SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Allen, J., & Perrault, C. R. (1980). Analyzing intention in utterances. Artificial Intelligence, 15, 143178.
  • Almor, A. (2000). Constraints and mechanisms in theories of anaphor processing. In M. Pickering, C. Clifton, & M. Crocker (Eds.), Architectures and mechanisms for language processing (pp. 341354).Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Appelt, D. (1985). Planning English referring expressions. Artificial Intelligence, 26, 133.
  • Ariel, M. (2001). Accessibility theory: An overview. In T. Sanders, J. Schilperoord & W. Spoorten (Eds.), Text representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects (pp. 2987). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
  • Arnold, J. E. (2001). The effect of thematic roles on pronoun use and frequency of reference continuation. Discourse Processes, 31(2), 137162.
  • Arnold, J. E., & Griffin, Z. M. (2007). The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: Everyone counts. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(4), 521536.
  • Arts, A. (2004). Overspecification in instructive texts. Unpublished PhD thesis, Tilburg University.
  • Arts, A., Maes, A., Noordman, L., & Jansen, C. (2011). Overspecification in written instruction. Linguistics, 49(3), 555574.
  • Bard, E., & Aylett, M. (2004). Referential form, word duration, and modeling the listener in spoken dialogue. In J. Trueswell & M. Tanenhaus(Eds.), Approaches to studying worldsituated language use: Bridging the language-as-product and language-as-action traditions (pp. 173191). Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
  • Belz, A. (2007). Automatic generation of weather forecast texts using comprehensive probabilistic generation space models. Natural Language Engineering, 14(4), 431455.
  • Brennan, S. E. (1995). Centering attention in discourse. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 137167.
  • Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22(6), 14821493.
  • Brennan, S. E., & Hanna, J. E. (2009). Partner-specific adaptation in dialog. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(2), 274291.
  • Brown-Schmidt, S. (2009). Partner-specific interpretation of maintained referential precedents during interactive dialog. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 171190.
  • Brown-Schmidt, S., & Tanenhaus, M. (2006). Watching the eyes talking about size: An investigation of message formulation and utterance planning. Journal of Memory and Language, 54(4), 592609.
  • Bruner, J. (1983). Child's talk: Learning to use language. New York: Norton.
  • Buschmeier, H., Bergmann, K., & Kopp, S. (2010). Modelling and evaluation of lexical and syntactic alignment with a priming-based microplanner. In E. Krahmer & M. Theune (Eds.), Empiricial methods in natural language generation (pp. 85104). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
  • Callaway, C., & Lester, J. (2002). Pronominalization in generated discourse and dialogue. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL’02) (pp. 8895). Philadelphia.
  • Clark, H. H., & Murphy, G. (1983). Audience design in meaning and reference. In J. F. LeNy & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Language and comprehension (pp. 287299). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North Holland.
  • Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 139.
  • Cohen, P., & Levesque, H. (1991). Confirmations and joint actions. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-91) (pp. 951975). Sydney, Australia.
  • Dale, R. (1989). Cooking up referring expressions. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL’89) (pp. 6875). Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Dale, R., & Reiter, E. (1995). Computational interpretations of the gricean maxims in the generation of referring expressions. Cognitive Science, 18, 233263.
  • Dale, R., & Viethen, J. (2010). Attribute-centric referring expression generation. In E. Krahmer & M. Theune (Eds.), Empirical methods in natural language generation (pp. 163179). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
  • de Ruiter, J., Bangerter, A., & Dings, P. (2012). The interplay between gesture and speech in the production of referring expressions: Investigating the tradeoff hypothesis. Topics in Cognitive Science, DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01183.x.
  • Engelhardt, P., Demiral, S. B., & Ferreira, F. (2011). Over-specified referring expressions impair comprehension: An erp study. Brain and Cognition, 77(2), 304314.
  • Engelhardt, P. E., Bailey, K. G., & Ferreira, F. (2006). Do speakers and listeners observe the Gricean Maxim of Quantity? Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 554573.
  • Fabbrizio, G. di, Stent, A., & Bangalore, S. (2008). Trainable speaker-based referring expression generation. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CONLL’08). Manchester, England.
