Processing homonymy and polysemy: Effects of sentential context and time-course following unilateral brain damage  

Oleh:

Klepousniotou, Ekaterini ; Baum, Shari R.

Jenis: Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: Brain and Language (Full Text) vol. 95 no. 3 (2005), page 365-382.
Topik: Brain laterality; Sentential context; Lexical ambiguity; Homonymy; Met onymy; Metaphor
Fulltext: 93_03_Klepousniotou.pdf (816.22KB)

Isi artikel

The present study investigated the abilities of left-hemisphere-damaged (LHD) non-fluent aphasic, right-hemisphere-damaged (RHD), and normal control individuals to access, in sentential biasing contexts, the multiple meanings of three types of ambiguous words, namely homonyms (e.g., “punch”), metonymies (e.g., “rabbit”), and metaphors (e.g., “star”). Furthermore, the predictions of the “suppression deficit” and “coarse semantic coding” hypotheses, which have been proposed to account for RH language function/ dysfunction, were tested. Using an auditory semantic priming paradigm, ambiguous words were incorporated in dominant- or subordinate- biasing sentence-primes followed after a short (100ms) or long (1000ms) interstimulus interval (ISI) by dominant-meaningrelated, subordinate-meaning-related or unrelated target words. For all three types of ambiguous words, both the effects of context and ISI were obvious in the performance of normal control subjects, who showed multiple meaning activation at the short ISI, but eventually, at the long ISI, contextually appropriate meaning selection. Largely similar performance was exhibited by the LHD non- fluent aphasic patients as well. In contrast, RHD patients showed limited effects of context, and no effects of the time-course of processing. In addition, although homonymous and metonymous words showed similar patterns of activation (i.e., both meanings were activated at both ISIs), RHD patients had difficulties activating the subordinate meanings of metaphors, suggesting a selective problem with figurative meanings. Although the present findings do not provide strong support for either the “coarse semantic coding” or the “suppression deficit” hypotheses, they are viewed as being more consistent with the latter, according to which RH damage leads to deficits suppressing alternative meanings of ambiguous words that become incompatible with the context.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali