DOCSLIB.ORG

This Section Includes 154 Letters of Provided by Members of the CHILDES Consortium Documenting Their Usage of the CHILDES System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
This Section Includes 154 Letters of Provided by Members of the CHILDES Consortium Documenting Their Usage of the CHILDES System This section includes 154 letters of provided by members of the CHILDES consortium documenting their usage of the CHILDES system. These letters are provided by groups representing a total of 232 researchers. On February 4, the following letter was sent out to the [email protected] mailing list, as well as the IASCL (International Association for the Study of Child Language) mailing list. All letters we received were responses to this request. The collection of published papers listed in these letters is now also included in the cumulative bibliography found in section 7. That bibliography includes a total 3104 publications, of which 1500 appeared during the last 5-year period, many of them cited in these letters. Dear Colleague, The NICHD grant for CHILDES is up for renewal this year and I am busy soliciting letters documenting its usage over the last five years. So, if you, your colleagues, or your students have indeed been making use of data or programs in CHILDES, could you please ask them to send me a letter documenting their usage. The new proposal is due March 1. However, I would appreciate receiving your letter as soon as possible. There is no need to send the letter in paper form; email is fine. The new proposal will propose work on: · continued expansion of the database, · web-distributed user tutorials, · creation of a new, user-friendly interface for CLAN, · more powerful search programs that work with the new interface, · fully automatic computation of IPSyn and DSS, · extension of automatic morphosyntactic analysis to more languages, · fuller support for coding of sign language with links to ELAN, · fuller support for Conversation Analysis (CA) coding, · computer-assisted methods for very rapid first-pass transcription, · extended support for video-based transcription, · extended interoperability with other major computer programs, and · a first generation system for web-based collaborative commentary. Letters should include citations for articles, conference presentations, talks, teaching activities, or student papers based on the use of CHILDES programs or data. I will then include these citations in the CHILDES-BIB that is on the web, as well as in the proposal. Also, they should mention any new features that you would like to see included in the programs and the database. You can just email your letter to [email protected]. I will acknowledge each email, as I receive it. Many thanks for your support for the continuation of this important component of the scientific infrastructure for the study of child language development. Brian MacWhinney Professor of Psychology, CMU [email protected] Table of Support Letters (lines are clickable) 1. Aguilar-Mediavilla, Eva........................................................................................... 6 2. Albalá, Maria José ................................................................................................... 7 3. Argus, Reili.............................................................................................................. 9 4. Aukrust, Vibeke Grøver......................................................................................... 10 5. Andrén, Mats ......................................................................................................... 13 6. Arkenberg, Marnie................................................................................................. 14 7. Avram, Larisa ........................................................................................................ 15 8. Baker, Anne........................................................................................................... 19 9. Bassano, Dominique .............................................................................................. 20 10. Bartsch, Karen ..................................................................................................... 22 11. Babarczy, Anna.................................................................................................... 24 12. Bazzanella, Carla ................................................................................................. 28 13. Beeghly, Marjorie ................................................................................................ 30 14. Behrens, Heike..................................................................................................... 31 15. Berko-Gleason, Jean ............................................................................................ 39 16. Berman, Ruth....................................................................................................... 40 17. Bernstein-Ratner, Nan.......................................................................................... 46 18. Bertinetto, Pier Marco.......................................................................................... 50 19. Bittner, Dagmar ................................................................................................... 51 20. Bok-Benneman, Reineke...................................................................................... 54 21. Bol, Gerard .......................................................................................................... 55 22. Borensztajn, Gideon............................................................................................. 57 23. Bosco, Cristina..................................................................................................... 