首页> 外文期刊>Aphasiology >Chance in agrammatic sentence comprehension: What does it really mean? Evidence from eye movements of German agrammatic aphasic patients
【24h】

Chance in agrammatic sentence comprehension: What does it really mean? Evidence from eye movements of German agrammatic aphasic patients

机译:语法理解的机会:这实际上是什么意思?来自德国语法失语症患者眼球运动的证据

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: In addition to the canonical subject-verb-object (SVO) word order, German also allows for non-canonical order (OVS), and the case-marking system supports thematic role interpretation. Previous eye-tracking studies (Kamide et al., 2003; Knoeferle, 2007) have shown that unambiguous case information in non-canonical sentences is processed incrementally. For individuals with agrammatic aphasia, comprehension of non-canonical sentences is at chance level (Burchert et al, 2003). The trace deletion hypothesis (Grodzinsky 1995, 2000) claims that this is due to structural impairments in syntactic representations, which force the individual with aphasia (IWA) to apply a guessing strategy. However, recent studies investigating online sentence processing in aphasia (Caplan et al., 2007; Dickey et al., 2007) found that divergences exist in IWAs' sentence-processing routines depending on whether they comprehended non-canonical sentences correctly or not, pointing rather to a processing deficit explanation.Aims: The aim of the current study was to investigate agrammatic IWAs' online and offline sentence comprehension simultaneously in order to reveal what online sentence-processing strategies they rely on and how these differ from controls' processing routines. We further asked whether IWAs' offline chance performance for non-canonical sentences does indeed result from guessing.Methods & Procedures: We used the visual-world paradigm and measured eye movements (as an index of online sentence processing) of controls (N = 8) and individuals with aphasia (N = 7) during a sentence-picture matching task. Additional offline measures were accuracy and reaction times.Outcomes & Results: While the offline accuracy results corresponded to the pattern predicted by the TDH, IWAs' eye movements revealed systematic differences depending on the response accuracy.Conclusions: These findings constitute evidence against attributing IWAs' chance performance for non-canonical structures...
机译:背景:除了规范的主语-动词-宾语(SVO)单词顺序外,德语还允许非规范的顺序(OVS),并且案例标记系统还支持主题角色解释。以前的眼动研究(Kamide等,2003; Knoeferle,2007)表明,非规范句子中明确的案例信息是逐步处理的。对于具有语法失语症的人,对非规范句子的理解是偶然的(Burchert等,2003)。痕迹删除假说(Grodzinsky 1995,2000)声称,这是由于句法表征中的结构性损伤,这迫使患有失语症的个体(IWA)采用猜测策略。但是,最近对失语症的在线句子处理进行调查的研究(Caplan等,2007; Dickey等,2007)发现,IWA的句子处理例程中存在分歧,这取决于它们是否正确理解了非规范句子,指出目的:本研究的目的是同时研究语法IWA的在线和离线句子理解,以揭示他们所依赖的在线句子处理策略以及这些策略与控件处理例程的区别。我们进一步询问是否IWA的非典型句子的离线机会表现确实是由猜测得出的。方法与步骤:我们使用视觉世界范式并测量控件的眼球运动(作为在线句子处理的指标)(N = 8) )和句子图片匹配任务中失语症(N = 7)的个人。其他离线指标包括准确性和反应时间。结果与结果:虽然离线准确性结果与TDH预测的模式相对应,但IWA的眼球运动显示出系统的差异,具体取决于响应准确性。结论:这些发现构成了对IWA归因的证据。非规范结构的机会表现...

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