Semantic processing of adjectives and nouns in American Sign Language: effects of reference ambiguity and word order across development.

IF 1.3 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science Pub Date : 2019-11-01 Epub Date: 2019-07-11 DOI:10.1007/s41809-019-00024-6
Anne Wienholz, Amy M Lieberman
{"title":"Semantic processing of adjectives and nouns in American Sign Language: effects of reference ambiguity and word order across development.","authors":"Anne Wienholz,&nbsp;Amy M Lieberman","doi":"10.1007/s41809-019-00024-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When processing spoken language sentences, listeners continuously make and revise predictions about the upcoming linguistic signal. In contrast, during comprehension of American Sign Language (ASL), signers must simultaneously attend to the unfolding linguistic signal and the surrounding scene via the visual modality. This may affect how signers activate potential lexical candidates and allocate visual attention as a sentence unfolds. To determine how signers resolve referential ambiguity during real-time comprehension of ASL adjectives and nouns, we presented deaf adults (n = 18, 19-61 years) and deaf children (n = 20, 4-8 years) with videos of ASL sentences in a visual world paradigm. Sentences had either an adjective-noun (\"SEE YELLOW WHAT? FLOWER\") or a noun-adjective (\"SEE FLOWER WHICH? YELLOW\") structure. The degree of ambiguity in the visual scene was manipulated at the adjective and noun levels (i.e., including one or more yellow items and one or more flowers in the visual array). We investigated effects of ambiguity and word order on target looking at early and late points in the sentence. Analysis revealed that adults and children made anticipatory looks to a target when it could be identified early in the sentence. Further, signers looked more to potential lexical candidates than to unrelated competitors in the early window, and more to matched than unrelated competitors in the late window. Children's gaze patterns largely aligned with those of adults with some divergence. Together, these findings suggest that signers allocate referential attention strategically based on the amount and type of ambiguity at different points in the sentence when processing adjectives and nouns in ASL.</p>","PeriodicalId":55640,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science","volume":"3 2","pages":"217-234"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s41809-019-00024-6","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41809-019-00024-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/7/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

When processing spoken language sentences, listeners continuously make and revise predictions about the upcoming linguistic signal. In contrast, during comprehension of American Sign Language (ASL), signers must simultaneously attend to the unfolding linguistic signal and the surrounding scene via the visual modality. This may affect how signers activate potential lexical candidates and allocate visual attention as a sentence unfolds. To determine how signers resolve referential ambiguity during real-time comprehension of ASL adjectives and nouns, we presented deaf adults (n = 18, 19-61 years) and deaf children (n = 20, 4-8 years) with videos of ASL sentences in a visual world paradigm. Sentences had either an adjective-noun ("SEE YELLOW WHAT? FLOWER") or a noun-adjective ("SEE FLOWER WHICH? YELLOW") structure. The degree of ambiguity in the visual scene was manipulated at the adjective and noun levels (i.e., including one or more yellow items and one or more flowers in the visual array). We investigated effects of ambiguity and word order on target looking at early and late points in the sentence. Analysis revealed that adults and children made anticipatory looks to a target when it could be identified early in the sentence. Further, signers looked more to potential lexical candidates than to unrelated competitors in the early window, and more to matched than unrelated competitors in the late window. Children's gaze patterns largely aligned with those of adults with some divergence. Together, these findings suggest that signers allocate referential attention strategically based on the amount and type of ambiguity at different points in the sentence when processing adjectives and nouns in ASL.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国手语中形容词和名词的语义加工:指称歧义和语序在发展中的影响
在处理口语句子时,听者不断地对即将到来的语言信号做出和修改预测。相反,在美国手语的理解过程中,手语使用者必须通过视觉模态同时关注展开的语言信号和周围的场景。这可能会影响手语者如何激活潜在的词汇候选词,以及如何在句子展开时分配视觉注意力。为了确定手语使用者在实时理解美国手语形容词和名词时如何解决指称歧义,我们向聋人成人(n = 18,19 -61岁)和聋人儿童(n = 20,4 -8岁)提供了视觉世界范式下的美国手语句子视频。句子要么是形容词+名词(“SEE YELLOW WHAT?”花”)或名形容词(参见FLOWER WHICH?黄”)结构。视觉场景的模糊程度在形容词和名词水平上被操纵(即,在视觉阵列中包括一个或多个黄色物品和一个或多个花朵)。我们研究了歧义和语序对目标人看句子前后点的影响。分析显示,当一个目标在句子的早期可以被识别出来时,成人和儿童都会对这个目标产生预期的目光。此外,在早期窗口中,手语者更多地关注潜在的候选词汇,而不是不相关的竞争对手;在后期窗口中,他们更多地关注匹配的词汇,而不是不相关的竞争对手。儿童的注视模式与成人基本一致,但存在一些差异。综上所述,这些发现表明,手语使用者在处理形容词和名词时,会根据句子中不同位置歧义的数量和类型,有策略地分配参考注意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science
Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
22
期刊最新文献
The effect of bilingualism and multicultural experience on social-cognitive processing: a meta-analytic review Interference of the inclusive language in the creation of the memory trace during the reading comprehension of texts Distributed embodiment of the Persian term dæqi:qæn in forward gestures The effect of linguistic medium on metaphor directionality: written standard Arabic versus oral colloquial Arabic Decoding orthography vs. mastering strategy: an exploratory study finds better opposite-orientation task transfer for monoliterates than for biliterates
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1