Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-59b7f5684b-frvt8 Total loading time: 0.278 Render date: 2022-10-01T22:28:21.070Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": true, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

Children's comprehension of intonation as a marker for discourse topic collaboration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Gary Holdgrafer*
Affiliation:
The University of Alberta
Thomas F. Campbell
Affiliation:
Glenrose Rehabilitation Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta
*
Gary Holdgrafer, Ph.D., Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology, 11044 Garneau Professional Building, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, CanadaT6G OT2

Abstract

Two prerecorded productions of the “What's this?” question were presented to Grade 2, 4, and 6 children and to adults over a series of trials in a referential communication task. One production contained emphatic stress on the word “this” and the other production contained equal stress on both words. For each question presentation the experimenter selected a colored picture of an object from a deck that was the match to one of two picture choices in view of the subjects. The students guessed on successive presentations whether a different picture (new topic collaboration) or the same picture (old topic collaboration) had been selected based on the presence or absence of emphatic stress in the questions. No feedback was given to the students throughout the experimental procedure. Use of intonation as a marker for topic collaboration appeared by Grade 4, which is in support of other similar research.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bates, E., McNew, S., MacWhinney, B., Devescovi, A., & Smith, S. (1982). Functional constraints on sentence processing: A crosslinguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., MacWhinney, B., Caselli, C., Devescovi, A., Natale, F., & Venza, V. (1984). A crosslinguistic study of the development of sentence interpretation strategies. Child Development, 55, 341354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, D. L. (1972). Accent is predictable (if you're a mind-reader). Language, 48, 633644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, T. F., & Shriberg, L. D. (1982). Associations among pragmatic functions, linguistic stress, and natural phonological processes in speech-delayed children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 25, 547553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chafe, W. L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, and topics. In Li, C. (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 2755). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, A. (1974). An experiment involving comprehension of intonation in children from 7 to 10. Journal of Child Language. 1, 221232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D. (1969). Prosodic systems and intonation in English. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (1981). Clinical linguistics. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, L. M., Morton, K. B., & Smith, J. O. (1968). Peabody language development kit. American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Hornby, P. A. (1971). Surface structure and the topic-comment distinction: A developmental study. Child Development, 42, 19751988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwan, S. J., & Siegel, G. M. (1982). The effects of feedback on referential communication of preschool children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 25, 224229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keenan, E., & Schieffelin, B. (1976). Topic as a discourse notion. In Li, C. (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 337384). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Kirk, R. E. (1968). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (1976). Sentential devices for conveying givenness and newness: A crosscultural developmental study. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 539558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Price, D. (1980). The development of the comprehension of topic-comment marking. In Ingram, D., Peng, C. C., & Dale, P. (Eds.), Proceedings of the first international congress for the study of child language. Lanham, MD.: University Press of America.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E., & Kleigl, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 127150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rees, N. S., & Shulman, M. (1978). I don't understand what you mean by comprehension. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 43, 208219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Children's comprehension of intonation as a marker for discourse topic collaboration
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Children's comprehension of intonation as a marker for discourse topic collaboration
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Children's comprehension of intonation as a marker for discourse topic collaboration
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *