Displaying 1 - 100 of 138
-
Ameka, F. K. (2005). "The woman is seeable" and "The woman perceives seeing": Undergoer voice constructions in Ewe and Likpe. In M. Dakubu, & E. Osam (
Eds. ), Studies in languages of the Volta Basin (pp. 43-62). Legon: University of Ghana. Department of Linguistics. -
Ameka, F. K. (2005). Forms of secondary predication in serializing languages: On depictives in Ewe. In N. P. Himmelmann, & E. Schultze-Berndt (
Eds. ), Secondary predication and adverbial modification: The typology of depictives (pp. 335-378). Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Ameka, F. K. (2005). Multiverb constructions on the West African littoral: Microvariation and areal typology. In M. Vulchanova, & T. A. Afarli (
Eds. ), Grammar and beyond: Essays in honour of Lars Hellan (pp. 15-42). Oslo: Novus. -
Ameka, F. K., & Wilkins, D. (1996). Semantics. In H. Goebl, P. H. Nelde, Z. Stary, & W. Wölck (
Eds. ), Contact linguistics: An international handbook of contemporary research. Volume 1 (pp. 130-137). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Baayen, R. H. (2005). Data mining at the intersection of psychology and linguistics. In A. Cutler (
Ed. ), Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones (pp. 69-83). Mahwah: Erlbaum. -
Bauer, B. L. M. (2005). Innovation in Old French syntax and its Latin origins. In S. Kiss, L. Mondin, & G. Salvi (
Eds. ), Latin et langues romanes: Etudes de linguistique offertes à Jozsef Herman à l’occasion de son 80ème anniversaire (pp. 507-521). Tübingen: Niemeyer.Files private
Request files -
Bauer, B. L. M. (2005). Living in two worlds. In W. R. Louis (
Ed. ), Burnt orange Britannia (pp. 732-744). Austin: Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center. -
Bauer, B. L. M. (1992). Evolution in language: Evidence from the Romance auxiliary. In B. Chiarelli, J. Wind, A. Nocentini, & B. Bichakjian (
Eds. ), Language origin: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 517-528). Dordrecht: Kluwer. -
Bauer, B. L. M. (1996). The verb in indirect speech in Old French. In T. Janssen, & W. Van der Wurff (
Eds. ), Reported Speech (pp. 75-96). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Bohnemeyer, J. (1998). Temporale Relatoren im Hispano-Yukatekischen Sprachkontakt. In A. Koechert, & T. Stolz (
Eds. ), Convergencia e Individualidad - Las lenguas Mayas entre hispanización e indigenismo (pp. 195-241). Hannover, Germany: Verlag für Ethnologie. -
Bohnemeyer, J. (1998). Sententiale Topics im Yukatekischen. In Z. Dietmar (
Ed. ), Deskriptive Grammatik und allgemeiner Sprachvergleich (pp. 55-85). Tübingen, Germany: Max-Niemeyer-Verlag.Files private
Request files -
Bowerman, M. (2005). Why can't you "open" a nut or "break" a cooked noodle? Learning covert object categories in action word meanings. In L. Gershkoff-Stowe, & D. H. Rakison (
Eds. ), Building object categories in developmental time (pp. 209-243). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Bowerman, M., & Pederson, E. (1992). Topological relations picture series. In S. C. Levinson (
Ed. ), Space stimuli kit 1.2 (pp. 51). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.883589.Abstract
This task is designed to elicit expressions of spatial relations. It was originally designed by Melissa Bowerman for use with young children, but was then developed further by Bowerman in collaboration with Pederson for crosslinguistic comparison. It has been used in fieldsites all over the world and is commonly known as “BowPed” or “TPRS”. Older incarnations did not always come with instructions. This entry includes a one-page instruction sheet and high quality versions of the original pictures.Additional information
1992_Topological_relations_picture_series.zip -
Bowerman, M. (1992). Topological Relations Pictures: Topological Paths. In S. C. Levinson (
Ed. ), Space stimuli kit 1.2 (pp. 18-24). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3512508.Abstract
This entry suggests ways to elicit descriptions of caused motion involving topological relations (the domain of English put IN/ON/TOGETHER, take OUT/OFF/APART, etc.). There is a large amount of cross-linguistic variation in this domain. The tasks outlined here address matters such as the division of labor between the various elements of spatial semantics in the sentence. For example, is most of the work of expressing PATH done in a locative marker, or in the verb, or both? -
Bowerman, M. (1992). Topological Relations Pictures: Static Relations. In S. C. Levinson (
Ed. ), Space stimuli kit 1.2 (pp. 25-28). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3512672.Abstract
The precursor to the Bowped stimuli, this entry suggests various spatial configurations to explore using real objects, rather than the line drawings used in Bowped. -
Bowerman, M. (2005). Linguistics. In B. Hopkins (
Ed. ), The Cambridge encyclopedia of child development (pp. 497-501). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Bowerman, M. (1996). Learning how to structure space for language: A crosslinguistic perspective. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (
Eds. ), Language and space (pp. 385-436). Cambridge, MA: MIT press. -
Bowerman, M. (1977). The acquisition of word meaning: An investigation of some current concepts. In P. Johnson Laird, & P. Wason (
Eds. ), Thinking: Readings in cognitive science (pp. 239-253). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Bowerman, M. (1996). The origins of children's spatial semantic categories: Cognitive vs. linguistic determinants. In J. J. Gumperz, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 145-176). Cambridge University Press. -
Brown, P. (1998). Early Tzeltal verbs: Argument structure and argument representation. In E. Clark (
Ed. ), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Stanford Child Language Research Forum (pp. 129-140). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Abstract
The surge of research activity focussing on children's acquisition of verbs (e.g., Tomasello and Merriman 1996) addresses some fundamental questions: Just how variable across languages, and across individual children, is the process of verb learning? How specific are arguments to particular verbs in early child language? How does the grammatical category 'Verb' develop? The position of Universal Grammar, that a verb category is early, contrasts with that of Tomasello (1992), Pine and Lieven and their colleagues (1996, in press), and many others, that children develop a verb category slowly, gradually building up subcategorizations of verbs around pragmatic, syntactic, and semantic properties of the language they are exposed to. On this latter view, one would expect the language which the child is learning, the cultural milieu and the nature of the interactions in which the child is engaged, to influence the process of acquiring verb argument structures. This paper explores these issues by examining the development of argument representation in the Mayan language Tzeltal, in both its lexical and verbal cross-referencing forms, and analyzing the semantic and pragmatic factors influencing the form argument representation takes. Certain facts about Tzeltal (the ergative/ absolutive marking, the semantic specificity of transitive and positional verbs) are proposed to affect the representation of arguments. The first 500 multimorpheme combinations of 3 children (aged between 1;8 and 2;4) are examined. It is argued that there is no evidence of semantically light 'pathbreaking' verbs (Ninio 1996) leading the way into word combinations. There is early productivity of cross-referencing affixes marking A, S, and O arguments (although there are systematic omissions). The paper assesses the respective contributions of three kinds of factors to these results - structural (regular morphology), semantic (verb specificity) and pragmatic (the nature of Tzeltal conversational interaction). -
Brown, P. (2005). Linguistic politeness. In U. Ammon, N. Dittmar, K. J. Mattheier, & P. Trudgill (
Eds. ), Sociolinguistics: An international handbook of the science of language and society (pp. 1410-1416). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Abstract
This is an encyclopedia entry surveying research and theoretical approaches to politeness phenomena in language usage. -
Brown, P. (1998). How and why are women more polite: Some evidence from a Mayan community. In J. Coates (
Ed. ), Language and gender (pp. 81-99). Oxford: Blackwell. -
Brown, C. M., Hagoort, P., & Swaab, T. Y. (1996). Neurophysiological evidence for a temporal disorganization in aphasic patients with comprehension deficits. In W. Widdig, I. Ohlendorff, T. A. Pollow, & J. Malin (
Eds. ), Aphasiatherapie im Wandel (pp. 89-122). Freiburg: Hochschul Verlag. -
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1998). Politeness, introduction to the reissue: A review of recent work. In A. Kasher (
Ed. ), Pragmatics: Vol. 6 Grammar, psychology and sociology (pp. 488-554). London: Routledge.Abstract
This article is a reprint of chapter 1, the introduction to Brown and Levinson, 1987, Politeness: Some universals in language usage (Cambridge University Press). -
Coenen, J., & Klein, W. (1992). The acquisition of Dutch. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 189-224). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Crago, M. B., & Allen, S. E. M. (1998). Acquiring Inuktitut. In O. L. Taylor, & L. Leonard (
