Acceptability Judgment Task
The acceptability judgment task is the modern, quantified successor to informal grammaticality judgments: instead of a single linguist marking a sentence grammatical or not, many participants rate carefully controlled sentences on a graded scale, and the ratings are analyzed statistically. Built on factorial designs with fillers and counterbalancing, and on response formats from Likert scales to magnitude estimation to forced choice, it turns intuition into replicable, gradient data. The approach anchors the experimental-syntax program associated with Jon Sprouse and colleagues, which tests grammatical hypotheses with the same methodological rigor as psycholinguistic experiments.
Dossier source
Citations copiées telles quelles du dossier source de la méthode. Aucune vérification au niveau de la revendication n'en est déduite.
- Sprouse, J., Schütze, C. T., & Almeida, D. (2013). A comparison of informal and formal acceptability judgments using a random sample from Linguistic Inquiry 2001–2010. Lingua, 134, 219–248. · DOI 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.002
- Bard, E. G., Robertson, D., & Sorace, A. (1996). Magnitude estimation of linguistic acceptability. Language, 72(1), 32–68. · DOI 10.2307/416793
- Schütze, C. T. (2016). The Empirical Base of Linguistics: Grammaticality Judgments and Linguistic Methodology. Language Science Press. · DOI 10.17169/langsci.b89.100
Revendications organisées
Revendications enregistrées dans le registre de preuves, chacune avec sa propre évaluation.
Cette vue n'invente pas d'évaluation de revendication lorsque le registre n'en contient aucune.
Méthodes apparentées
Généré à partir du graphe de méthodes et présenté comme des relations suggérées par la machine — aucune revendication de preuve n'est déduite.