They were shown the picture of each of the target words and two other pictures,one
categorically and one thematically related to the target word. For example in the case of the
oboe, they were shown a picture of a flute (taxonomically related) and a picture of a child
(thematically related). Then they were asked “Which of these pictures do you think go best
with this one (picture of the target word)? ”. Once they chose, then they were asked to justify
their choice “Why do you think they go together ?” In that way they were producing a
sentence which included the target word.
NVESTIGATING LEXICAL ACQUISITION PATTERNS: CONTEXT AND COGNITION
More intriguing information
1. Who’s afraid of critical race theory in education? a reply to Mike Cole’s ‘The color-line and the class struggle’2. A Computational Model of Children's Semantic Memory
3. The name is absent
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. Cardiac Arrhythmia and Geomagnetic Activity
7. Clinical Teaching and OSCE in Pediatrics
8. The name is absent
9. Wettbewerbs- und Industriepolitik - EU-Integration als Dritter Weg?
10. The name is absent
11. The purpose of this paper is to report on the 2008 inaugural Equal Opportunities Conference held at the University of East Anglia, Norwich
12. The name is absent
13. Developmental Robots - A New Paradigm
14. On the origin of the cumulative semantic inhibition effect
15. A dynamic approach to the tendency of industries to cluster
16. FISCAL CONSOLIDATION AND DECENTRALISATION: A TALE OF TWO TIERS
17. Markets for Influence
18. Fiscal Rules, Fiscal Institutions, and Fiscal Performance
19. Towards a Strategy for Improving Agricultural Inputs Markets in Africa
20. Pursuit of Competitive Advantages for Entrepreneurship: Development of Enterprise as a Learning Organization. International and Russian Experience