58 24. Bryant, Judith....................................................................................................... 60 25. Bunta, Ferenc....................................................................................................... 61 26. Chaney, Carolyn .................................................................................................. 63 27. Chang, Chien-ju................................................................................................... 64 28. Chang, Franklin ................................................................................................... 68 29. Channell, Ron ...................................................................................................... 69 30. Clark, Eve............................................................................................................ 70 31. Conti-Ramsden, Gina........................................................................................... 71 32. Codesido-García, Ana .......................................................................................... 73 33. Christofidou, Anastasia ........................................................................................ 75 34. Corrigan, Roberta................................................................................................. 77 35. Crutchley, Alison ................................................................................................. 79 36. Cruz-Ferreira, Madalena ...................................................................................... 80 37. De Houwer, Annick ............................................................................................. 84 38. Demuth, Katherine............................................................................................... 90 39. Dickinson, David ................................................................................................. 97 40. Dressler, Wolfgang .............................................................................................. 98 41. Edelman, Shimon............................................................................................... 100 42. Ely, Richard....................................................................................................... 102 43. Erkelens, Marian................................................................................................ 104 44. Fisher, Cynthia................................................................................................... 106 45. Fernández Pérez, Milagros................................................................................. 108 46. Fikkert, Paula..................................................................................................... 111 47. Franceschina, Florencia...................................................................................... 114 48. Freudenthal, Daniel............................................................................................ 115 49. Gagarina, Natalia ............................................................................................... 117 50. Gelman, Susan ................................................................................................... 122 51. Gillis, Steven...................................................................................................... 123 52. Givón, Tom........................................................................................................ 127 53. Granfeldt, Jonas ................................................................................................. 128 54. Guasti, Maria Teresa.......................................................................................... 129 55. Haman, Eva ....................................................................................................... 130 56. Hansen, Laila; Babøll, Hans; Bleses, Dorthe ...................................................... 131 57. Harris, Paul.......................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Talk Bank: a Multimodal Database of Communicative Interaction
    Talk Bank: A Multimodal Database of Communicative Interaction 1. Overview The ongoing growth in computer power and connectivity has led to dramatic changes in the methodology of science and engineering. By stimulating fundamental theoretical discoveries in the analysis of semistructured data, we can to extend these methodological advances to the social and behavioral sciences. Specifically, we propose the construction of a major new tool for the social sciences, called TalkBank. The goal of TalkBank is the creation of a distributed, web- based data archiving system for transcribed video and audio data on communicative interactions. We will develop an XML-based annotation framework called Codon to serve as the formal specification for data in TalkBank. Tools will be created for the entry of new and existing data into the Codon format; transcriptions will be linked to speech and video; and there will be extensive support for collaborative commentary from competing perspectives. The TalkBank project will establish a framework that will facilitate the development of a distributed system of allied databases based on a common set of computational tools. Instead of attempting to impose a single uniform standard for coding and annotation, we will promote annotational pluralism within the framework of the abstraction layer provided by Codon. This representation will use labeled acyclic digraphs to support translation between the various annotation systems required for specific sub-disciplines. There will be no attempt to promote any single annotation scheme over others. Instead, by promoting comparison and translation between schemes, we will allow individual users to select the custom annotation scheme most appropriate for their purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Student Research Workshop Associated with RANLP 2011, Pages 1–8, Hissar, Bulgaria, 13 September 2011
    RANLPStud 2011 Proceedings of the Student Research Workshop associated with The 8th International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP 2011) 13 September, 2011 Hissar, Bulgaria STUDENT RESEARCH WORKSHOP ASSOCIATED WITH THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE RECENT ADVANCES IN NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING’2011 PROCEEDINGS Hissar, Bulgaria 13 September 2011 ISBN 978-954-452-016-8 Designed and Printed by INCOMA Ltd. Shoumen, BULGARIA ii Preface The Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP) conference, already in its eight year and ranked among the most influential NLP conferences, has always been a meeting venue for scientists coming from all over the world. Since 2009, we decided to give arena to the younger and less experienced members of the NLP community to share their results with an international audience. For this reason, further to the first successful and highly competitive Student Research Workshop associated with the conference RANLP 2009, we are pleased to announce the second edition of the workshop which is held during the main RANLP 2011 conference days on 13 September 2011. The aim of the workshop is to provide an excellent opportunity for students at all levels (Bachelor, Master, and Ph.D.) to present their work in progress or completed projects to an international research audience and receive feedback from senior researchers. We have received 31 high quality submissions, among which 6 papers have been accepted as regular oral papers, and 18 as posters. Each submission has been reviewed by
    [Show full text]
  • Child Language
    ABSTRACTS 14TH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS FOR THE STUDY OF CHILD LANGUAGE IN LYON, IASCL FRANCE 2017 WELCOME JULY, 17TH21ST 2017 SPECIAL THANKS TO - 2 - SUMMARY Plenary Day 1 4 Day 2 5 Day 3 53 Day 4 101 Day 5 146 WELCOME! Symposia Day 2 6 Day 3 54 Day 4 102 Day 5 147 Poster Day 2 189 Day 3 239 Day 4 295 - 3 - TH DAY MONDAY, 17 1 18:00-19:00, GRAND AMPHI PLENARY TALK Bottom-up and top-down information in infants’ early language acquisition Sharon Peperkamp Laboratoire de Sciences Cognitives et Psycholinguistique, Paris, France Decades of research have shown that before they pronounce their first words, infants acquire much of the sound structure of their native language, while also developing word segmentation skills and starting to build a lexicon. The rapidity of this acquisition is intriguing, and the underlying learning mechanisms are still largely unknown. Drawing on both experimental and modeling work, I will review recent research in this domain and illustrate specifically how both bottom-up and top-down cues contribute to infants’ acquisition of phonetic cat- egories and phonological rules. - 4 - TH DAY TUESDAY, 18 2 9:00-10:00, GRAND AMPHI PLENARY TALK What do the hands tell us about lan- guage development? Insights from de- velopment of speech, gesture and sign across languages Asli Ozyurek Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Most research and theory on language development focus on children’s spoken utterances. However language development starting with the first words of children is multimodal. Speaking children produce gestures ac- companying and complementing their spoken utterances in meaningful ways through pointing or iconic ges- tures.
    [Show full text]
  • Segmentability Differences Between Child-Directed and Adult-Directed Speech: a Systematic Test with an Ecologically Valid Corpus
    Report Segmentability Differences Between Child-Directed and Adult-Directed Speech: A Systematic Test With an Ecologically Valid Corpus Alejandrina Cristia 1, Emmanuel Dupoux1,2,3, Nan Bernstein Ratner4, and Melanie Soderstrom5 1Dept d’Etudes Cognitives, ENS, PSL University, EHESS, CNRS 2INRIA an open access journal 3FAIR Paris 4Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland 5Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba Keywords: computational modeling, learnability, infant word segmentation, statistical learning, lexicon ABSTRACT Previous computational modeling suggests it is much easier to segment words from child-directed speech (CDS) than adult-directed speech (ADS). However, this conclusion is based on data collected in the laboratory, with CDS from play sessions and ADS between a parent and an experimenter, which may not be representative of ecologically collected CDS and ADS. Fully naturalistic ADS and CDS collected with a nonintrusive recording device Citation: Cristia A., Dupoux, E., Ratner, as the child went about her day were analyzed with a diverse set of algorithms. The N. B., & Soderstrom, M. (2019). difference between registers was small compared to differences between algorithms; it Segmentability Differences Between Child-Directed and Adult-Directed reduced when corpora were matched, and it even reversed under some conditions. Speech: A Systematic Test With an Ecologically Valid Corpus. Open Mind: These results highlight the interest of studying learnability using naturalistic corpora Discoveries in Cognitive Science, 3, 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_ and diverse algorithmic definitions. a_00022 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00022 INTRODUCTION Supplemental Materials: Although children are exposed to both child-directed speech (CDS) and adult-directed speech https://osf.io/th75g/ (ADS), children appear to extract more information from the former than the latter (e.g., Cristia, Received: 15 May 2018 2013; Shneidman & Goldin-Meadow,2012).
    [Show full text]
  • From CHILDES to Talkbank
    From CHILDES to TalkBank Brian MacWhinney Carnegie Mellon University MacWhinney, B. (2001). New developments in CHILDES. In A. Do, L. Domínguez & A. Johansen (Eds.), BUCLD 25: Proceedings of the 25th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 458-468). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla. a similar article appeared as: MacWhinney, B. (2001). From CHILDES to TalkBank. In M. Almgren, A. Barreña, M. Ezeizaberrena, I. Idiazabal & B. MacWhinney (Eds.), Research on Child Language Acquisition (pp. 17-34). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla. Recent years have seen a phenomenal growth in computer power and connectivity. The computer on the desktop of the average academic researcher now has the power of room-size supercomputers of the 1980s. Using the Internet, we can connect in seconds to the other side of the world and transfer huge amounts of text, programs, audio and video. Our computers are equipped with programs that allow us to view, link, and modify this material without even having to think about programming. Nearly all of the major journals are now available in electronic form and the very nature of journals and publication is undergoing radical change. These new trends have led to dramatic advances in the methodology of science and engineering. However, the social and behavioral sciences have not shared fully in these advances. In large part, this is because the data used in the social sciences are not well- structured patterns of DNA sequences or atomic collisions in super colliders. Much of our data is based on the messy, ill-structured behaviors of humans as they participate in social interactions. Categorizing and coding these behaviors is an enormous task in itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Multimedia Corpora (Media Encoding and Annotation) (Thomas Schmidt, Kjell Elenius, Paul Trilsbeek)
    Multimedia Corpora (Media encoding and annotation) (Thomas Schmidt, Kjell Elenius, Paul Trilsbeek) Draft submitted to CLARIN WG 5.7. as input to CLARIN deliverable D5.C­3 “Interoperability and Standards” [http://www.clarin.eu/system/files/clarin­deliverable­D5C3_v1_5­finaldraft.pdf] Table of Contents 1 General distinctions / terminology................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Different types of multimedia corpora: spoken language vs. speech vs. phonetic vs. multimodal corpora vs. sign language corpora......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Media encoding vs. Media annotation................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Data models/file formats vs. Transcription systems/conventions.......................................................................... 3 1.4 Transcription vs. Annotation / Coding vs. Metadata ............................................................................................. 3 2 Media encoding ............................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Audio encoding ..................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2
    [Show full text]
  • The General Regionally Annotated Corpus of Ukrainian (GRAC, Uacorpus.Org): Architecture and Functionality
    The General Regionally Annotated Corpus of Ukrainian (GRAC, uacorpus.org): Architecture and Functionality Maria Shvedova[0000-0002-0759-1689] Kyiv National Linguistic University [email protected] Abstract. The paper presents the General Regionally Annotated Corpus of Ukrainian, which is publicly available (GRAC: uacorpus.org), searchable online and counts more than 400 million tokens, representing most genres of written texts. It also features regional annotation, i. e. about 50 percent of the texts are attributed with regard to the different regions of Ukraine or countries of the di- aspora. If the author is known, the text is linked to their home region(s). The journalistic texts are annotated with regard to the place where the edition is pub- lished. This feature differs the GRAC from a majority of general linguistic cor- pora. Keywords: Ukrainian language, corpus, diachronic evolution, regional varia- tion. 1 Introduction Currently many major national languages have large universal corpora, known as “reference” corpora (cf. das Deutsche Referenzkorpus – DeReKo) or “national” cor- pora (a label dating back ultimately to the British National Corpus). These corpora are large, representative for different genres of written language, have a certain depth of (usually morphological and metatextual) annotation and can be used for many differ- ent linguistic purposes. The Ukrainian language lacks a publicly available linguistic corpus. Still there is a need of a corpus in the present-day linguistics. Independently researchers compile dif- ferent corpora of Ukrainian for separate research purposes with different size and functionality. As the community lacks a universal tool, a researcher may build their own corpus according to their needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference Abstracts
    EIGHTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LANGUAGE RESOURCES AND EVALUATION Held under the Patronage of Ms Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission, Digital Agenda Commissioner MAY 23-24-25, 2012 ISTANBUL LÜTFI KIRDAR CONVENTION & EXHIBITION CENTRE ISTANBUL, TURKEY CONFERENCE ABSTRACTS Editors: Nicoletta Calzolari (Conference Chair), Khalid Choukri, Thierry Declerck, Mehmet Uğur Doğan, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Asuncion Moreno, Jan Odijk, Stelios Piperidis. Assistant Editors: Hélène Mazo, Sara Goggi, Olivier Hamon © ELRA – European Language Resources Association. All rights reserved. LREC 2012, EIGHTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LANGUAGE RESOURCES AND EVALUATION Title: LREC 2012 Conference Abstracts Distributed by: ELRA – European Language Resources Association 55-57, rue Brillat Savarin 75013 Paris France Tel.: +33 1 43 13 33 33 Fax: +33 1 43 13 33 30 www.elra.info and www.elda.org Email: [email protected] and [email protected] Copyright by the European Language Resources Association ISBN 978-2-9517408-7-7 EAN 9782951740877 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without the prior permission of the European Language Resources Association ii Introduction of the Conference Chair Nicoletta Calzolari I wish first to express to Ms Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission, Digital agenda Commissioner, the gratitude of the Program Committee and of all LREC participants for her Distinguished Patronage of LREC 2012. Even if every time I feel we have reached the top, this 8th LREC is continuing the tradition of breaking previous records: this edition we received 1013 submissions and have accepted 697 papers, after reviewing by the impressive number of 715 colleagues.
    [Show full text]
  • Gold Standard Annotations for Preposition and Verb Sense With
    Gold Standard Annotations for Preposition and Verb Sense with Semantic Role Labels in Adult-Child Interactions Lori Moon Christos Christodoulopoulos Cynthia Fisher University of Illinois at Amazon Research University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [email protected] Urbana-Champaign [email protected] [email protected] Sandra Franco Dan Roth Intelligent Medical Objects University of Pennsylvania Northbrook, IL USA [email protected] [email protected] Abstract This paper describes the augmentation of an existing corpus of child-directed speech. The re- sulting corpus is a gold-standard labeled corpus for supervised learning of semantic role labels in adult-child dialogues. Semantic role labeling (SRL) models assign semantic roles to sentence constituents, thus indicating who has done what to whom (and in what way). The current corpus is derived from the Adam files in the Brown corpus (Brown, 1973) of the CHILDES corpora, and augments the partial annotation described in Connor et al. (2010). It provides labels for both semantic arguments of verbs and semantic arguments of prepositions. The semantic role labels and senses of verbs follow Propbank guidelines (Kingsbury and Palmer, 2002; Gildea and Palmer, 2002; Palmer et al., 2005) and those for prepositions follow Srikumar and Roth (2011). The corpus was annotated by two annotators. Inter-annotator agreement is given sepa- rately for prepositions and verbs, and for adult speech and child speech. Overall, across child and adult samples, including verbs and prepositions, the κ score for sense is 72.6, for the number of semantic-role-bearing arguments, the κ score is 77.4, for identical semantic role labels on a given argument, the κ score is 91.1, for the span of semantic role labels, and the κ for agreement is 93.9.
    [Show full text]
  • A Massively Parallel Corpus: the Bible in 100 Languages
    Lang Resources & Evaluation DOI 10.1007/s10579-014-9287-y ORIGINAL PAPER A massively parallel corpus: the Bible in 100 languages Christos Christodouloupoulos • Mark Steedman Ó The Author(s) 2014. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract We describe the creation of a massively parallel corpus based on 100 translations of the Bible. We discuss some of the difficulties in acquiring and processing the raw material as well as the potential of the Bible as a corpus for natural language processing. Finally we present a statistical analysis of the corpora collected and a detailed comparison between the English translation and other English corpora. Keywords Parallel corpus Á Multilingual corpus Á Comparative corpus linguistics 1 Introduction Parallel corpora are a valuable resource for linguistic research and natural language processing (NLP) applications. One of the main uses of the latter kind is as training material for statistical machine translation (SMT), where large amounts of aligned data are standardly used to learn word alignment models between the lexica of two languages (for example, in the Giza?? system of Och and Ney 2003). Another interesting use of parallel corpora in NLP is projected learning of linguistic structure. In this approach, supervised data from a resource-rich language is used to guide the unsupervised learning algorithm in a target language. Although there are some techniques that do not require parallel texts (e.g. Cohen et al. 2011), the most successful models use sentence-aligned corpora (Yarowsky and Ngai 2001; Das and Petrov 2011). C. Christodouloupoulos (&) Department of Computer Science, UIUC, 201 N.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Transitivity and Caused Events in the Acquisition of Emotion Verbs
    Love Is Hard to Understand: The Relationship Between Transitivity and Caused Events in the Acquisition of Emotion Verbs The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Hartshorne, Joshua K., Amanda Pogue, and Jesse Snedeker. 2014. Citation Love Is Hard to Understand: The Relationship Between Transitivity and Caused Events in the Acquisition of Emotion Verbs. Journal of Child Language (June 19): 1–38. Published Version doi:10.1017/S0305000914000178 Accessed January 17, 2017 12:55:19 PM EST Citable Link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:14117738 This article was downloaded from Harvard University's DASH Terms of Use repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP (Article begins on next page) Running head: TRANSITIVITY AND CAUSED EVENTS Love is hard to understand: The relationship between transitivity and caused events in the acquisition of emotion verbs Joshua K. Hartshorne Massachusetts Institute of Technology Harvard University Amanda Pogue University of Waterloo Jesse Snedeker Harvard University In press at Journal of Child Language Acknowledgements: The authors wish to thank Timothy O’Donnell for assistance with the corpus analysis as well as Alfonso Caramazza, Susan Carey, Steve Pinker, Mahesh Srinivasan, Nathan Winkler- Rhoades, Melissa Kline, Hugh Rabagliati, members of the Language and Cognition workshop, and three anonymous reviewers for comments and discussion. This material is based on work supported by a National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellowship to JKH and a grant from the National Science Foundation to Jesse Snedeker (0623845).
    [Show full text]
  • E-Content Submission to INFLIBNET Subject Name Linguistics Paper Name Corpus Linguistics Paper Coordinator Name & Contact Mo
    e-Content Submission to INFLIBNET Subject Name Linguistics Paper Name Corpus Linguistics Paper Coordinator Name & Contact Module name #0 5: Corpus Type: Genre of Text Module ID Content Writer (CW) Name Email id Phone Pre-requisites Objectives Keywords E-Text Self Learn Self Assessment Learn More Story Board √ √ √ √ √ Contents 5.0 Introduction 5.1 Why Classify Corpora ? 5.2 Genre of Text 5.2.1 Text Corpus 5.2.2 Speech Corpus 5.2.3 Spoken Corpus 5.3 Conclusion Assessment & Evaluation Resources & Lin 5.0 INTRODUCTION For last fifty years or so, corpus linguistics is attested as one of the mainstays of linguistics for various reasons. At various points of time scholars have discussed about the methods of generating corpora, techniques of processing them, and using information from corpora in linguistic works – starting from mainstream linguistics to applied linguistics and language technology. However, in general, these discussions often ignore an important aspect relating to classification of corpora, although scholars sporadically attempt to discuss about the form, formation, and function of corpora of various types. People avoid this issue, because it is a difficult scheme to classify corpora by way of a single frame or type. Any scheme that attempts to put various corpora within a single frame is destined to turn out to be unscientific and non-reliable. Digital corpora are designed to be used in various linguistic works. Sometimes, these are used for general linguistics research and application, some other times these are utilised for works of language technology and computational linguistics. The general assumption is that a corpus developed for certain types of work is not much useful for works of other types.
    [Show full text]