首页> 外文期刊>Cognition: International Journal of Cognitive Psychology >Bodies and codas or core syllables plus appendices? Evidence for a developmental theory of subsyllabic division preference
【24h】

Bodies and codas or core syllables plus appendices? Evidence for a developmental theory of subsyllabic division preference

机译:身体和尾声还是核心音节加上附录?亚音节划分偏向发展理论的证据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Two experiments examining the subsyllabic division behaviors of Chinese-speaking children learning English as a foreign language (EFL) are reported. In Experiment 1, target phonemes of monosyllabic English nonwords were varied in phonotactic context (e.g., (C)VC vs. (C)CVC), marginality (e.g., (C)CVC vs. C(C)VC), and/or position (e.g., (C)VC vs. CV(C)) in phoneme deletion and isolation tasks, with confounds such as global similarity, vowel length, and targets' sonority controlled. The fourth graders found the initial obstruent more difficult to isolate when it constituted the onset itself, i.e., (C)VC, than when it was part of a clustered onset, i.e., (C)CVC; no such difference was observed (non)word-finally, however. The results thus failed to support a subsyllabic preference for either onsets and rimes or bodies and codas. In Experiment 2, 49 second graders were tested on two other sets of phoneme awareness tasks and similar results were obtained. Items of one task were adapted from Hulme et al. (2002), in which the English-speaking first graders found the initial phoneme of a clustered onset, i.e., (C)CVC, more difficult to delete than the cluster as a whole, i.e., (CC)VC. The opposite patterns were observed with the Chinese EFL learners in Experiment 2, who found instead the initial consonant easier to remove. Taken together, the results suggested that Chinese-speaking EFL children process an English syllable as a linear combination of an intact core syllable (i.e., CV) plus its appendices. In both experiments, moreover, only performance in segmenting core syllable, but not that of segmenting appendices from the core syllable, predicted decoding success, a pattern again opposite to that of Hulme et al. (2002). The seemingly conflicting results were nevertheless consistent with a general developmental account of intra-syllabic division preference.
机译:报告了两个实验,研究了学习英语作为外语(EFL)的华语儿童的音节分隔行为。在实验1中,单音节英语非单词的目标音素在变音符环境中(例如(C)VC与(C)CVC),边际性(例如(C)CVC与C(C)VC)和/或音素删除和隔离任务中的位置(例如(C)VC与CV(C)),并具有诸如全局相似度,元音长度和目标音调受控等混杂因素。四年级生发现,最初的障碍物在构成发作本身即(C)VC时比在成簇发作(C)CVC中更难分离。最终,未观察到(非)单词的这种差异。因此,结果未能支持亚音节偏爱的发作和边缘,身体和尾气。在实验2中,对49位二年级学生进行了另外两组音素意识任务测试,并获得了相似的结果。一项任务的内容改编自Hulme等人。 (2002),其中说英语的一年级学生发现了一个群集发作的初始音素,即(C)CVC,比整个群集,即(CC)VC更难删除。在实验2中,中国EFL学习者观察到了相反的模式,他们发现初始辅音更容易去除。两者合计,结果表明,讲华语的EFL儿童将英语音节作为完整核心音节(即CV)及其附录的线性组合。此外,在两个实验中,只有在分割核心音节时的性能,而不是从核心音节中分割附件的性能,才能预测解码成功,这种模式与Hulme等人的相反。 (2002)。然而,看似矛盾的结果与音节内划分偏好的一般发展解释是一致的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号