Advertisement

Computers and the Humanities

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 235–250 | Cite as

A model for intelligent computer assisted language instruction (MICALI)

  • Ali Farghaly
Article

Abstract

This paper presents the view that Computer Assisted Language Instruction (CALI) software should be developed as a natural language processing system that offers an interactive environment for language learners. A description of Artificial Intelligence tools and techniques, such as parsing, knowledge representation and expert systems is presented. Their capabilities and limitations are discussed and a model for intelligent CALI software (MICALI) is proposed. MICALI is highly interactive and communicative and can initiate conversation with a student or respond to questions on a previously defined domain of knowledge. In the present state of the art, MICALI can only operate in limited parsing and domain-specific knowledge representation.

Key Words

foreign language teaching educational technology intelligent software parsing syntax natural language understanding grammar formalisms knowledge representation man-machine interaction tutoring systems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahmed, K., G. Corbett, M. Rogers, and R. Sussex. Computers, Language Learning and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  2. Bear, J. and L. Karttunen. “A Simple Phrase Structure Parser.“ Texas Linguistic Forum (Department of Linguistics, The University of Texas at Austin), 15 (1979), 1–46.Google Scholar
  3. Bernstein, B. Class, Codes and Control. St. Albans, Herts.: Paladin, 1973.Google Scholar
  4. Bonnet, A. L'intelligence artifcielle: Promesse et réalités. Paris: InterEdition, 1984.Google Scholar
  5. Both, J. “Communicative Approaches in Computer Assisted Language Instruction.” Paper presented at the TESOL's 21 st Annual Convention, Miami, Florida, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. Chapelle, C. and J. Jamieson. “Computer Assisted Language Learning as a Predictor of Success in Acquiring ESL.” TESOL Quarterly, 20, 1 (1986), 27–46.Google Scholar
  7. Charniak, E. Toward a Model of Children's Story Comprehension. AI TR-226. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, 1972.Google Scholar
  8. Chomsky, N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1965.Google Scholar
  9. Chomsky, N. Lectures on Government and Binding. Foris, Dordrecht. 1981.Google Scholar
  10. Chomsky, N. Barriers. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. 1986.Google Scholar
  11. Colmerauer, A. “Un sous-ensemble intéressant du français.” Paper presented at the Workshop on Logic and Databases, Toulouse, 1979.Google Scholar
  12. Evans, R. ProGram: a Development Tool for GPSG Grammars. CSRP 036. The University of Sussex, U.K., 1985.Google Scholar
  13. Evans, R. and G. Gazdar. The ProGram Manual. CSRP 035. The University of Sussex, U.K., 1984.Google Scholar
  14. Farghaly, A. and B. Brownsfield. “Towards More Intelligent Software.” In Proceedings of the First National Symposium on Language Teaching in Kuwait. Language Center, Kuwait University, 1985, pp. 32–51.Google Scholar
  15. Granger, R. H. The NOMAD System: Expectation-Based Detection and Correction of Errors during Understanding of Syntactically and Semanticlly Ill-Formed Text. American Journal of Computational Linguistics, 7 (1983), 99–108.Google Scholar
  16. Grishman, Ralph. Computational Linguistics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  17. Grishman, R. and Ping Peng. “Responding to Semantically Ill-Formed Input” In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing. Austin, TX, 1988.Google Scholar
  18. Hayes-Roth, F., D. Waterman, and D. Lenat. ed.Google Scholar
  19. Higgins, J. and T. Johns. Computers in Language Learning. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1984.Google Scholar
  20. Hill, B. “Interactive Video in the Teaching of English.” Paper presented at the TESOL's 21 st Annual Convention, Miami, Florida, 1987.Google Scholar
  21. Hope, G. R., H. F. Taylor, and J. P. Pusack. Using Computers in Teaching Foreign Languages. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  22. Jensen, K., G. Heidron, S. Richardson, and N. Haas. “PLNLP, PEG and CRITIQUE: Three Contributions to Computing in the Humanities.” Paper presented at the Conference on Computers and the Humanities, Toronto, Canada, 1986.Google Scholar
