2018
DOI: 10.1044/2018_jslhr-l-17-0036
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prosodic Boundary Effects on Syntactic Disambiguation in Children With Cochlear Implants

Abstract: Children with CIs do not use prosodic information to disambiguate sentences or to facilitate comprehension of unambiguous sentences similarly to children with NH. The results suggest that cross-linguistic differences may interact with syntactic disambiguation. Prosodic contrasts that affect sentence comprehension need to be addressed directly in intervention with children with CIs.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
(86 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Twenty-three adults (15 women and eight men) with mean age of 26;4 (±4;8) years and 15 children (seven girls and eight boys) with mean age of 9;9 (±1;3) years who were monolingual speakers of Brazilian Portuguese participated. The children's data presented here served as control group in a previously published study (19) that investigated the effects of prosodic boundaries on sentence comprehension in children with cochlear implants. All adults reported no history of language impairment, hearing impairment, or uncorrected visual impairment.…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Twenty-three adults (15 women and eight men) with mean age of 26;4 (±4;8) years and 15 children (seven girls and eight boys) with mean age of 9;9 (±1;3) years who were monolingual speakers of Brazilian Portuguese participated. The children's data presented here served as control group in a previously published study (19) that investigated the effects of prosodic boundaries on sentence comprehension in children with cochlear implants. All adults reported no history of language impairment, hearing impairment, or uncorrected visual impairment.…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Eight filler sentences contained a predicate attachment, like in (c), and eight contained a reflexive assignment, like in (d). These filler sentences were previously used in studies that did not investigate prosody (19,(23)(24)(25) . New recordings of the original sentences were made, focusing on stress manipulations.…”
Section: Statistical Analysis Of Experimental Manipulation Of Stimulimentioning
confidence: 99%