Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author or Editor: Bence Kas x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search

Az összetett mondatok feldolgozására vonatkozó hipotézisek egyrészt nem különíthetőek el a hagyományosan vizsgált angolban, másrészt nem alkalmazhatóak közvetlenül tipológiailag eltérő nyelvekre. Tanulmányunk fő kérdései 1. a szerkezeti tényezőkkel összefüggő nyelvfüggetlen vagy specifikus feldolgozási nehézségekre, 2. a nyelvfejlődési zavarra jellemző profilbeli eltérésekre, illetve 3. a mondatmegértési teljesítmény és az általános információfeldolgozási képességek kapcsolatára irányultak. 12 fő iskoláskorú, nyelvfejlődési zavart mutató (NyZ), illetve hozzájuk receptívszókincs-pontszámban illesztett tipikus fejlődésű (TF) gyereket vizsgáltunk. A különböző vonatkozósszerkezetek megértését mondatlejátszási helyzetben teszteltük. A statisztikai elemzés szignifikáns csoport- és szerkezeti hatásokat jelzett, többek közt a főmondat megszakítottsága, a fej szerepe és a perspektívaváltáshatását. A mondattípusok viszonylagos nehézsége az OS > SS > OO > SOsorrendet mutatta. Miután ugyanazok a mondatszerkezetek bizonyultak nehezebbnek mindkét csoportszámára, eredményeink a nyelvfejlődési zavar nem reprezentációs elméleteit támogatják.A visszafelé számterjedelmet mint kovariánst tartalmazó statisztikai elemzés nem jelzett szerkezeti hatásokat, ami arra utalhat, hogy a szerkezetek közti bonyolultságbeli eltérések valójában a verbális munkamemória és a végrehajtó funkciók terhelésében jelentkez'

Restricted access

Focus sentences in Hungarian are claimed to express exhaustive identification by a syntactic-semantic operator in standard generative descriptions, but there are also arguments against this view. Our study aimed to gather empirical evidence for the exhaustive interpretation of focus sentences and to explore developmental changes with age. Two groups of children (mean ages 6;3 and 10;8 years) and a group of adults participated in a picture-sentence verification task that systematically varied sentence and context types. Adults showed a marked sensitivity for focus as a group, but focus sensitivity was not evident in either group of children. All participant groups were remarkably inconsistent in distinguishing neutral and focus sentences. In spite of the measurable sensitivity to focus in adults, the pattern of the results contradicts the predictions of the syntactic-semantic operator model concerning exhaustive interpretation, and urges further research.

Full access

In a previous study of language production, a group of Hungarian-speaking children with language impairment (LI) committed a larger number of errors than typically developing peers on verb inflections that mark person, number, tense, and definiteness (Lukács et al. 2009b). However, the error forms produced often differed from the correct form by only a single dimension (e.g., person, number, tense, or definiteness) with no single dimension proving consistently problematic. In the present study, we sought to determine whether a similar pattern applied to the children’s understanding of verb inflections, as reflected in a grammaticality judgment task. We compared the performance of 17 Hungarian-speaking children with language impairment (LI) between ages 8;0 and 11;9 with typically developing children between 6;10 and 11;1 years individually matched on receptive vocabulary raw scores (VC) and also to a control group of children matched on chronological age (AC; between 8;1–12;1). We obtained grammaticality judgments for 68 sentences, including 56 ill-formed sentences that contained a single error of person, number, tense, definiteness, or morphophonology. As the AC group performed at ceiling, the analysis focused on comparisons between the LI and VC groups. Besides comparing accuracy scores in the two groups, we tested how well performance could be predicted by a test of grammatical comprehension (TROG) and a measure of nonword repetition ability obtained prior to the administration of the grammaticality judgment task. There were no significant group differences in the accuracy of grammaticality judgments. Both groups recognized well-formed sentences, and agreement errors of number, person or definiteness, significantly more accurately than tense or morphophonological errors. Although there was no difference between performance levels of the LI and the VC groups, we found differences between the two groups in the types of measures that were most closely tied to performance on the grammaticality judgment task. Performance in the LI group was strongly associated with nonword repetition span, while in the VC group, TROG performance was associated with grammaticality judgment performance. These results suggest that the same level and pattern of performance can be supported by different background mechanisms in typical and atypical language development.

Full access
Magyar Pszichológiai Szemle
Authors: Bence Kas, Ágnes Lukács, Csaba Pléh, and Zoltán Jakab

GósyMária: Pszicholingvisztika (Kas Bence –Lukács Ágnes)   577Traxler, MatthewJ. –Gernsbacher, MortonA_2

Restricted access