Displaying 1 - 100 of 159
-
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. -
Atlas, J. D., & Levinson, S. C. (1981). It-clefts, informativeness and logical form: Radical pragmatics (revised standard version). In P. Cole (
Ed. ), Radical pragmatics (pp. 1-62). New York: Academic Press. -
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. -
Becker, A., Dittmar, N., Gutmann, M., Klein, W., Rieck, B.-O., Senft, G., Senft, I., Steckner, W., & Thielecke, E. (1977). Heidelberger Forschungsprojekt 'Pidgin-Deutsch spanischer und italienischer Arbeiter in der Bundesrepublik': Die ungesteuerte Erlernung des Deutschen durch spanische und italienische Arbeiter; eine soziolinguistische Untersuchung. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie, Beihefte 2. Osnabrück: Universität Osnabrück.
-
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. (1985). Beyond communicative adequacy: From piecemeal knowledge to an integrated system in the child's acquisition of language. In K. Nelson (
Ed. ), Children's language (pp. 369-398). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Abstract
(From the chapter) the first section considers very briefly the kinds of processes that can be inferred to underlie errors that do not set in until after a period of correct usage acquisition often seems to be a more extended process than we have envisioned summarize a currently influential model of how linguistic forms, meaning, and communication are interrelated in the acquisition of language, point out some challenging problems for this model, and suggest that the notion of "meaning" in language must be reconceptualized before we can hope to solve these problems evidence from several types of late errors is marshalled in support of these arguments (From the preface) provides many examples of new errors that children introduce at relatively advanced stages of mastery of semantics and syntax Bowerman views these seemingly backwards steps as indications of definite steps forward by the child achieving reflective, flexible and integrated systems of semantics and syntax ( -
Bowerman, M. (2005). Linguistics. In B. Hopkins (
Ed. ), The Cambridge encyclopedia of child development (pp. 497-501). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Bowerman, M., & Eling, P. (1983). Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics: Annual Report nr. 4 1983. Nijmegen: MPI for Psycholinguistics.
-
Bowerman, M. (1981). Language development. In H. Triandis, & A. Heron (
Eds. ), Handbook of cross cultural psychology, Vol. 4: Developmental Psychology (pp. 93-185). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. -
Bowerman, M. (1979). The acquisition of complex sentences. In M. Garman, & P. Fletcher (
Eds. ), Studies in language acquisition (pp. 285-305). Cambridge: Cambridge University 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. (1981). The child's expression of meaning: Expanding relationships among lexicon, syntax, and morphology. In H. Winitz (
Ed. ), Native language and foreign language acquisition (pp. 172-189). New York: New York Academy of Sciences. -
Bowerman, M. (1985). What shapes children's grammars? In D. Slobin (
Ed. ), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 1257-1319). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. -
Braun, B. (2005). Production and perception of thematic contrast in German. Oxford: Lang.
-
Brown, P., Macintyre, M., Morpeth, R., & Prendergast, S. (1981). A daughter: A thing to be given away. In Cambridge Women's Studies Group (
Ed. ), Women in society: Interdisciplinary essays (pp. 127-145). London: Virago. -
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, P., & Jordanova, L. (1981). Oppressive dichotomies: The nature/culture debate. In Cambridge Women's Studies Group (
Ed. ), Women in society: Interdisciplinary essays (pp. 224-241). London: Virago. -
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1979). Social structure, groups and interaction. In H. Giles, & K. R. Scherer (
Eds. ), Social markers in speech (pp. 291-341). Cambridge University Press. -
Brown, P., & Fraser, C. (1979). Speech as a marker of situation. In H. Giles, & K. Scherer (
Eds. ), Social markers in speech (pp. 33-62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
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). -
Brown, P. (1981). Universals and particulars in the position of women. In Cambridge Women's Studies Group (
Ed. ), Women in society: Interdisciplinary essays (pp. 242-256). London: Virago. -
Burenhult, N. (2005). A grammar of Jahai. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
-
Cambridge Women's Studies Group, & Brown, P. (
Eds. ). (1981). Women in society: Interdisciplinary essays. London: Virago. -
Chen, A. (2005). Universal and language-specific perception of paralinguistic intonational meaning. Utrecht: LOT.
