05.06.2014 Views

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Queen Margaret University

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Queen Margaret University

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of - Queen Margaret University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

epresentations as a function <strong>of</strong> word class was found <strong>in</strong> Tyler, Russell, Fadili<br />

and Moss’ (2001) PET scan <strong>in</strong>vestigation with healthy people. They did report<br />

however that verbs with <strong>in</strong>flections were more difficult to retrieve than nouns with<br />

<strong>in</strong>flections. Dissociations between proper and common nouns follow<strong>in</strong>g bra<strong>in</strong><br />

damage have also frequently been reported, question<strong>in</strong>g if the different word<br />

classes are processed by dist<strong>in</strong>ct mechanisms (Robson, Marshall, Pr<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Montagu, 2004). It is generally agreed that proper nouns are processed<br />

differently both neuropsychologically and anatomically than common nouns <strong>in</strong><br />

the bra<strong>in</strong> with proper nouns be<strong>in</strong>g considered to be labels attached to referents<br />

and thus without semantic mean<strong>in</strong>g (Schmidt, Buchanan and Semenza, 2004;<br />

Yasuda, Nakamura and Beckman, 2000; Lyons, Hanley and Kay, 2002; Miceli,<br />

Capasso, Daniele, Esposito, Magarelli and Tomaiuolo, 2000). Robson et al.<br />

(2004) report that the production <strong>of</strong> proper nouns were significantly more difficult<br />

to name than common nouns but the comprehension <strong>of</strong> both word classes were<br />

high with no class effect.<br />

2.8.4 Summary and implications<br />

The above brief description <strong>of</strong> the representations <strong>of</strong> vocabulary <strong>in</strong>dicates some<br />

controversy <strong>in</strong> the <strong>in</strong>terpretation <strong>of</strong> evidence for the number <strong>of</strong> lexical and<br />

semantic systems as well as the behaviour <strong>of</strong> different word classes. This<br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigation will assume the existence <strong>of</strong> four lexicons – one for listen<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

read<strong>in</strong>g, speak<strong>in</strong>g and writ<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> accordance with the cognitive<br />

neuropsychological approach (Ellis and Young, 1996; Kay et al., 1992). There<br />

appears to be more evidence and support for a unimodal semantic system<br />

where all modalities access the mean<strong>in</strong>g and associations <strong>of</strong> words (for example<br />

Capitani et al., 2003; Caramazza et al., 1990; Hillis et al., 1990). Therefore this<br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigation will assume the existence <strong>of</strong> one central semantic system relat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

to the cognitive neuropsychological model (Ellis and Young, 1996; Kay et al.,<br />

1992). Controversy also exists for the behaviour and location <strong>of</strong> word class with<br />

verbs be<strong>in</strong>g considered more difficult to process than nouns by some<br />

55

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!