Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-14T03:24:16.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perfecting research techniques in an imperfect world: response to MacWhinney & Snow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Jane A. Edwards
Jane A. Edwards*
Affiliation:
University of California at Berkeley
*
[*] Institute of Cognitive Studies, Building T-4, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Edwards (1992c) concerns data and data use rather than manuals. It presents principles to facilitate reliable archive research in an imperfect world. MacWhinney & Snow (1992) endorse the principles but disagree on important details, discussed in this response. M&S underrate the impact of corpus inconsistencies on substantive conclusions. Since acquisition research concerns events which often trickle in a few at a time, main findings often involve a handful of examples, so overlooking a single early variant can seriously skew results. Until archives become perfect, if they do, type-token listings can help in identifying variants before computer search and avoiding this hazard.

Type
Notes and Discussion
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , February 1993 , pp. 209 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Berman, R. A. (1985). The acquisition of Hebrew. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1982). Reorganization processes in lexical and syntactic development. In Wanner, E. & Gleitman, L. R. (eds), Language acquisition: the state of the art. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. M. (1985). The acquisition of Japanese. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1985). The acquisition of Romance, with special reference to French. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1988). On the logic of contrast. Journal of Child Language 15, 317–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, J. A. (1987). Comments on the CHAT transcription System for the CHILDES archive. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. A. (1989). Transcription and the new functionalism: a counterproposal to the CHILDES CHAT conventions. Cognitive Science Program Technical Report, No. 58. University of California, Berkeley. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 341 236).Google Scholar
Edwards, J. A. (1991). Transcription in discourse. In Bright, W. (ed.), Oxford international encyclopedia of linguistics. Vol. 1. Oxford: O.U.P.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. A. (1992 a). Principles and Systems of transcription. In Edwards, J. A. & Lampert, M. D. (eds), Talking data: transcription and coding in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. A. (1992 b). Design principles in the transcription of spoken discourse. In Svartvik, J. (ed.), Directions in corpus linguistics: proceedings of the Nobel Symposium 82, Stockholm. New York: Mouton.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. A. (1992 c). Computerized methods in child language research: four principles for the use of archived data. Journal of Child Language 19, 435–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, J. A. & Lampert, M. D. (eds), (1992). Talking data: transcription and coding in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. & Snow, C. (1992). The wheat and the chaff or four confusions regarding CHILDES. Journal of Child Language 19, 459–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marcus, G. F., Ullman, M., Pinker, S., Hollander, M., Rosen, T. J. & Xu, F. (1990). Overregularization. MIT Center for Cognitive Science, Occasional paper No. 41. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Mills, A. E. (1985). The acquisition of German. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. (1985). Variation and error: a sociolinguistic approach to language acquisition in Samoa. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schieffelin, B. B. (1985). The acquisition of Kaluli. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1979). Psycholinguistics. Second edition. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (ed.) (1985) The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smoczynska, M. (1985). The acquisition of Polish. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 1. The data. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar