学龄前儿童的表达语用学和韵律学与结构语言的关系比与心理化的关系更密切

IF 1.5 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
M. Pronina, P. Prieto, L. Bischetti, V. Bambini
{"title":"学龄前儿童的表达语用学和韵律学与结构语言的关系比与心理化的关系更密切","authors":"M. Pronina, P. Prieto, L. Bischetti, V. Bambini","doi":"10.1080/15475441.2022.2074852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Pragmatics lies at the point where language meets the social world and encompasses both the linguistic and the social dimensions of communication. However, the relationship between pragmatic abilities, other language skills, and socio-cognitive aspects such as mentalizing is still a matter of wide debate. This study sets out to investigate the status of pragmatic abilities by testing from a developmental angle their relationship with other linguistic skills and mentalizing. We examined the role of structural language and mentalizing on both expressive pragmatic and prosodic skills in typically developing preschool children. A total of 105 3-to 4-year-old children were assessed on pragmatics and prosody with the Audiovisual Pragmatic Test, as well as on structural language skills (vocabulary and syntax) and a series of mentalizing measures (false belief, emotion understanding, and metacognitive vocabulary). A combined approach including correlations, regressions, and structural equation modeling (SEM) was used. Structural language was a strong positive predictor of both pragmatic and prosodic scores, while mentalizing predicted neither pragmatic nor prosodic performance. We suggest that in preschool years, expressive pragmatics and prosodic skills are more closely related to structural language skills than to mentalizing.","PeriodicalId":46642,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning and Development","volume":"23 1","pages":"323 - 344"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expressive Pragmatics and Prosody in Young Preschoolers are More Closely Related to Structural Language than to Mentalizing\",\"authors\":\"M. Pronina, P. Prieto, L. Bischetti, V. Bambini\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15475441.2022.2074852\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Pragmatics lies at the point where language meets the social world and encompasses both the linguistic and the social dimensions of communication. However, the relationship between pragmatic abilities, other language skills, and socio-cognitive aspects such as mentalizing is still a matter of wide debate. This study sets out to investigate the status of pragmatic abilities by testing from a developmental angle their relationship with other linguistic skills and mentalizing. We examined the role of structural language and mentalizing on both expressive pragmatic and prosodic skills in typically developing preschool children. A total of 105 3-to 4-year-old children were assessed on pragmatics and prosody with the Audiovisual Pragmatic Test, as well as on structural language skills (vocabulary and syntax) and a series of mentalizing measures (false belief, emotion understanding, and metacognitive vocabulary). A combined approach including correlations, regressions, and structural equation modeling (SEM) was used. Structural language was a strong positive predictor of both pragmatic and prosodic scores, while mentalizing predicted neither pragmatic nor prosodic performance. We suggest that in preschool years, expressive pragmatics and prosodic skills are more closely related to structural language skills than to mentalizing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46642,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Language Learning and Development\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"323 - 344\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Language Learning and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2022.2074852\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Learning and Development","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2022.2074852","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

语用学研究的是语言与社会世界的交集,涵盖了交际的语言和社会两个维度。然而,语用能力、其他语言技能和社会认知方面(如心智化)之间的关系仍然是一个广泛争论的问题。本研究从发展的角度考察语用能力与其他语言技能和心智化的关系,探讨语用能力的现状。我们研究了结构语言和心智化对典型学龄前儿童表达语用和韵律技能的作用。采用视听语用测试对105名3- 4岁儿童的语用学、韵律学、结构语言技能(词汇和句法)以及一系列心理化测试(错误信念、情感理解和元认知词汇)进行了评估。采用了包括相关性、回归和结构方程模型(SEM)在内的综合方法。结构语言对语用和韵律成绩都有很强的正向预测作用,而心智化对语用和韵律成绩都没有预测作用。我们认为,在学龄前,表达语用和韵律技能与结构语言技能的关系比与心智化的关系更密切。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Expressive Pragmatics and Prosody in Young Preschoolers are More Closely Related to Structural Language than to Mentalizing
ABSTRACT Pragmatics lies at the point where language meets the social world and encompasses both the linguistic and the social dimensions of communication. However, the relationship between pragmatic abilities, other language skills, and socio-cognitive aspects such as mentalizing is still a matter of wide debate. This study sets out to investigate the status of pragmatic abilities by testing from a developmental angle their relationship with other linguistic skills and mentalizing. We examined the role of structural language and mentalizing on both expressive pragmatic and prosodic skills in typically developing preschool children. A total of 105 3-to 4-year-old children were assessed on pragmatics and prosody with the Audiovisual Pragmatic Test, as well as on structural language skills (vocabulary and syntax) and a series of mentalizing measures (false belief, emotion understanding, and metacognitive vocabulary). A combined approach including correlations, regressions, and structural equation modeling (SEM) was used. Structural language was a strong positive predictor of both pragmatic and prosodic scores, while mentalizing predicted neither pragmatic nor prosodic performance. We suggest that in preschool years, expressive pragmatics and prosodic skills are more closely related to structural language skills than to mentalizing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信