A influência dos conectivos na leitura de estudantes graduandos e do ensino médio durante o processamento de períodos em português brasileiro

• Autor(a) principal: Simões, Antonia Barros Gibson
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da UFPB
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.ufpb.br/jspui/handle/123456789/19516
• topic: Conectivos; Processamento de períodos; Frequência; Familiaridade; Psicolinguística educacional; Connective; Coherence; Sentence processing; Frequency; Familiarity; CNPQ::LINGUISTICA, LETRAS E ARTES::LINGUISTICA

This dissertation investigated the influence of the connective on the processing of sentences in Brazilian Portuguese, from the observation of the facilitation in the reading of texts with connective (MILLIS AND JUST, 1994; TRAXLER AND COLLEGAS, 1997; SANDERS AND NOORDMAN, 2000; VONK AND NOORDMAN, 2012; VONK AND NOORDMAN, 2014) and the influence of the frequency of use of connectives on undergraduate and high school readers (SEGUI et.al., 1982; NIPPOLD et.al., 1992; ELLIS, 2002; CROSSON et. Al. , 2008; CAIN & NASH, 2011; SILFHOUT et al., 2015; FLORITT ET.AL., 2016). In Experiment 1, performed with an online stationary window reading task with undergraduates, we investigated the influence of connective on reading congruent and incongruent texts with and without text markers, and so (for example: “Eva / finished / brilliantly / the text / / (therefore) / the work / was / exquisite. She / is / an excellent / copywriter ";“ Eva / finished / brilliantly / the text / / (so) / the work / was / she / she is / is an excellent writer / writer ”). In experiment 2, with an online self-monitored reading task (movie window), familiarity test, and reader profile questionnaire, we investigated the role of connectors in textual processing by observing the influence of adverse connectors and the frequency of use of adverse connectors. reading undergraduates in texts with and without connective: “Eva / concluded / brilliantly / the text, / but / the editing / was / lousy / in the opinion / of the readers”; “Eve / concluded / brilliantly / the text, / but / the editing / was / lousy / in the opinion of the readers”; “Eva / concluded / brilliantly / the text / and / the edition / was / very bad / in the opinion of the readers”; “Eva / concluded / brilliantly / the text / / however / the editing / was / very bad / in the opinion of the readers”; “Eve / concluded / brilliantly / the text, / editing / was / lousy / in the opinion / of readers / demanding”). In experiment 3 we used the same experimental design and offline tasks as experiment 2, however, the readers were high school. Mapping of the beginning and end of sentences preceded by or not connected by connectors showed that readers had greater facilitation in reading the initial part of sentences preceded by connective, and we also found shorter reading times for the beginning of sentences preceded by more frequent connective ones. compared to less frequent connectors. In high school readers, we found no significant difference in reading time from the early part of the sentences preceded by the connective however and in the early part of sentences not preceded by the connective. In the final part of the sentece processing, the results showed that the existence of connectors did not facilitate reading when the coherence relationship manifested cause-consequence. In adverse relationships, the existence of connectors facilitated reading. High school readers did not find facilitation in reading late in the textual sentences with the connective however. High school and undergraduate readers found it easier to solve the probe task in text with connective when compared to text without a connective. Corroborating the results online, the familiarity test (offline) showed that readers consider the most frequent connectives as more familiar. Less frequent connectives were considered less familiar. In addition, data obtained through a reader profile questionnaire revealed that high school readers spend less time reading and have fewer books than undergraduate readers. We conclude that the existence of connectives in the sentence seems to instruct the reader about the structure and textual content. In addition, the role of connectives was influenced by the type of coherence relationship, the frequency of use of connectives, and the reader's familiarity with connectives, and to some extent the reader's age / educational level. Mapping of reading and questionnaires through an on-line and offline experimental task can assist teachers in assessing students' knowledge / learning process on subjects related to reading / understanding of cohesion and textual coherence resources.