Skip to main content
Log in

Use of Context in Question Answering by 3-, 4- and 5-Year-Old Children

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigates, within the theory of relevance of Sperber & Wilson (1995), how 3-, 4-, and 5-year-old children (n = 45) use context when answering questions. The children were required to answer questions that placed differing contextual and processing demands on them, as predicted by the theory. The results indicate that an increasing ability to use complex contextual information was related to age and was reflected in the children's ability to answer questions appropriately. A developmental pattern became evident in terms of how the children assigned referents, enriched semantic underdetermination, and recovered implicatures. It also became evident that even at the age of 5 years 6 months the children were in the process of becoming more skilled at integrating contextually complex inferences. It was further shown how children's selection of the appropriate context, given the focus of the question, depended on how relevance was achieved in that context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Bishop, D. V. M. (1997). Uncommon understanding: Development and disorders of language comprehension. Sussex: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, D. V. M., & Adams, C. (1992). Comprehension problems in children with specific language impairment: Literal and inferential meaning. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 35, 119-129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blakemore, D. (1990). Constraints on interpretations. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society. Parassession on the Legacy of Grice, 363-370.

  • Carston, R. (1998.) The semantics/pragmatics distinction: A view from Relevance Theory. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 10, 1-30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, E. V. (1973). Non-linguistic strategies and the acquisition of word meaning. Cognition, 2, 161-182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ervin-Tripp, S. (1971). An overview of theories of grammatical development. In D. Slobin (Ed.), The ontogensis of grammar (pp.189-212). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leinonen, E., & Kerbel, D. (1999). Relevance theory and pragmatic impairment. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 34(4), 367-390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leinonen, E., & Letts, C. (1997). Why pragmatic impairment? A case study in the comprehension of inferential meaning. European Journal of Disorders of Communication, 32, 35-51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milosky, L. M. (1992). Children listening: The role of world knowledge in comprehension. In R. Chapman (Ed.), Processes in language acquisition and disorders. St Louis: Mosby.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholle, S. (1997). Criteria for the identification of linguistically encoded procedural information. In G. Marjolein (Ed.), Proceedings of the University of Hertfordshire Relevance Theory Workshop. Chelmsford: Peter Thomas and Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakhill, J. V., & Yuill, N. M. (1986). Pronoun resolution in skilled and less-skilled comprehenders: Effects of memory load and inferential complexity. Language and Speech, 29, (1), 25-37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parnell, M. M., & Amerman, J. D. (1983). Answers to WH-questions: Research and applications. In T. M. Gallagher, & C. A. Prutting, Pragmatic assessment and intervention issues in language (pp. 129-150). San Diego: San Diego College Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stothard, S. E., & Hulme, C. (1992). Reading comprehension difficulties in children: The role of language comprehension and working memory skills in reading and writing. An Interdisciplinary Journal, 4, 245-256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strohner, H., & Nelson, K. E. (1974). The young child's development of sentence comprehension: Influence of event probability, nonverbal context, syntactic form and strategies. Child Development, 45, 567-576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyack, D. & Ingram, D. (1977). Children's production and comprehension of questions. Journal of Child Language, 4, 211-224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Umstead, R. S., & Leonard, L. B. (1983). Children's resolution of pronominal reference in text. First Language, 4 (2),11, 73-84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuill, N. M., & Oakhill, J. V. (1991). Children's problems in text comprehension: An experimental investigation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddell, M. & Granström, B. (1997). Ben's bring-your-bear party. Swindon: Walker Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ryder, N., Leinonen, E. Use of Context in Question Answering by 3-, 4- and 5-Year-Old Children. J Psycholinguist Res 32, 397–415 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024847529077

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024847529077

Navigation