Thank you very much for downloading applied longitudinal data analysis modeling change and event occurrence. As you may know, people have look hundreds times for their favorite novels like this applied longitudinal data analysis modeling change and event occurrence, but end up in malicious downloads. Rather than enjoying a good book with a cup of coffee in the afternoon, instead they are facing with some infectious virus inside their computer.

Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis Modeling Change And Event Occurrence

Child psychiatrists, pediatricians, and other child clinicians need to have a solid understanding of child language development. There are at least four important reasons that make this necessary. First, slowing, arrest, and deviation of language development are highly associated with, and complicate the course of, child psychopathology. Second, language competence plays a crucial role in emotional and mood regulation, evaluation, and therapy. Third, language deficits are the most frequent underpinning of the learning disorders, ubiquitous in our clinical populations. Fourth, clinicians should not confuse the rich linguistic and dialectal diversity of our clinical populations with abnormalities in child language development. The challenge for the clinician becomes, then, how to get immersed in the captivating field of child language acquisition without getting overwhelmed by its conceptual and empirical complexity. In the past 50 years and since the seminal works of Roger Brown, Jerome Bruner, and Catherine Snow, child language researchers (often known as developmental psycholinguists) have produced a remarkable body of knowledge. Linguists such as Chomsky and philosophers such as Grice have strongly influenced the science of child language. One of the major tenets of Chomskian linguistics (known as generative grammar) is that children’s capacity to acquire language is “hardwired” with “universal grammar”—an innate language acquisition device (LAD), a language “instinct”—at its core. This view is in part supported by the assertion that the linguistic input that children receive is relatively dismal and of poor quality relative to the high quantity and quality of output that they manage to produce after age 2 and that only an advanced, innate capacity to decode and organize linguistic input can enable them to “get from here (prelinguistic infant) to there (linguistic child).” In “Constructing a Language,” Tomasello presents a contrasting theory of how the child acquires language: It is not a universal grammar that allows for language development. Rather, human cognition universals of communicative needs and vocal-auditory processing result in some language universals, such as nouns and verbs as expressions of reference and predication (p. 19). The author proposes that two sets of cognitive skills resulting from biological/phylogenetic adaptations are fundamental to the ontogenetic origins of language. These sets of inherited cognitive skills are intentionreading on the one hand and pattern-finding, on the other. Intention-reading skills encompass the prelinguistic infant’s capacities to share attention to outside events with other persons, establishing joint attentional frames, to understand other people’s communicative intentions, and to imitate the adult’s communicative intentions (an intersubjective form of imitation that requires symbolic understanding and perspective-taking). Pattern-finding skills include the ability of infants as young as 7 months old to analyze concepts and percepts (most relevant here, auditory or speech percepts) and create concrete or abstract categories that contain analogous items. Tomasello, a most prominent developmental scientist with research foci on child language acquisition and on social cognition and social learning in children and primates, succinctly and clearly introduces the major points of his theory and his views on the origins of language in the initial chapters. In subsequent chapters, he delves into the details by covering most language acquisition domains, namely, word (lexical) learning, syntax, and morphology and conversation, narrative, and extended discourse. Although one of the remaining domains (pragmatics) is at the core of his theory and permeates the text throughout, the relative paucity of passages explicitly devoted to discussing acquisition and proBOOK REVIEWS

Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition

The complete title of this book runs ‘Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics using R’ and as such it very well reflects the purpose and spirit of the book. The author guides the reader in about 350 pages from descriptive and basic statistical methods over classification and clustering to (generalised) linear and mixed models. Each of the methods is introduced in the context of concrete linguistic problems and demonstrated on exciting datasets from current research in the language sciences. In line with its practical orientation, the book focuses primarily on using the methods and interpreting the results. This implies that the mathematical treatment of the techniques is held at a minimum if not absent from the book. In return, the reader is provided with very detailed explanations on how to conduct the analyses using R [1]. The first chapter sets the tone being a 20-page introduction to R. For this and all subsequent chapters, the R code is intertwined with the chapter text and the datasets and functions used are conveniently packaged in the languageR package that is available on the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN). With this approach, the author has done an excellent job in enabling researchers and students alike to reproduce the analyses and learn by doing. Another quality as a textbook is the fact that every chapter ends with Workbook sections where the user is invited to exercise his or her analysis skills on supplemental datasets. Full solutions including code, results and comments are given in Appendix A (30 pages). Instructors are therefore very well served by this text, although they might want to balance the book with some more mathematical treatment depending on the target audience. After the introductory chapter on R, the book opens on graphical data exploration. Chapter 3 treats probability distributions and common sampling distributions. Under basic statistical methods (Chapter 4), distribution tests and tests on means and variances are covered. Chapter 5 deals with clustering and classification. Strangely enough, the clustering section has material on PCA, factor analysis, correspondence analysis and includes only one subsection on clustering, devoted notably to hierarchical partitioning methods. The classification part deals with decision trees, discriminant analysis and support vector machines. The regression chapter (Chapter 6) treats linear models, generalised linear models, piecewise linear models and a substantial section on models for lexical richness. The final chapter on mixed models is particularly interesting as it is one of the few text book accounts that introduce the reader to using the (innovative) lme4 package of Douglas Bates which implements linear mixed-effects models. Moreover, the case studies included in this

Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R

中國科技大學通識教育中心英語文證照奬勵金實施要點 中華民國 105 年 1 月 8 日通識教育委員會議通過 一、 中國科技大學(以下簡稱本校)為鼓勵本校學生通過具公信力機構之英語文能力測驗或 取得證照,特訂定「中國科技大學通識教育中心英語文證照獎勵金實施要點」(以下簡 稱本要點)。 二、 學生於就讀本校期間,通過歐盟共同架構(CEFR)語言能力參考指標 B1(中級)同等級英 語文能力測驗以上(含)者,得依據本要點酌予獎勵。檢測項目請參閱本中心「歐洲語言 學習、教學、評量共同參考架構與各英語檢測分級對照表」(參見附表);未列於標準 對照表之測驗項目不給予獎助。 三、 凡本校學生,除應英系外,均得申請。大學部學生通過同等級以申請一次為限,在學期 間得重複申請,但該次申請之級別不得低於前次。 本獎勵金每學期核發乙次,每次核發全校前 10 名,各名次核發金額如附表。 四、 申請人應提供在學期間,申請當(學)期參加考試之證明文件及成績證明或證照,以憑辦 理。 五、 獎勵金申請作業:請至通識教育中心網頁下載「英語文證照獎勵金申請表」(附件 1), 填妥後檢附成績單正本及影本(背面簽名並註明與正本無異)各一份、本人金融帳戶存 簿(郵局或土地銀行)封面影本送至通識教育中心。 通識教育中心得每學期遴選受獎代表,擇期公開頒奬,並辦理後續請款作業。 六、 奬勵金申請期限:通過相關證照考試半年內應提出申請,逾期視同放棄。 七、 本要點之獎勵金由學校開設通識教育中心專戶,一切收支專款專用;每年度如有剩餘 款,則移至翌年度繼續使用。 八、 本要點經通識教育中心會議審查通過,陳請校長核定後公告實施,修訂時亦同。

文化と言語の多様性の中のCommon European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR)--それは基準か? (第10回明海大学大学院応用言語学研究科セミナー 講演)

Ethnologue: Languages of the World

The aim of this study was to adapt the Listening Span Task (Gaulin and Campbell, 1994; Pickering and Gathercole, 2001) into Turkish (LST-T), to administer it to children in order to measure how children of different ages perform on the task and to measure its psychometric properties by providing correlations with other cognitive measures: the Word Span Test that measures phonological WM capacity, the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test that measures both categorization ability and executive WM functions, and the Categorical Free Recall Test that examines both the development of the release from proactive interference pattern and the categorization ability during childhood. The results indicate that the LST-T scores increased in a significant stepwise manner without any gender difference between boys and girls. Measures of convergent validity showed significant correlations with the two working memory tests: the Word Span Test, and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. The results demonstrate that the LST-T is an adequate tool to be used by developmentalists for a variety of purposes, ranging from developmental research to educational and clinical practice to investigate cognitive development of Turkish-speaking children.

/pdf/assessing-complex-working-memory-in-turkish-speaking-4v2ijk5msl.pdf

Assessing Complex Working Memory in Turkish-Speaking Children : The Listening Span Task Adaptation Into Turkish

The Parallel Function Hypothesis (PFH) Sheldon (1974) suggests that children use a strategy that assigns the same role to the co-referential NPs as their matrix clauses. That is, a complex NP that appears in an embedded clause is processed more easily when it has the same grammatical role both in the matrix and embedded clause compared to when it has different roles. As far as relative clauses (RCs) are concerned, it predicts better performance in structures where the relativized head has the same grammatical role in the embedded clause and in the matrix clause. That is, a subject RC with the subject role (SS) or an object RC with the object role (OO) in the matrix clause should yield shorter reaction times (RTs) in processing than a subject RC with the object role (OS) and an object RC with the subject role (SO), respectively. Sheldon (1974) suggests the same pattern should be observed in all languages regardless of their typological characteristics. In other words, it is predicted to be a universal heuristic for the parsing of complex structures that involve embedded clauses. The PFH has been shown to work well for English (e.g., Sheldon, 1974; Grober, Beardsley, & Caramazza, 1978) but it has also received criticism (e.g., Hamburger & Crain, 1982; and Correa, 1982). Similarly, its cross-linguistic plausibility has been questioned (Hakuta, 1981 for Japanese; MacWhinney, 1989 for Hungarian; and Özcan, 1997 for Turkish). One common feature of the data from cross-linguistic studies is that they come from morphologically rich languages with variable word order. All of these studies focus on the offline end-sentence interpretation of these structures. They surely provide important insights into the general tendencies in those languages. Yet, it is hardly possible to single out the cause for the underlying pattern in those complex structures since a particular pattern could be due to a reason other than non-parallel roles in both clauses. Therefore, this hypothesis is revisited here with an on-line study with Turkish-speaking adults. We will focus on the participants’ RTs during the critical phrase to see how the matrix role of the relativized head could influence processing complex sentences in Turkish and revisit Özcan (1997)’s comprehension data from Turkish children to see whether the pattern observed in adults could account for the child data. Özcan (1997) investigated the effect of RC-Type in combination with the

Parallel function hypothesis revisited in the processing of Turkish relative clauses in adults

In this study, we explored the linguistic consolidation processes associated with bilingual processing using an experimental paradigm novel in bilingualism research, i.e., sentence repetition. We tested 46 L1-German L2-English bilinguals immersed in the L2 context. Firstly, we compared participants’ sentence repetition accuracy in single-language sentences and in sentences involving code-switches. Secondly, we investigated the processing cost associated with different types of code-switching, i.e., alternation, insertion, and dense code-switching. Finally, we assessed the following potential predictors of repetition accuracy: regular usage of different code-switching types, executive functions (working memory and inhibitory control), as well as relevant bilingualism variables (proficiency, dominance, and immersion). Our first finding was that bilinguals displayed reduced repetition accuracy in sentences involving code-switches compared to single-language sentences, but only when the single-language sentences were in the participants’ L1. This suggests that any processing costs associated with code-switching are modulated by bilinguals’ language background. Moreover, bilinguals’ poor performance in L2 compared to L1 single-language sentences, despite reporting high levels of L2 exposure frequency, highlights the importance of age of acquisition and dominance profiles for language processing. In terms of code-switching, our results revealed that bilinguals’ repetition accuracy differed across different types of code-switching. The processing effort associated with different types of code-switching in the sentence repetition task was primarily driven by the structural depth and the degree of mixing of the involved code-switch, i.e., dense forms of code-switching involving high levels of linguistic co-activation were harder to repeat than alternations involving unintegrated language switching. This effect partially converged with bilinguals’ sociolinguistic practices because bilinguals also reported lower exposure frequency to dense code-switching, but no direct correlations were observed at the level of individual differences. In terms of general cognitive functions, repetition accuracy was modulated by working memory but not by inhibitory control. By investigating this issue, we hope to contribute to our understanding of language processing in the face of cross-linguistic consolidation processes.

