Noun and Verb (Re)learning: A Comparative Perspective on Acquisition and Post-Stroke Aphasia

IF 1.9 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Ran Li, Angela Xiaoxue He
{"title":"Noun and Verb (Re)learning: A Comparative Perspective on Acquisition and Post-Stroke Aphasia","authors":"Ran Li,&nbsp;Angela Xiaoxue He","doi":"10.1111/lnc3.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Nouns and verbs are fundamental building blocks of language, yet they exhibit important asymmetries. In language acquisition, nouns typically enter young children's lexicon earlier and are acquired more easily, while verbs are learned later and with greater difficulty. The mechanisms supporting the acquisition of these two categories also differ: nouns are often learned through observational and social contexts, whereas verb learning heavily relies on the nouns that accompany them. This noun-verb asymmetry evident in <i>language learning</i> is paralleled in <i>language relearning</i> among individuals with aphasia. Verbs are generally more vulnerable to impairment than nouns, and the recovery of verbs is shown to benefit most from treatments that target the nouns serving as their arguments. While previous research has separately addressed the noun-verb asymmetry in the contexts of both <i>learning</i> and <i>relearning</i>, there has been a lack of comparative discussion between these domains. This review article integrates findings from both areas, reinforcing the view that nouns and verbs differ significantly in their linguistic and psycholinguistic properties and neural representations—differences that underpin the disparities observed in their acquisition (learning) and recovery (relearning).</p>","PeriodicalId":47472,"journal":{"name":"Language and Linguistics Compass","volume":"20 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lnc3.70050","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language and Linguistics Compass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lnc3.70050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nouns and verbs are fundamental building blocks of language, yet they exhibit important asymmetries. In language acquisition, nouns typically enter young children's lexicon earlier and are acquired more easily, while verbs are learned later and with greater difficulty. The mechanisms supporting the acquisition of these two categories also differ: nouns are often learned through observational and social contexts, whereas verb learning heavily relies on the nouns that accompany them. This noun-verb asymmetry evident in language learning is paralleled in language relearning among individuals with aphasia. Verbs are generally more vulnerable to impairment than nouns, and the recovery of verbs is shown to benefit most from treatments that target the nouns serving as their arguments. While previous research has separately addressed the noun-verb asymmetry in the contexts of both learning and relearning, there has been a lack of comparative discussion between these domains. This review article integrates findings from both areas, reinforcing the view that nouns and verbs differ significantly in their linguistic and psycholinguistic properties and neural representations—differences that underpin the disparities observed in their acquisition (learning) and recovery (relearning).

名词与动词(再)学习:习得与脑卒中后失语的比较研究
名词和动词是语言的基本组成部分,但它们也表现出重要的不对称性。在语言习得中,名词进入幼儿词汇的时间通常较早,也较容易习得,而动词的学习时间较晚,难度较大。支持这两类习得的机制也有所不同:名词通常是通过观察和社会环境来学习的,而动词的学习则严重依赖于伴随它们的名词。这种在语言学习中很明显的名词-动词不对称在失语症患者的语言再学习中也有相似之处。动词通常比名词更容易受到损害,并且动词的恢复被证明从针对作为其论据的名词的治疗中获益最多。虽然以往的研究分别研究了学习和再学习情境下的名动不对称,但缺乏这两个领域之间的比较讨论。这篇综述文章整合了这两个领域的研究结果,强调了名词和动词在语言和心理语言特性以及神经表征方面的显著差异——这些差异支撑了在它们的习得(学习)和恢复(再学习)中观察到的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Language and Linguistics Compass
Language and Linguistics Compass LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Unique in its range, Language and Linguistics Compass is an online-only journal publishing original, peer-reviewed surveys of current research from across the entire discipline. Language and Linguistics Compass publishes state-of-the-art reviews, supported by a comprehensive bibliography and accessible to an international readership. Language and Linguistics Compass is aimed at senior undergraduates, postgraduates and academics, and will provide a unique reference tool for researching essays, preparing lectures, writing a research proposal, or just keeping up with new developments in a specific area of interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书