Publications

Displaying 201 - 226 of 226
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Ten Bosch, L., Baayen, R. H., & Ernestus, M. (2006). On speech variation and word type differentiation by articulatory feature representations. In Proceedings of Interspeech 2006 (pp. 2230-2233).

    Abstract

    This paper describes ongoing research aiming at the description of variation in speech as represented by asynchronous articulatory features. We will first illustrate how distances in the articulatory feature space can be used for event detection along speech trajectories in this space. The temporal structure imposed by the cosine distance in articulatory feature space coincides to a large extent with the manual segmentation on phone level. The analysis also indicates that the articulatory feature representation provides better such alignments than the MFCC representation does. Secondly, we will present first results that indicate that articulatory features can be used to probe for acoustic differences in the onsets of Dutch singulars and plurals.
  • ten Bosch, L., Hämäläinen, A., Scharenborg, O., & Boves, L. (2006). Acoustic scores and symbolic mismatch penalties in phone lattices. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing [ICASSP 2006]. IEEE.

    Abstract

    This paper builds on previous work that aims at unraveling the structure of the speech signal by means of using probabilistic representations. The context of this work is a multi-pass speech recognition system in which a phone lattice is created and used as a basis for a lexical search in which symbolic mismatches are allowed at certain costs. The focus is on the optimization of the costs of phone insertions, deletions and substitutions that are used in the lexical decoding pass. Two optimization approaches are presented, one related to a multi-pass computational model for human speech recognition, the other based on a decoding in which Bayes’ risks are minimized. In the final section, the advantages of these optimization methods are discussed and compared.
  • Ten Bosch, L., Boves, L., & Ernestus, M. (2017). The recognition of compounds: A computational account. In Proceedings of Interspeech 2017 (pp. 1158-1162). doi:10.21437/Interspeech.2017-1048.

    Abstract

    This paper investigates the processes in comprehending spoken noun-noun compounds, using data from the BALDEY database. BALDEY contains lexicality judgments and reaction times (RTs) for Dutch stimuli for which also linguistic information is included. Two different approaches are combined. The first is based on regression by Dynamic Survival Analysis, which models decisions and RTs as a consequence of the fact that a cumulative density function exceeds some threshold. The parameters of that function are estimated from the observed RT data. The second approach is based on DIANA, a process-oriented computational model of human word comprehension, which simulates the comprehension process with the acoustic stimulus as input. DIANA gives the identity and the number of the word candidates that are activated at each 10 ms time step.

    Both approaches show how the processes involved in comprehending compounds change during a stimulus. Survival Analysis shows that the impact of word duration varies during the course of a stimulus. The density of word and non-word hypotheses in DIANA shows a corresponding pattern with different regimes. We show how the approaches complement each other, and discuss additional ways in which data and process models can be combined.
  • Terrill, A., & Dunn, M. (2006). Semantic transference: Two preliminary case studies from the Solomon Islands. In C. Lefebvre, L. White, & C. Jourdan (Eds.), L2 acquisition and Creole genesis: Dialogues (pp. 67-85). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  • Terrill, A. (2006). Central Solomon languages. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (vol. 2) (pp. 279-280). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Abstract

    The Papuan languages of the central Solomon Islands are a negatively defined areal grouping: They are those four or possibly five languages in the central Solomon Islands that do not belong to the Austronesian family. Bilua (Vella Lavella), Touo (Rendova), Lavukaleve (Russell Islands), Savosavo (Savo Island) and possibly Kazukuru (New Georgia) have been identified as non-Austronesian since the early 20th century. However, their affiliations both to each other and to other languages still remain a mystery. Heterogeneous and until recently largely undescribed, they present an interesting departure from what is known both of Austronesian languages in the region and of the Papuan languages of the mainland of New Guinea.
  • Tsoukala, C., Frank, S. L., & Broersma, M. (2017). “He's pregnant": Simulating the confusing case of gender pronoun errors in L2 English. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2017) (pp. 3392-3397). Austin, TX, USA: Cognitive Science Society.

    Abstract

    Even advanced Spanish speakers of second language English tend to confuse the pronouns ‘he’ and ‘she’, often without even noticing their mistake (Lahoz, 1991). A study by AntónMéndez (2010) has indicated that a possible reason for this error is the fact that Spanish is a pro-drop language. In order to test this hypothesis, we used an extension of Dual-path (Chang, 2002), a computational cognitive model of sentence production, to simulate two models of bilingual speech production of second language English. One model had Spanish (ES) as a native language, whereas the other learned a Spanish-like language that used the pronoun at all times (non-pro-drop Spanish, NPD_ES). When tested on L2 English sentences, the bilingual pro-drop Spanish model produced significantly more gender pronoun errors, confirming that pronoun dropping could indeed be responsible for the gender confusion in natural language use as well.
  • Tuinman, A. (2006). Overcompensation of /t/ reduction in Dutch by German/Dutch bilinguals. In Variation, detail and representation: 10th Conference on Laboratory Phonology (pp. 101-102).
  • Van Staden, M., Bowerman, M., & Verhelst, M. (2006). Some properties of spatial description in Dutch. In S. C. Levinson, & D. Wilkins (Eds.), Grammars of Space (pp. 475-511). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Van Dooren, A., Dieuleveut, A., Cournane, A., & Hacquard, V. (2017). Learning what must and can must and can mean. In A. Cremers, T. Van Gessel, & F. Roelofsen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Amsterdam Colloquium (pp. 225-234). Amsterdam: ILLC.

