Displaying 401 - 410 of 410
-
Verkerk, A. (2014). Where Alice fell into: Motion events from a parallel corpus. In B. Szmrecsanyi, & B. Wälchli (
Eds. ), Aggregating dialectology, typology, and register analysis: Linguistic variation in text and speech (pp. 324-354). Berlin: De Gruyter. -
Von Stutterheim, C., Carroll, M., & Klein, W. (2009). New perspectives in analyzing aspectual distinctions across languages. In W. Klein, & P. Li (
Eds. ), The expression of time (pp. 195-216). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Wilkins, D., Kita, S., & Enfield, N. J. (2007). 'Ethnography of pointing' - field worker's guide. In A. Majid (
Ed. ), Field Manual Volume 10 (pp. 89-95). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.492922.Abstract
Pointing gestures are recognised to be a primary manifestation of human social cognition and communicative capacity. The goal of this task is to collect empirical descriptions of pointing practices in different cultural settings. -
Willems, R. M. (2015). Cognitive neuroscience of natural language use: Introduction. In Cognitive neuroscience of natural language use (pp. 1-7). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Wittenburg, P., Trilsbeek, P., & Wittenburg, F. (2014). Corpus archiving and dissemination. In J. Durand, U. Gut, & G. Kristoffersen (
Eds. ), The Oxford Handbook of Corpus Phonology (pp. 133-149). Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Wood, N. (2009). Field recording for dummies. In A. Majid (
Ed. ), Field manual volume 12 (pp. V). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Zeshan, U. (2006). Sign language of the world. In K. Brown (
Ed. ), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (vol. 11) (pp. 358-365). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Abstract
Although sign language-using communities exist in all areas of the world, few sign languages have been documented in detail. Sign languages occur in a variety of sociocultural contexts, ranging from sign languages used in closed village communities to officially recognized national sign languages. They may be grouped into language families on historical grounds or may participate in various language contact situations. Systematic cross-linguistic comparison reveals both significant structural similarities and important typological differences between sign languages. Focusing on information from non-Western countries, this article provides an overview of the sign languages of the world. -
Zinken, J., Rossi, G., & Reddy, V. (2020). Doing more than expected: Thanking recognizes another's agency in providing assistance. In C. Taleghani-Nikazm, E. Betz, & P. Golato (
Eds. ), Mobilizing others: Grammar and lexis within larger activities (pp. 253-278). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Abstract
In informal interaction, speakers rarely thank a person who has complied with a request. Examining data from British English, German, Italian, Polish, and Telugu, we ask when speakers do thank after compliance. The results show that thanking treats the other’s assistance as going beyond what could be taken for granted in the circumstances. Coupled with the rareness of thanking after requests, this suggests that cooperation is to a great extent governed by expectations of helpfulness, which can be long-standing, or built over the course of a particular interaction. The higher frequency of thanking in some languages (such as English or Italian) suggests that cultures differ in the importance they place on recognizing the other’s agency in doing as requested. -
Zwitserlood, I., & Van Gijn, I. (2006). Agreement phenomena in Sign Language of the Netherlands. In P. Ackema (
Ed. ), Arguments and Agreement (pp. 195-229). Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Zwitserlood, I. (2014). Meaning at the feature level in sign languages. The case of name signs in Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT). In R. Kager (
Ed. ), Where the Principles Fail. A Festschrift for Wim Zonneveld on the occasion of his 64th birthday (pp. 241-251). Utrecht: Utrecht Institute of Linguistics OTS.
Share this page