Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T14:42:36.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Computers in English language research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2008

Geoffrey Leech  and
Andrew Beale
Geoffrey Leech
Affiliation:
University of Lancaster
Andrew Beale
Affiliation:
University of Lancaster
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Information

Type
State-of-the-Art Article
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , July 1984 , pp. 216 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Aarts, J. & Meijs, W. (eds.) (1984). Corpus linguistics. Recent developments in the use of computer corpora in English language research. Amsterdam: Rodopi (Costerus. New series; vol. 45).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aarts, J. & Van, den Heuvel T. (1984). Linguistic and computational aspects of corpus research. In Aarts, & Meijs, (1984), 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atwell, E. S. (1983). Constituent-likelihood grammar. Bergen: ICAME News, 7, 34–67. Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Atwell, E. S., Leech, G. N. & Garside, R. (1984). Analysis of the LOB Corpus: progress and prospects. In Aarts, & Mejis, (1984), 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bar-Hillel, Y. (1960). The present status of automatic translation of languages. In Alt, F. L. (ed.) (1960), Advances in computers, vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 91–163.Google Scholar
Bridle, J. S., Brown, M. D. & Chamberlain, R. M. (1983). Continuous connected word recognition using whole word templates. The Radio and Electronic Engineer, 53, 4, 167–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B., Davies, P. & Richman, B. (eds.) (1971), Word frequency book. New York: American Heritage.Google Scholar
Charniak, E. & Wilks, Y. (1975). Computational semantics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins English dictionary (1979). London and Glasgow: Collins.Google Scholar
Coates, J. (1983). The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London and Canberra: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Davies, G. D. & Higgins, J. (1982). Computers, language and language learning. London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.Google Scholar
DeJong, G. (1979). Prediction and substantiation: a new approach to natural language processing. Cognitiue Science, 3 (1979), 251–73.Google Scholar
Doddington, G. R. & Schalk, T. B. (1981). Speech recognition: turning theory to practice. IEEE Spectrum, 18, 9, 26–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelhart, M. & Davies, O. (eds.) (1983), Omni online database directory. New York: Cullier Books.Google Scholar
Eeg-Olofsson, M. & Svartvik, J. (1984). Four-level tagging of spoken English. In Aarts, & Meijs, (1984), 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellegård, A. (1978). The syntactic structure of English texts: a computer based study of four kinds of text in the Brown University Corpus. (Gothenburg Studies in English, 43) Gothenburg University.Google Scholar
Elovitz, H., Johnson, R., McHugh, A. & Shore, J. (1976). Letter-to-sound rules for automatic translation of English text to phonetics. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, ASSP-24, No.6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engels, L. K., Van, Beckhoven B., Leenders, Th. & Brasseur, I. (1981). Leuven English teaching vocabulary-list. Leuven, Belgium: Acco.Google Scholar
Fjelkestan-, Nilsson B. (1983). ALSO and TOO: yya corpus-based study of their frequency and use in Modern English. Stockholm: Stockholm Studies in English, lviii.Google Scholar
Francis, W. N. (1980). A tagged corpus – problems and prospects. In Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. N. & Svartvik, J. (eds.), Studies in English lingusticsfor Randolph Quirk (1980), 192–209. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Francis, W. N. & Kučera, H. (1964, revised 1971 and 1979). Manual of information to accompany a standard corpus of present-day edited American English, for use with digital computers. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Francis, W. N. & Kučera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Geens, D. (1984). Semantic analysis automated for large computer corpora and their exploitation. In Aarts, & Meijs, (1984), 211–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geens, D., Engels, L. K. & Martin, W. (1975). Leuven Drama Corpus and frequency list. University of Leuven: PAL. Institute of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Gingrich, P. S. (1983). The UNIX Writer's Workbench software: results of a field study. Bell System Technical Journal, 62, 6, 1909–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, B. B. & Rubin, G. M. (1971). Automatic grammatical tagging of English. Providence, R.I.: Department of Linguistics, Brown University.Google Scholar
Grishman, R. (1976). A survey of syntactic analysis procedures for natural language. AJCL Microfiche 47.Google Scholar
Harris, L. R. (1977). User-oriented data base query with the Robot natural language query system. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 9, 697–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, R. R. K. (ed.) (1983). Lexicography: principles and practice. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hauge, J. & Hofland, K. (1978). Microfiche version of the Brown University Corpus of Present-Day American English. Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Heidorn, G. E., Jensen, K., Miller, L. A., Byrd, R. J. & Chodorow, M. S. (1983). The EPISTLE text-critiquing system. IBM Systems Journal, 21, 3, 305–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, J. & Johns, T. (1984). Computers in language learning. London and Glasgow: Collins.Google Scholar
Hockey, S. (1980). A guide to computer applications in the humanities. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Hofland, K. & Johansson, S. (1980). LOB Corpus: KWIC Concordance (microfiche). Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Hofland, K. & Johansson, S. (1982). Word frequencies in British and American English. Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Hutchins, W. J. (1978). Machine Translation and Machine-Aided Translation. Journal of Documentation, 34, 2, 119–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ICAME News. 1978–. Newsletter of the International Computer Archive of Modern English. Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Johansson, S. (ed.) (1982). Computer corpora in English language research. Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Johansson, S., Leech, G. & Goodluck, H. (1978). Manual of information to accompany the Lancaster Oslo/Bergen corpus of British English, for use with digital computers. Oslo: Department of English, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Kelly, E. F. & Stone, P. J. (1975). Computer recognition of English word senses. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Kenning, M. J. & Kenning, M-M. (1983). Introduction to computer assisted language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
