Displaying 1 - 11 of 11
-
Levelt, W. J. M., Drenth, P., & Noort, E. (
Eds. ). (2012). Flawed science: The fraudulent research practices of social psychologist Diederik Stapel. Tilburg: Commissioned by the Tilburg University, University of Amsterdam and the University of Groningen.Abstract
Final report Stapel investigation -
Ehrich, V., & Levelt, W. J. M. (
Eds. ). (1982). Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics: Annual Report Nr.3 1982. Nijmegen: MPI for Psycholinguistics. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1982). Cognitive styles in the use of spatial direction terms. In R. Jarvella, & W. Klein (
Eds. ), Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics (pp. 251-268). Chichester: Wiley. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1982). Het lineariseringsprobleem van de spreker. Tijdschrift voor Taal- en Tekstwetenschap (TTT), 2(1), 1-15.
-
Levelt, W. J. M. (1982). Linearization in describing spatial networks. In S. Peters, & E. Saarinen (
Eds. ), Processes, beliefs, and questions (pp. 199-220). Dordrecht - Holland: D. Reidel.Abstract
The topic of this paper is the way in which speakers order information in discourse. I will refer to this issue with the term "linearization", and will begin with two types of general remarks. The first one concerns the scope and relevance of the problem with reference to some existing literature. The second set of general remarks will be about the place of linearization in a theory of the speaker. The following, and main part of this paper, will be a summary report of research of linearization in a limited, but well-defined domain of discourse, namely the description of spatial networks. -
Levelt, W. J. M., & Kelter, S. (1982). Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 78-106. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(82)90005-6.
Abstract
Speakers tend to repeat materials from previous talk. This tendency is experimentally established and manipulated in various question-answering situations. It is shown that a question's surface form can affect the format of the answer given, even if this form has little semantic or conversational consequence, as in the pair Q: (At) what time do you close. A: “(At)five o'clock.” Answerers tend to match the utterance to the prepositional (nonprepositional) form of the question. This “correspondence effect” may diminish or disappear when, following the question, additional verbal material is presented to the answerer. The experiments show that neither the articulatory buffer nor long-term memory is normally involved in this retention of recent speech. Retaining recent speech in working memory may fulfill a variety of functions for speaker and listener, among them the correct production and interpretation of surface anaphora. Reusing recent materials may, moreover, be more economical than regenerating speech anew from a semantic base, and thus contribute to fluency. But the realization of this strategy requires a production system in which linguistic formulation can take place relatively independent of, and parallel to, conceptual planning. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1982). Science policy: Three recent idols, and a goddess. IPO Annual Progress Report, 17, 32-35.
-
Levelt, W. J. M. (1982). Zelfcorrecties in het spreekproces. KNAW: Mededelingen van de afdeling letterkunde, nieuwe reeks, 45(8), 215-228.
-
Levelt, W. J. M. (1973). Formele grammatica's in linguistiek en taalpsychologie (Vols. I-III). Deventer: Van Loghem Slaterus.
-
Levelt, W. J. M. (1973). Recente ontwikkelingen in de taalpsychologie. Forum der Letteren, 14(4), 235-254.
-
Levelt, W. J. M., & Bonarius, M. (1973). Suffixes as deep structure clues. Methodology and Science, 6(1), 7-37.
Abstract
Recent work on sentence recognition suggests that listeners use their knowledge of the language to directly infer deep structure syntactic relations from surface structure markers. Suffixes may be such clues, especially in agglutinative languages. A cross-language (Dutch-Finnish) experiment is reported, designed to investigate whether the suffix structure of Finnish words (as opposed to suffixless Dutch words) can facilitate prompted recall of sentences in case these suffixes differentiate between possible deep structures. The experiment, in which 80 subjects recall sentences at the occasion of prompt words, gives only slight confirmatory evidence. Meanwhile, another prompted recall effect (Blumenthal's) could not be replicated.
Share this page