Eds. ), Language Acquisition Across North America: Cross-Cultural And Cross-Linguistic Perspectives (pp. 245-279). San Diego, CA, USA: Singular Publishing Group, Inc. -
Cutler, A., & Broersma, M. (2005). Phonetic precision in listening. In W. J. Hardcastle, & J. M. Beck (
Eds. ), A figure of speech: A Festschrift for John Laver (pp. 63-91). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Cutler, A., Klein, W., & Levinson, S. C. (2005). The cornerstones of twenty-first century psycholinguistics. In A. Cutler (
Ed. ), Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones (pp. 1-20). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Cutler, A. (2005). Lexical stress. In D. B. Pisoni, & R. E. Remez (
Eds. ), The handbook of speech perception (pp. 264-289). Oxford: Blackwell. -
Cutler, A., Norris, D., & McQueen, J. M. (1996). Lexical access in continuous speech: Language-specific realisations of a universal model. In T. Otake, & A. Cutler (
Eds. ), Phonological structure and language processing: Cross-linguistic studies (pp. 227-242). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Cutler, A., & Otake, T. (1996). Phonological structure and its role in language processing. In T. Otake, & A. Cutler (
Eds. ), Phonological structure and language processing: Cross-linguistic studies (pp. 1-12). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Cutler, A. (1992). Processing constraints of the native phonological repertoire on the native language. In Y. Tohkura, E. Vatikiotis-Bateson, & Y. Sagisaka (
Eds. ), Speech perception, production and linguistic structure (pp. 275-278). Tokyo: Ohmsha. -
Cutler, A. (1998). Prosodic structure and word recognition. In A. D. Friederici (
Ed. ), Language comprehension: A biological perspective (pp. 41-70). Heidelberg: Springer. -
Cutler, A. (1996). Prosody and the word boundary problem. In J. L. Morgan, & K. Demuth (
Eds. ), Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition (pp. 87-99). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Cutler, A. (1992). Psychology and the segment. In G. Docherty, & D. Ladd (
Eds. ), Papers in laboratory phonology II: Gesture, segment, prosody (pp. 290-295). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Cutler, A. (1992). The perception of speech: Psycholinguistic aspects. In W. Bright (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of language: Vol. 3 (pp. 181-183). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Cutler, A. (1992). The production and perception of word boundaries. In Y. Tohkura, E. Vatikiotis-Bateson, & Y. Sagisaka (
Eds. ), Speech perception, production and linguistic structure (pp. 419-425). Tokyo: Ohsma. -
Cutler, A. (1992). Why not abolish psycholinguistics? In W. Dressler, H. Luschützky, O. Pfeiffer, & J. Rennison (
Eds. ), Phonologica 1988 (pp. 77-87). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Dimroth, C., & Watorek, M. (2005). Additive scope particles in advanced learner and native speaker discourse. In Hendriks, & Henriëtte (
Eds. ), The structure of learner varieties (pp. 461-488). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Dirksmeyer, T. (2005). Why do languages die? Approaching taxonomies, (re-)ordering causes. In J. Wohlgemuth, & T. Dirksmeyer (
Eds. ), Bedrohte Vielfalt. Aspekte des Sprach(en)tods – Aspects of language death (pp. 53-68). Berlin: Weißensee.Abstract
Under what circumstances do languages die? Why has their “mortality rate” increased dramatically in the recent past? What “causes of death” can be identified for historical cases, to what extent are these generalizable, and how can they be captured in an explanatory theory? In pursuing these questions, it becomes apparent that in typical cases of language death various causes tend to interact in multiple ways. Speakers’ attitudes towards their language play a critical role in all of this. Existing categorial taxonomies do not succeed in modeling the complex relationships between these factors. Therefore, an alternative, dimensional approach is called for to more adequately address (and counter) the causes of language death in a given scenario. -
Drude, S. (2005). A contribuição alemã à Lingüística e Antropologia dos índios do Brasil, especialmente da Amazônia. In J. J. A. Alves (
Ed. ), Múltiplas Faces da Históriadas Ciência na Amazônia (pp. 175-196). Belém: EDUFPA. -
Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I., Senft, B., & Senft, G. (1998). Trobriander (Ost-Neuguinea, Trobriand Inseln, Kaile'una) Fadenspiele 'ninikula'. In Ethnologie - Humanethologische Begleitpublikationen von I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt und Mitarbeitern. Sammelband I, 1985-1987. Göttingen: Institut für den Wissenschaftlichen Film.
-
Enfield, N. J. (2005). Depictive and other secondary predication in Lao. In N. P. Himmelmann, & E. Schultze-Berndt (
Eds. ), Secondary predication and adverbial modification (pp. 379-392). Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Enfield, N. J. (2005). Micro and macro dimensions in linguistic systems. In S. Marmaridou, K. Nikiforidou, & E. Antonopoulou (
Eds. ), Reviewing linguistic thought: Converging trends for the 21st Century (pp. 313-326). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Gaby, A. R. (2005). Some participants are more equal than others: Case and the composition of arguments in Kuuk Thaayorre. In M. Amberber, & H. d. Hoop (
Eds. ), Competition and variation in natural languages: the case for the case (pp. 9-39). Amsterdam: Elsevier. -
Goudbeek, M., Smits, R., Cutler, A., & Swingley, D. (2005). Acquiring auditory and phonetic categories. In H. Cohen, & C. Lefebvre (
Eds. ), Handbook of categorization in cognitive science (pp. 497-513). Amsterdam: Elsevier. -
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. (2005). Breintaal. In S. Knols, & D. Redeker (
Eds. ), NWO-Spinozapremies 2005 (pp. 21-34). Den Haag: NWO. -
Hagoort, P. (2005). Broca's complex as the unification space for language. In A. Cutler (
Ed. ), Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones (pp. 157-173). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Hagoort, P. (1998). The shadows of lexical meaning in patients with semantic impairments. In B. Stemmer, & H. Whitaker (
Eds. ), Handbook of neurolinguistics (pp. 235-248). New York: Academic Press. -
De Hoop, H., & Narasimhan, B. (2005). Differential case-marking in Hindi. In M. Amberber, & H. de Hoop (
Eds. ), Competition and variation in natural languages: The case for case (pp. 321-345). Amsterdam: Elsevier. -
Janzen, G. (2005). Wie das mensliche Gehirn Orientierung ermöglicht. In G. Plehn (
Ed. ), Jahrbuch der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft (pp. 599-601). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. -
Johnsrude, I., Davis, M., & Hervais-Adelman, A. (2005). From sound to meaning: Hierarchical processing in speech comprehension. In D. Pressnitzer, S. McAdams, A. DeCheveigne, & L. Collet (
Eds. ), Auditory Signal Processing: Physiology, Psychoacoustics, and Models (pp. 299-306). New York: Springer. -
Jordan, F., & Mace, R. (2005). The evolution of human sex-ratio at birth: A bio-cultural analysis. In R. Mace, C. J. Holden, & S. Shennan (
Eds. ), The evolution of cultural diversity: A phylogenetic approach (pp. 207-216). London: UCL Press. -
Jordens, P. (1998). Defaultformen des Präteritums. Zum Erwerb der Vergangenheitsmorphologie im Niederlänidischen. In H. Wegener (
Ed. ), Eine zweite Sprache lernen (pp. 61-88). Tübingen, Germany: Verlag Gunter Narr. -
Kempen, G., & Harbusch, K. (2005). The relationship between grammaticality ratings and corpus frequencies: A case study into word order variability in the midfield of German clauses. In S. Kepser, & M. Reis (
Eds. ), Linguistic evidence - emperical, theoretical, and computational perspectives (pp. 329-349). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Kempen, G. (1977). Building a psychologically plausible sentence generator. In P. A. M. Seuren (
Ed. ), Symposium on semantic theory: held at Nijmegen, March 14-18, 1977 / Volume 9 (pp. 107-117 ). Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.Abstract
The psychological process of translating semantic into syntactic structures has dynamic properties such as the following. (1) The speaker is able to start pronouncing an utterance before having worked out the semantic content he wishes to express. Selection of semantic content and construction of syntactic form proceed partially in parallel. (2) The human sentence generator takes as input not only a specification of semantic content but also some indication of desired syntactic shape. Such indications, if present, do not complicate the generation process but make it easier. (3) Certain regularities of speech errors suggest a two-stage generation process. Stage I constructs the “syntactic skeleton” of an utterance; stage II provides the skeleton with morpho- honological information. An outline is given of the type of grammar which is used by a sentence generation system embodying these characteristics. The system is being implemented on a computer. -
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. (1977). Conceptualizing and formulating in sentence production. In S. Rosenberg (
Ed. ), Sentence production: Developments in research and theory (pp. 259-274). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. -
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. (1992). Generation. In W. Bright (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of linguistics (pp. 59-61). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Kempen, G. (1977). Man's sentence generator: Aspects of its control structure. In M. De Mey, R. Pinxten, M. Poriau, & E. Vandamme (
Eds. ), International workshop on the cognitive viewpoint. Ghent: University of Ghent, Communication & Cognition. -
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. (1998). Sentence parsing. In A. D. Friederici (
Ed. ), Language comprehension: A biological perspective (pp. 213-228). 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. (1977). Wat is psycholinguistiek? In B. T. M. Tervoort (
Ed. ), Wetenschap en taal: Het verschijnsel taal van verschillende zijden benaderd (pp. 86-99 ). Muiderberg: Coutinho. -
Klein, W. (2005). Söldner des Wissens. In R. Kiesow, R. Ogorek, & S. Simitis (
Eds. ), Summa: Dieter Simon zum 70. Geburtstag (pp. 319-332). Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann. -
Klein, W. (2005). The grammar of varieties. In U. Ammon, N. Dittmar, K. J. Mattheier, & P. Trudgill (
Eds. ), Sociolinguistics: An international handbook of the Science of Language and Society (pp. 1163-1171). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. -
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. (1998). Ein Blick zurück auf die Varietätengrammatik. In U. Ammon, K. Mattheier, & P. Nelde (
Eds. ), Sociolinguistica: Internationales Jahrbuch für europäische Soziolinguistik (pp. 22-38). Tübingen: Niemeyer. -
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. (1977). Die Wissenschaft der Interpretation. In W. Klein (
Ed. ), Methoden der Textanalyse (pp. 1-23). Heidelberg: Quelle und Meyer. -
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. (2005). Der alte und der neue Grimm. In Grimm-Sozietät (
Ed. ), Die Brüder Grimm in Berlin (pp. 167-176). Stuttgart: Hirzel. -
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (1992). Framework. In W. Klein, & C. Perdue (
Eds. ), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 11-59). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
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., & 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., & 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. (1977). Transitional grammars in the acquisition of German by Spanish and Italian workers. In J. Meisel (
Ed. ), Langues en contact - Pidgins - Creoles - Languages in contact (pp. 167-183). Tübingen: Narr. -
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. (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. (1996). Foreword. In T. Dijkstra, & K. De Smedt (
Eds. ), Computational psycholinguistics (pp. ix-xi). London: Taylor & Francis. -
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., Van Gent, J., Haans, A., & Meijers, A. (1977). Grammaticality, paraphrase, and imagery. In S. Greenbaum (
Ed. ), Acceptability in language (pp. 87-101). The Hague: Mouton. -
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. -
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. (1998). Deixis. In J. L. Mey (
Ed. ), Concise encyclopedia of pragmatics (pp. 200-204). Amsterdam: Elsevier. -
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. (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. (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., & 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.
Share this page