Mor with replacements

[Stephen Wilson]

Leonid, thank you, that is extremely helpful.

My version of the CHAT manual, that I've been using in my lab, was from 
1/14/2011, and it didn't have this distinction between [: and [::. I'm very 
glad that the latest version has this distinction, so I can code my data in 
a way that makes sense to me.

Thanks again for your quick and helpful reply.

best,
Stephen

On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 10:24:01 PM UTC-7, Spektor, Leonid: CMU wrote:
>
> Stephen,
>
> There are two different kinds of replacements in CHAT. You can read about 
> them in CHAT manual that you can get from URL:
>
> http://childes.psy.cmu.edu/manuals/chat.pdf
>
> Look at paragraphs "Replacement [: text]" and "Replacement of Real Word 
> [:: text]" on pages 70 and 71. You would code your example this way:
>
> gonna [: going to] [*]
> flag [:: kite] [*]
>
> MOR and other CLAN commands will not replace spoken word like "flag" if 
> it's replacement is indicated by [:: ...] code. If for some reason you 
> would want replacements indicated by [:: ...] code to be performed, then 
> you would add the "+r50" option to command line. You can see those options 
> if you type, for example, command "freq" in CLAN's Commands window and 
> press return.
>
> Leonid.
>
>
>  
> On Oct 3, 2012, at 20:06 , Stephen Wilson wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> My research involves patients with aphasia. I am somewhat new to 
> CHAT/CLAN, having used other methods (i.e. QPA) in the past.
>
> I'm puzzled about how mor is supposed to work with replacement forms. I 
> can see how with a form like "gonna", it makes sense to expand it as "[: 
> going to]" so that its morphosyntax can be analyzed accordingly. But the [: 
> replacement] notation is also used for what seems like a fundamentally 
> different purpose, i.e. denoting intended forms when errors are made. Lots 
> of examples are given in the "Error Coding" chapter of the CHAT manual.
>
> When I'm doing my morphosyntactic/lexical analysis, I want to treat 
> "gonna" as "going to", but when my patients make errors, I want mor to 
> analyze what they actually said, not what they intended to say. For 
> instance, if a patient said "flag" instead of "kite", I would not want mor 
> (or my subsequent analysis) to proceed as if they had said "kite", which is 
> a low-frequency word that they probably can't produce.
>
> Have other people encountered this issue, and do you have any ideas of a 
> good way to approach it?
>
> best,
> Stephen
>
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "chibolts" group.
> To post to this group, send email to chib... at googlegroups.com<javascript:>
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> chibolts+u... at googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/chibolts/-/J8_8wMNVLWwJ.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>  
>  
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "chibolts" group.
To post to this group, send email to chibolts at googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to chibolts+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/chibolts/-/DympDEDXwYcJ.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/chibolts/attachments/20121004/756ef838/attachment.htm>