King, M. (1981). Design characteristics of a machine translation system. 7th IJCAI (1981), 43–6.Google Scholar
King, M. (ed.) (1983). Parsing natural language. London, New York, etc.: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kjellmer, G. (1984). Some thoughts on collocational distinctiveness. In Aarts, & Meijs, (1984), 163–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klatt, D. K., Seneff, S. & Zue, V. W. (1982). Design considerations for optimizing the intelligibility of a DFT-based, pitch-excited, critical-band-spectrum speech analysis-resynthesis system. Speech Communication Group Working Papers, Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Research Lab of Electronics.Google Scholar
Knowles, F. (1983). Towards the machine dictionary. In Hartmann, (1983), 181–93.Google Scholar
Kučera, H. (1980). Computational analysis of predicational structures in English. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Tokyo: 32–7.Google Scholar
Kučera, H. & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, Rhode Island: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Last, R. W. (1983). Computer-assisted language learning: a growth area in humanities computing. ALLC Bulletin 11, 3, 83–6.Google Scholar
Lawson, V. (1983). Machine translation. In Picken, C. (1983). The translator's handbook, 81–8. London: Aslib.Google Scholar
Leech, G. N., Garside, R. & Atwell, E. S. (1983 a). The automatic grammatical tagging of the LOB Corpus. ICAME News, 7, 13–33.Google Scholar
Leech, G. N., Garside, R. & Atwell, E. S. (1983 b). Recent developments in the use of computer corpora in English language research. Transactions of the Philological Society, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, W. N. & Booth, A. D. (1955). Machine translation of languages. Cambridge, Mass, and New York: M.I.T. Press and J. Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Longman dictionary of contemporary English (1978). London: Longman.Google Scholar
MacDonald, N. H. (1983). The UNIX Writer's Workbench software: rationale and design. Bell System Technical Journal, 62, 6, 1891–1908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, M. P. (1980). A theory of syntactic recognition for natural language. Cambridge, Mass, and London: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, I. (1983). Choice of grammatical word-class without global syntactic analysis: tagging words in the LOB Corpus. Computers and the Humanities, 17, 3, 139–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meijs, W. (1984). ‘You can do so if you want to’ – Some elliptic structures in Brown and LOB and their syntactic description. In Aarts, & Meijs, (1984), 141–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melby, A. K. (1982). Multi-level translation aids in a distributed system. In COLING82, edited by Jan, Horecky, 215–20. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Michiels, A. (1982). Exploiting a large dictionary data base. Ph.D. thesis. Liège: Université de Liège.Google Scholar
Oddy, R. N., Robertson, S. E., van, Rijsbergen C. J. & Williams, P. V. (eds.) (1981). Information retrieval research. London, etc.: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Paice, C. D. (1977). Information retrieval and the computer. London: Macdonald & Jane's.Google Scholar
Paice, C. D. (1981). The automatic generation of literature abstracts: an approach based on the identification of self-indicating phrases. In Oddy, et al. (1981), 172–91.Google Scholar
Peckham, J. B., Green, J. R. D., Canning, J. V. & Stephens, P. (1983). A real-time hardware continuous speech recognition system. In Procedures of the 1982 IEEE International Conference of Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, Paris, 863–6.Google Scholar
Peterson, J. (1980). Computer programs for detecting and correcting spelling errors. In Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 23, 12, 676–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R. (1960). Towards a description of English usage. Transactions of the Philological Society, 40–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R. & Svartvik, J. (1979). A corpus of modern English. SSE report. Lund: Lund University; also in Bergenholz, H. & Schaeder, B. (eds.), Empirische Textwissenschaft. Aufbau und Auswertung von Text-Corpora. Konigstein: Scriptor.Google Scholar
Renouf, A. (1984). Corpus development at Birmingham University. In Aarts, & Meijs, (1984), 3–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sager, N. (1981). Natural language information processing: a computer grammar of English and its applications. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH. (1982). Reflections on computer corpora in English language research. In Johansson, (1982).Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. McH., Jones, S. & Daley, R. (1970). English lexical studies. OSTI report. Department of English, University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
Stenström, A-B. (1984). Discourse tags. In Aarts, & Meijs, (1984), 65–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svartvik, J. & Quirk, R. (eds.) (1980). A corpus of English conversation. Lund Studies in English 56. Lund: Gleerups/Liber.Google Scholar
Svartvik, J., Eeg-Olofsson, M., Forsheden, O., Oreström, B. & Thavenius, C. (1982). Survey of spoken English. Report on research 1975–81. Lund: Lund Studies in English 63.Google Scholar
Toma, P. (1977). SYSTRAN as a multi-lingual machine translation system. In Commission of the European Communities; Overcoming the Language Barrier, 569–81. Munich: Verlag Dokumentation.Google Scholar
Tottie, G., Altenberg, B. & Hermerén, L. (1983). English in speech and writing. ETOS Report 1. Lund and Uppsala: the Departments of English at the Universities of Lund and Uppsala.Google Scholar
Van, Halteren H. (1984). User interface for a linguistic data base. ICAME News, 8, 1, 31–40.Google Scholar
Weaver, W. (1949). Translation. In Locke, & Booth, (1957), 15–23.Google Scholar
Welin, C. W. (1979). Studies in computational text comprehension. Monograph 5, Institute of Linguistics. University of Stockholm.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. (1983). Connected speech system aims for industrial market. Sensor Review, 3, 4.Google Scholar
Winograd, T. (1972). Understanding natural language. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winograd, T. (1983). Language as a cognitive process. Volume 1: Syntax. Reading, Mass. etc.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Woods, W. A. (1973). Progress in natural language understanding: an application to lunar geology. AFIPS Conference Proceedings, 42, 441–50.Google Scholar