    Abstract

    This corpus study investigates how children figure out that functional modals
    like must can express various flavors of modality. We examine how modality is
    expressed in speech to and by children, and find that the way speakers use
    modals may obscure their polysemy. Yet, children eventually figure it out. Our
    results suggest that some do before age 3. We show that while root and
    epistemic flavors are not equally well-represented in the input, there are robust
    correlations between flavor and aspect, which learners could exploit to discover
    modal polysemy.
  • Van Dooren, A. (2017). Dutch must more structure. In A. Lamont, & K. Tetzloff (Eds.), NELS 47: Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (pp. 165-175). Amherst: GLSA.
  • Van den Bos, E. J., & Poletiek, F. H. (2006). Implicit artificial grammar learning in adults and children. In R. Sun (Ed.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2006) (pp. 2619). Austin, TX, USA: Cognitive Science Society.
  • 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.
  • 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 Valin Jr., R. D. (2006). Some universals of verb semantics. In R. Mairal, & J. Gil (Eds.), Linguistic universals (pp. 155-178). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Van Valin Jr., R. D. (2006). Semantic macroroles and language processing. In I. Bornkessel, M. Schlesewsky, B. Comrie, & A. Friederici (Eds.), Semantic role universals and argument linking: Theoretical, typological and psycho-/neurolinguistic perspectives (pp. 263-302). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Weber, A. (1998). Listening to nonnative language which violates native assimilation rules. In D. Duez (Ed.), Proceedings of the European Scientific Communication Association workshop: Sound patterns of Spontaneous Speech (pp. 101-104).

    Abstract

    Recent studies using phoneme detection tasks have shown that spoken-language processing is neither facilitated nor interfered with by optional assimilation, but is inhibited by violation of obligatory assimilation. Interpretation of these results depends on an assessment of their generality, specifically, whether they also obtain when listeners are processing nonnative language. Two separate experiments are presented in which native listeners of German and native listeners of Dutch had to detect a target fricative in legal monosyllabic Dutch nonwords. All of the nonwords were correct realisations in standard Dutch. For German listeners, however, half of the nonwords contained phoneme strings which violate the German fricative assimilation rule. Whereas the Dutch listeners showed no significant effects, German listeners detected the target fricative faster when the German fricative assimilation was violated than when no violation occurred. The results might suggest that violation of assimilation rules does not have to make processing more difficult per se.
  • Widlok, T. (2006). Two ways of looking at a Mangetti grove. In A. Takada (Ed.), Proceedings of the workshop: Landscape and society (pp. 11-16). Kyoto: 21st Century Center of Excellence Program.
  • Wittek, A. (1998). Learning verb meaning via adverbial modification: Change-of-state verbs in German and the adverb "wieder" again. In A. Greenhill, M. Hughes, H. Littlefield, & H. Walsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 779-790). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
  • Wittenburg, P., Brugman, H., Russel, A., Klassmann, A., & Sloetjes, H. (2006). ELAN: a professional framework for multimodality research. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006) (pp. 1556-1559).

    Abstract

    Utilization of computer tools in linguistic research has gained importance with the maturation of media frameworks for the handling of digital audio and video. The increased use of these tools in gesture, sign language and multimodal interaction studies has led to stronger requirements on the flexibility, the efficiency and in particular the time accuracy of annotation tools. This paper describes the efforts made to make ELAN a tool that meets these requirements, with special attention to the developments in the area of time accuracy. In subsequent sections an overview will be given of other enhancements in the latest versions of ELAN, that make it a useful tool in multimodality research.
  • Wittenburg, P., Broeder, D., Klein, W., Levinson, S. C., & Romary, L. (2006). Foundations of modern language resource archives. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2006) (pp. 625-628).

    Abstract

    A number of serious reasons will convince an increasing amount of researchers to store their relevant material in centers which we will call "language resource archives". They combine the duty of taking care of long-term preservation as well as the task to give access to their material to different user groups. Access here is meant in the sense that an active interaction with the data will be made possible to support the integration of new data, new versions or commentaries of all sort. Modern Language Resource Archives will have to adhere to a number of basic principles to fulfill all requirements and they will have to be involved in federations to create joint language resource domains making it even more simple for the researchers to access the data. This paper makes an attempt to formulate the essential pillars language resource archives have to adhere to.
  • 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.
  • Zhang, Y., & Yu, C. (2017). How misleading cues influence referential uncertainty in statistical cross-situational learning. In M. LaMendola, & J. Scott (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD 41) (pp. 820-833). Boston, MA: Cascadilla Press.
  • 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.

Share this page