  • Ferreira, V. S., Slevc, L. R., & Rogers, E. S. (2005). How do speakers avoid ambiguous linguistic expressions? Cognition, 96(3), 263284.
  • Fukumura, K., van Gompel, R., & Pickering, M. J. (2010). The use of visual context during the production of referring expressions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 17001715.
  • Fukumura, K., & van Gompel, R. P. G. (2010). Choosing anaphoric expressions: Do people take into account likelihood of reference? Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 5266.
  • Garrod, S., Freudenthal, D., & Boyle, E. (1994). The role of different types of anaphor in the on-line resolution of sentences in a discourse. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 3968.
  • Gatt, A., & Belz, A. (2010). Introducing shared task evaluation to NLG: The TUNA shared task evaluation challenges. In E. Krahmer & M. Theune (Eds.), Empirical methods in natural language generation (pp. 264293). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
  • Gatt, A., Gompel, R. van, Krahmer, E., & Deemter, K. van. (2011). Non-deterministic attribute selection in reference production. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Production of Referring Expressions: Bridging the gap between empirical, computational and psycholinguistic approaches to reference (pre-cogsci’11). Retrieved January 2012, from http://pre2011.uvt.nl/workshop-program.html.
  • Gibbs, R., & Van Orden, G. (2012). Pragmatic choice in conversation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4, 1.
  • Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103(4), 650669.
  • Givon, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  • Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B. J., & Gilliom, L. A. (1993). Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse. Cognitive Science, 17(3), 311347.
  • Gordon, P. C., & Hendrick, R. (1999). The representation and processing of coreference in discourse. Cognitive Science, 22, 389424.
  • Gordon, P. C., Kendrick, R., Ledoux, K., & Yang, C. L. (1999). Processing of reference and the structure of language: An analysis of complex noun phrases. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 353379.
  • Goudbeek, M., & Krahmer, E. (2012). Alignment in interactive reference production: Content planning, modifier ordering and referential overspecification. Topics in Cognitive Science, DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01186.x.
  • Grice, H. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts (Vol. III) (pp. 4158). New York: Academic Press.
  • Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2), 203225.
  • Guhe, M. (2012). Utility-based generation of referring expressions. Topics in Cognitive Science, DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01185.x.
  • Gundel, J., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (2012). Underspecification of cognitive status in reference production: Some empirical predictions. Topics in Cognitive Science, DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01184.x.
  • Gupta, S., & Stent, A. (2005). Automatic evaluation of referring expression generation using corpora. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Using Copora in Natural Language Generation (UCNLG’05) (pp. 16). Brighton, England.
  • Heeman, P. A., & Hirst, G. (1995). Collaborating on referring expressions. Computational Linguistics, 21(3), 351382.
  • Heller, D., Skovbroten, K., & Tanenhaus, M. (2012). To name or to describe: shared knowledge affects referential form. Topics in Cognitive Science, DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01182.x.
  • Holden, J., & Van Orden, G. (2009). Dispersion of response times reveals cognitive dynamics. Psychological Review, 2, 318342.
  • Horton, W. S., & Keysar, B. (1996). When do speakers take into account common ground? Cognition, 59, 91117.
  • Jordan, P. (2002). Contextual influences on attribute selection for repeated descriptions. In K. van Deemter & R. Kibble (Eds.), Information sharing: Reference and presupposition in language generation and interpretation (pp. 295328). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
  • Jordan, P., & Walker, M. (2005). Learning content selection rules for generating object descriptions in dialogue. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 24, 157194.
  • Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89, 2541.
  • Khan, I., van Deemter, K., & Ritchie, G. (2012). Managing ambiguity in reference generation: The role of surface structure. Topics in Cognitive Science, DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2011.01167.x.
  • Koolen, R., Gatt, A., Goudbeek, M., & Krahmer, E. (2011). Factors causing overspecification in definite descriptions. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 32313250.
