, the requester can use just enough language to attract the requestee’s attention and secure immediate recipiency. This study contributes to a line of research concerned with the organisation of verbal and nonverbal resources for requesting. Focussing on situations in which language is not – or only minimally – used, it demonstrates the role played by visible bodily behaviour and by the structure of everyday activities in the formation and understanding of requests. -
Rowland, C. F., Noble, C. H., & Chan, A. (2014). Competition all the way down: How children learn word order cues to sentence meaning. In B. MacWhinney, A. Malchukov, & E. Moravcsik (
Eds. ), Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage (pp. 125-143). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Abstract
Most work on competing cues in language acquisition has focussed on what happens when cues compete within a certain construction. There has been far less work on what happens when constructions themselves compete. The aim of the present chapter was to explore how the acquisition mechanism copes when constructions compete in a language. We present three experimental studies, all of which focus on the acquisition of the syntactic function of word order as a marker of the Theme-Recipient relation in ditransitives (form-meaning mapping). In Study 1 we investigated how quickly English children acquire form-meaning mappings when there are two competing structures in the language. We demonstrated that English speaking 4-year- olds, but not 3-year-olds, correctly interpreted both preposition al and double object datives, assigning Theme and Recipient participant roles on the basis of word order cues. There was no advantage for the double object dative despite its greater frequency in child directed speech. In Study 2 we looked at acquisition in a language which has no dative alternation –Welsh–to investigate how quickly children acquire form-meaning mapping when there is no competing structure. We demonstrated that Welsh children (Study 2) acquired the prepositional dative at age 3 years, which was much earlier than English children. Finally, in Study 3 we examined bei2 (give) ditransitives in Cantonese, to investigate what happens when there is no dative alternation (as in Welsh), but when the child hears alternative, and possibly competing, word orders in the input. Like the English 3-year-olds, the Cantonese 3-year-olds had not yet acquired the word order marking constraints of bei2 ditransitives. We conclude that there is not only competition between cues but competition between constructions in language acquisition. We suggest an extension to the competition model (Bates & MacWhinney, 1982) whereby generalisations take place across constructions as easily as they take place within constructions, whenever there are salient similarities to form the basis of the generalisation.
Share this page