| 1 |
Cambridge Psycholinguistic Inventory of Christian Beliefs: A registered report of construct validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability. ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Can distributional semantics explain performance on the false belief task? ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Factors That Prevent Mosquito-Borne Diseases among Migrant Workers in Taiwan: Application of the Health Belief Model in a Church-Based Health Promotion Study
|
|
|
|
In: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health; Volume 19; Issue 2; Pages: 787 (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
Digital and Spatial Humanities Mapping: Eurasia-Pacific Early Trade and Belief Linkages
|
|
|
|
In: Monsoon: South Asian Studies Association Journal (2022)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Cambridge Psycholinguistic Inventory of Christian Beliefs: A registered report of construct validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability.
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
Cambridge Psycholinguistic Inventory of Christian Beliefs: A registered report of construct validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
Does “Think” Mean the Same Thing as “Believe”? Linguistic Insights Into Religious Cognition
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
How to make believe: Inquisitivity, veridicality, and evidentiality in belief reports
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
This dissertation explores, through three case studies, the relationship between the lexical semantics of clausal embedding (CE) predicates, and the syntactic and pragmatic restrictions on their complements, such as the (in)ability of certain predicates to embed declarative clauses or nominal expressions. I propose that these restrictions arise from interactions between fine-grained aspects of predicate meaning and the linguistic environment in which those predicates occur, rather than being stipulated into predicates' lexical entries via restrictions on permissible semantic types or semantic categories of their arguments (e.g. Grimshaw 1979, Pesetsky 1982, 1991) or resulting from polysemy or ambiguity of CE predicates (e.g. George 2011). First, I examine the Estonian verb mõtlema, which has a believe-like interpretation with an embedded declarative, and a wonder-like interpretation with embedded declaratives. I show that this behavior can be derived straightforwardly only if declaratives and interrogatives are typewise identical, i.e. sets of sets of worlds (Hamblin 1973, Ciardelli et al. 2013), and \textit{mõtlema} denotes an ontologically primitive attitude of 'contemplation'. Second, I analyze the behavior of English believe, which cannot embed interrogatives except under a combination of modal and nonveridical operators, such as can't. I propose that the apparent 'lifting' of selectional restrictions of believe in some contexts, as well as other unexpected properties of the can't believe construction, can be understood compositionally: believe can in fact compose with interrogative clauses in principle, but doing so normally results in systematically trivial meanings (Theiler et al. 2019). By placing believe under the right combination of operators, this triviality can be obviated (see Mayr 2019). Finally, I develop a semantic account of verbs like believe and trust, which can embed variety of nominal expressions alongside clauses, posing a compositional puzzle (Djärv 2019). I propose that these predicates are a kind of weak response-stance predicates (Cattell 1978), in that they presuppose an evidential source of the relevant attitude, which can be spelled out as a direct object. I take this to suggest a tight link between argument structure of belief predicates and their external syntactic distribution.
|
|
Keyword:
argument structure; attitudes; belief; clausal embedding; Linguistics; semantics
|
|
URL: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4d43b9rz
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 9 |
A Hierarchical Computational Framework for Social Interaction Understanding: Interactiveness, Shared Attention, Gaze Communication and Triadic Belief Dynamics
|
|
Fan, Lifeng. - : eScholarship, University of California, 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
Strategic use of (un)certainty expressions ... : Strategic Use of (Un)certainty expressions ...
|
|
Unkn Unknown. - : University of Edinburgh. School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences. Department of Linguistics., 2021
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 12 |
Does “Think” Mean the Same Thing as “Believe”? Linguistic Insights Into Religious Cognition ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 14 |
Implicit dimensions of explicit faith: inquiring into the centrality of belief by attending to the holistic character of Christian believing
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 15 |
Exploring Elementary Science Teachers’ Perceptions for Incorporating Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Lesson Plans
|
|
|
|
In: Dissertations (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 16 |
Reading And Writing A Garden, Materials Of A Garden Made In Germantown, Pennsylvania (1683–1719)
|
|
|
|
In: Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 17 |
THE DISCURSIVE CONSTRUCTION OF INDIGENOUS BELIEF ISSUE IN THE JAKARTA POST
|
|
|
|
In: Language Literacy: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching, Vol 5, Iss 2, Pp 417-430 (2021) (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 18 |
Practical reasoning, rule-following and belief revision: an account in terms of Jeffrey’s rule
|
|
|
|
In: ISSN: 0039-7857 ; EISSN: 1573-0964 ; Synthese ; https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02864932 ; Synthese, Springer Verlag (Germany), 2020, ⟨10.1007/s11229-020-02536-z⟩ (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 19 |
Nonverbal content and swift trust: An experiment on digital communication
|
|
|
|
In: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-02483343 ; 2020 (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 20 |
Adapting Implicit Stereotype Expectation Through Perspective Distancing
|
|
|
|
In: Capstone Showcase (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
