ten.1007/s10936-012-9218-2.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA

ten.1007/s10936-012-9218-2.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptThe effects of cognitive linguistic variables and language encounter on behavioural and kinematic performances in nonword learningJayanthi Sasisekaran, Ph.D. and Division of Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences, University of Minnesota Sanford Weisberg, Ph.D. College of Statistics, University of MinnesotaAbstractThe aim in the present study was to investigate the effect of cognitive linguistic variables and language practical experience on behavioral and kinematic measures of nonword studying in young adults. Group 1 consisted of thirteen participants who spoke American English as the very first and only language. Group 2 consisted of seven participants with varying levels of proficiency in a second language. Logistic regression on the % of appropriate productions revealed short-term memory to become a considerable contributor. The bilingual group showed greater overall performance in comparison with the monolinguals. Linear regression from the kinematic data revealed that the short term memory variable contributed considerably to movement coordination. Differences had been not observed among the bilingual as well as the monolingual speakers in kinematic performance. Nonword properties such as syllable length and complexity influenced each behavioral and kinematic efficiency. The findings supported the observation that nonword repetition is multiply determined in adults.Keyword phrases Nonword repetition; cognitive-linguistic; lip aperture variability The capacity to repeat novel phonological strings is considered to be a crucial talent for language learning. Research of nonword studying recommend that the process is sub-served by quite a few cognitive – linguistic systems such as, phonological storage or short-term memory (e.g. Gupta, 2004), phonological processes or strength of long-term sublexical representations mediated by vocabulary size and resulting phonological expertise (e.Hydroxychloroquine sulfate g.Ripretinib Storkel et al., 2006; Majerus, Poncelet, Van der Linden, Weekes, 2008), nonword repetition capabilities (e.g. Gathercole, 2006), and ultimately, an intact speech motor method (e.g. Aichert Ziegler, 2004). Gathercole (2006) described nonword learning as a primitive mechanism that’s mediated by phonological storage and is accessible throughout the lifespan. The aim in the present study is always to investigate nonword learning in adults to study the effects of the various cognitive linguistic variables and language knowledge on behavioral and kinematic measures of task performance.PMID:23775868 Though the involvement on the distinct sub-systems is essential to nonword understanding, the varying influences is significantly debated. As an illustration, differences have been reported in theCONTACT AUTHOR: Jayanthi Sasisekaran, SLHS, University of Minnesota, 164 Pillsbury Drive S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55455, [email protected], Telephone: 612-626-6001.Sasisekaran and WeisbergPagerelevance of phonological storage vs. processes. A reliance on phonological storage would indicate dependence on phonological short-term in lieu of on long-term memory, i.e., vocabulary size, for better activity performance. Research findings help a function for vocabulary size in nonword finding out in youngsters (e.g. Gathercole Baddeley, 1989; Storkel, 2001; Storkel, 2004) whilst short-term memory as an alternative to long-term sublexical representations is considered essential in adults (e.g. Gaskell Dumay, 2003). As a result, the key objective of this preliminary study should be to investigate experimentally th.