No abstract

No abstract

In two experiments, phrases describing a referent object contained two prenominal adjectives in either normal or inverted order. The time to identify the position of the referent in a display was a function of both the adjective order and the nonreferent context. If the referent appeared with a nonreferent differing from it only in size or number. the normal order of adjectives facilitated responding. However, if the referent appeared with a nonreferent differing from it only in color, the inverted order of adjectives resulted in faster identification times. These results support a pragmatic communication rule that, when the more discriminating adjectives are ordered earlier in aseries. comprehension is facilitated.

-, and eighth-grade children and college u ndergraduates indicated preference for either normal or inverted orders 01' prenominal adjectives (for example, the large red car or the red large car. respectively) to describe a pictorial referent. Preference for the normal order 01' adjectives first appeared with the fourth graders. When communication context was varied by presenting a nonreferent that required a coloradjective for discrimination from the referent, college students increased their preference for the inverted order. This separation 01' the acquisition 01' a linguistic rule from its utilization in cornrnunication was discussed.Prenominal adjectives are ordered according to some rule or convention. For exarnple, the phrase the Zarge red car is generally preferred to the phrase the red Zarge car. Recently. there have been a number 01' laboratory demonstrations that adjective order preferences in English do exist and that the ordering is not random (Danks & Glucksberg. 1971; Martin. 1969b). Additionally. Martin and Molfese (1971) found that children as young as 9 years 01' age preferred basically the same prenominal ordering 01' adjectives as did adults. Schefflin (1971) found that 5-. 6-, and 7-year-old children produced noun phrases with the adjectives normally ordered even after hearing similar phrases with the orders permuted to inc1ude all possible orders. Unusual adjective ordering occurred in only 127c 01' the phrases in which multiple adjectives were used to describe an object. There is also sorne evidence that children as young as 3 and 4 years exhibit specific adjective order preferences (Bever. 1970: Martin & Molfese. 1972. although it is not clear that their preferences are precisely the sarne as those exhibited by older children and adults.While both children and adults exhibit preferences for certain orderings 01' prenorninal adjectives, the basis for these preferences is not easily specified. Schefflin (1971 ) has noted that English grammar books written for teachers 01' native English speakers typically ignore the problem 01' adjective ordering. Martin (1969a. b) has commented on the failure 01' efforts to account for adjective ordering with syntactic rules. The search for a semantic rule to account for the phenomenon 01' adjective ordering has met with some success. Ratings 01'

The use of virtual humans (i.e., avatars) holds the potential for interactive, automated interaction in domains such as remote communication, customer service, or public announcements. For signed language users, signing avatars could potentially provide accessible content by sharing information in the signer’s preferred or native language. As development of signing avatars has gained traction in recent years, many different methods of creating signing avatars have been developed, and the resulting avatars vary widely in their appearance, the naturalness of their movements, and their facial expressions--all of which may potentially impact users’ acceptance of the avatars. We designed a study to test the effects of these intrinsic properties of different signing avatars, while also examining the extent to which people’s own language experiences change their responses to signing avatars. We created video stimuli showing individual signs produced by 1) a live human signer (Human), 2) an avatar made using computer-synthesized animation (CS Avatar), and 3) an avatar made using high-fidelity motion capture (Mocap avatar). We surveyed 191 American Sign Language users, including Deaf (N = 83), Hard-of-Hearing (N = 34), and Hearing (N= 67) groups. Participants rated the three signers on multiple dimensions which were then combined to form ratings of Attitudes, Impressions, Comprehension, and Naturalness. Analyses demonstrated that the Mocap avatar was rated significantly more positively than the CS avatar on all primary variables. Correlations revealed that signers who acquire sign language later in life are more accepting of, and likely to have positive impressions of signing avatars. Finally, those who learned ASL earlier were more likely to give lower, more negative ratings to the CS avatar, but this association was not seen for the Mocap avatar or the Human signer. Together, these findings suggest that movement quality and appearance significantly impact users’ ratings of signing avatars, and show that signed language users with earlier age of ASL exposure are the most sensitive to movement quality issues seen in computer-generated avatars. We suggest that future efforts to develop signing avatars be considerate of retaining the fluid movement qualities which are integral to signed languages.