  23. Hobbs, J. R. “Resolving Pronoun References.” In Natural Language Processing. Eds. Barbara Grosz et al. Inc. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufman, 1986, pp. 339–52.Google Scholar
  24. Johnson, Brett. “Essential Idioms in English: A Review.” CALL-IS Newsletter (Published by TESOL), 4 (December 1987).Google Scholar
  25. Jones, C. and S. Fortescue. Using Computers in the Language Classroom. New York: Longman, 1987.Google Scholar
  26. Karttunen, Lauri and Arnold Zwicky. “Introduction.” In Natural Language Parsing. Eds. D. R. Dowty, L. Karttunen, and A. Zwicky. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  27. Kay, Martin. “Parsing in Functional Unification Grammar.” In Natural Language Parsing. Eds. D. R. Dowty, L. Karttunen, and A. Zwicky. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985, pp. 251–78.Google Scholar
  28. Kelso, S., B. Tuller, and K. Harris. “A ‘Dynamic Pattern’ Perspective on the Control and Coordination of Movement.” In The Production of Speech. Ed. Peter MacNeilage. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1983, 137–73.Google Scholar
  29. Marlsen-Wilson, W. Linguistic Structure and Speech Shadowing at Very Short Latencies. Nature, 244 (1973), 522–23.Google Scholar
  30. Marlsen-Wilson, W. Sentence Perception as an Interactive Parallel Process. Science, 189 (1975), 226–28.Google Scholar
  31. Moyne, John A. “Language Use: A Performance Model.” International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences, 9 (1980), 459–81.Google Scholar
  32. Moyne, John, A. Understanding Language: Man or Machine. New York: Plenum Press, 1985.Google Scholar
  33. Pereira, F. Logic For Natural Language. Technical Report 275. Artificial Intelligence Center, SRI International, 1983.Google Scholar
  34. Perkins, K. and B. Jones, “Measuring Passage Contribution in ESL Reading Comprehension.” TESOL Quarterly, 19, 1 (1985), 137–53.Google Scholar
  35. Phinney, M. “Writing and Revising with Computers in ESL Composition.” Paper presented at TESOL's 21st Annual Convention, Miami, Florida, 1987.Google Scholar
  36. Rich, E. and S. LuperFoy. “An Architecture for Anaphora Resolution.” In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing. ACL, Austin, TX 1988, pp. 18–24.Google Scholar
  37. Richardson, S. and Lisa Braden-Harder. “The Experience of Developing a Large Scale Language Text Processing System: CRITIQUE.” In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing. ACL, Austin, Texas, 1988, pp. 195–202.Google Scholar
  38. Schank, R. “Conceptual Dependency: A Theory of Natural Language Understanding.” Cognitive Psychology, 3, 4 (1972), 552–631.Google Scholar
  39. Schank, R., ed. Conceptual Information Processing. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1975.Google Scholar
  40. Schank, R. “Intelligent Advisory Systems.” In The AI Business. Eds. P. Winston and K. Prendergast. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1984, pp. 133–48.Google Scholar
  41. Slocum, J. “Parser Construction Techniques.” Tutorial presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 1985.Google Scholar
  42. Stevens, V. “English Lessons on PLATO: A Review.” TESOL Quarterly, 17, 2 (1983), 293–300.Google Scholar
  43. Stevens, V. and Emily Thrush. “Use of the Computer Now and in the Future for ESL.” Paper presented at the Software Evaluation Workshop, TESOL's 21st Annual Convention, Miami, Florida, 1987.Google Scholar
  44. The, L. “Educational Software for the Home.” Display Structure, 6 (1982), 48–52, 102–14.Google Scholar
  45. Underwood, J. H. Linguistics, Computers and the Language Teacher. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 1984.Google Scholar
  46. Wilks, Y. “Preference Semantics.” In Formal Semantics of Natural Languages. Ed. E. Keenan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
  47. Winograd, T. Understanding Natural Language. New York: Academic Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  48. Winograd, T. Language as a Cognitive System. Volume I: Syntax. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1983.Google Scholar
  49. Winston, P. H. and B. K. P. Horn. LISP. 2nd Edition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ali Farghaly
    • 1
  1. 1.English DepartmentKuwait UniversitySafatKuwait

Personalised recommendations