Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T00:31:06.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The wheat and the chaff: or four confusions regarding CHILDES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Brian Macwhinney  and
Catherine Snow
Brian Macwhinney*
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University
Catherine Snow
Affiliation:
Harvard University
*
Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. e-mail: brian@andrew.cmu.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Edwards (1992) presents a set of examples from the Child Language Data Exchange System (CHILDES) as prototypes of bad transcription practice. Her discussion is based upon four basic confusions. First, Edwards confuses old and discarded versions of CHAT with current CHAT. Second, she confuses the relation between CHAT standards with the implementation of these standards during the process of reformatting older corpora. Third, she confuses transcription for automatic analysis with transcription for documentation. Fourth, she confuses the CHAT guidelines with the larger CHILDES system. We argue that these confusions have misled Edwards into developing an overly rigid set of principles for data analysis which, if followed literally, could choke off progress in the analysis of spontaneous language samples.

Type
Notes and Discussion
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , June 1992 , pp. 459 - 471
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Edwards, J. (1992). Computer methods in child language research: four principles for the archived data. Journal of Child Language 19, 435–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ervin-Tripp, S. (1979). Children's verbal turn-taking. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. (eds), Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1991). The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. (eds), Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Peters, A., Fahn, R., Glover, G., Harley, H., Sawyer, M. & Shimura, A. (1990). Keeping close to the data: a two-tier computer-coding schema for the analysis of morphological development. Unpublished manuscript, University of Hawaii, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Sokolov, J. & MacWhinney, B. (1990). The CHIP framework: automatic coding and analysis of parent-child conversational interaction. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 22, 151–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar