Se ha estudiado la comprensión de relaciones anafóricas escritas en 810 niños de 8 años y 10 meses a 10 años y 10 meses de edad. A través de 32 textos cortos en una tarea de lápiz y papel, se han considerado cinco clases de anáforas: pronombres personales átonos, pronombre relativo “que”, adverbio de lugar “donde”, pronombres demostrativos y el contraste “éste/aquél” con valor anafórico. En cada una de ellas se ha manipulado la distancia entre el antecedentey elemento fórico, obteniendo tres versiones de cada texto con el mismo significado (distancia corta, media y larga). Los resultados muestran: a) un incremento global de la comprensión de las relaciones anafóricas en esas edades. b) una comprensión mejor cuanto más próximos se hallan los elementos de la anáfora. c) una mejor comprensión del pronombre relativo y el adverbio de lugar respecto a los pronombres personales átonos, y de éstos sobre los pronombres demostrativos. d) El contraste “éste/aquél” presenta un patrón de respuestas cualitativamente distinto, sin haber sido adquirido en el periodo estudiado.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AguadoG. (1988). Valoración de la competencia morfosintáctica en el niño de dos ande'os y medio.Infancia y Aprendizaje, 43, 73–96.
2.
AndersonA. H.GarrodS. (1979). The influence of textual features on comprehension. Comunicación presentada alSpring Meeting of the Experimental Psychology Society, Universidad de York.
3.
BaddeleyA. D. (1981). The concept of working memory: A view of its current states and probable future development.Cognition, 10, 17–23.
4.
BaddeleyA. D. (1983). Working memory.Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. London, 302, 311–324.
5.
BowermanM. (1982). Reorganization processes in lexical and syntactic development. En WannerE.GleitmanL. R. (Eds.), Language acquisition: the state of the art (pp. 319–346). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
CardenG. (1986). Blocked forwards coreference: Theoretical implications of the acquisition Data. En LustB. (Ed.), Studies in Acquisition of Anaphora, Volume I. Dordrecht: Reidel.
7.
CarpenterP. A.JustM. A. (1977). Reading comprehension as the eyes see it. En JustM. A.CarpenterP. A., Cognitive Processes in Comprehension (pp. 145–160). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
8.
CarreirasM.GarnhamA.OakhillJ. V. (1993). The use of superficial and meaning-based representations in interpreting pronouns: Evidence from Spanish.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5, 93–116.
9.
CarreirasM.GernsbacherM. A. (1992). Comprehending Conceptual Anaphors in Spanish, Language and Cognitive Processes, 7, 281–299.
10.
ClarkH. H.SengulC. J. (1979). In search of referents for nouns and pronouns.Memory and Cognition, 7, 35–41.
11.
Cohen ShermanJ. (1983). The acquisition of control in complement sentences: The role of structural and lexical factors. Tesis Doctoral no publicada, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
12.
ColleyA. M. (1987). Text Comprehension. En BeechJ. R.ColleyA. M. (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to reading (pp. 113–138). Chichester: Wiley.
13.
CorbettA. T.ChangF. R. (1983). Pronoun disambiguation: Accessing potential antecedents.Memory and Cognition, 11, 283–294.
14.
ChangF. R. (1980). Active memory processes in visual sentece comprehension: Clause effects and pronominal reference.Memory and Cognition, 8, 58–64.
15.
ChiatS. (1986). Personal pronouns. En FletcherP.GarmanM. (Eds.), Language Acquisition (pp. 339–355). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16.
ChipmanH.GerardJ. (1983). Stratégies de traitement de l'anaphore. En BronckartJ. P.KailM.NoisetG. (Eds.), Psycholinguistique de l'enfant. Recherches sur l'acquisition du langage (pp. 205–238). Neuchatel: Delachaux el Niestlé.
17.
ChomskyC. (1969). The Acquisition of Syntax in Children from 5 to 10.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18.
ChomskyC. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding.Dordrecht: Foris.
19.
DanemanM. (1987). Reading and Working Memory. En BeechJ. R.ColleyA. M. (Eds.), Cognitive Approaches to Reading (pp. 57–86). Chichester: Wiley.
20.
DanemanM.CarpenterP. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.
21.
DellG. S.MckoonG.RatcliffR. (1983). The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 121–132.
22.
DijkT. A. VANKintschW. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension.New York: Academic Press.
23.
EckardtB. VONPotterM. C. (1985). Clauses and the semantic representation of words.Memory and Cognition, 13, 371–376.
24.
GarnhamA.OakhillJ. V. (1985). On-line resolution of anaphoric pronouns: Effects of inference making and verb semantics.British Journal of Psychology, 76, 385–393.
25.
