Differences between revisions 2 and 7 (spanning 5 versions)

Redundancy and Syntactic Reduction

This is a series of corpus-based studies and production experiments on syntactic reduction and too what extent it is driven by redundancy/information density/predictability. Please follow the links below for more information -- some may be only accessible to HLP lab members or HLP lab guests.

Non-subject-extracted relative clauses (NSRCs)
- Corpus studies:
  - Jaeger (2006 -- my thesis)
  - Jaeger and Wasow (2006)
  - Wasow et al. (2009)
- Experiments:
  - Recall, completion, and forced-choice preference experiments on ''that''-omission in object-extracted relative clauses in collaboration with Roger Levy and Vic Ferreira at UCSD.
Complement clauses (CCs)
- Corpus studies:
  - Jaeger (submitted).
Reduction of subject-extracted relative clauses (SRCs)
- Corpus studies:
  - Reduction of passive SRCs in the BNC\ (so called whiz-deletion). Also, feel free to have a look at the [wiki:/Annotation annotation guidelines for the studies on subject-extracted passive relative clauses in the British National Corpus].
  - Tom Wasow also has done some studies on that-omission in subject-extracted relative clauses in non-standard English (not the same as whiz-deletion), which are summarized in the presentation we gave at the International Relative Conference, Cambridge, September 2007.
to-omission after the verb help : There is some preliminary data, which I presented in some invited talks. Let me know if you want more information.

-  ⇤ ← Revision 2 as of 2009-01-25 00:00:38 → 
  Size: 389
  Editor: cpe-67-240-134-21
  Comment:
+   ← Revision 7 as of 2011-08-09 19:28:19 → ⇥
  Size: 2083
  Editor: echidna
  Comment:
-Deletions are marked like this.
+Additions are marked like this.
 Line 7:
-This is a series of corpus-based studies and production experiments on syntactic reduction and too what extent it is driven by redundancy/information density/predictability.
+This is a series of corpus-based studies and production experiments on syntactic reduction and too what extent it is driven by redundancy/information density/predictability. Please follow the links below for more information -- some may be only accessible to HLP lab members or HLP lab guests.
 Line 9:
-For more detail continue to the [wiki:/LabLog lab log].
+ * '''Non-subject-extracted relative clauses (NSRCs)'''
  * Corpus studies:
   * Jaeger (2006 -- my thesis)
   * [[http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/fjaeger/papers/http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/fjaeger/papers/JaegerWasow06_BLS.pdf|Jaeger and Wasow (2006)]]
   * [[http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/fjaeger/papers/WasowJaegerOrrDGfSpaper.pdf|Wasow et al. (2009)]]
  * Experiments:
   * [[ProjectsSyntacticReductionORCreductionExperiments|Recall, completion, and forced-choice preference experiments on ''that''-omission in object-extracted relative clauses]] in collaboration with Roger Levy and Vic Ferreira at UCSD.
 * '''Complement clauses (CCs)'''
  * Corpus studies: 
   * [[http://www.bcs.rochester.edu/people/fjaeger/papers/Jaeger09UIDcomplementizers.pdf|Jaeger (submitted)]].
 * '''Reduction of subject-extracted relative clauses (SRCs)''' 
  * Corpus studies: 
   * [[ProjectsSyntacticReductionSRCreduction|Reduction of passive SRCs in the BNC]]\ (so called ''whiz''-deletion). Also, feel free to have a look at the [wiki:/Annotation annotation guidelines for the studies on subject-extracted passive relative clauses in the British National Corpus].
   * Tom Wasow also has done some studies on ''that''-omission in subject-extracted relative clauses in non-standard English (not the same as ''whiz''-deletion), which are summarized in the presentation we gave at the International Relative Conference, Cambridge, September 2007.
 * ''' ''to''-omission after the verb ''help'' ''': There is some preliminary data, which I presented in some invited talks. Let me know if you want more information.