Journal articles: 'Language production and comprehension'

1

Hendriks, Petra, and Charlotte Koster. "Production/comprehension asymmetries in language acquisition." Lingua 120, no. 8 (August 2010): 1887–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.02.002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Hopman, Elise W. M., and Maryellen C. MacDonald. "Production Practice During Language Learning Improves Comprehension." Psychological Science 29, no. 6 (April 11, 2018): 961–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797618754486.

Full text

Abstract:

Language learners often spend more time comprehending than producing a new language. However, memory research suggests reasons to suspect that production practice might provide a stronger learning experience than comprehension practice. We tested the benefits of production during language learning and the degree to which this learning transfers to comprehension skill. We taught participants an artificial language containing multiple linguistic dependencies. Participants were randomly assigned to either a production- or a comprehension-learning condition, with conditions designed to balance attention demands and other known production–comprehension differences. After training, production-learning participants outperformed comprehension-learning participants on vocabulary comprehension and on comprehension tests of grammatical dependencies, even when we controlled for individual differences in vocabulary learning. This result shows that producing a language during learning can improve subsequent comprehension, which has implications for theories of memory and learning, language representations, and educational practices.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Hartsuiker, Robert J., and Martin J. Pickering. "A common framework for language comprehension and language production?" Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24, no. 5 (October 2001): 887–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x01290104.

Full text

Abstract:

Natural language processing involves a tight coupling between action (the production of language) and perception (the comprehension of language). We argue that similar theoretical principles apply to language processing as to action/perception in general. Language production is not driven solely by the speaker's intentions; language comprehension is not only input-driven; production and perception use common representations. We will relate recent findings from our language production lab to the Theory of Event Coding (TEC)'s principle of feature binding.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Raissi, Reza, Neda Hedayat, and Fakhereh Kazemirad. "Syntactic Priming Effects and their Underlying Mechanisms in Language Production and Comprehension." Theory and Practice in Language Studies 10, no. 11 (November 1, 2020): 1370. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1011.04.

Full text

Abstract:

Exposure to a syntactic structure influences the way we process a similar syntactic structure in language production and comprehension in what has been called ‘syntactic priming’. Syntactic priming is a robust phenomenon which can be observed in spoken and written production, with a range of syntactic constructions in laboratory tasks and naturally occurring samples of speech, in many languages, and also across languages within the same speaker. It has been used as a vehicle for exploring language production, language comprehension, and the relationship between them. Research in syntactic priming has made it the dominant means of investigating the processes involved in language production and comprehension. Some researchers propose that there are distinct mechanisms underlying the production and comprehension of syntactic structures; however, other researchers suggest that the same mechanisms underlie syntactic priming in production and comprehension. Thus, the mechanisms underlying syntactic priming effects in production and comprehension are still under debate. Moreover, although a fairly large body of research has addressed syntactic priming in production or in comprehension, there are few studies that consider and compare priming effects in both of these modalities. Therefore, the current study reviews the literature on syntactic priming in production and contrasts these findings to those in comprehension. It also provides an overview of syntactic priming effects and mechanisms underlying these effects in both production and comprehension.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

BOCK, K., G. DELL, F. CHANG, and K. ONISHI. "Persistent structural priming from language comprehension to language production☆☆☆." Cognition 104, no. 3 (September 2007): 437–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.07.003.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Bertram, Raymond, Jukka Hyönä, and Matti Laine. "Morphology in language comprehension, production and acquisition." Language and Cognitive Processes 26, no. 4-6 (May 2011): 457–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2011.559102.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Gernsbacher, Morton Ann, and Michael P. Kaschak. "Neuroimaging Studies of Language Production and Comprehension." Annual Review of Psychology 54, no. 1 (February 2003): 91–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145128.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Pickering, M. J., and S. Garrod. "Neural integration of language production and comprehension." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, no. 43 (October 20, 2014): 15291–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1417917111.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Bates, Elizabeth. "COMPREHENSION AND PRODUCTION IN EARLY LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT." Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 58, no. 3-4 (May 1993): 222–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5834.1993.tb00403.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Yoon, Si On, and Sarah Brown-Schmidt. "Lexical differentiation in language production and comprehension." Journal of Memory and Language 69, no. 3 (October 2013): 397–416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.05.005.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Chater, Nick, Stewart M. McCauley, and Morten H. Christiansen. "Language as skill: Intertwining comprehension and production." Journal of Memory and Language 89 (August 2016): 244–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.11.004.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

RIVERS, WILGA M. "Comprehension and Production in Interactive Language Teaching." Modern Language Journal 70, no. 1 (March 1986): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05234.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Graumann, Carl F., and C. Michael Sommer. "Perspective Structure in Language Production and Comprehension." Journal of Language and Social Psychology 7, no. 3-4 (September 1988): 193–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0261927x8800700404.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Bley-Vroman, Robert. "FREQUENCY IN PRODUCTION, COMPREHENSION, AND ACQUISITION." Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24, no. 2 (June 2002): 209–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s027226310200205x.

Full text

Abstract:

Although there are certainly observable frequency effects in language, in most cases, there are alternative approaches to explanation that more directly relate to the essential characteristic of language—that it is a system relating form to meaning. For example, for both word choice in production and ambiguity resolution in comprehension, meaning-based approaches can often provide equally satisfying, or more satisfying, explanations. In the meaning-based approach, the statistical structure of the language can affect the development of linguistic knowledge (for example, by influencing acquisition order or providing evidence for developing grammars); however, linguistic knowledge is not itself knowledge of the statistical structure of language. An example is provided of how frequency may relate to grammaticality judgments of nonnative speakers acquiring multiple wh-questions.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Lidzba, Karen, Eleonore Schwilling, Wolfgang Grodd, Inge Krägeloh-Mann, and Marko Wilke. "Language comprehension vs. language production: Age effects on fMRI activation." Brain and Language 119, no. 1 (October 2011): 6–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2011.02.003.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Häberling, Isabelle S., Anita Steinemann, and Michael C. Corballis. "Cerebral asymmetry for language: Comparing production with comprehension." Neuropsychologia 80 (January 2016): 17–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.11.002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Pickering, Martin J., and Simon Garrod. "An integrated theory of language production and comprehension." Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36, no. 4 (June 24, 2013): 329–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x12001495.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractCurrently, production and comprehension are regarded as quite distinct in accounts of language processing. In rejecting this dichotomy, we instead assert that producing and understanding are interwoven, and that this interweaving is what enables people to predict themselves and each other. We start by noting that production and comprehension are forms of action and action perception. We then consider the evidence for interweaving in action, action perception, and joint action, and explain such evidence in terms of prediction. Specifically, we assume that actors construct forward models of their actions before they execute those actions, and that perceivers of others' actions covertly imitate those actions, then construct forward models of those actions. We use these accounts of action, action perception, and joint action to develop accounts of production, comprehension, and interactive language. Importantly, they incorporate well-defined levels of linguistic representation (such as semantics, syntax, and phonology). We show (a) how speakers and comprehenders use covert imitation and forward modeling to make predictions at these levels of representation, (b) how they interweave production and comprehension processes, and (c) how they use these predictions to monitor the upcoming utterances. We show how these accounts explain a range of behavioral and neuroscientific data on language processing and discuss some of the implications of our proposal.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Segaert, K., L. Menenti, K. Weber, K. M. Petersson, and P. Hagoort. "Shared Syntax in Language Production and Language Comprehension--An fMRI Study." Cerebral Cortex 22, no. 7 (September 20, 2011): 1662–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhr249.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Glenberg, Arthur M., and Vittorio Gallese. "Action-based language: A theory of language acquisition, comprehension, and production." Cortex 48, no. 7 (July 2012): 905–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.010.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Tasseva-Kurktchieva, Mila. "Can production precede comprehension in L2 acquisition?" Second Language Research 31, no. 4 (April 28, 2015): 493–522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0267658315581725.

