The neighborhood characteristics of malapropisms.
This study examined the phonological neighborhood characteristics (frequency, density, and neighborhood frequency) of 138 malapropisms. Malapropisms are whole word substitutions that are phonologically, but not semantically, related. A statistical analysis of a speech error corpus suggests that neig...
| Publicado en: | Language & Speech Vol. 40; no. 3; pp. 211 - 229 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Sage Publications Inc.
Jul-Sep97
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=107249109&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 107249109 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 00238309 3YY jtl: Language & Speech issn: 00238309 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jul-Sep97 vid: 40 iid: 3 pid: 344 pub: Sage Publications Inc. place: Thousand Oaks, California artinfo: ui: 107249109 1998022347 10.1177/002383099704000301 NLM9509578 107249109 ppf: 211 ppct: 18 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: The neighborhood characteristics of malapropisms. aug: au: Vitevitch MS affil: Speech Research Laboratory, Department of Psychology, Bloomington, Indiana 47405-1301. E-mail: mvitevit@indiana.edu sug: subj: Speech Disorders Diagnosis Speech Evaluation Chi Square Test Descriptive Statistics Funding Source Human One-Way Analysis of Variance Phonology Word Lists ab: This study examined the phonological neighborhood characteristics (frequency, density, and neighborhood frequency) of 138 malapropisms. Malapropisms are whole word substitutions that are phonologically, but not semantically, related. A statistical analysis of a speech error corpus suggests that neighborhood density and word frequency differentially affected the number of malapropisms. Specifically, a greater number of malapropisms were found among high frequency words with dense neighborhoods than with sparse neighborhoods. Exactly the opposite pattern was found among low frequency words. That is, more errors were found among low frequency words with sparse neighborhoods than with dense neighborhoods. More malapropisms resided in low frequency neighborhoods than in high. The average word frequency, average neighborhood density, and average neighborhood frequency of the malapropisms were significantly lower than the same averages computed from randomly sampled control words. Finally, more target words were replaced by error words that had relatively higher frequency than by error words that had relatively lower frequency. The implications of these findings for models of lexical representation and processing are discussed. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|