On differences between spoken and written language∗

Redeker, Gisela

doi:10.1080/01638538409544580

Cited by 80 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the basic syntactic rules are the same, spoken and written language differ in many ways, such as sentence length and complexity (Chafe, 1992;Hayes. 1988;Kroll, 1977;Redeker, 1984). It seems unlikely that these differences entail large differences in the occurrence of contexts permitting the application of sentence-level phonological rules, but this is, of course, an empirical issue.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of lexeme and speech syllables in Dutch

Schiller

Meyer

Baayen

et al. 1996

Journal of Quantitative Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The CELEX lexical database includes a list of Dutch syllables and their frequencies, based on syllabification of isolated word forms. In connected speech, however, sentence-level phonological rules can modify the syllables and their token frequencies. In order to estimate the changes syllables may undergo in connected speech, an empirical investigation was carried out. A large Dutch text corpus (TROUW) was transcribed, processed by word level rules, and syllabified. The resulting lexeme syllables were evaluated by comparing them to the CELEX lexical database for Dutch. Then additional phonological sentence-level rules were applied to the TROUW corpus, and the frequencies of the resulting connected speech syllables were compared with those of the lexeme syllables from TROUW. The overall correlation between lexeme and speech syllables was very high. However, speech syllables generally had more complex CV structures than lexeme syllables. Implications of the results for research involving syllables are discussed. With respect to the notion of a mental syllabary (a store for precompiled articulatory programs for syllables, see Levelt & Wheeldon, 1994) this study revealed an interesting statistical result. The calculation of the cumulative syllable frequencies showed that 85% of the syllable tokens in Dutch can be covered by the 500 most frequent syllable types, which makes the idea of a syllabary very attractive.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of lexeme and speech syllables in Dutch

Schiller

Meyer

Baayen

et al. 1996

Journal of Quantitative Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although it is true that all syntactic constructions can be found in all types of language, more complex syntactic constructions are disproportionately found in text (Biber, 1986;Redeker, 1984). This is not to deny that complex syntactic constructions are also found disproportionately in types of speech that are text-like, such as judicial proceedings, planned speeches, and college lectures (Biber, 1986;Chafe & Danielewicz, 1987)-it is only to establish that the average person experiences these syntacticconstructions disproportionately in print (Chafe & Danielewicz, 1987;Purcell-Gates, 1988;Redeker, 1984). In short, print exposure might be expected to contribute to skill in verbal domains because print is an exceptional source of rich stimulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Studying the consequences of literacy within a literate society: The cognitive correlates of print exposure

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most studies of the cognitive consequences of literacy have attempted to compare the performance of literate individuals with that of illiterate individuals. We argue that it is not absolutely necessary to examine illiterates in order to study the cognitive consequences of reading experience because there is enormous variation in exposure to print even within a generally literate society. In the present study, we tested several methods of assesaing differential exposure to print and demonstrated that all have significant correlations with measures of vocabulary, cultural knowledge, spelling ability, and verbal fluency. Several indicators of print exposure predicted variance in these knowledge domains even when general ability and reading-comprehension skill were statistically controlled. Our results, although correlational, suggest that print exposure is an independent contributor to the development of certain verbal skills.51

show abstract

“…Gra Ãce a Á ce de Âbat les chercheurs ont pris conscience du fait que la modalite Â ne peut pas e Ãtre analyse Âe sans tenir compte d'autres variables inde Âpendantes. Redeker (1984) par exemple, limite l'in¯uence des variables qui co-varient avec la modalite Â (e Âcrit/oral), notamment le sujet, le temps de pre Âparation, la formalite Â de la situation et l'audience, et ne manipule que les deux premie Áres variables (modalite Â et sujet). Elle utilise les dimensions`implication versus de Âtachement' et`fragmentation versus inte Âgration ' de Chafe (1982), avec la collaboration de ce dernier, pour distinguer le discours oral du discours e Âcrit chez huit e Âtudiantes anglophones.…”

Section: P Pprohes Et Me â Thodologiesunclassified

“…Les travaux impressionnants de Biber sur l'anglais (1988de Biber sur l'anglais ( , 1995, de Biber et al (1994de Biber et al ( , 1998 et de Biber et Finegan (1991 sur la variation de 17 registres dans 481 textes tire Âs du corpus Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen (960.000 mots) et 6 registres oraux tire Âs de 148 extraits oraux du corpus London-Lund anglais, s'inscrivent dans la ligne Âe des travaux de Chafe (1982), Tannen (1982) et Redeker (1984. Comme Redeker, Biber (1988) analyse des phe Ânome Ánes de co-occurence entre 67 variables linguistiques, dont l'occurence est calcule Âe sur 1000 mots, et analyse ensuite la variation entre diffe Ârents registres oraux et e Âcrits.…”

Section: P Pprohes Et Me â Thodologiesunclassified

“…Le me Ârite des travaux de Redeker (1984), de Mazzie (1987) et de Biber (1988;, de Biber et Finegan (1991 et de Biber et al (1994de Biber et al ( , 1998 (Moscovici et Humbert, 1960;Moscovici et Plon, 1966;Mu Èller, 1985;Biber et al, 1995;Halliday, 1989) puisque les analyses portent uniquement sur des cate Âgories grammaticales. Les analyses sont malheureusement incomple Átes a Á cause de la pre Âdilection pour les mots lexicaux et l'absence d'inte Âre Ãt pour les mots grammaticaux.…”

Section: P Pprohes Et Me â Thodologiesunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation