What matters in processing German object relative clauses in aphasia – timing or morpho-syntactic cues?
What matters in processing German object relative clauses in aphasia – timing or morpho-syntactic cues?
复制标题
在失语症中处理德语宾语关系从句时，什么最重要——时间或形态句法线索？
DOI：
10.1080/02687038.2019.1645290
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Stadie
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Burchert;Stadie
研究背景失语症患者在使用形态句法线索判断非规范句子（如宾语关系从句）的意义时存在困难，这是一个公认的发现。而非脑损伤的说话者可以处理通过明确的情况标记比数字标记更容易消除歧义的ORCs（即主谓一致），摘要关于格和数字标记对失语症患者句子加工的不同影响，目前仍存在很大的争议，本研究的目的是探讨格和数字标记作为句子理解线索的使用情况，并检验相对化的预测结果。最小化方法。在这个帐户中，在主题和对象的数量规格的差异被假定为促进ORC处理失语症，而案件是不是.Methods & ProceduresCombining的视觉世界的眼跟踪方法与听觉参考识别任务，我们测量离线和在线句子处理在德语失语症的个人和一组控制参与者。ORCs是通过格或数标记来消除歧义的，格出现在不同的消歧点：格标记在（1）关系代词，（2）下面的名词短语，或（3）在句末动词上的数标记。因此，我们能够控制的主题和对象在ORCs的数量相异性，与数量规格是类似的情况下，标记ORCs和不同的数字标记ORC.Outcome & ResultsWe发现，这两个参与者组表现出一般的处理优势的情况下，在数字消歧的ORCs。此外，在句子中的不同位置消歧的情况下标记的ORC进行了处理类似的准确性，反应时间或在线processingspeeds.ConclusionsThese结果支持的假设，情况下标记可以更成功地用于推导句子的意义相比，数字标记-无论时间的消歧。未来的研究还需要进一步理清格和数在极小值计算中的地位。
BackgroundIt is a well-established finding that individuals with aphasia have difficulties in using morpho-syntactic cues to determine the meaning of non-canonical sentences, such as object relative clauses (ORCs). While non-brain-damaged speakers can process ORCs disambiguated through unambiguous case marking more easily than number marking (i.e. subject-verb agreement), there is still much debate concerning the varying impact of case and number cues on sentence processing in aphasia.AimsThe objective of the present study is to investigate the use of case and number marking as cues to sentence interpretation and to test the predictions of the Relativized Minimality approach. Within this account, dissimilarity in the number specification of the subject and object is assumed to facilitate ORC processing in aphasia, while case is not.Methods & ProceduresCombining the visual-world eye-tracking methodology with an auditory referent-identification task, we measured offline and online sentence processing in German-speaking individuals with aphasia and in a group of control participants. ORCs were disambiguated through case or number marking, whereby case occurred at different points of disambiguation: case marking at (1) the relative pronoun, (2) the following noun phrase, or (3) number marking on the sentence-final verb. Thereby, we were able to control for number dissimilarity of the subject and object in ORCs, with number specification being similar in case-marked ORCs and dissimilar in number-marked ORCs.Outcome & ResultsWe found that both participant groups exhibit a general processing advantage for case- over number-disambiguated ORCs. Moreover, case-marked ORCs disambiguated at different positions within the sentence were processed similarly in term of accuracy, reaction times or online processing speed.ConclusionsThese results support the assumption that case marking can be used more successfully to derive sentence meaning as compared to number marking – regardless of the timing of disambiguation. Future research is needed to further disentangle the status of case and number in the computation of Minimality.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.1
作者：
Adani, Flavia;van der Lely, Heather K. J.;Forgiarini, Matteo;Guasti, Maria Teresa
通讯作者：
Guasti, Maria Teresa
测试任意主语代词对关系从句理解的影响：一项针对希伯来语儿童的研究
影响因子：
2.2
作者：
Yair Haendler;F. Adani
通讯作者：
F. Adani
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Barr, Dale J.
通讯作者：
Barr, Dale J.
视觉和语言对句子理解的影响：视觉世界研究
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
Jincho;N.;Oishi;H.;& Mazuka;R.
通讯作者：
R.
影响因子：
1.1
作者：
Grillo, Nino
通讯作者：
Grillo, Nino