Abstract
A scale for assessing the complexity or density of utterances was developed using 10 categories ofsemantic relations (e.g., temporal ordering, causality). The categories are inferable from the particular “meanings” of the words (e.g., connectives, particular tense variations) used in an utterance. The scale was applied to three samples of subjects to assess its interjudge reliability and to compare the utterances of fourth-, sixth-, and eighth-grade children from middle- and working-class neighborhoods. It was also used to compare the complexity of utterances for different types of visual stimuli (used to elicit language samples). Interjudge reliabilities were more than acceptable for each of the samples, and significant differences in semantic density were found across grade, between children from working-class and middle-class neighborhoods, and for the stimuli used to elicit the utterances. When two of the three types of eliciting visual stimuli were equated for content and exposure conditions, the differences in verbal density between eliciting conditions were not replicated. The usefulness of the scale for assessing utterance density and by implication, comprehension difficulty of utterances and of texts, is discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bennett, J. (1974).Usage of verbal connectives by children in relation to age and contextual variation. Unpublished master's thesis. Worcester, MA: Clark University.
Bernstein, B. (1964). Elaborated and restricted codes: Their social origins and some consequences.American Anthropologist Special Publication, 66(2), 55–69.
Bever, T. G. (1970). The comprehension of memory of sentences with temporal relations. In G. B. Flores D'Arcias, & W. J. M. Levelt (Eds.),Advances in psycholinguistics. New York: North Holland/American Elsevier.
Chomsky, N. (1965).Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press.
Choy, S. J., & Dodd, B. H. (1976). Standard and nonstandard English.Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 184–193.
Clark, E. (1973). How children describe time and order. In C. A. Ferguson, & D. I. Slobin (Eds.),Studies of Child Language Development. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Frederiksen, C. H. (1975). Representing logical and semantic structure of knowledge acquired from discourse.Cognitive Psychology, 7, 371–457.
Frederiksen, C. H. (1977). Semantic processing units in understanding text. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.),Discourse Production and Comprehension, (pp. 57–87). New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Company.
Garfinkel, H. (1972). Studies of the routine grounds of everyday activities. In D. Sudnow (Ed.),Studies in Social Interaction. New York: The Free Press.
Glazer, S. A., & Morrow, M. (1978). The syntactic complexity of primary grade children's oral language and primary reading materials: A comparative analysis.Journal of Reading Behavior, 10, 200–203.
Granowsky, A., & Botel, M. (1974). Background for a new syntactic complexity formula.Reading Teacher, 28, 31–35.
Groff, P. (1978). Children's oral language and their written composition.The Elementary School Journal, 78, 181–191.
Guttman, L. (1947). The Cornell technique for scale and intensity analysis.Educational Psychological Measurement, 7, 247–280.
Labov, W. (1972).Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Perfetti, C. A. (1969). Lexical density and phrase structure depths as variables in sentence retention.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 719–724.
Robbins, O., Devoe, S., & Wiener, M. (1978). Social patterns of turn-taking: Non-verbal regulators.Journal of Communication, 23(8), 38–46.
Rosenburg, S. (1968). Association and phrase structure in sentence recall.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7, 1077–1081.
Rubano, M. (1976).The assessment of linguistic complexity in terms of discrimination of relations. Unpublished master's thesis. Worcester, MA: Clark University.
Shank, R. C., & Colby, K. M. (1973).Computer Models of Thought and Language. San Francisco: Freeman.
Wiener, M., & Cromer, W. (1967). Reading and reading difficulties: A conceptual analysis.Harvard Education Review, 27, 620–643.
Wiener, M. & Shilkret, R. (1974). Complexity in auditory and graphic language. National Institute of Education, Grant Proposal, No. NIE-6-74-0017.
Wiener, M., & Shilkret, R. (1977). Complexity in auditory and graphic language. National Institute of Education, Project No. NIE-4-470.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This study was supported in part by a Grant from the National Institute of Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, “Complexity in Auditory and Graphics Communication,” Project No. 4-470. Points of view or opinions stated here do not necessarily represent National Institute of Education position or policy.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wiener, M., Rubano, M. & Shilkret, R. A measure of semantic complexity among predications. J Psycholinguist Res 19, 103–123 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068093
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068093