SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Abney, S. (1996). Statistical methods and linguistics. In J. Klavans & P. Resnik (Eds.), The balancing act: Combining symbolic and statistical approaches to language (pp. 126). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Angwin, A., Chenery, H., Copland, D., Murdoch, B., & Silburn, P. (2006). Self-paced reading and sentence comprehension in Parkinson's disease. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 19(3), 239252.
  • Belz, A., & Gatt, A. (2007). Attribute selection for referring expression generation: New algorithms and evaluation methods. In Proceedings of the 2nd UCNLG workshop: language generation and machine translation (UCNLG + MT) (pp. 7583). Stroudsburg, PA: ACL.
  • Binot, J.-I., & Jensen, K. (1987). A semantic expert using an online standard dictionary. In Proceedings of international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-87) (pp. 709714). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
  • Chantree, F. (2006). Identifying nocuous ambiguity in natural language requirements, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Milton Keynes, England: The Open Univeristy.
  • Chantree, F., Kilgarriff, A., De Roeck, A., & Willis, A. (2005). Disambiguating coordinations using word distribution information. In Proceedings of the recent advances in natural language processing. Borovets, Bulgaria.
  • Cushing, S. (1994). Fatal words: Communication clashes and aircraft crashes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Dale, R., & Reiter, E. (1995). Computational interpretations of the Gricean maxims in the generation of referring expressions. Cognitive Science, 18, 233263.
  • Danlos, L., Jussieu, P., Lapalme, G., & Lux, V. (2000). Generating a controlled language. In Proceedings of the First international conference on natural language generation (pp. 141147). Mitzpe Ramon, Israel: ACL.
  • van Deemter, K. (2002). Generating referring expressions: Boolean extensions of the incremental algorithm. Computational Linguistics, 28(1), 3752.
  • van Deemter, K. (2004). Towards a probabilistic version of bidirectional OT syntax and semantics. Journal of Semantics, 21(3), 251281.
  • van Deemter, K., & Krahmer, E. (2006). Graphs and Booleans: On the generation of referring expressions. In H. Bunt & R. Muskens (Eds.), Computing meaning, vol. iii, studies in linguistics and philosophy (pp. 1753). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • Dubinsky, S., Egan, M., Schmauder, A. R., & Traxler, M. J. (2000). Functional projections of predicates: Experimental evidence from coordinate structure processing. Syntax, 3(3), 182214.
  • Ferreira, F., & Patson, N. D. (2007). The ‘good enough’ approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(1–2), 7183.
  • Ferreira, F., Ferraro, V., & Bailey, K. G. D. (2002). Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 1115.
    Direct Link:
  • Flesch, R. (1948). A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32(3), 221233.
  • Gardent, C. (2002). Generating minimal definite descriptions. In Proceedings of the 40th annual meeting of the acl (pp. 96103). Stroudsburg, PA: ACL.
  • Gatt, A. (2007). Generating coherent references to multiple entities, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Aberdeen, Scotland: University of Aberdeen.
  • Gatt, A., Belz, A., & Kow, E. (2008). The tuna challenge 2008: Overview and evaluation results. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on natural language generation (pp. 198206). Stroudsburg, PA: ACL.
  • Gatt, A., Belz, A., & Kow, E. (2009). The tuna-reg challenge 2009: Overview and evaluation results. In Proceedings of the 12th European workshop on natural language aeneration (pp. 174182). Athens, Greece: ACL.
  • van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Evidence against competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory & Language, 52, 284307.
  • Horacek, H. (2004). On referring to sets of objects naturally. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on nlg (pp. 7079). Brockenhurst, England: ACL.
  • Inui, K., Tokunaga, T., & Tanaka, H. (1992). Text revision: A model and its implementation. In Proceedings of the 6th international workshop on nlg (pp. 215230). Berlin, Heidelberg: ACL.
  • Khan, I. H., van Deemter, K., & Ritchie, G. (2008). Generation of referring expressions: Managing structural ambiguities. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on computational linguistics (coling-8) (pp. 433440). Manchester, England: Coling 2008 Organizing Committee.
  • Kilgarriff, A., Rychly, P., Smrz, P., & Tugwell, D. (2004). The sketch engine. In Proceedings of EURALEX (pp. 105116). Lorient, France: EURALEX.
  • Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R. P., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S.(1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (automated readability index, Fog count, and Flesch reading ease formula) for navy enlisted personnel. Navy Training Command Research Branch Report , 875.
  • Krahmer, E., & Theune, M. (2002). Efficient context-sensitive generation of referring expressions. In K. van Deemter & R. Kibble (Eds.), Information sharing: Reference and presupposition in language generation and interpretation (pp. 223264). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
  • Merlo, P., & Stevenson, S. (1999). Language acquisition and ambiguity resolution: The role of frequency distributions. In Proceedings of the 21st annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 399404). Vancouver, BC: Simon Frazer University.
  • Neumann, G. (1994). A uniform computational model for natural language parsing and generation, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Saarland, Saarbrücken: University of the Saarland.
  • Paraboni, I., Masthoff, J., & van Deemter, K. (2006). Overspecified reference in hierarchical domain: Measuring the benefits for readers. In Proceedings of the fourth international natural language generation conference (pp. 5562). Sydney, Australia: ACL.
  • Ratcliff, R. (1993). Methods for dealing with reaction-time outliers. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 510532.
  • Reiter, E., & Dale, R. (2000). Building natural language generation systems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Siddharthan, A., & Copestake, A. (2004). Generating referring expressions in open domains. In Proceedings of the 42nd annual meeting of the acl (pp. 407414). Barcelona, Spain: ACL.
  • Stone, M. (2000). On identifying sets. In Proceedings of the 1st inlg conference (pp. 116123). Israel: ACL.
  • Stone, M., & Webber, B. (1998). Textual economy through close coupling of syntax and semantics. In Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on nlg (pp. 178187). New Brunswick, NJ.
  • Swets, B., Desmet, T., Clifton, C., & Ferreira, F. (2008). Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: Evidence from self-paced reading. Memory & Cognition, 36(1), 201216.
  • Traxler, M., Pickering, M., & Clifton, C. (1998). Adjunct attachment is not a form of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 39(35), 558592.
  • Trueswell, J. C.(1996). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 566585.
  • Wasow, T., Perfors, A., & Beaver, D. (2005). The puzzle of ambiguity. In O. Orgun & P. Sells (Eds.), Morphology and the Web of grammar: Essays in memory of Steven G. Lapointe (pp. 265282). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
  • Willis, A., Chantree, F., & De Roeck, A. (2008). Automatic identification of nocuous ambiguity. Research on Language and Computation, 6(4), 355374.
  • Wu, H., & Furugori, T. (1998). A computational method for resolving ambiguities in coordinate structures. In Proceedings of PACLIC-12 (pp. 263270). Singapore: National University of Singapore.