Reading of Dutch homophonous verb forms in tweets - present tense
This dataset includes Dutch participants' responses to an eye-tracking experiment. A total of 60 subjects, most of them bachelor's or master's students at Radboud University, participated in the experiment. The aim of the experiment was to investigate whether and to what extent the morphological principle facilitates the reading of morphologically complex words, such as Dutch homophonous verb forms. These verb forms sound identical, but are spelled differently, reflecting the difference in morphological structure. When the members of a homophone pair are interchanged, this is inaudible, but vi... Mehr ...
Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Erscheinungsdatum: | 2022 |
Schlagwörter: | Language and literature studies / eye-tracking / reading for comprehension / homophonous verb forms |
Sprache: | Niederländisch Englisch |
Permalink: | https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-27399081 |
Datenquelle: | BASE; Originalkatalog |
Powered By: | BASE |
Link(s) : | http://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:nl:ui:13-eo-qmuv |
This dataset includes Dutch participants' responses to an eye-tracking experiment. A total of 60 subjects, most of them bachelor's or master's students at Radboud University, participated in the experiment. The aim of the experiment was to investigate whether and to what extent the morphological principle facilitates the reading of morphologically complex words, such as Dutch homophonous verb forms. These verb forms sound identical, but are spelled differently, reflecting the difference in morphological structure. When the members of a homophone pair are interchanged, this is inaudible, but visible in spelling, with the spelling indicating an incorrect morphological structure. To approach the natural reading situation as closely as possible, the focus is on reading for comprehension of natural language material, that is, the reading of Dutch tweets. The focus is on the homophone pair consisting of the first and third person singular present tense. In the experiment, the reading of a correctly-spelled member is compared with the reading of an incorrectly-spelled member of the same homophone pair. Each participant was presented 320 tweets, of which 32 contained an incorrectly-spelled homophone form a target verb, and 32 contained an incorrectly-spelled homophone form of a target verb (just as they were originally posted on Twitter). Each participant was only presented with one verb form of a homophone pair.