Відмінності між версіями «R gyrus (AG), the IFG, along with the posterior middle and superior»
(Створена сторінка: Author manuscript; offered in PMC 2015 July 01.Meltzer-Asscher and ThompsonPageproduced by agrammatic speakers parallel those made by controls in their capacity...) |
м |
||
| Рядок 1: | Рядок 1: | ||
| − | Author manuscript; | + | Additionally, it really is hardly ever the [https://dx.doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2016.57.6.1427 title= ymj.2016.57.6.1427] case that an adjective obligatorily selects a complement. Ordinarily, adjectives pick optional complements, and are grammatical with no complementation (compare (3a), exactly where the complement is obligatory, to (3b-e), where the complements are optional). (three) a. She was fond [of animals].NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscriptb. She was worried [about the time]. c. She was nice [to her mother].d. He was excited [that the prince was throwing a party]. e. It is wonderful [that Cinderella went to the ball].In the current study, we examined no matter if the adjectives developed by agrammatic participants paralleled these developed by healthier speakers with regard to their argument structure complexity. Particularly, we investigated i) no matter whether the predicative adjectivesJ Neurolinguistics. Author manuscript; readily available in PMC 2015 July 01.Meltzer-Asscher and ThompsonPageproduced by agrammatic speakers parallel those made by controls in their capacity to choose arguments, i.e. inside the complexity of lexical information and facts linked with them, and ii) no matter if those predicative adjectives that choose for optional complements in reality appear using a complement after they are utilized inside the narratives. If [http://www.entrespace.org/members/pastetomato47/activity/158626/ Obstacles. Ideally they've access to a number of support resources] sufferers exhibit lower argument structure complexity than controls, this suggests that the argument structure deficit observed in agrammatism is likely a basic impairment, not linked with verbs only.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript2. Method2.1 Participants Narrative samples had been elicited from 14 agrammatic speakers and 14 cognitively wholesome controls, all native English speakers with standard hearing and normal or corrected-to-normal vision. The wholesome participants had no history of speech or language disorder, or maybe a neurological or psychiatric illness. Aphasic participants were recruited in the subject pool with the Aphasia and Neurolinguistics Research Laboratory in, inside the Center for the Neurobiology of Language Recovery at Northwestern University. The study was authorized by the IRB at Northwestern University and all participants gave their written informed.R gyrus (AG), the IFG, along with the posterior middle and superior temporal gyri (MTG and STG, respectively). Although the AG is often a vital area for representation of lexical argument structure facts, the IFG is involved in syntactic structure creating necessitated by the projection of arguments (at the same time as in syntactic movement, when it occurs), as well as the posterior MTG and STG play a part inside the integration of your verb with its arguments. 1 question which has not been absolutely explored within the context of argument structure deficits in agrammatism is no matter whether the observed argument structure complexity effect is really a verb-specific phenomenon, or irrespective of whether it truly is common and independent of lexical category. Collina, Marangolo, Tabossi (2001) and Tabossi et al. (2010) have shown that agrammatic Italian speakers have difficulty with argument-taking nouns (e.g. pianto `crying') as opposed to non-argumental nouns (e.g. medaglia `medal'). Nonetheless, the effect of argument structure complexity has not been investigated within the adjectival domain. Adjectives might take distinct [https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jgr.2016.08.005 title= j.jgr.2016.08.005] varieties of arguments, as exemplified in (three) (for discussion in the argument structure of adjectives, see Meltzer-Asscher, 2010, 2011). |
Поточна версія на 19:48, 26 березня 2018
Additionally, it really is hardly ever the title= ymj.2016.57.6.1427 case that an adjective obligatorily selects a complement. Ordinarily, adjectives pick optional complements, and are grammatical with no complementation (compare (3a), exactly where the complement is obligatory, to (3b-e), where the complements are optional). (three) a. She was fond [of animals].NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscriptb. She was worried [about the time]. c. She was nice [to her mother].d. He was excited [that the prince was throwing a party]. e. It is wonderful [that Cinderella went to the ball].In the current study, we examined no matter if the adjectives developed by agrammatic participants paralleled these developed by healthier speakers with regard to their argument structure complexity. Particularly, we investigated i) no matter whether the predicative adjectivesJ Neurolinguistics. Author manuscript; readily available in PMC 2015 July 01.Meltzer-Asscher and ThompsonPageproduced by agrammatic speakers parallel those made by controls in their capacity to choose arguments, i.e. inside the complexity of lexical information and facts linked with them, and ii) no matter if those predicative adjectives that choose for optional complements in reality appear using a complement after they are utilized inside the narratives. If Obstacles. Ideally they've access to a number of support resources sufferers exhibit lower argument structure complexity than controls, this suggests that the argument structure deficit observed in agrammatism is likely a basic impairment, not linked with verbs only.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript2. Method2.1 Participants Narrative samples had been elicited from 14 agrammatic speakers and 14 cognitively wholesome controls, all native English speakers with standard hearing and normal or corrected-to-normal vision. The wholesome participants had no history of speech or language disorder, or maybe a neurological or psychiatric illness. Aphasic participants were recruited in the subject pool with the Aphasia and Neurolinguistics Research Laboratory in, inside the Center for the Neurobiology of Language Recovery at Northwestern University. The study was authorized by the IRB at Northwestern University and all participants gave their written informed.R gyrus (AG), the IFG, along with the posterior middle and superior temporal gyri (MTG and STG, respectively). Although the AG is often a vital area for representation of lexical argument structure facts, the IFG is involved in syntactic structure creating necessitated by the projection of arguments (at the same time as in syntactic movement, when it occurs), as well as the posterior MTG and STG play a part inside the integration of your verb with its arguments. 1 question which has not been absolutely explored within the context of argument structure deficits in agrammatism is no matter whether the observed argument structure complexity effect is really a verb-specific phenomenon, or irrespective of whether it truly is common and independent of lexical category. Collina, Marangolo, Tabossi (2001) and Tabossi et al. (2010) have shown that agrammatic Italian speakers have difficulty with argument-taking nouns (e.g. pianto `crying') as opposed to non-argumental nouns (e.g. medaglia `medal'). Nonetheless, the effect of argument structure complexity has not been investigated within the adjectival domain. Adjectives might take distinct title= j.jgr.2016.08.005 varieties of arguments, as exemplified in (three) (for discussion in the argument structure of adjectives, see Meltzer-Asscher, 2010, 2011).
