Modality effects on coherence: Is it better to be seen than heard?

1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger J. Kreuz ◽  
Richard M. Roberts ◽  
Elizabeth A. Bainbridge ◽  
D. Kristen Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 527-562
Author(s):  
Ulrike Zeshan ◽  
Nick Palfreyman

AbstractThis article sets out a conceptual framework and typology of modality effects in the comparison of signed and spoken languages. This is essential for a theory of cross-modal typology. We distinguish between relative modality effects, where a linguistic structure is markedly more common in one modality than in the other, and absolute modality effects, where a structure does not occur in one of the modalities at all. Using examples from a wide variety of sign languages, we discuss examples at the levels of phonology, morphology (including numerals, negation, and aspect) and semantics. At the phonological level, the issue of iconically motivated sub-lexical components in signs, and parallels with sound symbolism in spoken languages, is particularly pertinent. Sensory perception metaphors serve as an example for semantic comparison across modalities. Advocating an inductive approach to cross-modal comparison, we discuss analytical challenges in defining what is comparable across the signed and spoken modalities, and in carrying out such comparisons in a rigorous and empirically substantiated way.


Author(s):  
Catherine G. Penney ◽  
Annette Godsell

1995 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 289-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirjam Woutersen ◽  
Kess de Bot ◽  
Bert Weltens

Author(s):  
Bijoyaa Mohapatra ◽  
Jacqueline Laures-Gore

Purpose This article presents a viewpoint highlighting concerns regarding currently available assessments of working memory in adults with neurogenic communication disorders. Additionally, we provide recommendations for improving working memory assessment in this population. Method This viewpoint includes a critique of clinical and experimental working memory tests relevant to speech-language pathologists. We consider the terminology used to describe memory, as well as discuss language demands and test construction. Results Clinical and experimental testing of working memory in adults with neurogenic communication disorders is challenged due to theoretical, methodological, and practical limitations. The major limitations are characterized as linguistic and task demands, presentation and response modality effects, test administration, and scoring parameters. Taking these limitations into consideration, several modifications to working memory testing and their relevance to neurogenic populations are discussed. Conclusions The recommendations provided in this article can better guide clinicians and researchers to advocate for improved tests of working memory in adults with neurogenic communication disorders. Future research should continue to address these concerns and consider our recommendations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document