  • Krahmer, E., & Theune, M. (2002). Efficient context-sensitive generation of descriptions in context. In K. van Deemter & R. Kibble (Eds.), Information sharing: Givenness and newness in language processing (pp. 223264). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
  • Krahmer, E., & van Deemter, K. (2011). Computational generation of referring expressions: A survey. Computational Linguistics, 38(1), 173218.
  • Kroch, A. (2000). Syntactic change. In M. Baltin & C. Collins (Eds.), Handbook of contemporary syntactic theory (pp. 699729). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
  • Kronfeld, A. (1990). Reference and computation: An essay in applied philosophy of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Matthews, D., Butcher, J., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2012). Two- and four-year-olds learn to adapt referring expressions to context: Effects of distracters and feedback on referential communication. Topics in Cognitive Science, DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01181.x.
  • Matthews, D. E., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2007). How toddlers and preschoolers learn to uniquely identify referents for others: A training study. Child Development, 78, 17441759.
  • McCoy, K., & Strube, M. (1999). Generating anaphoric expressions: Pronoun or definite description? In Proceedings of the ACL’99 Workshop on Discourse and Reference Structure (pp. 6371). College Park: University of Maryland.
  • Mellish, C., Scott, D., Cahill, L., Paiva, D., Evans, R., & Reape, M. (2006). A reference architecture for natural language generation systems. Natural Language Engineering, 12, 134.
  • Oberlander, J. (1998). Do the right thing . . . but expect the unexpected. Computational Linguistics, 24(3), 501507.
  • Olson, D. R. (1970). Language and thought: Aspects of a cognitive theory of semantics. Psychological Review, 77, 257273.
  • Paraboni, I., van Deemter, K., & Masthoff, J. (2007). Generating referring expressions: Making referents easy to identity. Computational Linguistics, 33, 229254.
  • Passonneau, R. (1996). Using centering to relax Gricean informational constraints on discourse anaphoric noun phrases. Language and Speech, 39, 229264.
  • Pechmann, T. (1989). Incremental speech production and referential overspecification. Linguistics, 27, 98110.
  • Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2004). Towards a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 27, 169226.
  • Poesio, M., Stevenson, R., Eugenio, B. D., & Hitzeman, J. (2004). Centering: A parametric theory and its instantiations. Computational Linguistics, 30, 309363.
  • Purver, M., & Kempson, R. (2004). Context-based incremental generation for dialogue. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Natural Language Generation (INLG’04) (pp. 151160). Brockenhurst, England.
  • Reiter, E., & Dale, R. (2000). Building natural language generation systems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sedivy, J. G., Tanenhaus, M. K., Chambers, C. G., & Carlson, G. N. (1999). Achieving incremental semantic interpretation through contextual representation. Cognition, 71, 109147.
  • Siddharthan, A., & Copestake, A. (2004). Generating referring expressions in open domains. In Proceedings of the 42th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-2004) (pp. 407414). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  • Simon, H. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63(2), 129138.
  • Stevenson, R. J., Crawley, R. A., & Kleinman, D. (1994). Thematic roles, focus and the representation of actions. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 519548.
  • Stoia, L., Shockley, D. M., Byron, D. K., & Fosler-Lussier, E. (2006). Noun phrase generation for situated dialogs. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Natural Language Generation (INLG’06) (pp. 8188). Morristown, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics.
  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 322). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • van Deemter, K., Gatt, A., van der Sluis, I., & Power, R. (in press). Generation of referring expressions: Assessing the incremental algorithm. Cognitive Science.
  • van der Sluis, I., & Krahmer, E. (2007). Generating multimodal referring expressions. Discourse Processes, 44(3), 145174.
  • Viethen, J., & Dale, R. (2007). Evaluation in natural language generation: Lessons from referring expression generation. Traitement Automatique des Langues, 48(1), 141160.
  • Wardlow Lane, L., Groisman, M., & Ferreira, V. S. (2006). Don't talk about pink elephants! Speakers’ control over leaking private information during language production. Psychological Science, 17, 273277.
    Direct Link:
  • Winograd, T. (1972). Understanding natural language. New York: Academic Press.
  • Wu, S., & Keysar, B. (2007). The effect of information overlap on communication effectiveness. Cognitive Science, 31, 113.