Abstract
ABSTRACTThe present study focuses on the effect of an important methodological choice in word association studies in children: the elicitation of single versus multiple responses. This choice has been shown to affect the numbers and types of associations adults produce, however, little is known about how it affects children’s word associations. A total of 11,725 associations to 80 nouns from 207 monolingual and bilingual minority children were classified according to a detailed coding system, and differences between the semantic characteristics of first, second, and third responses were examined. We show that in children as well, the multiple association task elicits more and qualitatively different responses, resulting in more diversified semantic networks surrounding the stimulus nouns. On the speaker level, reading comprehension scores were related differently to initial and later responses, suggesting a more complex measure of semantic knowledge emerges from the multiple word association task. No differences were found between monolingual and bilingual children’s associative preferences. We argue that the multiple association task produces more detailed data on language users’ semantic networks than the single association task, and suggest a number of ways in which this task could be employed in future research.
Highlights
The network metaphor for the storage of semantic knowledge in the mental lexicon is evoked in many studies on lexical knowledge, and the studies using word associations to probe the exact nature of this network are numerous (Fitzpatrick, 2012)
Word associations give us insight in semantic networks on two levels: on the word level, that is they show us what a semantic network surrounding a specific word may look like based on associations from a group of people; and on the level of the mental lexicon of the individual language user, that is combining word associations to several words from one person can shed light on the types of semantic relations that are more prominent in the individual’s mental lexicon
Despite the limitations discussed in the preceding text, our study has shown that the use of the multiple association task leads to interesting insights on the structure of the mental lexicon
Summary
The network metaphor for the storage of semantic knowledge in the mental lexicon is evoked in many studies on lexical knowledge, and the studies using word associations to probe the exact nature of this network are numerous (Fitzpatrick, 2012). Word associations give us insight in semantic networks on two levels: on the word level, that is they show us what a semantic network surrounding a specific word may look like based on associations from a group of people; and on the level of the mental lexicon of the individual language user, that is combining word associations to several words from one person can shed light on the types of semantic relations that are more prominent in the individual’s mental lexicon (cf Zareva, 2011). Word association data on the word level are widely used in psycholinguistic studies on lexical knowledge and retrieval (most notably semantic priming studies, cf. McNamara, 2005), while word association data on the level of the language user have been employed with varying success as a tool to measure vocabulary knowledge (e.g., Cremer et al, 2011; Fitzpatrick et al, 2013) and to distinguish different types of language users such as L1 and L2 speakers or bilinguals (e.g., Cremer et al, 2011; Fitzpatrick, 2006, 2007, 2009; Fitzpatrick & Izura, 2011; Söderman, 1993; Wolter, 2001; Zareva, 2007; Zareva & Wolter, 2012) and different age groups (Borghi & Caramelli, 2003; Fitzpatrick et al, 2013)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