GernsbacherM. A. (1989). Mechanisms that improve referential access.Cognition, 32, 99–156.
26.
GernsbacherM. A. (1990). Language Comprehension as Structure Building.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27.
GernsbacherM. A. (1991). Comprehending conceptual anaphors.Language and Cognitive Processes, 6, 81–105.
28.
GlanzerM.DorfmanD.KaplanB. (1981). Short-term storage in the processing of text.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 656–670.
29.
GlanzerM.FischerB.DorfmanD. (1984). Short-term storage in reading.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 467–486.
30.
GlenbergA. M.MeyerM.LindenK. (1987). Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension.Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 69–83.
31.
González-ácute;lvarezJ. (1993). Comprensión de Anáforas en el Ciclo Medio de EGB. Tesis Doctoral no publicada. Universitat de Valéncia.
32.
González-álvarezJCerveraT. (1993). Las relaciones anafóricas y la integración del significado.Revista de Psicología Universitas Tarraconensis, 15, 49–73.
33.
GoodluckH. (1981). Children's grammar of complement subject interpretation. En TavakolianS. (Ed.), Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory (pp. 121–140). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
34.
GreenbergJ. H. (1966). Universals of Language, segunda edición. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35.
HaberlandtK. F.GraesserA. C. (1990). Integration and buffering of new information. En GraesserA. C.BowerG. H. (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, vol. 25 (pp. 71–87). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
36.
HamburgerH.CrainS. (1982). Relative acquisition. En Kuczaj (Ed.), Language development. Vol 1. Syntax and semantics.Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
37.
HammertonM. (1970). Disputed interpretation of a pronoun.Nature, 227, 202–230.
38.
HankamerJ.SagI. (1976). Deep and surface anaphora.Linguistic Inquiry7, 391–426.
39.
Hernández PinaF. (1984). Teorías psicosociolingüísticas y su aplicación a la adquisición del español como lengua materna.Madrid: Siglo XXI.
40.
HickmannnM. (1980). Creating referents in discourse: a development analysis of linguistic cohesion. En Papers from the sixteenth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society: Parasession on anaphora.Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
41.
IngramD. (1975). If and when tranformations are acquired by children.Language and Linguistics. Georgetown University, 27, 99–127.
42.
IngramD.ShawC. (1981). The comprehension of pronominal reference in children.Vancouver: University of British Columbia.
43.
JarvellaJ. R. (1971). Syntactic processing of connected discourse.Journal of Verbal Learning And Verbal Behavior, 10, 409–416.
44.
Johnson-LairdP. N. (1983). Mental Models.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
KailM.LéveilléM. (1977). Compréhension de la coréférence des pronoms personnels chez l'enfant et adulte.Année Psychologique, 77, 79–94.
46.
Karmiloff-SmithA. (1983). Language acquisition as a problem solving process. EnStanford Papers and Reports on Child Development, 22, 1–22.
47.
Karmiloff-SmithA. (1986). Some fundamentals aspects of language development after age 5. En FletcherP.GarmanM. (Eds.), Language Acquisition.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48.
KleiberG. (1990). Quan il n'a pas d'antecedent.Langages, 97, 24–50.
49.
KunoS. (1972a). Pronominalization, reflexivization and direct discourse.Linguistic Inquiry3, 161–195.
50.
KunoS. (1972b). Functional sentence perspective: A case study from Japanese and English.Linguistic Inquiry3, 269–320.
51.
LasnikH. (1976). Remarks on coreference.Linguistic Analysis2, 1–22.
52.
LeesR.KlimaE. (1963). Rules for English pronominalization.Language39, 17–28.
53.
LesgoldA. M.RothS. F.CurtisM. E. (1979). Foregrounding effects in discourse comprehension.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 291–308.
54.
LustB. (1974). Conjuction reduction in language of young children: Studied with particular concern for the directionality of the deletion component. Tesis Doctoral no publicada, City University of New York Graduate Center.
55.
LustB. (1977). Conjunction reduction in child language.Journal of Child Language4, 257–287.
56.
LustB. (1981). Constraint on anaphora in child language: A prediction for a universal. En TavakolianS. (Ed.), Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
57.
LustB. (1986). Introduction. En LustB. (Ed.), Studies in Acquisition of Anaphora, Volume I.Dordrecht: Reidel.
58.
LustB.CliffordT. (1986). The 3-D Study: Effects of depth, distance and directionality on children's acquisition of anaphora. En LustB. (Ed.), Studies in the Acquisition of Anaphora, volume I (pp. 203–243). Dordrecht: Reidel.
59.
LustB.LovelandK.KornetR. (1980). The development of anaphora in first language: Syntactic and Pragmatic constraint.Linguistic Analysis, 6, 359–391.
60.
LustB.MervisC. (1980). Development and coordination in the natural speech of young children.Journal of Chil Language7, 270–304.
61.
LustB.SolanL.FlynnS.CrossC.SchuetzE. (1986). A Comparison of Null and Pronoun Anaphora in First Language Acquisition. En LustB. (Ed.), Studies in the Acquisition of Anaphora, volume I (pp. 245–277). Dordrecht: Reidel.
62.
MuñozC. (1986). Los pronombres personales. En SiguanM. (Ed), Estudios de Psicolingüítica.Madrid: Pirámide.
63.
MurphyG. L. (1985). Processes of Understanding Anaphora.Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 290–303.
64.
NewportE. L. (1982). Task specifity in language learning? Evidence from speech perception and American sign language. En WannerE.GleitmanL. R. (Eds.), Language acquisition: the state of the art.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
65.
O'donnellR. C.GriffinW. J.NorrisR. C. (1967). Syntax of kidergarten and elementary school children: a transformational analysis. National Council of Teachers of English. Urbana, IL.
66.
Padilla RiveraJ. (1985). On the definition of binding domains in the first language acquisition of anaphora in Spanish. The modular role of binding principles and lexical factors. Tesis Doctoral no publicada. Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
67.
Padilla RiveraJ. (1990). On the definition of binding domains in Spanish.Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
68.
ReadC.Chou HareV. (1977). Children's interpretation of reflexive pronouns in English En EckmanF. R.HastingsA. J. (Eds.), Studies in first and second language acquisition (pp. 75–110). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
69.
ReinhartT. (1983). Anaphora and semantic interpretation.London: Croom Helm (reimpreso con correcciones y revisiones en 1984).
70.
SachsJ. D, (1967). Recognition memory for syntactic and semantic aspects of connected discourse.Perception and Psychophysics, 2, 437–442.
71.
SanfordA. J.GarrodS. C. (1981). Understanding Written Language: Explorations in Comprehension beyond the Sentence.Chichester: Wiley.
72.
ShermanJ. C. (1983). The minimun distance priciple reconsidered: A new explanation for previous findings. Comunicación presentada alEight Annual Boston University Conference of Language Development.
73.
ShermanJ. C.LustB. (1986). Syntactic and lexical constraints on the acquisition of control in complement sentences. En LustB. (Ed.), Studies in Acquisition of Anaphora, Volume I (pp. 279–308). Dordrecht: Reidel.
74.
SolanL. (1981). The acquisition of structural restrictions on anaphora. En TavakolianS. (Ed.), Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory (pp. 83–110). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
75.
SolanL. (1983). Pronominal reference: Child language and the theory of grammar.Dordrecht: Reidel.
76.
StenningK. (1978). Anaphora as an approach to pragmactics. En HalleM.BresnanJ.MillerG. (Eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality (pp. 217–232). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
77.
StevensonR. J. (1986). The time course of pronoun comprehension.Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 102–109). Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum.
78.
TavakolianS. (1977). Structural principles in the acquisition of complex sentence. Tesis Doctoral no publicada. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
79.
Taylor-BrowneK. (1983). Acquiring restrictions on forwards anaphora: A pilot study, Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics9, 75–99.
80.
VegaM. DE (1984). Introducción a la Psicología cognitiva.Madrid: Alianza.
81.
DeVEGA M.CarreirasM.Gutiérrez-calvoM.Alonso-QuecutyM. L. (1990). Lectura y comprensión. Una perspectiva cognitiva.Madrid: Alianza.
82.
WalesR. (1986). Deixis. En FletcherP.GarmanM. (Eds.), Language Acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge university Press.
83.
WalkerC. H.YekovichF. R. (1987). Activation and use of script-based antecedents in anaphoric reference.Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 673–691.
84.
WarburtonI.PrabhuN. S. (1972). Anaphoric pronouns: Syntax vs. semantics, Journal of Linguistics, 8, 289–292.
85.
WasowT. (1986). Reflections on anaphora. En LustB. (Ed.), Studies in Acquisition of Anaphora, Volume I (pp. 107–122). Dordrecht: Reidel.
86.
WilliamsE. (1977a). Discourse and logical formLinguistic Inquiry, 8, 101–139.
87.
WilliamsE. (1977b). On deep and surface anaphora.Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 692–696.
88.
WittenE. (1970). Pronominalization: A handbook for secret agents. Universidad de Brandeis.
89.
YekovichF. R.WalkerC. H. (1987). The activation and use of scripted knowledge in reading about activities. En BrittonB. K.GlynnS. M. (Eds.), Executive control processes in reading (pp. 145–176). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
