(Not) Hearing Optional Subjects: The Effects of Pragmatic Usage Preferences.
作者信息
Mack Jennifer E, Clifton Charles, Frazier Lyn, Taylor Patrick V
机构信息
University of Massachusetts Amherst Department of Psychology Tobin Hall 135 Hicks Way Amherst, MA 01003.
出版信息
J Mem Lang. 2012 Jul 1;67(1):211-223. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.02.011. Epub 2012 Mar 20.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
(Not) Hearing Optional Subjects: The Effects of Pragmatic Usage Preferences.（未）听取选修科目：语用使用偏好的影响。
J Mem Lang. 2012 Jul 1;67(1):211-223. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.02.011. Epub 2012 Mar 20.
2
Factors Associated With Social-Pragmatic Understanding in Deaf and Hard of Hearing and Typically Hearing 6-Year-Old Children.聋、重听及听力正常的6岁儿童社会语用理解的相关因素
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2025 Feb 4;68(2):808-826. doi: 10.1044/2024_JSLHR-23-00574. Epub 2025 Jan 24.
3
Pragmatic Skills in Children with Hearing Loss: Comparison Between Cochlear Implants and Hearing Aids Users.听力损失儿童的实用技能：人工耳蜗使用者与助听器使用者的比较
Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2022 Sep;74(3):434-438. doi: 10.1007/s12070-021-02529-5. Epub 2021 Apr 1.
4
Pragmatic abilities of children with hearing loss using cochlear implants or hearing AIDS compared to hearing children.与听力正常儿童相比，使用人工耳蜗或助听器的听力损失儿童的语用能力。
J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2010 Fall;15(4):422-37. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enq032. Epub 2010 Jul 12.
5
Development of Social-Pragmatic Understanding in Children With Congenital Hearing Loss and Typical Hearing Between the Ages of 4 and 6 Years.4 至 6 岁先天性听力损失儿童与典型听力儿童社会语用理解能力的发展。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2023 Jul 12;66(7):2503-2520. doi: 10.1044/2023_JSLHR-22-00700. Epub 2023 May 25.
6
Bonobos assign meaning to food calls based on caller food preferences.倭黑猩猩根据呼叫者的食物偏好赋予食物叫声意义。
PLoS One. 2022 Jun 15;17(6):e0267574. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267574. eCollection 2022.
7
Early Intervention, Parent Talk, and Pragmatic Language in Children With Hearing Loss.早期干预、家长话语与听力损失儿童的语用能力
Pediatrics. 2020 Nov;146(Suppl 3):S270-S277. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-0242F.
8
Why optional stopping can be a problem for Bayesians.为什么可选停止对于贝叶斯主义者来说可能是一个问题。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2021 Jun;28(3):795-812. doi: 10.3758/s13423-020-01803-x.
9
Mapping changes in the utilization of childhood immunization over 5 years in a south Indian tertiary care hospital.印度南部一家三级护理医院5年间儿童免疫接种利用情况的变化映射
Ther Adv Vaccines Immunother. 2024 Oct 29;12:25151355241287705. doi: 10.1177/25151355241287705. eCollection 2024.
10
Subjective Benefits of Bimodal Listening in Cochlear Implant Recipients with Asymmetric Hearing Loss.双侧聆听对非对称听力损失人工耳蜗植入者主观获益的研究。
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Jun;162(6):933-941. doi: 10.1177/0194599820911716. Epub 2020 Mar 17.
引用本文的文献
1
Delayed onset facilitates subsequent retrieval of words during language comprehension.延迟启动有助于语言理解过程中后续单词的提取。
Mem Cognit. 2024 Apr;52(3):491-508. doi: 10.3758/s13421-023-01479-3. Epub 2023 Oct 24.
2
Information Structure Preferences in Focus-Sensitive Ellipsis: How Defaults Persist.焦点敏感省略中的信息结构偏好：默认情况如何持续存在。
Lang Speech. 2018 Sep;61(3):480-512. doi: 10.1177/0023830917737110. Epub 2017 Nov 9.
3
Reversing the Approach to Null Subjects: A Perspective from Language Acquisition.扭转对零主语的研究方法：来自语言习得的视角。
Front Psychol. 2017 Feb 14;8:27. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00027. eCollection 2017.
4
Accommodation to an Unlikely Episodic State.适应一种不太可能的偶发状态。
J Mem Lang. 2016 Jan 1;86:20-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2015.10.004.
5
Anticipatory Deaccenting in Language Comprehension.语言理解中的预期性弱化
Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2015 Feb;30(1-2):197-211. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2014.885534.
6
Do Null Subjects (mis-)Trigger Pro-drop Grammars?零主语（是否）触发省略主语的语法规则？
J Psycholinguist Res. 2015 Dec;44(6):669-74. doi: 10.1007/s10936-014-9312-8.
7
How language production shapes language form and comprehension.语言产生如何塑造语言形式和理解。
Front Psychol. 2013 Apr 26;4:226. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00226. eCollection 2013.
本文引用的文献
1
QUANTIFIERS UNDONE: REVERSING PREDICTABLE SPEECH ERRORS IN COMPREHENSION.量词难题：纠正理解中可预测的言语错误。
Language (Baltim). 2011 Mar 1;87(1):158-171. doi: 10.1353/lan.2011.0024.
2
Saying "that" in dialogue: The influence of accessibility and social factors on syntactic production.对话中“that”的使用：可及性和社会因素对句法生成的影响。
Lang Cogn Process. 2011 Dec 1;26(10):1736-1762. doi: 10.1080/01690965.2010.537482. Epub 2011 Jun 28.
3
Redundancy and reduction: speakers manage syntactic information density.冗余与简化：说话者如何管理句法信息密度
Cogn Psychol. 2010 Aug;61(1):23-62. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2010.02.002.
4
Eye movement evidence that readers maintain and act on uncertainty about past linguistic input.眼动证据表明，读者会对过去的语言输入保持并采取不确定性措施。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Dec 15;106(50):21086-90. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0907664106. Epub 2009 Nov 24.
5
Linking production and comprehension processes: the case of relative clauses.连接生产与理解过程：关系从句的案例
Cognition. 2009 Apr;111(1):1-23. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.12.006. Epub 2009 Feb 11.
6
Expectation-based syntactic comprehension.基于期望的句法理解。
Cognition. 2008 Mar;106(3):1126-77. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006. Epub 2007 Jul 30.
7
Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension?人们在理解过程中会运用语言生成来进行预测吗？
Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Mar;11(3):105-10. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.12.002. Epub 2007 Jan 24.
8
Minimization of dependency length in written English.书面英语中依存长度的最小化。
Cognition. 2007 Nov;105(2):300-33. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.09.011.
9
Becoming syntactic.变得符合句法规则。
Psychol Rev. 2006 Apr;113(2):234-72. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.234.
10
Should given information come before new? Yes and no.
Mem Cognit. 2004 Sep;32(6):886-95. doi: 10.3758/bf03196867.
Zotero 插件