CSLISC. S. Lewis and Inklings Society (Oklahoma City, OK)
Copyright 1988-2018 AcronymFinder.com, All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
Carpenter, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the government did not conduct a Fourth Amendment search when it obtained CSLI because the information constituted business records.
The first rationale behind the Carpenter decision was that CSLI could not be evaluated under Jones because CSLI could not pinpoint the exact location of the user.
The second rationale in Carpenter was that the user could not have a reasonable expectation of privacy because CSLI qualified as business records held by a third party.
GrahamThe court held that cell phone users do not have Fourth Amendment protections over their CSLI because the third-party doctrine still applies when the information is "'revealed' to a third party ...
Nonetheless, the court in Graham specified that CSLI falls directly under the ambit of the third-party doctrine because, by connecting to a cell tower to utilize cell phone services, the users "convey" their location to their providers whenever they connect to the network.
The defendants in Graham also unsuccessfully argued that CSLI deserves Fourth Amendment protections.
Similarly, the CSLI children in the study reported in Stokes and Fletcher (2000) appear to prefer to use zo2, a completive marker, with accomplishment or achievement verbs.
One interpretation of this behavior is that it indicates that the grammatical status of these forms has not yet been recognized by the younger Mandarin-speaking children or the CSLI children.
It seems that the treatment by CSLI children of aspect markers as lexical could be subsumed under either the morphological richness or grammar deficit account.
In this study we compare a somewhat older group of CSLI children than in our previous report (Stokes and Fletcher 2000) with an age-matched CND group, for two reasons.
We expect the CSLI children to perform at the same level as the CTD children in the sentence-repetition task.
They did differ for haa5 ([V.sup.2] = 8.30, p < 0.01),4 with only seven of the thirteen CSLI children using haa5, compared with all fourteen of the CND group, and mean use of 0.75 and 1.00 respectively.