Full text

Abstract:

So far, the comprehension and production language modes have typically been studied separately in generative second language acquisition research, with the focus shifting from one to the other. This article revisits the asymmetric relationship between comprehension and production by examining the second language (L2) acquisition of the noun phrase in Bulgarian by speakers of English. Drawing on data from a forced choice comprehension task and elicited production task, I show that in some cases production of certain grammatical features may precede the full comprehension of their relevance to the morpho-syntax of the target language. An explanation is sought based on (1) Jackendoff’s (2002) parallel architecture of the linguistics modules, and (2) feature differentiation based on their relevance to syntax proper and semantics. Structural features with no semantic bearing (e.g. [gender]) are argued to be overlooked by the parser in comprehension. Conversely, features with a semantic load (e.g. [number]) are argued to cause an overload in the semantic tier in production. This, in turn, prevents their overt realization. This study sets the stage for future investigations into the phenomenon exploiting more refined methodology, which will allow for teasing apart the theoretical proposal from task effects.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Keppenne, Valérie, Elise W. M. Hopman, and Carrie N. Jackson. "Production-based training benefits the comprehension and production of grammatical gender in L2 German." Applied Psycholinguistics 42, no. 4 (May 14, 2021): 907–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s014271642100014x.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractOngoing debate exists regarding the role of production-based versus comprehension-based training for L2 learning. However, recent research suggests an advantage for production training due to benefits stemming from the opportunity to compare generated output with feedback and from the memory mechanisms associated with language production. Based on recent findings with an artificial language paradigm, we investigated the effects of production-based and comprehension-based training for learning grammatical gender among beginning L2 German learners. Participants received production-based or comprehension-based training on grammatical gender assignment and gender agreement between determiners, adjectives, and 15 German nouns, followed by four tasks targeting the comprehension and production of the target nouns and their corresponding gender marking on determiners and adjectives. Both groups were equally accurate in comprehending and producing the nouns. For tasks requiring knowledge of grammatical gender, the production-based group outperformed the comprehension-based group on both comprehension and production tests. These findings demonstrate the importance of language production for creating robust linguistic representations and have important implications for classroom instruction.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Amos, Rhona M., and Martin J. Pickering. "A theory of prediction in simultaneous interpreting." Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 23, no. 4 (October 16, 2019): 706–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1366728919000671.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractPeople make comprehension easier by predicting upcoming language. We might therefore expect prediction to occur during the extremely difficult task of simultaneous interpreting. This paper examines the theoretical and empirical foundations of this premise. It reviews accounts of prediction during comprehension in both monolinguals and bilinguals, and discusses these theories in light of experimental data (e.g., using the visual-world paradigm). It considers how these accounts may be applied to the unique and ecologically valid context of simultaneous interpreting, when two languages are used concurrently, one overtly engaging the comprehension system, and the other overtly engaging the production system. It then posits a role for the production system in prediction during comprehension and develops a theoretical framework for prediction-by-production in simultaneous interpreting that has implications for our understanding of prediction during language comprehension.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Wagner, Katie, Jill Jergens, and David Barner. "Partial Color Word Comprehension Precedes Production." Language Learning and Development 14, no. 4 (March 22, 2018): 241–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2018.1445531.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Spinner, Patti, and Sehoon Jung. "PRODUCTION AND COMPREHENSION IN PROCESSABILITY THEORY." Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40, no. 2 (June 19, 2017): 295–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263117000110.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to determine whether processability theory (PT; Pienemann, 1998, 2005) accounts for the emergence of grammatical forms and structures in comprehension. Sixty-one learners of English participated in oral interviews that elicited a variety of structures relevant to PT. Learners were divided into two groups: those who produced these structures productively in speech (high level) and those who did not (low level). These groups then read grammatical and ungrammatical sentences with PT structures in a self-paced reading task. Based on Pienemann (1998), PT predicts that the high-level group should perform similarly to native speakers. However, only the native speaker control group demonstrated sensitivity to ungrammaticalities. There was evidence that learners might have acquired lower-stage structures in an implicational order in comprehension, but it was quite mixed. These results have implications for PT and for models of the L2 linguistic system that include both production and comprehension.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

