Displaying 101 - 121 of 121
-
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. (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. (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., & 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. -
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