Displaying 1 - 15 of 15
-
Kempen, G., & Harbusch, K. (2003). A corpus study into word order variation in German subordinate clauses: Animacy affects linearization independently of function assignment. In Proceedings of AMLaP 2003 (pp. 153-154). Glasgow: Glasgow University.
-
Kempen, G., & Harbusch, K. (2003). Dutch and German verb clusters in performance grammar. In P. A. Seuren, & G. Kempen (
Eds. ), Verb constructions in German and Dutch (pp. 185-221). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Kempen, G., & Harbusch, K. (2003). An artificial opposition between grammaticality and frequency: Comment on Bornkessel, Schlesewsky & Friederici (2002). Cognition, 90(2), 205-210 [Rectification on p. 215]. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00145-8.
Abstract
In a recent Cognition paper (Cognition 85 (2002) B21), Bornkessel, Schlesewsky, and Friederici report ERP data that they claim “show that online processing difficulties induced by word order variations in German cannot be attributed to the relative infrequency of the constructions in question, but rather appear to reflect the application of grammatical principles during parsing” (p. B21). In this commentary we demonstrate that the posited contrast between grammatical principles and construction (in)frequency as sources of parsing problems is artificial because it is based on factually incorrect assumptions about the grammar of German and on inaccurate corpus frequency data concerning the German constructions involved. -
Kempen, G. (2003). Language generation. In W. Frawley (
Ed. ), International encyclopedia of linguistics (pp. 362-364). New York: Oxford University Press. -
Kempen, G., & Harbusch, K. (2003). Word order scrambling as a consequence of incremental sentence production. In H. Härtl, & H. Tappe (
Eds. ), Mediating between concepts and grammar (pp. 141-164). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Seuren, P. A. M., & Kempen, G. (
Eds. ). (2003). Verb constructions in German and Dutch. Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Dijkstra, T., & Kempen, G. (1997). Het taalgebruikersmodel. In H. Hulshof, & T. Hendrix (
Eds. ), De taalcentrale. Amsterdam: Bulkboek. -
Kempen, G. (1997). De ontdubbelde taalgebruiker: Maken taalproductie en taalperceptie gebruik van één en dezelfde syntactische processor? [Abstract]. In 6e Winter Congres NvP. Programma and abstracts (pp. 31-32). Nederlandse Vereniging voor Psychonomie.
-
Kempen, G., Kooij, A., & Van Leeuwen, T. (1997). Do skilled readers exploit inflectional spelling cues that do not mirror pronunciation? An eye movement study of morpho-syntactic parsing in Dutch. In Abstracts of the Orthography Workshop "What spelling changes". Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.
-
Kempen, G. (1997). Taalpsychologie week. In Wetenschappelijke Scheurkalender 1998. Beek: Natuur & Techniek.
Abstract
[Seven one-page psycholinguistic sketches] -
Kempen, G. (1997). Van taalbarrières naar linguïstische snelwegen: Inrichting van een technische taalinfrastructuur voor het Nederlands. Grenzen aan veeltaligheid: Taalgebruik en bestuurlijke doeltreffendheid in de instellingen van de Europese Unie, 43-48.
-
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., & Huijbers, P. (1983). The lexicalization process in sentence production and naming: Indirect election of words. Cognition, 14(2), 185-209. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(83)90029-X.
Abstract
A series of experiments is reported in which subjects describe simple visual scenes by means of both sentential and non-sentential responses. The data support the following statements about the lexicalization (word finding) process. (1) Words used by speakers in overt naming or sentence production responses are selected by a sequence of two lexical retrieval processes, the first yielding abstract pre-phonological items (Ll -items), the second one adding their phonological shapes (L2-items). (2) The selection of several Ll-items for a multi-word utterance can take place simultaneously. (3) A monitoring process is watching the output of Ll-lexicalization to check if it is in keeping with prevailing constraints upon utterance format. (4) Retrieval of the L2-item which corresponds with a given LI-item waits until the Ld-item has been checked by the monitor, and all other Ll-items needed for the utterance under construction have become available. A coherent picture of the lexicalization process begins to emerge when these characteristics are brought together with other empirical results in the area of naming and sentence production, e.g., picture naming reaction times (Seymour, 1979), speech errors (Garrett, 1980), and word order preferences (Bock, 1982). -
Kempen, G. (1983). Wat betekent taalvaardigheid voor informatiesystemen? TNO project: Maandblad voor toegepaste wetenschappen, 11, 401-403.
Share this page