-
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. (
Ed. ). (2005). Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Cutler, A. (1979). Beyond parsing and lexical look-up. In R. J. Wales, & E. C. T. Walker (
Eds. ), New approaches to language mechanisms: a collection of psycholinguistic studies (pp. 133-149). Amsterdam: North-Holland. -
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. (1979). Monitoring sentence comprehension. In W. E. Cooper, & E. C. T. Walker (
Eds. ), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett (pp. 113-134). Hillsdale: Erlbaum. -
Cutler, A. (1983). Lexical complexity and sentence processing. In G. B. Flores d'Arcais, & R. J. Jarvella (
Eds. ), The process of language understanding (pp. 43-79). Chichester, Sussex: Wiley. -
Cutler, A., & Pearson, M. (1985). On the analysis of prosodic turn-taking cues. In C. Johns-Lewis (
Ed. ), Intonation in discourse (pp. 139-155). London: Croom Helm. -
Cutler, A. (1985). Performance measures of lexical complexity. In G. Hoppenbrouwers, P. A. Seuren, & A. Weijters (
Eds. ), Meaning and the lexicon (pp. 75). Dordrecht: Foris. -
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., & Ladd, D. R. (
Eds. ). (1983). Prosody: Models and measurements. Heidelberg: Springer. -
Cutler, A. (1981). The cognitive reality of suprasegmental phonology. In T. Myers, J. Laver, & J. Anderson (
Eds. ), The cognitive representation of speech (pp. 399-400). Amsterdam: North-Holland. -
Cutler, A. (1983). Speakers’ conceptions of the functions of prosody. In A. Cutler, & D. R. Ladd (
Eds. ), Prosody: Models and measurements (pp. 79-91). Heidelberg: Springer. -
Cutler, A. (
Ed. ). (2005). Twenty-first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. -
Deutsch, W., & Frauenfelder, U. (1985). Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics: Annual Report Nr.6 1985. Nijmegen: MPI for Psycholinguistics.
-
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. -
Gullberg, M. (1998). Gesture as a communication strategy in second language discourse: A study of learners of French and Swedish. Lund: Lund University Press.
Abstract
Gestures are often regarded as the most typical compensatory device used by language learners in communicative trouble. Yet gestural solutions to communicative problems have rarely been studied within any theory of second language use. The work presented in this volume aims to account for second language learners’ strategic use of speech-associated gestures by combining a process-oriented framework for communication strategies with a cognitive theory of gesture. Two empirical studies are presented. The production study investigates Swedish learners of French and French learners of Swedish and their use of strategic gestures. The results, which are based on analyses of both individual and group behaviour, contradict popular opinion as well as theoretical assumptions from both fields. Gestures are not primarily used to replace speech, nor are they chiefly mimetic. Instead, learners use gestures with speech, and although they do exploit mimetic gestures to solve lexical problems, they also use more abstract gestures to handle discourse-related difficulties and metalinguistic commentary. The influence of factors such as proficiency, task, culture, and strategic competence on gesture use is discussed, and the oral and gestural strategic modes are compared. In the evaluation study, native speakers’ assessments of learners’ gestures, and the potential effect of gestures on evaluations of proficiency are analysed and discussed in terms of individual communicative style. Compensatory gestures function at multiple communicative levels. This has implications for theories of communication strategies, and an expansion of the existing frameworks is discussed taking both cognitive and interactive aspects into account. -
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. -
Hickmann, M., & Weissenborn, J. (
Eds. ). (1981). Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics: Annual Report Nr.2 1981. Nijmegen: MPI for Psycholinguistics. -
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. -
Hoppenbrouwers, G., Seuren, P. A. M., & Weijters, A. (
Eds. ). (1985). Meaning and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Foris. -
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. -
Kelly, A., Narasimhan, B., & Smits, R. (2005). Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics: Annual Report 2005. Nijmegen: MPI for Psycholinguistics.
-
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. (1979). A study of syntactic bookkeeping during sentence production. In H. Ueckert, & D. Rhenius (
Eds. ), Komplexe menschliche Informationsverarbeitung (pp. 361-368). Bern: Hans Huber.Abstract
It is an important feature of the human sentence production system that semantic and syntactic processes may overlap in time and do not proceed strictly serially. That is, the process of building the syntactic form of an utterance does not always wait until the complete semantic content for that utterance has been decided upon. On the contrary, speakers will often start pronouncing the first words of a sentence while still working on further details of its semantic content. An important advantage is memory economy. Semantic and syntactic fragments do not have to occupy working memory until complete semantic and syntactic structures for an utterance have been computed. Instead, each semantic and syntactic fragment is processed as soon as possible and is kept in working memory for a minimum period of time. This raises the question of how the sentence production system can maintain syntactic coherence across syntactic fragments. Presumably there are processes of "syntactic bookkeeping" which (1) store in working memory those syntactic properties of a fragmentary sentence which are needed to eliminate ungrammatical continuations, and (2) check whether a prospective continuation is indeed compatible with the sentence constructed so far. In reaction time experiments where subjects described, under time pressure, simple static pictures of an action performed by an actor, the second aspect of syntactic bookkeeping could be demonstrated. This evidence is used for modelling bookkeeping processes as part of a computational sentence generator which aims at simulating the syntactic operations people carry out during spontaneous speech. -
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. (1985). Artificiële intelligentie: Bouw, benutting, beheersing. In W. Veldkamp (
Ed. ), Innovatie in perspectief (pp. 42-47). Vianen: Nixdorf Computer B.V. -
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. (1983). Het artificiële-intelligentieparadigma. Ervaringen met een nieuwe methodologie voor cognitief-psychologisch onderzoek. In J. Raaijmakers, P. Hudson, & A. Wertheim (
Eds. ), Metatheoretische aspekten van de psychonomie (pp. 85-98). Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus. -
Kempen, G. (1983). Natural language facilities in information systems: Asset or liability? In J. Van Apeldoorn (
Ed. ), Man and information technology: Towards friendlier systems (pp. 81-86). Delft University Press. -
Kempen, G. (1977). Onder woorden brengen: Psychologische aspecten van expressief taalgebruik [Inaugural lecture]. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.
