Syntactic Structural Assignment in Brazilian Portuguese-Speaking Children With Specific Language Impairment

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_FORTUNATO-TAVARES_Syntactic_Structural_Assignment_in_Brazilian_Portuguese_Speaking_Children_2012.PDF (6.2 MB)
Citações na Scopus
13
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2012
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
AMER SPEECH-LANGUAGE-HEARING ASSOC
Autores
HESTVIK, Arild
EPSTEIN, Baila
TORNYOVA, Lidiya
SCHWARTZ, Richard G.
Citação
JOURNAL OF SPEECH LANGUAGE AND HEARING RESEARCH, v.55, n.4, p.1097-1111, 2012
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Purpose: In this study, the authors examined the comprehension of sentences with predicates and reflexives that are linked to a nonadjacent noun as a test of the hierarchical ordering deficit (HOD) hypothesis. That hypothesis and more modern versions posit that children with specific language impairment (SLI) have difficulty in establishing nonadjacent (hierarchical) relations among elements of a sentence. The authors also tested whether additional working memory demands in constructions containing reflexives affected the extent to which children with SLI incorrectly structure sentences as indicated by their picture-pointing comprehension responses. Method: Sixteen Brazilian Portuguese-speaking children (8;4-10;6 [years; months]) with SLI and 16 children with typical language development (TLD) matched for age (+/- 3 months), gender, and socioeconomic status participated in 2 experiments (predicate and reflexive interpretation). In the reflexive experiment, the authors also manipulated working memory demands. Each experiment involved a 4-choice picture selection sentence comprehension task. Results: Children with SLI were significantly less accurate on all conditions. Both groups made more hierarchical syntactic construction errors in the long working memory condition than in the short working memory condition. Conclusion: The HOD hypothesis was not confirmed. For both groups, syntactic factors (structural assignment) were more vulnerable than lexical factors (prepositions) to working memory effects in sentence miscomprehension.
Palavras-chave
specific language impairment, syntax, structural assignment, working memory, children
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/4045
Referências
  1. ABEP-Associacao Brasileira de Empresas de Pesquisa [Brazilian Association of Research Companies], 2008, CCEB CRIT CLASS EC B
  2. Andrade C. F., 2004, ABFW TESTE LINGUAGEM
  3. Araujo K., 2007, THESIS U SAO PAULO S
  4. Baddeley A. D., 1986, WORKING MEMORY
  5. Bedore LM, 2001, J SPEECH LANG HEAR R, V44, P905, DOI 10.1044/1092-4388(2001/072)
  6. Billard C, 2009, EPILEPSIA, V50, P21, DOI 10.1111/j.1528-1167.2009.02213.x
  7. BISHOP DVM, 1982, J CHILD PSYCHOL PSYC, V23, P1, DOI 10.1111/j.1469-7610.1982.tb00045.x
  8. Boersma P., 2006, PRAAT VERSION 4 4 16
  9. Botwinik-Rotem I., 2009, HDB CHILD LANGUAGE D, P143
  10. Brown L, 1997, TEST NONVERBAL INTEL
  11. Costa J., 2007, 22 ENC NAC ASS PORT, P303
  12. Cromer R. F., 1978, DEV DYSPHASIA, P85
  13. Deevy P, 2004, J SPEECH LANG HEAR R, V47, P802, DOI 10.1044/1092-4389(2004/060)
  14. Deonna T, 2005, COGNITIVE BEHAV DISO
  15. Dollaghan C, 1998, J SPEECH LANG HEAR R, V41, P1136
  16. Ennis DM, 1999, J SENS STUD, V14, P321, DOI 10.1111/j.1745-459X.1999.tb00120.x
