Search

The wanna facts are a classic Poverty of Stimulus (PoS) problem: wanna is grammatical in certain contexts ( Who do you want PRO to play with? ) but not others ( Who do you want who to play with you? ). On a standard analysis, "contraction" to wanna is blocked by some empty constituents (WH-copies) but not others (PRO). All empty constituents are inaudible, so it has been unclear how restrictions on them could be learned. Children's reported knowledge of the wanna facts (Crain & Thornton, 1998) has therefore been attributed to a principle of Universal Grammar (UG). In two experiments, we demonstrate that children's use of wanna is not in fact adultlike and that error rates are modulated by the frequency of the embedded verb ( play above). These results suggest that if there is a UG principle, children appear not to know that it is relevant, raising important questions about what learning mechanisms enable children to circumvent the input's apparent poverty.

Background: The efficacy of telerehabilitation-based treatment for anomia has been demonstrated in post-stroke aphasia, but the efficacy of this method of anomia treatment delivery has not been established within the context of degenerative illness., Aims: The current study evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of a telerehabilitation-based approach to anomia treatment within the three subtypes of primary progressive aphasia (PPA)., Methods & Procedures: Each of the three telerehabilitation participants represented a distinct subtype of PPA. Following a baseline evaluation of language and cognition, a phonological treatment and an orthographic treatment were administered to all participants over the course of six months. One month after the end of treatment, a post-treatment evaluation began. All treatment sessions and the majority of the evaluation sessions were administered via telerehabilitation. Treatment effects were examined within each subject, and treatment effects were also compared between each telerehabilitation participant and a group of in-person participants who had the same subtype of PPA., Outcomes & Results: All three telerehabilitation participants exhibited positive treatment effects. CGR (nonfluent/agrammatic variant PPA) and WCH (logopenic variant PPA) showed maintenance of naming for prophylaxis items in both treatment conditions, while ACR (semantic variant PPA) demonstrated increased naming of remediation items in the phonological treatment condition. Compared to in-person participants with the same subtype of PPA, each of the telerehabilitation participants typically showed effects that were either within the expected range or larger than expected., Conclusions: Telerehabilitation-based anomia treatment is feasible and effective in all three subtypes of PPA.