Abstract
Rede, uitgesproken bij de aanvaarding van het ambt van lector in de taalpsychologie aan de Katholieke Universiteit te Nijmegen op Vrijdag 10 juni 1977 -
Kempen, G. (1998). Sentence parsing. In A. D. Friederici (
Ed. ), Language comprehension: A biological perspective (pp. 213-228). Berlin: Springer. -
Kempen, G. (1981). Taalpsychologie. In H. Duijker, & P. Vroon (
Eds. ), Codex Psychologicus (pp. 205-221). Amsterdam: Elsevier. -
Kempen, G., Schotel, H., & Pijls, J. (1985). Taaltechnologie en taalonderwijs. In J. Heene (
Ed. ), Onderwijs en informatietechnologie. Den Haag: Stichting voor Onderzoek van het Onderwijs (SVO). -
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., & Rath, R. (1981). Automatische Lemmatisierung deutscher Flexionsformen. In R. Herzog (
Ed. ), Computer in der Übersetzungswissenschaft (pp. 94-142). Framkfurt am Main, Bern: Verlag Peter Lang. -
Klein, W., & Levelt, W. J. M. (
Eds. ). (1981). Crossing the boundaries in linguistics: Studies presented to Manfred Bierwisch. Dordrecht: Reidel. -
Klein, W. (1983). Deixis and spatial orientation in route directions. In H. Pick, & L. Acredolo (
Eds. ), Spatial orientation theory: Research, and application (pp. 283-311). New York: Plenum. -
Klein, W. (1983). Der Ausdruck der Temporalität im ungesteuerten Spracherwerb. In G. Rauh (
Ed. ), Essays on Deixis (pp. 149-168). Tübingen: Narr. -
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. (1981). Eine kommentierte Bibliographie zur Computerlinguistik. In R. Herzog (
Ed. ), Computer in der Übersetzungswissenschaft (pp. 95-142). Frankfurt am Main: Lang. -
Klein, W. (1985). Ellipse, Fokusgliederung und thematischer Stand. In R. Meyer-Hermann, & H. Rieser (
Eds. ), Ellipsen und fragmentarische Ausdrücke (pp. 1-24). Tübingen: Niemeyer. -
Klein, W., & Dittmar, N. (1979). Developing grammars. Berlin: Springer.
-
Klein, W. (1977). Die Wissenschaft der Interpretation. In W. Klein (
Ed. ), Methoden der Textanalyse (pp. 1-23). Heidelberg: Quelle und Meyer. -
Klein, W. (1985). Argumentationsanalyse: Ein Begriffsrahmen und ein Beispiel. In W. Kopperschmidt, & H. Schanze (
Eds. ), Argumente - Argumentationen (pp. 208-260). München: Fink. -
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. (1979). Die Geschichte eines Tores. In R. Baum, F. J. Hausmann, & I. Monreal-Wickert (
Eds. ), Sprache in Unterricht und Forschung: Schwerpunkt Romanistik (pp. 175-194). Tübingen: Narr. -
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. (
Ed. ). (1977). Methoden der Textanalyse. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer. -
Klein, W. (1981). Knowing a language and knowing to communicate: A case study in foreign workers' communication. In A. Vermeer (
Ed. ), Language problems of minority groups (pp. 75-95). Tilburg: Tilburg University. -
Klein, W. (1981). Logik der Argumentation. In Institut für deutsche Sprache (
Ed. ), Dialogforschung: Jahrbuch 1980 des Instituts für deutsche Sprache (pp. 226-264). Düsseldorf: Schwann. -
Klein, W. (1981). Some rules of regular ellipsis in German. In W. Klein, & W. J. M. Levelt (
Eds. ), Crossing the boundaries in linguistics: Studies presented to Manfred Bierwisch (pp. 51-78). Dordrecht: Reidel.
Share this page