/pdf/what-sentence-repetition-tasks-can-reveal-about-the-2n7emdjw.pdf

What Sentence Repetition Tasks Can Reveal about the Processing Effort Associated with Different Types of Code-Switching

Although the role of parsing for language acquisition has long been recognized (e.g., Fodor, 1998), empirical research on sentence processing in populations whose language abilities are still developing was sparse until about fifteen years ago when Clahsen and colleagues conducted the project ‘The development of language processing’. This led to a series of influential studies on sentence processing in monolingual (L1) children (Felser, Marinis, & Clahsen, 2003a; Roberts, Marinis, & Clahsen, 2007) and adult second language (L2) learners (Felser, Roberts, Marinis, & Gross, 2003b; Felser & Roberts, 2007; Marinis, Roberts, Felser, & Clahsen, 2005) and the formulation of the Shallow Surface Hypothesis (SSH) (Clahsen & Felser, 2006). The SSH sparked controversy in L2 acquisition research and led to the explosion of language processing studies in adult L2 learners, many of which are presented in the keynote paper by Phillips and Ehrenhofer (2015) (henceforth P&E). Compared to adult L2 processing research, research on language processing in L1 children is still limited, and even more limited are studies on processing in L2 children and children with Specific Language Impairment (SLI). Research in these populations is crucial if we want to understand the role of language processing in language acquisition, which is the aim of P&E’s keynote paper. In this commentary I will add some more pieces to the puzzle P&E address by reporting recent findings on the role of immersion in adult L2 processing and discussing results on language processing in L2 children and children with SLI in relation to reanalysis and predictive parsing. The paper will conclude with a note on the need to compare on-line comprehension with production.

/pdf/providing-some-more-pieces-to-the-puzzle-l2-adults-l2-57j3yd8owb.pdf

Providing some more pieces to the puzzle: L2 adults, L2 children and children with Specific Language Impairment

Generative research on language acquisition within the Principles and Parameters framework based on the Functional Parameterisation Hypothesis (cf. Atkinson, 1992) has provided a formal account of the acquisition of lexical vs. functional categories. Accordingly, early child grammar consists of lexical-thematic categories. This idea originates in Radford (1986) and has been further developed among others by Lebeaux (1988), Guilfoyle & Noonan (1992), Radford (1990), Tsimpli (1992/1996) and Powers (1996), who have claimed that early child speech lacks functional categories. More recently, Platzack (2001-a), adopting Rizzi's (1997) ideas for an articulated structure of the Left Periphery of the clause, developed the idea that normally developing children (along with children with SLI, adults acquiring a second language and Broca's aphasic patients) display a non target-like production of the syntax of the highest structural level, the CP layer (the Left Periphery of the clause), while their production of lower structural levels, the IP layer and the VP layer (the Core Domain of the clause), is target-like. This paper aims to contribute to this issue by extending the discussion of the acquisition of the Left Periphery to the nominal domain. The analysis of acquisition data from Greek normally developing children will show that children pass through a stage in which they do not use structures involving the Left Periphery of the nominal domain, while they do use structures involving the Core Domain (the FP layer and the NP layer). This will be taken as evidence for the unavailability of the Left Periphery of the DP in early child speech. Furthermore, it will be shown that children pass through a stage in which there is no evidence for the FP (which corresponds to the IP layer in the clausal domain). This observation is similar to those made by Clahsen, Eisenbeiss & Penke (1996) and Eisenbeiss (2000) for the acquisition of the DP in German. The extension of Rizzi's views for the Left Periphery of the clausal domain to the Left Periphery of the nominal domain provides a principled account for the development of the acquisition of the DP, which, unlike previous approaches to the same issue, such as Radford (1990), Clahsen, Eisenbeiss & Penke (1996) and Eisenbeiss (2000), explains the specific developmental route based on the different types of information encoded in each one of the three structural layers. The paper is organised as follows: Section 2 is concerned with Rizzi's (1997) analysis of the Left Periphery of the clausal domain and with Platzack's (2001-b) idea of multiple interfaces. Section 3 extends the tri-partition of the clausal domain to the tri-partition of the nominal domain and provides an analysis of phenomena that are related to the Core Domain and Left Periphery of the nominal domain in Modern Greek, namely case and number marking in nouns, the Possessive Construction and Determiner Spreading. Data on the acquisition of these phenomena are presented in Section 4. Finally, Section 5 summarises the

Theodoros Marinis

Papers

Assessing Complex Working Memory in Turkish-Speaking Children : The Listening Span Task Adaptation Into Turkish

Parallel function hypothesis revisited in the processing of Turkish relative clauses in adults

What Sentence Repetition Tasks Can Reveal about the Processing Effort Associated with Different Types of Code-Switching

Providing some more pieces to the puzzle: L2 adults, L2 children and children with Specific Language Impairment

Acquiring the Left Periphery of the Modern Greek DP