GRÜTER, THERES. "Comprehension and production of French object clitics by child second language learners and children with specific language impairment." Applied Psycholinguistics 26, no. 3 (July 2005): 363–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0142716405050216.

Full text

Abstract:

The objective of this research was to compare child second language (L2) learners and children with specific language impairment (SLI) on both production and comprehension in order to investigate whether the similarity of their error profiles observed in spontaneous production extends to comprehension. Results are presented from an elicited production and a sentence–picture matching task targeting accusative object clitics in French. As groups, both L2 learners and children with SLI show a low rate of clitic suppliance in production, yet perform well on the comprehension task. No statistically significant differences are found between the two groups on either task. Analyses of individual results, however, reveal diversity within both groups. Although there seems to be a correlation between performance in production and comprehension in the L2 group, this is not the case in the SLI group.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Calvillo, Jesús, Harm Brouwer, and Matthew W. Crocker. "Semantic Systematicity in Connectionist Language Production." Information 12, no. 8 (August 16, 2021): 329. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/info12080329.

Full text

Abstract:

Decades of studies trying to define the extent to which artificial neural networks can exhibit systematicity suggest that systematicity can be achieved by connectionist models but not by default. Here we present a novel connectionist model of sentence production that employs rich situation model representations originally proposed for modeling systematicity in comprehension. The high performance of our model demonstrates that such representations are also well suited to model language production. Furthermore, the model can produce multiple novel sentences for previously unseen situations, including in a different voice (actives vs. passive) and with words in new syntactic roles, thus demonstrating semantic and syntactic generalization and arguably systematicity. Our results provide yet further evidence that such connectionist approaches can achieve systematicity, in production as well as comprehension. We propose our positive results to be a consequence of the regularities of the microworld from which the semantic representations are derived, which provides a sufficient structure from which the neural network can interpret novel inputs.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Watson, Duane, and Edward Gibson. "Intonational phrasing and constituency in language production and comprehension*." Studia Linguistica 59, no. 2-3 (August 2005): 279–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.2005.00130.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Gahl, Susanne. "Phonetics and Phonology in Language Comprehension and Production (review)." Language 82, no. 1 (2006): 222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0032.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Anstatt, Tanja, and Ursula Mikić. "What does a receptive bilingual understand? Evidence from Polish as a heritage language in Germany." Zeitschrift für Slawistik 67, no. 3 (August 1, 2022): 355–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/slaw-2022-0017.

Full text

Abstract:

Summary Our study explores the field of receptive bilingualism, a highly common phenomenon with respect to heritage languages—one that, despite its commonness, has been analyzed by few studies. We collected data from 10 receptive bilinguals of Polish as a heritage language in Germany, including data from interviews regarding language biographies, a battery of tests on language comprehension skills, and a single-word production task. The main focus of our study was the analysis of the receptive abilities of our 10 participants, with a specific emphasis on their level of listening comprehension of spoken text. We conducted an explorative correlation analysis with respect to the interrelation of listening comprehension with other parameters, such as single-word comprehension, sentence comprehension, single-word production, and the language choice of the participants’ parents. The results indicate that all participants coped well with spoken texts up to level B1 of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). There was great variance in performance at levels B2 and C1, with some of the participants still performing very well. Their performance at levels B2 and C1 strongly correlated with the number of direct address instances in Polish by the parents during childhood and with single-word comprehension. Furthermore, the word production task generated the lowest outcomes of all tests, thus revealing a wide gap between receptive and productive abilities. Interestingly, the results of the word production task did not correlate with those pertaining to the listening comprehension of texts at levels B2 and C1. This finding underscores the fact that productive skills do not constitute a valid indicator of receptive abilities. In summary, our results demonstrate the special quality of receptive bilingualism and the need to avoid underestimating this specific status (e. g., in language classes).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

DEUCHAR, MARGARET. "Cross-language effects in bilingual production and comprehension: some novel findings." Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 19, no. 4 (April 21, 2016): 706–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s136672891600050x.

Full text

Abstract:

This special issue began as a conference on Bilingual and Multilingual Interaction at Bangor University in 2012. The papers collected here all have novel elements, either because of their innovative methods, their unusual data, or their unexpected findings. They present findings from studies of bilinguals speaking six different pairs of languages, and use a range of methods including experiments, naturalistic observation and auditory judgment data. Despite the differences in subject matter and methodological approaches, all the papers demonstrate that bilinguals draw on resources which are different from those of monolinguals. They show that the two languages spoken by bilinguals have clearly discernible effects on one another, and that these effects can potentially be enhancing. Future research will no doubt build on the studies presented here and extend our understanding of cross-language effects in bilingual production and comprehension.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Flynn, Suzanne. "Production vs. Comprehension: Differences in Underlying Competences." Studies in Second Language Acquisition 8, no. 2 (June 1986): 135–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100006057.

Full text

Abstract:

In this paper empirical data are presented that demonstrate significant differences in the manner in which two commonly used experimental tasks evaluate developing linguistic competence in adult second language (L2) learners. Results indicate that production tests principally evaluate a learner's developing structural competence in the L2. On the other hand, comprehension tests provide a less direct measure of structural competence and are significantly influenced by pragmatic context.Fifty-one adult Spanish speakers at three levels of ESL ability were tested in both their elicited imitation (production) and act-out (comprehension) of complex sentences that were structurally identical. The stimuli varied in terms of the pre- and post-posing of a subordinate adverbial when clause and in terms of the direction of pronoun anaphora (forward and backward). Results from the production test indicate a significant effect of directionality, i.e., a preference for forward pronouns in post-posed clauses at the intermediate level. Results from the comprehension test did not show a significant directionality constraint at any level. They did, however, demonstrate a significant effect due to the use of a biasing pragmatic lead. Such findings are comparable to those found in early first language acquisition (Lust, Loveland, & Kornet, 1980). Implications of these findings for experimental methodology are discussed.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Chen, Baoguo, Yuefang Jia, Zhu Wang, Susan Dunlap, and Jeong-Ah Shin. "Is word-order similarity necessary for cross-linguistic structural priming?" Second Language Research 29, no. 4 (October 2013): 375–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0267658313491962.

Full text

Abstract:

This article presents two experiments employing two structural priming paradigms that investigated whether cross-linguistic syntactic priming occurred in Chinese and English passive sentences that differ in word order (production-to-production priming in Experiment 1 and comprehension-to-production priming in Experiment 2). Results revealed that cross-linguistic syntactic priming occurred in Chinese and English passive sentences, regardless of production of primes or comprehension of primes and language direction (L1–L2 or L2–L1). Our findings indicate that word-order similarity between languages is not necessary for cross-linguistic structural priming, supporting the view of a two-stage model of language production.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

BORNSTEIN, MARC H., and CHARLENE HENDRICKS. "Basic language comprehension and production in >100,000 young children from sixteen developing nations." Journal of Child Language 39, no. 4 (December 1, 2011): 899–918. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0305000911000407.

