NVESTIGATING LEXICAL ACQUISITION PATTERNS: CONTEXT AND COGNITION



Lexical contrast group during post tests 2 and 3 (Wilcoxon: P2: Z=2.6, p<.05; P3: Z-2.3,
p<.05) and the Definition group during post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Pl: Z=2.6, p<.05).

Is the provision of “cutlery contrasts ” influenced by the semantic domain of the lexical
items?

Children provided significantly more cutlery contrasts for the words describing artifacts than
for the words describing animals across testing (Wilcoxon, Pl :Z=3.9, p<.0005; P2: Z=4.2,
p<.0000; P3: Z=4.1, p<.0000). The same pattern was found for each group. Significant
differences were found for the Phonological control group (Wilcoxon, P3: Z=2.02, p<.05),
the Ostensive definition group across testing (Wilcoxon, Pl: Z=2.2, p<.05; P2: Z=2.02,
p<.05; P3: Z=2.2, p<.05), the Lexical contrast group (Wilcoxon, P2: Z=2.6, p<.05) and the
Definition group across testing (Wilcoxon, Pl: Z=3.07, p<.005; P2: Z=2.7, p<005; P3:
Z=2.3, p<.05).

Analysis of the “furniture contrasts”

Is there a differential impact of the type of exposure to new lexical items that the children
receive on the provision of “furniture contrasts ”?

Children’s performance was not found to differ by the type of exposure during post test 1.
During post test 2 the Lexical contrast provided significantly more furniture contrasts (for the
stool) than the Ostensive definition group (Wilcoxon: Z=2.2, p<.05). In post test 3 the
Lexical contrast group provided significantly more furniture contrasts than the Control
(Wilcoxon: Z=1.9, p<.05), the Phonological control (Wilcoxon: Z=2.3, p<.05) and the
Ostensive definition group (Wilcoxon: Z=2.9, p<.005). In addition the Definition group
provided significantly more contrasts than the Ostensive definition group.

Does children ,s provision of “furniture contrasts ” increase with increased exposure to the
lexical items ?

Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences over time.

Does the children ,s prior knowledge of the lexical items influence the provision of “furniture
contrasts ”?

The children provided significantly more furniture contrasts for the partially represented than
the unknown words across testing (Wilcoxon, Pl: Z=3.6, p<.0005; P2: Z=4.1, p<.0000; P3:

258



More intriguing information

1. Evidence of coevolution in multi-objective evolutionary algorithms
2. The name is absent
3. BARRIERS TO EFFICIENCY AND THE PRIVATIZATION OF TOWNSHIP-VILLAGE ENTERPRISES
4. How do investors' expectations drive asset prices?
5. MATHEMATICS AS AN EXACT AND PRECISE LANGUAGE OF NATURE
6. The name is absent
7. Improvements in medical care and technology and reductions in traffic-related fatalities in Great Britain
8. The name is absent
9. Aktive Klienten - Aktive Politik? (Wie) Läßt sich dauerhafte Unabhängigkeit von Sozialhilfe erreichen? Ein Literaturbericht
10. Monetary Discretion, Pricing Complementarity and Dynamic Multiple Equilibria
11. The name is absent
12. Quality Enhancement for E-Learning Courses: The Role of Student Feedback
13. Backpropagation Artificial Neural Network To Detect Hyperthermic Seizures In Rats
14. Washington Irving and the Knickerbocker Group
15. The name is absent
16. The name is absent
17. Structural Conservation Practices in U.S. Corn Production: Evidence on Environmental Stewardship by Program Participants and Non-Participants
18. The name is absent
19. Uncertain Productivity Growth and the Choice between FDI and Export
20. DIVERSITY OF RURAL PLACES - TEXAS