Search in linguistic processing

2011 ◽  
pp. 149-180
Author(s):  
Joris Bleys ◽  
Kevin Stadler ◽  
Joachim De Beule
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Processing

Sentence Structures of Trainable and Educable Mentally Retarded Subjects

1978 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 722-731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn S. Bliss ◽  
Doris V. Allen ◽  
Georgia Walker
Keyword(s):  
Mentally Retarded ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
Completion Task ◽  
Mentally Retarded Children ◽  
Educable Mentally Retarded ◽  
Story Completion ◽  
Grammatical Structures ◽  
Trainable Mentally Retarded

Educable and trainable mentally retarded children were administered a story completion task that elicits 14 grammatical structures. There were more correct responses from educable than from trainable mentally retarded children. Both groups found imperatives easiest, and future, embedded, and double-adjectival structures most difficult. The children classed as educable produced more correct responses than those termed trainable for declarative, question, and single-adjectival structures. The cognitive and linguistic processing of both groups is discussed as are the implications for language remediation.

scholarly journals No Language-Specific Activation during Linguistic Processing of Observed Actions

PLoS ONE ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (9) ◽  
pp. e891 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingo G. Meister ◽  
Marco Iacoboni
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Processing

Why subtitle speed matters: Evidence from word skipping and rereading

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Jan-Louis Kruger ◽  
Natalia Wisniewska ◽  
Sixin Liao
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Lexical Processing ◽  
Situation Model ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
Reading Behavior ◽  
New Findings ◽  
Word Skipping

Abstract High subtitle speed undoubtedly impacts the viewer experience. However, little is known about how fast subtitles might impact the reading of individual words. This article presents new findings on the effect of subtitle speed on viewers’ reading behavior using word-based eye-tracking measures with specific attention to word skipping and rereading. In multimodal reading situations such as reading subtitles in video, rereading allows people to correct for oculomotor error or comprehension failure during linguistic processing or integrate words with elements of the image to build a situation model of the video. However, the opportunity to reread words, to read the majority of the words in the subtitle and to read subtitles to completion, is likely to be compromised when subtitles are too fast. Participants watched videos with subtitles at 12, 20, and 28 characters per second (cps) while their eye movements were recorded. It was found that comprehension declined as speed increased. Eye movement records also showed that faster subtitles resulted in more incomplete reading of subtitles. Furthermore, increased speed also caused fewer words to be reread following both horizontal eye movements (likely resulting in reduced lexical processing) and vertical eye movements (which would likely reduce higher-level comprehension and integration).

scholarly journals Function of the left planum temporale in auditory and linguistic processing

Brain ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 119 (4) ◽  
pp. 1239-1247 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. Binder ◽  
J. A. Frost ◽  
T. A. Hammeke ◽  
S. M. Rao ◽  
R. W. Cox
Keyword(s):  
Planum Temporale ◽  
Linguistic Processing

scholarly journals Electrophysiological correlates of rapid auditory and linguistic processing in adolescents with specific language impairment

2010 ◽  
Vol 115 (3) ◽  
pp. 162-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Weber-Fox ◽  
Laurence B. Leonard ◽  
Amanda Hampton Wray ◽  
J. Bruce Tomblin
Keyword(s):  
Language Impairment ◽  
Specific Language Impairment ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
Specific Language

scholarly journals Where the action could be: Speakers look at graspable objects and meaningful scene regions when describing potential actions

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gwendolyn L Rehrig ◽  
Candace Elise Peacock ◽  
Taylor Hayes ◽  
Fernanda Ferreira ◽  
John M. Henderson
Keyword(s):  
Visual Attention ◽  
Real World ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Native English Speakers ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
General Meaning ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Better Than

The world is visually complex, yet we can efficiently describe it by extracting the information that is most relevant to convey. How do the properties of real-world scenes help us decide where to look and what to say? Image salience has been the dominant explanation for what drives visual attention and production as we describe displays, but new evidence shows scene meaning predicts attention better than image salience. Here we investigated the relevance of one aspect of meaning, graspability (the grasping interactions objects in the scene afford), given that affordances have been implicated in both visual and linguistic processing. We quantified image salience, meaning, and graspability for real-world scenes. In three eyetracking experiments, native English speakers described possible actions that could be carried out in a scene. We hypothesized that graspability would preferentially guide attention due to its task-relevance. In two experiments using stimuli from a previous study, meaning explained visual attention better than graspability or salience did, and graspability explained attention better than salience. In a third experiment we quantified image salience, meaning, graspability, and reach-weighted graspability for scenes that depicted reachable spaces containing graspable objects. Graspability and meaning explained attention equally well in the third experiment, and both explained attention better than salience. We conclude that speakers use object graspability to allocate attention to plan descriptions when scenes depict graspable objects within reach, and otherwise rely more on general meaning. The results shed light on what aspects of meaning guide attention during scene viewing in language production tasks.

A Dynamical, Self-Organized View of the Context for Linguistic Performance

2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-86
Author(s):  
Raymond W. Gibbs, Jr.
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Science ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Human Cognition ◽  
Linguistic Processing ◽  
Linguistic Performance ◽  
Self Organized ◽  
Temporal Process ◽  
The World ◽  
Organizational View

Most everyone agrees that context is critical to the pragmatic interpretation of speakers’ utterances. But the enduring debate within cognitive science concerns when context has its influence in shaping people’s interpretations of what speakers imply by what they say. Some scholars maintain that context is only referred to after some initial linguistic analysis of an utterance has been performed, with other scholars arguing that context is present at all stages of immediate linguistic processing. Empirical research on this debate is, in my view, hopelessly deadlocked. My goal in this article is to advance a framework for thinking about the context for linguistic performance that conceives of human cognition and language use in terms of dynamical, self-organized processes. A self-organizational view of the context for linguistic performance demands that we acknowledge the multiple, interacting constraints which create, or soft-assemble, any specific moment of pragmatic experience. Pragmatic action and understanding is not producing or recovering a “meaning” but a continuously unfolding temporal process of the person adapting and orienting to the world. I discuss the implications of this view for the study of pragmatic meaning in discourse.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document