Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:51:29.770Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Developmental changes in indicators that literal interpretations of homonyms are associated with conflict

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 1999

MICHÈLE M. M. MAZZOCCO
MICHÈLE M. M. MAZZOCCO
Affiliation:
Kennedy Krieger Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Processes by which children interpret homonyms were examined. Participants were 16 two- and three-year-olds, 32 four-year-olds, 32 seven-year-olds and 32 ten-year-olds. Each child individually was asked to interpret keywords from stories read aloud by an examiner. Keywords were homonyms, nonsense words, or unambiguous words. For the three older groups, response times (RTs) to unambiguous words were significantly shorter than RTs to homonyms and nonsense words, when interpretations for all three-word types were consistent with the story contexts. Seven-year-olds had longer RTs for homonyms versus nonsense words. RTs did not vary among responses to homonyms. Four- and seven-year-olds had longer RTs for inappropriate, versus appropriate, nonsense-word interpretations. The number of cues recalled from a story about a keyword did not differ across appropriately versus inappropriately interpreted homonyms, but did differ across appropriately versus inappropriately interpreted nonsense words. These findings have implications for understanding how children arrive at literal interpretations of homonyms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , June 1999 , pp. 393 - 417
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

This work represents, in part, dissertation research completed by the author. The author wishes to acknowledge Susan C. Somerville, who served as her dissertation advisor. The author also thanks all of the participants and their parents, the teachers and principals in the participating Tempe, Arizona Public Elementary School District, the teachers and directors of the Arizona State University Child Study Laboratory and Child Development Laboratory, and research assistants Jef Miller, Cynthia Kay Jenkins and Lisa Cramer Whitfield.