1. C. Phillips, *Syntax, Macmillan Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science (2001).
2. S. Edelman, Bridging language with the rest of cognition: computational, algorithmic and neurobiological issues and methods, Proc. Ithaca EMCL workshop (John Benjamins, 2005, in press).

• M. Hauser, N. Chomsky and T. Fitch, *The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?, Science 298:1569-1579 (2002).
• S. Pinker and R. Jackendoff, *The faculty of language: what's special about it?, Cognition 95:201-236 (2005).

1. P. Adriaans and M. van Zaanen, *Computational Grammar Induction for Linguists, Grammars 7:57-68 (2004).
2. A. Roberts and E. Atwell, Unsupervised grammar inference systems for natural language, School of Computing, University of Leeds, TR 2002.20 (2002).

• B. Krenn and C. Samuelsson, The Linguist's Guide to Statistics (Don't Panic) (1997).
• D. Klein and C. D. Manning, Corpus-based induction of syntactic structure: models of dependency and constituency, Proc. 42nd Annual Meeting of the ACL, 478-485 (2004).

1. M. Penke and A. Rosenbach, *What counts as evidence in linguistics? The case of innateness, Studies in Language 28:480-526 (2004).
2. N. F. Johnson, The psychological reality of phrase-structure rules, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 4:469-475 (1965).

• C. Schutze, The Empirical Base of Linguistics: Grammaticality Judgments and Linguistic Methodology, U. of Chicago Press, 1996.
• S. Edelman, Bridging language with the rest of cognition: computational, algorithmic and neurobiological issues and methods, Proc. Ithaca EMCL workshop (John Benjamins, 2005, in press).

[no meeting]

1. G. K. Pullum and B. Scholz, *Empirical assessment of poverty of the stimulus arguments, The Linguistic Review 19:9-50 (2002).
2. F. Reali and M. H. Christiansen, *Uncovering the richness of the stimulus: Structural dependence and indirect statistical evidence, Cognitive Science, in press (2005).

• B. MacWhinney, Language Emergence, 17-42, in An integrated view of language development — Papers in honor of Henning Wode, P. Burmeister and T. Piske and A. Rohde, eds. (2002).

1. E. Bates and J. C. Goodman, *On the Emergence of Grammar From the Lexicon, 29-79, in Emergence of Language, B. MacWhinney, ed., Erlbaum (1999).
2. M. Tomasello, *The item-based nature of children's early syntactic development, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4:156-163 (2000).

• M. Gross, Lexicon-Grammar: Application to French, 2195-2205, in The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, R. E. Asher, ed., Pergamon Press (1994).

1. A. J. Sanford and P. Sturt, *Depth of processing in language comprehension: not noticing the evidence, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6:382-386 (2002).
2. F. Ferreira, K. G. D. Bailey, and V. Ferraro, *Good-enough representations in language comprehension, Current Directions in Psychological Science 11:11-15 (2002).

• E. Gibson and N. Pearlmutter, *Constraints on sentence comprehension, Trends in Cognitive Science 2:262-268 (1998).

1. N. Chipere, Real Language Users, CogPrints (1998).
2. N. Chipere, *Native speaker variations in syntactic competence: implications for first language teaching, Language Awareness 10:107-124 (2001).

• A. Wray, Needs only analysis in linguistic ontogeny and phylogeny, in Proc. 2nd AISB Intl. Symp. on the Emergence and Evolution of Linguistic Communication, A. Cangelosi, ed. (2005).

1. C. L. Harris and E. Bates, *Clausal backgrounding and pronominal reference: A functionalist approach to c-command, Language and Cognitive Processes 17:237-270 (2002).

• R. A. Zwaan, R. A. Stanfield, and R. H. Yaxley, *Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects, Psychological Science 13:168-172 (2002).

1. C. L. Harris, Psycholinguistic studies of entrenchment, in Conceptual Structures, Language and Discourse, volume 2, J. Koenig, ed., CSLI (1998).
2. J. Saffran, *Constraints on statistical language learning, Journal of Memory and Language 47:172-196 (2002).

• A. L. Theakston, *The role of entrenchment in children's and adults' performance on grammaticality judgment tasks, Cognitive Development 19:15-34 (2004).

1. R. Scha, R. Bod, and K. Sima'an, A memory-based model of syntactic analysis: data-oriented parsing J. of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 11:409-440 (1999).

• B. Erman and B. Warren, *The idiom principle and the open-choice principle, Text 20:29-62 (2000).

1. A. Clark, Unsupervised induction of stochastic context-free grammars using distributional clustering, Proc. CoNLL (2001).
2. M. van Zaanen and P. Adriaans, Comparing two unsupervised grammar induction systems: alignment-based learning vs. EMILE, School of Computing, Leeds University TR 05 (2001).

• [P. Adriaans and] M. Vervoort, The EMILE user guide (2003).

1. J. G. Wolff, Learning syntax and meanings through optimization and distributional analysis, 179-215, in Categories and Processes in Language Acquisition, Y. Levy, I. M. Schlesinger, and M. D. S. Braine, eds., Erlbaum (1988).
2. P. Langley and S. Stromsten, Learning context-free grammars with a simplicity bias, 220-228, Proc. 11th European Conference on Machine Learning (2002).

• P. J. Henrichsen, GraSp: grammar learning from unlabeled speech corpora, 22-28, in Proc. CoNLL, D. Roth and A. van den Bosch, eds. (2002).

1. Z. Solan, D. Horn, E. Ruppin, and S. Edelman, *Unsupervised learning of natural languages, in Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. (102:11629-11634, 2005).

• Z. Solan, D. Horn, E. Ruppin, and S. Edelman, *supplementary material to Unsupervised learning of natural languages.

1. A. E. Goldberg, *Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7:219-224 (2003).
2. L. Cyrus, review of Construction Grammar in a Cross-Language Perspective, M. Fried and J.-O. Östman, John Benjamins (2004).

• M. Hoey, Lexical priming and the properties of text, 385-412, in Corpora and discourse, A. Partington, J. Morley, and L. Haarman, eds., Peter Lang (2004).
• V. Quochi, review of Construction Grammar in a Cross-Language Perspective, M. Fried and J.-O. Östman, John Benjamins (2004).