Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
| Content Provider | Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) |
|---|---|
| Author | Shannon Mackenzie Matthew Walenski Tracy Love Heather Harris Wright |
| Abstract | We describe two experiments investigating the comprehension of different types of Wh-questions in neurotypical adults (Experiment 1) and adults with Broca's aphasia (Experiment 2). Consider as examples: Two mailmen and a fireman got into a fight yesterday afternoon. 1a. Who pushed the fireman yesterday afternoon? – Subject-extracted Who 1b. Who did the fireman push ___ yesterday afternoon? – Object-extracted Who 2a. Which mailman pushed the fireman yesterday afternoon? – Subject-extracted Which 2b. Which mailman did the fireman push ___ yesterday afternoon? – Object-extracted Which There is evidence from the linguistic and psycholinguistic literatures that suggest Which-questions are more difficult to understand than Who/What-questions and within those, that object-extracted are more difficult than subject-extracted. We used a unique eye tracking-while listening method where listeners were presented with sentences like (1) and (2) above while gazing at a three-figure picture (e.g., a picture of a mailman pushing a fireman who is pushing another mailman); we measured gazes to the referents in the pictures across the time-course of the sentences, and also collected accuracy and response time data to answer the questions (by button press). We examined four specific hypotheses: Discourse, Memory Retrieval, Word Order, and Intervener. The Discourse hypothesis suggests that Which-questions should be more difficult to process than Who-questions because the former is required to refer to an individual taken from a set of entities previously mentioned in the discourse (Donkers & Stowe, 2006; Shapiro, 2000). The Memory Retrieval hypothesis makes the opposite claim; Which-questions, unlike Who-questions, contain specific information in the Wh-phrase that should speed memory retrieval (Hofmeister, 2007). The Word Order hypothesis suggests that, regardless of question type (Which or Who), object-extracted questions should be more difficult to understand than subject-extracted questions because the former are in non-canonical word order. Finally, the Intervener hypothesis suggests that only object-extracted Which-questions should be problematic, particularly for those participants with language disorders (e.g., Friedmann & Novogrodsky, 2011). An intervener is an NP that has similar properties to other NPs in the sentence, and thus results in similarity-based interference. Only object-extracted Which-questions contain an intervener (e.g., the fireman in (2b), which interferes with the chain consisting of the displaced Which-phrase, Which mailman, and its direct object gap occurring after the verb). Briefly here, only the Intervener Hypothesis was supported by our rich data set, and this was observed unambiguously for our participants with Broca's aphasia. As an example (see Figure 1), we observed significantly greater proportion of gazes to the incorrect referent (i.e., the intervening NP) in the object-extracted Which- relative to Who-questions beginning in the Verb-gap time window and extending throughout the remainder of the sentence and into the response period following the sentence. These patterns indicate lasting similarity-based interference effects during real-time sentence processing. The implications of our findings to extant accounts of sentence processing disruptions will be discussed, including accounts that root sentence comprehension impairments to memory-based interference. |
| e-ISSN | 16641078 |
| DOI | 10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2014.64.00080 |
| Journal | Frontiers in Psychology |
| Volume Number | 5 |
| Language | English |
| Publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| Publisher Date | 2014-04-01 |
| Publisher Place | Switzerland |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Subject Keyword | Psychology Syntax Eye-tracking Sentence Processing Neurolinguistics Broca's Aphasia |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
National Digital Library of India (NDLI) is a virtual repository of learning resources which is not just a repository with search/browse facilities but provides a host of services for the learner community. It is sponsored and mentored by Ministry of Education, Government of India, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT). Filtered and federated searching is employed to facilitate focused searching so that learners can find the right resource with least effort and in minimum time. NDLI provides user group-specific services such as Examination Preparatory for School and College students and job aspirants. Services for Researchers and general learners are also provided. NDLI is designed to hold content of any language and provides interface support for 10 most widely used Indian languages. It is built to provide support for all academic levels including researchers and life-long learners, all disciplines, all popular forms of access devices and differently-abled learners. It is designed to enable people to learn and prepare from best practices from all over the world and to facilitate researchers to perform inter-linked exploration from multiple sources. It is developed, operated and maintained from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.
Learn more about this project from here.
NDLI is a conglomeration of freely available or institutionally contributed or donated or publisher managed contents. Almost all these contents are hosted and accessed from respective sources. The responsibility for authenticity, relevance, completeness, accuracy, reliability and suitability of these contents rests with the respective organization and NDLI has no responsibility or liability for these. Every effort is made to keep the NDLI portal up and running smoothly unless there are some unavoidable technical issues.
Ministry of Education, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), has sponsored and funded the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) project.
| Sl. | Authority | Responsibilities | Communication Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education |
Sanctioning Authority | https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives |
| 2 | Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project | https://www.iitkgp.ac.in |
| 3 | National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur | The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project | Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in |
| 4 | Project PI / Joint PI | Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project |
Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon |
| 5 | Website/Portal (Helpdesk) | Queries regarding NDLI and its services | support@ndl.gov.in |
| 6 | Contents and Copyright Issues | Queries related to content curation and copyright issues | content@ndl.gov.in |
| 7 | National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club) | Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach | clubsupport@ndl.gov.in |
| 8 | Digital Preservation Centre (DPC) | Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books | dpc@ndl.gov.in |
| 9 | IDR Setup or Support | Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops | idr@ndl.gov.in |
|
Loading...
|