Sentence examples for morphological errors from inspiring English sources

Morphology was assessed through calculation of morphological errors that were coded for each transcript using the same categories as found in the Wugs test: plurality, third-person singular, past tense, comparative/superlative, present progressive, and possessive.

A ratio comparing the number of morphological errors to the total number of morphological forms found in the transcript was used as the discourse-based measure of morphology.

This pattern persists across linguistic domains, so the same negative relationship is seen when looking at the Wug test scores and syntactic errors, and the formulated sentences standard scores and morphological errors.

Of the 40 files used for reliability coding, 17 were identified by both coders as having no morphological errors and 6 were identified by both coders as having no syntactic errors.

The disorder of agrammatic aphasia (or agrammatism), the focus of this article, is classically characterised as a non-fluent aphasia, with associated "telegraphic" speech, word order and morphological errors and reduced ability to produce verbs, although comprehension remains relatively intact (see for example, Goodglass, Kaplan, & Barresi, 2001; Marshall, 2002).

There was no relation between the composite discourse score and the discourse-based measures of morphological error rate, r (45) = −.19, ns, or syntactic error rate, r (45) = −.19, ns.

The participants made phonological, morphological, and semantic errors that clearly indicated a reliance on their native language linguistic experiences [54].

That is, the fewer morphological and syntactic errors that the children showed in the discourse, the higher their Wug test and formulated sentences scores tended to be, on average.

The extra simulation results show that the LFP range and magnitude in the Bush neuron populations generally fall within a biologically reasonable range; while the reduced models are not ideal substitutes for the morphological reconstructions, the errors incurred by the reduction method are similar to those introduced by neglecting morphological diversity in reconstructed neuron model populations.

As a further verification whether the identified gap represents the human arm and is not a consequence of errors in morphological operations, the mean depth of the surrounding pixels on one side and the other side of the table edge is compared.

In order to avoid such an error, a morphological dilation with a horizontal structuring element is previously performed, as shown in Figure 5b.