A semiotic perspective for AAC

REFERENCES

• Ballinger, L. B., & Ballinger, R. A. (1972). Sign, symbol and form. New York: Nostrand Reinhold Company.
   Google Scholar
• Blissymbolics Communication Institute. (1984). Picture your Blissymbols. Toronto: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Bowler, D. M. (1991). Need for theory in studies of augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 127–132.
   Google Scholar
• Buchler, J. (1956). The philosophy of Peirce. Selected writings. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, D. S. (1990). Sources of semiotic. Carbondale, IL: South-ern Illinois University.
   Google Scholar
• Cregan, A. (1980). Sigsymbols. Wartford, England: Chiltern Con-sortium.
   Google Scholar
• Cregan, A., & Lloyd, L. L. (1990). Sigsymbols. Wauconda, IL: Don Johnston Developmental Equipment.
   Google Scholar
• Deely, J. (1990). Basics of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana Uni-versity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eco, U. (1976). A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eco, U. (1984). Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett, R. P. (1984). The semiotics of culture and language. London: Frances Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Feibleman, J. K. (1969). An introduction to the philosophy of Charles S. Peirce. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frank, L. K. (1966). The world as a communication network. In G. Kepes (Ed.), Sign, image, and symbol (pp. 1–14). New York: George Braziller.
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, D. R., & Lloyd, L. L. (1987). A study of physical charac-teristics of a graphic symbol system as predictors of perceived complexity. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3,26–35.
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, D. R., Lloyd, L. L., & Schlosser, R. W. (1992). The further development of an augmentative and alternative communica-tion symbol taxonomy. Augmentative and Alternative Commu-nication, 8, 67–73.
   Google Scholar
• Goudge, T. A. (1950). The thought of C. S. Peirce. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1976). What is universal pragmatics. In J. Haber-mas (Ed.), Communication and the evolution of society (pp. 1–68). Toronto: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herrero, A. (1988). Semiotica y cretividad. (Semiotics and crea-tivity). Madrid: Palas Atenea.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, P. A., & Cregan, A. (1986). Sign and symbol: Communi-cation for mentally handicapped people. London: Croom Helm.
   Google Scholar
• Knapp, M. (1976). Essentials of nonverbal communication. Lon-don: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Korac, N. (1988). Functional, cognitive and semiotic factors in the development of audiovisual comprehension. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 36, 67–91.
   Google Scholar
• Leach, E. (1976). Culture and communication. Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J. C. (1989). Towards a definition of communicative com-petence for individuals using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Augmentative and Alternative Com-munication, 5, 137–144.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J. C., & Lindsay, P. (1991). Cognitive science and augmen-tative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alter-native Communication, 7, 186–203.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd, L. L., & Blischak, D. M. (1992). AAC terminology policy and issues update. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 104–109.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd, L. L., & Fuller, D. R. (1986). Toward an augmentative and alternative communication symbol taxonomy: Subordinate classifications. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2, 165–171.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd, L. L., & Fuller, D. R. (1990). The role of iconicity in augmentative and alternative communication symbol learning. In W. I. Fraser (Ed.), Key issues in mental retardation research (pp. 295–306). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd, L. L., & Kangas, K. A. (1988). AAC terminology policy and issues. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 4, 54–57.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd, L. L., & Kangas, K. A. (1990). AAC terminology policy and issues update. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 4, 167–170.
   Google Scholar
• Lloyd, L. L., Quist, R. D., & Windsor, J. (1990). A proposed AAC model. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 6, 172–183.
   Google Scholar
• Maxwell, J. A. (1960). Hobo symbology. In E. Whitney (Ed.), Symbology (pp. 30–94). New York: Hastings House.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, W. T. (1986). Icon°logy: Image, text, ideology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Modley, R. (1966). Graphic symbols for world-wide communica-tion. In G. Kepes (Ed.), Sign, image, and symbol (pp. 108–125). New York: George Braziller.
   Google Scholar
• Olmstead, W. T. (1991). Comprehensibility estimates of symbols for public information signs in health care facilities. M.S.D. Thesis, Arizona State University.
   Google Scholar
• Pavio, A. (1978). On exploring visual knowledge. In I. E. Sigel (Ed.), Visual learning, thinking and, communication. San Di-ego: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pavio, A. (1986). Mental representation: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Petterson, R., & Forlag, E. (1988). Verbal/visual literacies: Their languaging relationships. Reading Psychology, 9, 295–314.
   Google Scholar
• Rauch, F., & Carr, D. (1980). The signifying animal. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raghavendra, P., & Fristoe, M. (1990). A spinach with aV on it: What 3-year-olds see in standard and enhanced Blissymbols. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 149–159.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saint-Marti, M. (1990). Semiotics of visual communication. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Serrano, S. (1987). La Semiotica. (Semiotics). Madrid: Montesi-nos.
   Google Scholar
• Shaumyan, S. (1987). A semiotic theory of language. Bloom-ington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sigel, I. E. (1978). The development of pictorial comprehension. In I. E. Sigel (Ed.), Visual learning, thinking, and communica-tion. San Diego: Academic Press Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Soto, G., & Merrell, F. (1992). A semiotic analysis of augmenta-tive and alternative communication systems. Semiotica, sub-mitted.
   Google Scholar
• Sperber, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stokoe, W. C. (1972). Semiotics and human sign languages. Paris: Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• Suhor, C., & Little, D. (1988). Visual literacy and print literacy. Reading Psychology, 9, 469–481.
   Google Scholar
• Vanderheiden, G. C., & Lloyd, L. L. (1986). Nonspeech modes and systems. In S. W. Blackstone (Ed.), Augmentative and alternative communication (pp. 49–61). Rockville, MD: Ameri-can Speech Language and Hearing Association.
   Google Scholar
• von Bertalanffy, L. (1965). On the definition of the symbol. In J. R. Royce (Ed.), Psychology and the symbol (pp. 27–72). New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Werner, H., & Kaplan, B. (1963). Symbol formation. New York: Clark University Press.
   Google Scholar