Does the children ^,s prior knowledge of the lexical items influence the provision of descriptive
properties ?

The provision of “cZe^crzpfz've” properties did not differ by the children’s prior knowledge.

Is the provision of descriptive properties influenced by the semantic domain of the lexical
items?

The provision of “descriptive" properties did not differ by the semantic domain of the lexical
items.

Analysis of the “contextual properties”

Is there a differential impact of the type of exposure to new lexical items that the children
receive to the provision of contextual properties?

No significant differences were found for post test 1 and post test 2. Significant differences
were found for post test 3 (Kjuskall-Wallis I-Way Anova: X² =12.4, df=4, p<.05).
Particularly, the Definition group provided significantly more "contextual" properties than
the Control group (Wilcoxon: Z=2.9, p<.0005)and the Phonological control group
(WilcoxomZ=2.5, p<.05).

Does children ^,s provision of contextual properties increase with increased exposure to the
lexical items?

The children provided more “contextual" properties over time. Particularly, they provided
significantly more “contextual" properties during post test 3 than during post test 1
(Wilcoxon: Z=2.5, p<.05). The Definition group provided significantly more “contextual"
properties during post test 3 than during post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=2.1, p<.05).

Does the children ^,s prior knowledge of the lexical items influence the provision of contextual
properties?

Children provided more “contextual" properties for the partially represented words than for
the unknown words, however, the differences were not significant.

270

<<   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   >>

More intriguing information