Displaying 101 - 149 of 149
-
Levinson, S. C. (1989). Conversation. In E. Barnouw (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of communications (pp. 407-410). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (1997). Deixis. In P. V. Lamarque (
Ed. ), Concise encyclopedia of philosophy of language (pp. 214-219). Oxford: Elsevier. -
Levinson, S. C. (1991). Deixis. In W. Bright (
Ed. ), Oxford international encyclopedia of linguistics (pp. 343-344). Oxford University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (1997). From outer to inner space: Linguistic categories and non-linguistic thinking. In J. Nuyts, & E. Pederson (
Eds. ), Language and conceptualization (pp. 13-45). Cambridge University 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. (1995). Interactional biases in human thinking. In E. N. Goody (
Ed. ), Social intelligence and interaction (pp. 221-260). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C., Pederson, E., & Senft, G. (1997). Sprache und menschliche Orientierungsfähigkeiten. In Jahrbuch der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (pp. 322-327). München: Generalverwaltung der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft.
-
Levinson, S. C. (1995). Three levels of meaning. In F. Palmer (
Ed. ), Grammar and meaning: Essays in honour of Sir John Lyons (pp. 90-115). Cambridge University Press. -
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. -
McQueen, J. M., & Cutler, A. (1997). Cognitive processes in speech perception. In W. J. Hardcastle, & J. D. Laver (
Eds. ), The handbook of phonetic sciences (pp. 556-585). Oxford: Blackwell. -
Nas, G., Kempen, G., & Hudson, P. (1984). De rol van spelling en klank bij woordherkenning tijdens het lezen. In A. Thomassen, L. Noordman, & P. Elling (
Eds. ), Het leesproces. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. -
Noordman, L. G., & Vonk, W. (1997). The different functions of a conjunction in constructing a representation of the discourse. In J. Costermans, & M. Fayol (
Eds. ), Processing interclausal relationships: studies in the production and comprehension of text (pp. 75-94). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. -
Patterson, R. D., & Cutler, A. (1989). Auditory preprocessing and recognition of speech. In A. Baddeley, & N. Bernsen (
Eds. ), Research directions in cognitive science: A european perspective: Vol. 1. Cognitive psychology (pp. 23-60). London: Erlbaum. -
Pederson, E. (1995). Questionnaire on event realization. In D. Wilkins (
Ed. ), Extensions of space and beyond: manual for field elicitation for the 1995 field season (pp. 54-60). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3004359.Abstract
"Event realisation" refers to the normal final state of the affected entity of an activity described by a verb. For example, the sentence John killed the mosquito entails that the mosquito is afterwards dead – this is the full realisation of a killing event. By contrast, a sentence such as John hit the mosquito does not entail the mosquito’s death (even though we might assume this to be a likely result). In using a certain verb, which features of event realisation are entailed and which are just likely? This questionnaire supports cross-linguistic exploration of event realisation for a range of event types. -
Perdue, C., & Klein, W. (1992). Conclusions. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 301-337). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Perdue, C., & Klein, W. (1992). Introduction. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 1-10). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Senft, G. (1995). Elicitation. In J. Blommaert, J.-O. Östman, & J. Verschueren (
Eds. ), Handbook of Pragmatics: Manual (pp. 577-581). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. -
Senft, G. (1992). As time goes by..: Changes observed in Trobriand Islanders' culture and language, Milne Bay Province, Papua New Guinea. In T. Dutton (
Ed. ), Culture change, language change: Case studies from Melanesia (pp. 67-89). Canberra: Pacific Linguistics. -
Senft, G. (1995). 'Noble savages' and 'the islands of love': Trobriand Islanders in 'popular publications'. In C. Baak, M. Bakker, & D. Van der Meij (
Eds. ), Tales from a concave world: Liber amicorum Bert Voorhoeve (pp. 480-510). Leiden: Projects division, department of languages and cultures of South East Asia and Oceania, Leiden University. -
Senft, G. (1995). Fieldwork. In J. Blommaert, J.-O. Östman, & J. Verschueren (
Eds. ), Handbook of Pragmatics: Manual (pp. 595-601). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. -
Senft, G., & Heeschen, V. (1989). Humanethologisches Tonarchiv. In Generalverwaltung der MPG (
Ed. ), Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Jahrbuch 1989 (pp. 246). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht. -
Senft, G. (1997). Magic, missionaries, and religion - Some observations from the Trobriand Islands. In T. Otto, & A. Borsboom (
Eds. ), Cultural dynamics of religious change in Oceania (pp. 45-58). Leiden: KITLV press. -
Senft, G. (1991). Mahnreden auf den Trobriand Inseln: Eine Fallstudie. In D. Flader (
Ed. ), Verbale Interaktion: Studien zur Empirie und Methologie der Pragmatik (pp. 27-49). Stuttgart: Metzler. -
Senft, G. (1995). Mit Tinkertoy in die Tiefe(n) des Raumes: Zum räumlichen Verweisen im Kilivila - Eine Fallstudie. In R. Fiehler, & D. Metzing (
Eds. ), Untersuchungen zur Kommunikationstruktur (Bielefelder Schriften zu Linguistik und Literaturwissenschaft, pp. 139-162). Bielefeld: Aisthesis Verlag. -
Senft, G. (1997). Introduction. In G. Senft (
Ed. ), Referring to space - Studies in Austronesian and Papuan languages (pp. 1-38). Oxford: Clarendon Press. -
Senft, G. (1991). Prolegomena to the pragmatics of "situational-intentional" varieties in Kilivila language. In J. Verschueren (
Ed. ), Levels of linguistic adaptation: Selected papers from the International Pragmatics Conference, Antwerp, August 1987 (pp. 235-248). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. -
Seuren, P. A. M. (1989). A problem in English subject complementation. In D. Jaspers, W. Klooster, Y. Putseys, & P. A. M. Seuren (
Eds. ), Sentential complementation and the lexicon: Studies in honour of Wim de Geest (pp. 355-375). Dordrecht: Foris. -
Seuren, P. A. M. (1976). Echo, een studie in negatie. In G. Koefoed, & A. Evers (
Eds. ), Lijnen van taaltheoretisch onderzoek: Een bundel oorspronkelijke artikelen aangeboden aan prof. dr. H. Schultink (pp. 160-184). Groningen: Tjeenk Willink. -
Seuren, P. A. M. (1991). Formalism and ecologism in linguistics. In E. Feldbusch, R. Pogarell, & C. Weiss (
Eds. ), Neue Fragen der Linguistik: Akten des 25. Linguistischen Kolloquiums, Paderborn 1990. Band 1: Bestand und Entwicklung (pp. 73-88). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. -
Seuren, P. A. M. (1991). Modale klokkenhuizen. In M. Klein (
Ed. ), Nieuwe eskapades in de neerlandistiek: Opstellen van vrienden voor M.C. van den Toorn bij zijn afscheid als hoogleraar Nederlandse taalkunde aan de Katholieke Universiteit te Nijmegen (pp. 202-236). Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff. -
Seuren, P. A. M. (1989). Notes on reflexivity. In F. J. Heyvaert, & F. Steurs (
Eds. ), Worlds behind words: Essays in honour of Prof. Dr. F.G. Droste on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday (pp. 85-95). Leuven: Leuven University Press. -
Seuren, P. A. M. (1995). Reflections on negation. In H. C. M. De Swart, & L. J. M. Bergmans (
Eds. ), Perspectives on Negation. Essays in honour of Johan J. de Iongh on his 80th birthday (pp. 153-176). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press. -
Seuren, P. A. M. (1991). The definition of serial verbs. In F. Byrne, & T. Huebner (
Eds. ), Development and structures of Creole languages: Essays in honor of Derek Bickerton (pp. 193-205). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Seuren, P. A. M. (1991). Präsuppositionen. In A. Von Stechow, & D. Wunderlich (
Eds. ), Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung (pp. 286-318). Berlin: De Gruyter. -
Skiba, R. (1991). Eine Datenbank für Deutsch als Zweitsprache Materialien: Zum Einsatz von PC-Software bei Planung von Zweitsprachenunterricht. In H. Barkowski, & G. Hoff (
Eds. ), Berlin interkulturell: Ergebnisse einer Berliner Konferenz zu Migration und Pädagogik. (pp. 131-140). Berlin: Colloquium. -
Skiba, R. (1989). Funktionale Beschreibung von Lernervarietäten: Das Berliner Projekt P-MoLL. In N. Reiter (
Ed. ), Sprechen und Hören: Akte des 23. Linguistischen Kolloquiums, Berlin (pp. 181-191). Tübingen: Niemeyer. -
Skiba, R., & Steinmüller, U. (1995). Pragmatics of compositional word formation in technical languages. In H. Pishwa, & K. Maroldt (
Eds. ), The development of morphological systematicity: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 305-321). Tübingen: Narr. -
De Smedt, K., & Kempen, G. (1991). Segment Grammar: A formalism for incremental sentence generation. In C. Paris, W. Swartout, & W. Mann (
Eds. ), Natural language generation and computational linguistics (pp. 329-349). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Abstract
Incremental sentence generation imposes special constraints on the representation of the grammar and the design of the formulator (the module which is responsible for constructing the syntactic and morphological structure). In the model of natural speech production presented here, a formalism called Segment Grammar is used for the representation of linguistic knowledge. We give a definition of this formalism and present a formulator design which relies on it. Next, we present an object- oriented implementation of Segment Grammar. Finally, we compare Segment Grammar with other formalisms. -
Stassen, H., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1976). Systemen, automaten en grammatica's. In J. Michon, E. Eijkman, & L. De Klerk (
Eds. ), Handboek der psychonomie (pp. 100-127). Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus. -
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. -
Trabasso, T., & Ozyurek, A. (1997). Communicating evaluation in narrative understanding. In T. Givon (
Ed. ), Conversation: Cognitive, communicative and social perspectives (pp. 268-302). Philadelphia, PA: Benjamins. -
Van Berkum, J. J. A., Hijne, H., De Jong, T., Van Joolingen, W. R., & Njoo, M. (1995). Characterizing the application of computer simulations in education: Instructional criteria. In A. Ram, & D. B. Leake (
Eds. ), Goal-driven learning (pp. 381-392). Cambridge, M: MIT Press. -
Van Valin Jr., R. D. (1995). Toward a functionalist account of so-called ‘extraction constraints’. In B. Devriendt (
Ed. ), Complex structures: A functionalist perspective (pp. 29-60). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Von Stutterheim, C., & Klein, W. (1989). Referential movement in descriptive and narrative discourse. In R. Dietrich, & C. F. Graumann (
Eds. ), Language processing in social context (pp. 39-76). Amsterdam: Elsevier. -
Weissenborn, J., & Stralka, R. (1984). Das Verstehen von Mißverständnissen. Eine ontogenetische Studie. In Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik (pp. 113-134). Stuttgart: Metzler.
-
Weissenborn, J. (1984). La genèse de la référence spatiale en langue maternelle et en langue seconde: similarités et différences. In G. Extra, & M. Mittner (
Eds. ), Studies in second language acquisition by adult immigrants (pp. 262-286). Tilburg: Tilburg University. -
Wilkins, D. (1995). Towards a Socio-Cultural Profile of the Communities We Work With. In D. Wilkins (
Ed. ), Extensions of space and beyond: manual for field elicitation for the 1995 field season (pp. 70-79). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3513481.Abstract
Field data are drawn from a particular speech community at a certain place and time. The intent of this survey is to enrich understanding of the various socio-cultural contexts in which linguistic and “cognitive” data may have been collected, so that we can explore the role which societal, cultural and contextual factors may play in this material. The questionnaire gives guidelines concerning types of ethnographic information that are important to cross-cultural and cross-linguistic enquiry, and will be especially useful to researchers who do not have specialised training in anthropology. -
Wilkins, D., Pederson, E., & Levinson, S. C. (1995). Background questions for the "enter"/"exit" research. In D. Wilkins (
Ed. ), Extensions of space and beyond: manual for field elicitation for the 1995 field season (pp. 14-16). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3003935.Abstract
How do languages encode different kinds of movement, and what features do people pay attention to when describing motion events? This document outlines topics concerning the investigation of “enter” and “exit” events. It helps contextualise research tasks that examine this domain (see 'Motion Elicitation' and 'Enter/Exit animation') and gives some pointers about what other questions can be explored. -
Wilkins, D. (1995). Motion elicitation: "moving 'in(to)'" and "moving 'out (of)'". In D. Wilkins (
Ed. ), Extensions of space and beyond: manual for field elicitation for the 1995 field season (pp. 4-12). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3003391.Abstract
How do languages encode different kinds of movement, and what features do people pay attention to when describing motion events? This task investigates the expression of “enter” and “exit” activities, that is, events involving motion in(to) and motion out (of) container-like items. The researcher first uses particular stimuli (a ball, a cup, rice, etc.) to elicit descriptions of enter/exit events from one consultant, and then asks another consultant to demonstrate the event based on these descriptions. See also the related entries Enter/Exit Animation and Background Questions for Enter/Exit Research.
Share this page