Full text

Abstract:

ABSTRACTUsing the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey, language comprehension and production were compared in a sample of 101,250 children aged 2 ; 00 to 9 ; 11 and a focus subsample of 38,845 children aged 2 ; 00 to 4 ; 11 from sixteen under-researched developing nations. In the whole sample, comprehension slightly exceeded production; correlations between comprehension and production by country were positive and significant, but varied in size, and the average correlation was positive, significant, and small to medium. Mean comprehension and production varied with child age, reaching an asymptote at 5 ; 00, and correlations between comprehension and production by age were positive, significant, and similar at each age. In the focus subsample, comprehension exceeded production; correlations between comprehension and production by country were positive and significant, but varied in size, and the average correlation was positive, significant, and medium in size. Children in countries with lower standards of living were less likely to demonstrate basic language comprehension or production.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Allbritton, David. "Strategic Production of Predictive Inferences During Comprehension." Discourse Processes 38, no. 3 (November 2004): 309–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3803_2.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Donaldson, M. L. "Children's comprehension and production of locative expressions." First Language 9, no. 27 (October 1989): 308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014272378900902707.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Zavaleta, Kaitlyn L., and Janet L. Nicol. "Effects of second language proficiency and working memory span on novel language learning." Journal of Second Language Studies 1, no. 1 (May 7, 2018): 79–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/jsls.17025.zav.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract In this paper we examine the effects of prior language learning experience and working memory capacity on learning a novel language. Participants with a range of proficiency in a second language were trained on a third language. They were presented with 20 Turkish words (to test word-learning) and their plural counterparts (to test rule-learning). After training, participants were asked to judge whether a given label correctly matched the pictured object (comprehension) and to verbally produce the correct label for a given object (production). The comprehension test took place immediately after training and again a week later. The production test was administered after the second comprehension test. We found that performance on the initial comprehension test was predicted by working memory span but not L2 proficiency; L2 proficiency predicted learning performance only for the delayed tests. This suggests that the two variables – L2 Proficiency and Working Memory – play different roles in L3 learning.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Pourquié, Marie, Hugues Lacroix, and Natalia Kartushina. "Investigating vulnerabilities in grammatical processing of bilinguals." Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9, no. 4-5 (October 9, 2019): 600–627. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lab.17035.pou.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Bilinguals show a large gap in their expressive-receptive abilities, in both languages. To date, most studies have examined lexical processing. The current study aimed to assess comprehension and production of verb agreement, i.e., grammatical processing, in bilinguals, and to examine the factors that might modulate them: exposure, age and language-specific morphological complexity. Twenty balanced Basque-Spanish bilinguals (10 adults and 10 children) were assessed on comprehension and production of subject-verb agreement in both languages and object-verb agreement in Basque. Twenty age-matched Spanish-dominant Basque-Spanish bilinguals were assessed in Spanish only. The results revealed a consistent gap in Basque in both children and adults, with an advantage for comprehension. In Spanish, a gap appeared in children only, with an advantage for production. The gap size did not vary with the amount of language exposure but with age and morphological complexity, suggesting that these factors modulate bilinguals’ grammatical processing.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Krishnan, Saloni. "A developmental perspective on the integration of language production and comprehension." Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36, no. 4 (June 24, 2013): 363–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x12002774.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe integration of language production and comprehension processes may be more specific in terms of developmental timing than Pickering & Garrod (P&G) discuss in their target article. Developmental studies do reveal links between production and comprehension, but also demonstrate that the integration of these skills changes over time. Production-comprehension links occur within specific language skills and specific time windows.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Frankenberg-Garcia, Ana. "The use of corpus examples for language comprehension and production." ReCALL 26, no. 2 (February 19, 2014): 128–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0958344014000093.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractOne of the many new features of English language learners’ dictionaries derived from the technological developments that have taken place over recent decades is the presence of corpus-based examples to illustrate the use of words in context. However, empirical studies have generally not been able to produce conclusive evidence about their actual worth. In Frankenberg-Garcia (2012a), I argued that these studies – and indeed learners’ dictionaries themselves – do not distinguish sufficiently between examples meant to aid language comprehension and examples that focus on enhancing language production. The present study reports on an experiment with secondary school students carried out to test the usefulness of separate corpus examples for comprehension and production. The results support the need for different types of examples for comprehension and production, and provide evidence in support of data-driven learning, particularly if learners have access to more than one example.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

McCauley, Stewart M., and Morten H. Christiansen. "Toward a unified account of comprehension and production in language development." Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36, no. 4 (June 24, 2013): 366–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x12002658.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractAlthough Pickering & Garrod (P&G) argue convincingly for a unified system for language comprehension and production, they fail to explain how such a system might develop. Using a recent computational model of language acquisition as an example, we sketch a developmental perspective on the integration of comprehension and production. We conclude that only through development can we fully understand the intertwined nature of comprehension and production in adult processing.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Struys, Esli, Jill Surmont, Piet Van de Craen, Olga Kepinska, and Maurits Van den Noort. "Bilingual language control across modalities." Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9, no. 4-5 (October 9, 2019): 542–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lab.17020.str.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Bilingual language control has previously been tested separately in tasks of language comprehension and language production. Whereas these studies have suggested that local control processes are selectively recruited during mixed-language production, the present study investigated whether measures of global control show the same dependence on modality, or are shared across modalities. Thirty-eight Dutch-French bilingual young adults participated by completing two tasks of bilingual language control in both modalities. Global accuracy on mixed-language comprehension was related to mixing costs on bilingual verbal fluency, but only when compared to the L2-baseline. Global performance on mixed-language production was related to forward (L1-to-L2) switch costs. Finally, a significant correlation was found between the mixing cost on verbal fluency and forward switch costs on the comprehension task. The results are interpreted as evidence for the involvement of monitoring processes in bilingual language control across modality. The results also highlight the relevance of language switch directionality.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Litcofsky, Kaitlyn A., Darren Tanner, and Janet G. van Hell. "Effects of language experience, use, and cognitive functioning on bilingual word production and comprehension." International Journal of Bilingualism 20, no. 6 (July 27, 2016): 666–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1367006915579737.

Full text

Abstract:

Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions: Considerable research has investigated how bilinguals produce and comprehend words, focusing mainly on how bilinguals are able to select words from the appropriate language. Less research, however, has investigated whether production and comprehension involve the same underlying mechanisms. The present study explores this issue by examining whether production and comprehension, in the first language (L1) and second language (L2), are similarly influenced by factors relating to language experience, language use, and cognitive functioning. Design/methodology/approach Spanish-English bilinguals living in an English-speaking environment completed a picture naming task and a lexical decision task in their L1 and L2. In addition, participants completed the Operation Span task testing working memory and the Flanker task testing inhibitory control, and completed a language history questionnaire probing their language experience, relative proficiency, and codeswitching behavior. Data and analysis: Performance on all tasks was submitted to correlation analyses and the impact of individual difference measures on word production and comprehension was assessed via regression analyses. Findings/conclusions: Results showed that (1) production and comprehension were more closely linked in L1 than in L2; (2) production in L1 and L2 was predicted by language proficiency; and (3) comprehension in L1 and L2 was predicted by working memory. Originality: This is the first study to compare lexical processing in production and comprehension in both L1 and L2 and how these processes are influenced by language experience, use, and cognitive factors. Significance/implications: Word production and comprehension appear to be more tightly linked in L1 than L2, but seem to rely on different processing mechanisms.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Kempen, Gerard, Nomi Olsthoorn, and Simone Sprenger. "Grammatical workspace sharing during language production and language comprehension: Evidence from grammatical multitasking." Language and Cognitive Processes 27, no. 3 (April 2012): 345–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.544583.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Nozari, Nazbanou, and Jared Novick. "Monitoring and Control in Language Production." Current Directions in Psychological Science 26, no. 5 (October 2017): 403–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721417702419.

Full text

Abstract:

Language research has provided insight into how speakers translate a thought into a sequence of sounds that ultimately becomes words, phrases, and sentences. Despite the complex stages involved in this process, relatively little is known about how we avoid and handle production and comprehension errors that would otherwise impede communication. We review current research on the mechanisms underlying monitoring and control of the language system, especially production, with particular emphasis on whether such monitoring is issued by domain-general or domain-specific procedures.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

EMMOREY, KAREN, MARCEL R. GIEZEN, and TAMAR H. GOLLAN. "Psycholinguistic, cognitive, and neural implications of bimodal bilingualism." Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 19, no. 2 (April 23, 2015): 223–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1366728915000085.

Full text

Abstract:

Bimodal bilinguals, fluent in a signed and a spoken language, exhibit a unique form of bilingualism because their two languages access distinct sensory-motor systems for comprehension and production. Differences between unimodal and bimodal bilinguals have implications for how the brain is organized to control, process, and represent two languages. Evidence from code-blending (simultaneous production of a word and a sign) indicates that the production system can access two lexical representations without cost, and the comprehension system must be able to simultaneously integrate lexical information from two languages. Further, evidence of cross-language activation in bimodal bilinguals indicates the necessity of links between languages at the lexical or semantic level. Finally, the bimodal bilingual brain differs from the unimodal bilingual brain with respect to the degree and extent of neural overlap for the two languages, with less overlap for bimodal bilinguals.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Bernice, Anokye. "Language and the Brain: A Twofold Study of Language Production and Language Comprehension as a Separate or Integrated Set of Processes." Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics 3, no. 5 (May 30, 2021): 82–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.32996/jeltal.2021.3.5.9.

Full text

Abstract:

Humans can understand their language due to the processes in the brain. It is very easy for language users to presume that language production and language comprehension are two simple phenomena. For psycholinguistics, these two processes are part of the three core topics in the study of the language and the mind. Psycholinguistics attempt to have a model that explains how language is processed in our brain. It is nearly impossible to do or think about anything without using language, whether this entails following a set of written instructions or an internal talk-through by your inner voice. Language permeates our brains and our lives like no other skill. Beforehand, psycholinguists described our comprehension and production of language in terms of the rules that were hypothesized by linguists (Fodor, Bever, & Garrett, 1974). Now, that is not the case. These linguistic rules inform rather than taking precedent in studying language and the brain. This paper aims to describe the brain regions/structures, language processes, and the intricate connections between them. The study discusses the brain as the underlying basis of the relationship between language and the brain. Moreover, this study descriptively analyses some of the recent expositive psycholinguistic research on language production and comprehension in order to understand the nature and dynamics of language. The methodology of this paper has to do with the research design, materials and concludes with descriptive analyses of the major finding from the secondary data reviewed in the paper. The linguistic approaches used for this study do not entail any sort of calculation or enumeration. It takes the form of a descriptive qualitative approach or a desktop study where research work mainly capitalizes on preexisting literature in the research domain. The study's main finding reveals that research works on language processing treat production and comprehension as quite distinct from each other. Language production processes differ fundamentally from comprehension processes in many respects. However, other researchers reject such a dichotomy. In its place, they propose that producing and understanding are tightly interwoven, and this interweaving underlies people’s ability to predict themselves and each other.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Hauk, Olaf. "Preface to special issue “prediction in language comprehension and production”." Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 31, no. 1 (November 27, 2015): 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1102300.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Botting, Nicola, Nicholas Riches, Marguerite Gaynor, and Gary Morgan. "Gesture production and comprehension in children with specific language impairment." British Journal of Developmental Psychology 28, no. 1 (March 2010): 51–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/026151009x482642.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Balasubramanian, Venu, Karen Murphy, Shelly Spatafore, Rene Lopardo, and Vanessa Dickinson. "Language production and comprehension in an adult with ACoA syndrome." Brain and Cognition 46, no. 1-2 (June 2001): 24–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2626(01)80026-9.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Pickering, Martin J., and Simon Garrod. "Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension?" Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11, no. 3 (March 2007): 105–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.12.002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Journal articles on the topic 'Language production and comprehension'

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles