GCS: A grammatical coding system for natural language data

Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 459-480

  Curtiss, Susan ^a   MacSwan, Jeff ^b   Schaeffer, Jeannette ^c   Kural, Murat ^d   Sano, Tetsuya ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^e MEIJI GAKUIN UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 12344309494     PISSN: 07433808     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03195593     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. ABNEY, S. P. (1987). The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.
2. BORER, H. (1984). Parametric syntax: Case studies in Semitic and Romance languages. Dordrecht: Foris.
3. BROWN, R. (1973). A first language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. CAPLAN, R., CURTISS, S., CHUGANI, H. T., & VINTERS, H. V. (1996). Pediatric Rasmussen encephalitis: Social communication, language, PET and pathology before and after hemispherectomy. Brain & Cognition, 32, 45-66.
5. CHOMSKY, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
6. CHOMSKY, N. (1991). Linguistics and cognitive science: Problems and mysteries. In A. Kasher (Ed.), The Chomskyan turn. Cambridge: Blackwell.
7. CHOMSKY, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. CURTISS, S., & DE BODE, S. (1998). Linguistic outcomes in hemispherectomized children. In A. Greenhill, M. Hughes, H. Littlefield, & H. Walsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 121-133). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
9. CURTISS, S., & DE BODE, S. (1999a). Age and etiology as predictors of language outcome following hemispherectomy. Developmental Neuroscience, 21, 174-181.
10. CURTISS, S., & DE BODE, S. (1999b). Language outcome after hemispherectomy. Brain & Cognition, 41, 111.
11. CURTISS, S., & DE BODE, S. (2003). How normal is grammatical development in the right hemisphere following hemispherectomy? The RI stage and beyond. Brain & Language, 86, 193-206.
12. CURTISS, S., DE BODE, S., & MATHERN, G. (2001). Spoken language outcomes after hemispherectomy: Factoring in etiology. Brain & Language, 79, 379-396.
13. CURTISS, S., MACSWAN, J., SCHAEFFER, J., KURAL, M., & SANO, T. (2001). GCS: Grammatical Coding System manual. Available at http://www.psychonomic.org/archive/.
14. CURTISS, S., & SCHAEFFER, J. (1997a, March). Development of the I-and D-systems in children with hemispherectomy. Paper presented at the annual Society for Cognitive Neuroscience meeting, Boston.
15. CURTISS, S., & SCHAEFFER, J. (1997b). Syntactic development in children with hemispherectomy: The INFL-system. In E. Hughes, M. Hughes, & A. Greenhill (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 103-114). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
16. CURTISS, S., & SCHAEFFER, J. (2004). Syntactic development in children with hemispherectomy: The I-, D-, and C-systems. Manuscript submitted for publication.
17. DE BODE, S. (1998). Interhemispheric language transfer and functional plasticity. In A. Greenhill, M. Hughes, H. Littlefield, & H. Walsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 134-140). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
18. DE BODE, S., & CURTISS, S. (1999). Neurobiological mechanisms of lan guage acquisition. In A. Greenhill, H. Littlefield, & C. Tano (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 150-161). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
19. FROMKIN, V. (ED.) (2000). Linguistics: An introduction to linguistic theory. London: Blackwell.
20. HENDRICK, R. (ED.) (2003). Minimalist syntax. Maiden, MA: Blackwell.
21. HUFF, F. J., CORKIN, S., & GROWDON, J. H. (1986). Semantic impairment and anomia in Alzheimer's disease. Brain & Language, 28, 235-249.
22. HYAMS, N. (1996). The underspecification of functional categories in early grammar. In H. Clahsen (Ed.), Generative perspectives on language acquisition: Empirical findings, theoretical considerations, and crosslinguistic comparisons (pp. 91-127). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
23. JAKUBOWICZ, C., DURAND, C., RIGAUT, C., & VAN DER VELDE, M. (2001). Computational complexity over time: The development of functional categories in French-speaking children with SLI. In A. H.-J. Do, L. Dominguez, & A. Johansen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 1, pp. 365-376). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.
24. KEMPLER, D. (1988). Syntactic and symbolic abilities in Alzheimer's disease. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, UCLA.
25. KEMPLER, D. (1995). Language changes in dementia of the Alzheimer's type. In R. Lubinski (Ed.), Dementia and communication: Research and clinical applications (pp. 98-114). San Diego: Singular.
26. KEMPLER, D., CURTISS, S., & JACKSON, C. (1987). Syntactic preservation in Alzheimer's disease. Journal of Speech & Hearing Research, 30, 343-350.
27. LABOV, W. (1975). Empirical foundations of linguistic theory. In R. Austerlitz (Ed.), The scope of American linguistics (pp. 77-133). Lisse: de Ridder.
28. LEONARD, L. B. (1998). Functional categories in the grammars of children with specific language impairment. Auditory & Speech Sciences, 38, 1270-1283.
29. MACSWAN, J. (2001, April). The non-non crisis: Knowledge of language and problems of construct validity in native language assessment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Seattle.
30. MACWHINNEY, B. (1991). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. MACWHINNEY, B. (1995). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. MACWHINNEY, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. MACWHINNEY, B., & SNOW, C. (1990). The Child Language Data Exchange System: An update. Journal of Child Language, 17, 457-472.
34. NEWMEYER, F. (1983). Grammatical theory: Its limits and its possibilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35. PARISSE, C., & LE NORMAND, M.-T. (2000). Automatic disambiguation of the morphosyntax in spoken language corpora. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 468-481.
36. RADFORD, A. (1995). Phrase structure and functional categories. In P. Fletcher & B. MacWhinney (Eds.), Handbook of child language acquisition (pp. 483-507). Oxford: Blackwell.
37. RADFORD, A. (1997). Syntax: A minimalist introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. SAGAE, K., LAVIE, A., & MACWHINNEY, B. (2001). Parsing the CHILDES database: Methodology and lessons learned. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop in Parsing Technologies. Beijing.
39. SAGAE, K., MACWHINNEY, B., & LAVIE, A. (2004). Automatic parsing of parental verbal input. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 113-126.
40. SCHÜTZE, C. T. (1996). The empirical base of linguistics: Grammaticality judgments and linguistic methodology. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
41. SINKA, I., & SCHELLETTER, C. (1998). Morphosyntactic development in bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingualism, 2, 301-326.
42. VALADEZ, C., MACSWAN, J., & MARTÍNEZ, C. (2002). Toward a new view of low achieving bilinguals: A study of linguistic competence in designated "semilinguals." Bilingual Review, 25, 238-248.
43. WEBELHUTH, G. (ED.) (1995). Government and binding theory and the minimalist program: Principles and parameters in syntactic theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
44. WEXLER, K. (1998). Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: A new explanation of the optional infinitive stage. Lingua, 106, 23-79.