USE OF PRAGMATIC COHESION CUES TO RESOLVE DEGREES OF PRONOUN REFERENCE AMBIGUITY IN READING (ESL, BILINGUAL).

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/188185
Title:
USE OF PRAGMATIC COHESION CUES TO RESOLVE DEGREES OF PRONOUN REFERENCE AMBIGUITY IN READING (ESL, BILINGUAL).
Author:
FREEMAN, DAVID EDWARD.
Issue Date:
1986
Publisher:
The University of Arizona.
Rights:
Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Abstract:
The psycholinguistic theory of reading developed by Kenneth Goodman, which closely parallels the analysis-by-synthesis model of listening comprehension proposed by Cooper and Stevens, claims that readers use grapho-phonic, syntactic, semantic and pragmatic cues to construct meaningful texts through cycles of sampling, inference, prediction, confirmation or disconfirmation and integration. Pragmatic cues are supplied in part by pronoun reference, which adds cohesion to texts. Evidence to support the psycholinguistic theory of reading comes from miscues, cases during oral reading when there is a difference between the reader's observed response and the expected response. The analysis of pronoun miscues provides insights into the text features and strategies readers use to assign reference. Five text features readers use to assign pronoun reference are preceding noun phrases, preceding pronouns, self-reference or direct address in dialog, the dialog carrier position, and paragraph-initial "I". Readers make significantly fewer miscues at sites where these cues are available than at other sites. For any story certain text features provide less ambiguous cues than others. However, a comparison of two stories suggests that there is no absolute hierarchy of pragmatic cues. Rather, the strength of a text feature depends on how it is realized in a particular text. Readers sometimes overgeneralize normally-successful strategies for assigning pronoun reference. Two types of overgeneralization are pronoun maintenance and topic maintenance, using a preceding pronoun or noun to assign reference when that pronoun or noun is not co-referential with the pronoun for which reference is being assigned. Patterns of correction of pronoun miscue reveal readers' tentativeness and scope of focus, two factors important for reading proficiency. Proficient readers are tentative and maintain a wide scope of focus. Correction of pronoun miscues, which frequently are disconfirmed pragmatically, requires a wide focus. In order to develop appropriate strategies for assigning reference, readers need frequent opportunities to transact with whole, cohesive texts. In addition, if readers are encouraged to read for meaning and given the chance to self-correct, they can develop the tentativeness and wide scope of focus characteristic of proficient readers.
Type:
text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
Keywords:
Reading.; Miscue analysis.; Anaphora (Linguistics)
Degree Name:
Ph.D.
Degree Level:
doctoral
Degree Program:
Linguistics; Graduate College
Degree Grantor:
University of Arizona
Advisor:
Demers, Richard

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.titleUSE OF PRAGMATIC COHESION CUES TO RESOLVE DEGREES OF PRONOUN REFERENCE AMBIGUITY IN READING (ESL, BILINGUAL).en_US
dc.creatorFREEMAN, DAVID EDWARD.en_US
dc.contributor.authorFREEMAN, DAVID EDWARD.en_US
dc.date.issued1986en_US
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.description.abstractThe psycholinguistic theory of reading developed by Kenneth Goodman, which closely parallels the analysis-by-synthesis model of listening comprehension proposed by Cooper and Stevens, claims that readers use grapho-phonic, syntactic, semantic and pragmatic cues to construct meaningful texts through cycles of sampling, inference, prediction, confirmation or disconfirmation and integration. Pragmatic cues are supplied in part by pronoun reference, which adds cohesion to texts. Evidence to support the psycholinguistic theory of reading comes from miscues, cases during oral reading when there is a difference between the reader's observed response and the expected response. The analysis of pronoun miscues provides insights into the text features and strategies readers use to assign reference. Five text features readers use to assign pronoun reference are preceding noun phrases, preceding pronouns, self-reference or direct address in dialog, the dialog carrier position, and paragraph-initial "I". Readers make significantly fewer miscues at sites where these cues are available than at other sites. For any story certain text features provide less ambiguous cues than others. However, a comparison of two stories suggests that there is no absolute hierarchy of pragmatic cues. Rather, the strength of a text feature depends on how it is realized in a particular text. Readers sometimes overgeneralize normally-successful strategies for assigning pronoun reference. Two types of overgeneralization are pronoun maintenance and topic maintenance, using a preceding pronoun or noun to assign reference when that pronoun or noun is not co-referential with the pronoun for which reference is being assigned. Patterns of correction of pronoun miscue reveal readers' tentativeness and scope of focus, two factors important for reading proficiency. Proficient readers are tentative and maintain a wide scope of focus. Correction of pronoun miscues, which frequently are disconfirmed pragmatically, requires a wide focus. In order to develop appropriate strategies for assigning reference, readers need frequent opportunities to transact with whole, cohesive texts. In addition, if readers are encouraged to read for meaning and given the chance to self-correct, they can develop the tentativeness and wide scope of focus characteristic of proficient readers.en_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeDissertation-Reproduction (electronic)en_US
dc.subjectReading.en_US
dc.subjectMiscue analysis.en_US
dc.subjectAnaphora (Linguistics)en_US
thesis.degree.namePh.D.en_US
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineLinguisticsen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
dc.contributor.advisorDemers, Richarden_US
dc.contributor.committeememberLehrer, Adrienneen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberGoodman, Kennethen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberOehrle, Richarden_US
dc.identifier.proquest8613816en_US
dc.identifier.oclc697298477en_US
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.