Displaying 201 - 220 of 220
-
Stivers, T. (2004). Question sequences in interaction. In A. Majid (
Ed. ), Field Manual Volume 9 (pp. 45-47). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.506967.Abstract
When people request information, they have a variety of means for eliciting the information. In English two of the primary resources for eliciting information include asking questions, making statements about their interlocutor (thereby generating confirmation or revision). But within these types there are a variety of ways that these information elicitors can be designed. The goal of this task is to examine how different languages seek and provide information, the extent to which syntax vs prosodic resources are used (e.g., in questions), and the extent to which the design of information seeking actions and their responses display a structural preference to promote social solidarity. -
Stolker, C. J. J. M., & Poletiek, F. H. (1998). Smartengeld - Wat zijn we eigenlijk aan het doen? Naar een juridische en psychologische evaluatie. In F. Stadermann (
Ed. ), Bewijs en letselschade (pp. 71-86). Lelystad, The Netherlands: Koninklijke Vermande. -
Sumer, B., Perniss, P. M., & Ozyurek, A. (2017). A first study on the development of spatial viewpoint in sign language acquisition: The case of Turkish Sign Language. In F. N. Ketrez, A. C. Kuntay, S. Ozcalıskan, & A. Ozyurek (
Eds. ), Social Environment and Cognition in Language Development: Studies in Honor of Ayhan Aksu-Koc (pp. 223-240). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/tilar.21.14sum.Abstract
The current study examines, for the first time, the viewpoint preferences of signing children in expressing spatial relations that require imposing a viewpoint (left-right, front-behind). We elicited spatial descriptions from deaf children (4–9 years of age) acquiring Turkish Sign Language (TİD) natively from their deaf parents and from adult native signers of TİD. Adults produced these spatial descriptions from their own viewpoint and from that of their addressee depending on whether the objects were located on the lateral or the sagittal axis. TİD-acquiring children, on the other hand, described all spatial configurations from their own viewpoint. Differences were also found between children and adults in the type of linguistic devices and how they are used to express such spatial relations. -
Suppes, P., Böttner, M., & Liang, L. (1998). Machine Learning of Physics Word Problems: A Preliminary Report. In A. Aliseda, R. van Glabbeek, & D. Westerståhl (
Eds. ), Computing Natural Language (pp. 141-154). Stanford, CA, USA: CSLI Publications.Files private
Request files -
Takashima, A., & Bakker, I. (2017). Memory consolidation. In H.-J. Schmid (
Ed. ), Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge (pp. 177-200). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. -
Terrill, A. (2004). Coordination in Lavukaleve. In M. Haspelmath (
Ed. ), Coordinating Constructions. (pp. 427-443). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. -
Thomassen, A. J., & Kempen, G. (1979). Memory. In J. A. Michon, E. Eijkman, & L. Klerk (
Eds. ), Handbook of psychonomics (pp. 75-137 ). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company. -
Van Turennout, M., Schmitt, B., & Hagoort, P. (2003). When words come to mind: Electrophysiological insights on the time course of speaking and understanding words. In N. O. Schiller, & A. S. Meyer (
Eds. ), Phonetics and phonology in language comprehension and production: Differences and similarities (pp. 241-278). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
van Staden, M., & Majid, A. (2003). Body colouring task 2003. In N. J. Enfield (
Ed. ), Field research manual 2003, part I: Multimodal interaction, space, event representation (pp. 66-68). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.877666.Abstract
This Field Manual entry has been superceded by the published version: Van Staden, M., & Majid, A. (2006). Body colouring task. Language Sciences, 28(2-3), 158-161. doi:10.1016/j.langsci.2005.11.004.Additional information
2003_body_model_large.pdfFiles private
Request files -
Van Valin Jr., R. D. (2003). Minimalism and explanation. In J. Moore, & M. Polinsky (
Eds. ), The nature of explanation in linguistic theory (pp. 281-297). University of Chicago Press. -
Van Gijn, R., Hammarström, H., Van de Kerke, S., Krasnoukhova, O., & Muysken, P. (2017). Linguistic Areas, Linguistic Convergence and River Systems in South America. In R. Hickey (
Ed. ), The Cambridge Handbook of Areal Linguistics (pp. 964-996). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781107279872.034. -
Van Geenhoven, V. (1998). On the Argument Structure of some Noun Incorporating Verbs in West Greenlandic. In M. Butt, & W. Geuder (
Eds. ), The Projection of Arguments - Lexical and Compositional Factors (pp. 225-263). Stanford, CA, USA: CSLI Publications.Files private
Request files -
Van Valin Jr., R. D. (1998). The acquisition of WH-questions and the mechanisms of language acquisition. In M. Tomasello (
Ed. ), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (pp. 221-249). Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum. -
Van Berkum, J. J. A. (2004). Sentence comprehension in a wider discourse: Can we use ERPs to keep track of things? In M. Carreiras, Jr., & C. Clifton (
Eds. ), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: eyetracking, ERPs and beyond (pp. 229-270). New York: Psychology Press. -
Von Stutterheim, C., Carroll, M., & Klein, W. (2003). Two ways of construing complex temporal structures. In F. Lenz (
Ed. ), Deictic conceptualization of space, time and person (pp. 97-133). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Von Stutterheim, C., & Klein, W. (2004). Die Gesetze des Geistes sind metrisch: Hölderlin und die Sprachproduktion. In H. Schwarz (
Ed. ), Fenster zur Welt: Deutsch als Fremdsprachenphilologie (pp. 439-460). München: Iudicium. -
Vonk, W., & Cozijn, R. (2003). On the treatment of saccades and regressions in eye movement measures of reading time. In J. Hyönä, R. Radach, & H. Deubel (
Eds. ), The mind's eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 291-312). Amsterdam: Elsevier. -
Warner, N. (2003). Rapid perceptibility as a factor underlying universals of vowel inventories. In A. Carnie, H. Harley, & M. Willie (
Eds. ), Formal approaches to function in grammar, in honor of Eloise Jelinek (pp. 245-261). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Wender, K. F., Haun, D. B. M., Rasch, B. H., & Blümke, M. (2003). Context effects in memory for routes. In C. Freksa, W. Brauer, C. Habel, & K. F. Wender (
Eds. ), Spatial cognition III: Routes and navigation, human memory and learning, spatial representation and spatial learning (pp. 209-231). Berlin: Springer. -
Zwitserlood, I. (2003). Word formation below and above little x: Evidence from Sign Language of the Netherlands. In Proceedings of SCL 19. Nordlyd Tromsø University Working Papers on Language and Linguistics (pp. 488-502).
Abstract
Although in many respects sign languages have a similar structure to that of spoken languages, the different modalities in which both types of languages are expressed cause differences in structure as well. One of the most striking differences between spoken and sign languages is the influence of the interface between grammar and PF on the surface form of utterances. Spoken language words and phrases are in general characterized by sequential strings of sounds, morphemes and words, while in sign languages we find that many phonemes, morphemes, and even words are expressed simultaneously. A linguistic model should be able to account for the structures that occur in both spoken and sign languages. In this paper, I will discuss the morphological/ morphosyntactic structure of signs in Nederlandse Gebarentaal (Sign Language of the Netherlands, henceforth NGT), with special focus on the components ‘place of articulation’ and ‘handshape’. I will focus on their multiple functions in the grammar of NGT and argue that the framework of Distributed Morphology (DM), which accounts for word formation in spoken languages, is also suited to account for the formation of structures in sign languages. First I will introduce the phonological and morphological structure of NGT signs. Then, I will briefly outline the major characteristics of the DM framework. Finally, I will account for signs that have the same surface form but have a different morphological structure by means of that framework.Additional information
http://www.ub.uit.no/baser/septentrio/index.php/nordlyd/article/viewFile/17/16
Share this page