No description available.

No description available.

Although there are many studies about the relationship between grammar and lexicon, there is a lack of studies examining the relationship between the growth of compound words and complex sentences. This study examined the relationship between compound words at the lexical level, and complex sentences, auxiliaries and modals, and coordinated subjects/objects at the grammatical level, for both brain-injured and typically developing children between the ages 4 and 6. For 10 typically developing children, 3091 utterances, and for 18 brain-injured children, 6460 utterances were examined. The results revealed that both groups showed a significant increase in the use of compound words and coordinated clauses. The growth of auxiliary and modal verbs is significant only for typically developing children and the growth of subordinate clauses is significant just for brain injured children. Moreover, there is an interaction between the growth of coordinate clauses and compound words just for brain injured children.

Although there are many studies about the relationship between grammar and lexicon, there is a lack of studies examining the relationship between the growth of compound words and complex sentences. This study examined the relationship between compound words at the lexical level, and complex sentences, auxiliaries and modals, and coordinated subjects/objects at the grammatical level, for both brain-injured and typically developing children between the ages 4 and 6. For 10 typically developing children, 3091 utterances, and for 18 brain-injured children, 6460 utterances were examined. The results revealed that both groups showed a significant increase in the use of compound words and coordinated clauses. The growth of auxiliary and modal verbs is significant only for typically developing children and the growth of subordinate clauses is significant just for brain injured children. Moreover, there is an interaction between the growth of coordinate clauses and compound words just for brain injured children.

Competing models of eye movement control during reading disagree over the extent to which eye movements reflect ongoing linguistic and lexical processing, as opposed to visual/oculomotor factors (for reviews, see Rayner, 1998, 2009a). To address this controversy, participants’ eye movements were monitored in four experiments that manipulated a wide range of lexical variables. Specifically, Experiment 1 manipulated contextual predictability by presenting target words (e.g., teeth) in a high-predictability prior context (e.g. “The dentist told me to brush my teeth to prevent cavities.”) versus a low-predictability prior context (e.g., “I'm planning to take better care of my teeth to prevent cavities.”), Experiment 2 manipulated lexical ambiguity by presenting biased homographs (e.g., bank, crown, dough) in a subordinate-instantiating versus a dominant-instantiating prior context, and Experiments 3A and 3B manipulated word frequency by contrasting high frequency target words (e.g., table) and low frequency target words (e.g., banjo). In all four experiments, I used distributional analyses to examine the time-course of lexical influences on fixation times. Ex-Gaussian fitting (Staub, White, Drieghe, Hollway, & Rayner, 2010) revealed that all three lexical variables (i.e., predictability, lexical ambiguity, word frequency) were fast-acting enough to shift the entire distribution of fixation times, and a survival analysis technique (Reingold, Reichle, Glaholt, & Sheridan, 2012) revealed rapid lexical effects that emerged as early as 112 ms from the start of the fixation. Building on these findings, Experiments 3A and 3B provided evidence that lexical processing is delayed in an unsegmented text condition that contained numbers instead of spaces (e.g., “John4decided8to5sell9the7table2in3the9garage6sale”), relative to a normal text condition (e.g., “John decided to sell the table in the garage sale”). These findings have implications for ongoing theoretical debates concerning eye movement control, lexical ambiguity resolution, and the role of interword spaces during reading. In particular, the present findings provide strong support for models of eye movement control that assume that lexical influences can have a rapid influence on the majority of fixation durations, and are inconsistent with models that assume that fixation times are primarily determined by visual/oculomotor constraints.

The study examined how 5 adult Korean learners of English developed self-regulated learning (SRL) skills to overcome lexical problems in their English writing. Empirical studies have consistently shown that many of the greatest problems for ESL learners in writing are lexical in nature. The goal of the present study was to help participants to address these problems, first through tutored assistance and then more independently by controlling their uses of strategies through planning, monitoring, and evaluation processes. The study involved two phases: Phase 1 was exploratory in nature, in which I attempted to identify typical lexical problems Korean learners of English encounter in writing. Phase 2 included an intervention in the form of one-on-one tutoring that followed the cyclic model of SRL proposed by Zimmerman, Bonner, and Kovach (1996). I worked with 5 participants through the SRL cycle individually as they wrote and revised 3 argumentative essays. The intervention lasted for 9 weeks, focusing on developing the participants’ SRL skills in writing through the use of various strategies that were devised in Phase 1 and refined throughout Phase 2. I analyzed the participants’ difficulties and uses of strategies, self-ratings on their essays, and several measures of essay quality to examine changes in their SRL skills, self-efficacy, and writing skills. The participants initially encountered various types of difficulties in their English writing and primarily relied on self-employed strategies to cope with their difficulties. Over the course of the intervention, the participants’ attention to their difficulties and uses of various linguistic resources became progressively more focused and specific. Initially, the participants largely depended on their L1 to write their L2 essays, being chiefly occupied with the grammatical encoding of their communicative intentions. Subsequently, the participants displayed unique patterns in developing their SRL skills, which exerted positive influences on building their self-efficacy beliefs as writers and on improving the quality of their essays. Based on these findings, I emphasize the growing need for L2 writing teachers to incorporate language-focused, vocabulary-centered, and corpora-based instruction into their teaching practices. In turn, students require individual support and untimed writing tasks to develop SRL skills in writing.

Competing models of eye movement control during reading disagree over the extent to which eye movements reflect ongoing linguistic and lexical processing, as opposed to visual/oculomotor factors (for reviews, see Rayner, 1998, 2009a). To address this controversy, participants’ eye movements were monitored in four experiments that manipulated a wide range of lexical variables. Specifically, Experiment 1 manipulated contextual predictability by presenting target words (e.g., teeth) in a high-predictability prior context (e.g. “The dentist told me to brush my teeth to prevent cavities.”) versus a low-predictability prior context (e.g., “I'm planning to take better care of my teeth to prevent cavities.”), Experiment 2 manipulated lexical ambiguity by presenting biased homographs (e.g., bank, crown, dough) in a subordinate-instantiating versus a dominant-instantiating prior context, and Experiments 3A and 3B manipulated word frequency by contrasting high frequency target words (e.g., table) and low frequency target words (e.g., banjo). In all four experiments, I used distributional analyses to examine the time-course of lexical influences on fixation times. Ex-Gaussian fitting (Staub, White, Drieghe, Hollway, & Rayner, 2010) revealed that all three lexical variables (i.e., predictability, lexical ambiguity, word frequency) were fast-acting enough to shift the entire distribution of fixation times, and a survival analysis technique (Reingold, Reichle, Glaholt, & Sheridan, 2012) revealed rapid lexical effects that emerged as early as 112 ms from the start of the fixation. Building on these findings, Experiments 3A and 3B provided evidence that lexical processing is delayed in an unsegmented text condition that contained numbers instead of spaces (e.g., “John4decided8to5sell9the7table2in3the9garage6sale”), relative to a normal text condition (e.g., “John decided to sell the table in the garage sale”). These findings have implications for ongoing theoretical debates concerning eye movement control, lexical ambiguity resolution, and the role of interword spaces during reading. In particular, the present findings provide strong support for models of eye movement control that assume that lexical influences can have a rapid influence on the majority of fixation durations, and are inconsistent with models that assume that fixation times are primarily determined by visual/oculomotor constraints.

Typescript. / Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1990. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 180-188) / Microfiche. / xii, 188 leaves, bound ill. 29 cm

If an individual speaks more than one language, there are always at least two ways of verbalising any thought to be expressed. The bilingual speaker must then have a means of ensuring that their utterances are produced in the desired language. However, prominent models of speech production are based almost exclusively on monolingual considerations and require substantial modification to account for bilingual production. A particularly important feature to be explained is the way bilinguals control the language of speech production: for instance, preventing interference from the unintended language, and switching from one language to another. One recent model draws a parallel between bilinguals??? control of their linguistic system and the control of cognitive tasks more generally. The first two experiments reported in this thesis explore the validity of this model by comparing bilingual language switching with a monolingual switching task, as well as to the broader task-switching literature. Switch costs did not conform to the predictions of the task-set inhibition hypothesis in either experiment, as the ???paradoxical??? asymmetry of switch costs was not replicated and some conditions showed benefits, rather than costs, for switching between languages or tasks. Further experiments combined picture naming with negative priming and semantic competitor priming paradigms to examine the role of inhibitory and competitive processes in bilingual lexical selection. Each experiment was also conducted in a parallel monolingual version. Very little negative priming was evident when speaking the second language, but the effects of interlingual cognate status were pronounced. There were some indications of cross-language competition at the level of lexical selection: participants appeared unable to suppress the irrelevant language, even when doing so would make the task easier. Across all the experiments, there was no evidence for global inhibition of the language-not-in-use during speech production. Overall results were characterised by a remarkable flexibility in the mechanisms of bilingual control. A striking dissociation emerged between the patterns of results for cognate and non-cognate items, which was reflected throughout the series of experiments and implicates qualitative differences in the way these lexical items are represented and interconnected.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2007. / Full text release at OhioLINK's ETD Center delayed at author's request