  17. Friedmann N, 2004, J CHILD LANG, V31, P661, DOI 10.1017/S0305000904006269
  18. Friedmann N, 2007, BRAIN LANG, V101, P50, DOI 10.1016/j.bandl.2006.09.006
  19. Gallon N, 2007, CLIN LINGUIST PHONET, V21, P435, DOI 10.1080/02699200701299982
  20. GATHERCOLE SE, 1990, J MEM LANG, V29, P336, DOI 10.1016/0749-596X(90)90004-J
  21. Guasti M. T., 1993, LANG ACQUIS, V3, P1, DOI 10.1207/s15327817la0301_1
  22. Hansson K, 2006, INT J SPEECH LANGUAG, V8, P376
  23. Hestvik A, 2010, J PSYCHOLINGUIST RES, V39, P443, DOI 10.1007/s10936-010-9151-1
  24. Hick R, 2005, INT J LANG COMM DIS, V40, P137, DOI 10.1080/13682820400011507
  25. Jakubowicz C, 2000, CAN J LING/REV CAN L, V45, P119
  26. JUST MA, 1992, PSYCHOL REV, V99, P122, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122
  27. KAMHI AG, 1988, J SPEECH HEAR DISORD, V53, P316
  28. Lopes R. V., 2003, PROBUS, V15, P123, DOI 10.1515/prbs.2003.001
  29. Mainela-Arnold E, 2005, J SPEECH LANG HEAR R, V48, P897, DOI 10.1044/1092-4388(2005/062)
  30. Marinis T, 2007, INT J LANG COMM DIS, V42, P557, DOI 10.1080/13682820601058190
  31. Marshall CR, 2006, COGNITION, V100, P302, DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.06.001
  32. Martin AE, 2009, J EXP PSYCHOL LEARN, V35, P1231, DOI 10.1037/a0016271
  33. Marton K, 2003, J SPEECH LANG HEAR R, V46, P1138, DOI 10.1044/1092-4388(2003/089)
  34. Marton K, 2006, INT J LANG COMM DIS, V41, P653, DOI 10.1080/13682820500420418
  35. Marton K, 2008, INT J LANG COMM DIS, V43, P181, DOI 10.1080/16066350701340719
  36. McElree B, 1998, J MEM LANG, V38, P225, DOI 10.1006/jmla.1997.2545
  37. McElree B, 2003, J MEM LANG, V48, P67, DOI 10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00515-6
  38. McElree B, 2000, J PSYCHOLINGUIST RES, V29, P111, DOI 10.1023/A:1005184709695
  39. Miyamoto E. T., 1998, THESIS MIT CAMBRIDGE
  40. Molenberghs G, 2005, MODELS DISCRETE LONG
  41. Montgomery J, 2004, INT J LANG COMM DIS, V39, P115, DOI 10.1080/13682820310001616985
  42. Montgomery JW, 2009, J SPEECH LANG HEAR R, V52, P269, DOI 10.1044/1092-4388(2008/07-0116)
  43. MONTGOMERY JW, 1995, J SPEECH HEAR RES, V38, P187
  44. Montgomery JW, 2000, J SPEECH LANG HEAR R, V43, P293
  45. Overvliet GM, 2010, EPILEPSY BEHAV, V19, P550, DOI 10.1016/j.yebeh.2010.09.015
  46. Paulino C. D., 2006, ANALISE DADOS CATEGO
  47. Precious A., 1988, INT J LANG COMM DIS, V23, P229, DOI 10.3109/13682828809011935
  48. Reinhardt T., 1976, THESIS MIT CAMBRIDGE
  49. Schaeffer J., 1997, THESIS U CALIFORNIA
  50. Schuele CM, 2001, CLIN LINGUIST PHONET, V15, P257
  51. Schwartz R. G., 2009, HDB CHILD LANGUAGE D, P3
  52. Silva C. G. A. G., 2008, THESIS U NOVA LISBOA
  53. STEVENS SS, 1946, SCIENCE, V103, P677, DOI 10.1126/science.103.2684.677
  54. van der Lely Heather, 1998, LANG ACQUIS, V72, P161
  55. Van der Velde M., 2002, PROCESS LANGUAGE ACQ, P115
  56. Van Valin Robert D, 2001, INTRO SYNTAX
  57. VANDERLELY H, 1986, BRIT J DISORD COMMUN, V21, P291
  58. van der Lely HKJ, 2005, TRENDS COGN SCI, V9, P53, DOI 10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.002
  59. vanderLely HKJ, 1997, COGNITION, V62, P245, DOI 10.1016/S0010-0277(96)00783-4
  60. Waters GS, 1996, PSYCHOL REV, V103, P761, DOI 10.1037/0033-295X.103.4.761
  61. Wexler K., 2004, ROMANCE LANGUAGES LI, P253

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MFT
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/34