Publications

Abstract

We report on an eye-tracking study that investigated four-year-old Cantonese-speaking children's online processing of subject and object relative clauses (RCs). Children's eye-movements were recorded as they listened to RC structures identifying a unique referent (e.g. “Can you pick up the horse that pushed the pig?”). Two RC types, classifier (CL) and ge3 RCs, were tested in a between-participants design. The two RC types differ in their syntactic analyses and frequency of occurrence, providing an important point of comparison for theories of RC acquisition and processing. A permutation analysis showed that the two structures were processed differently: CL RCs showed a significant object-over-subject advantage, whereas ge3 RCs showed the opposite effect. This study shows that children can have different preferences even for two very similar RC structures within the same language, suggesting that syntactic processing preferences are shaped by the unique features of particular constructions both within and across different linguistic typologies.

Abstract

The mutual exclusivity (ME) assumption is proposed to facilitate early word learning by guiding infants to map novel words to novel referents. This study assessed the emergence and use of ME to both disambiguate and retain the meanings of novel words across development in 18‐month‐old monolingual and bilingual children (Experiment 1; N = 58), and in a sub‐group of these children again at 24 months of age (Experiment 2: N = 32). Both monolinguals and bilinguals employed ME to select the referent of a novel label to a similar extent at 18 and 24 months. At 18 months, there were also no differences in novel word retention between the two language‐background groups. However, at 24 months, only monolinguals showed the ability to retain these label–object mappings. These findings indicate that the development of the ME assumption as a reliable word‐learning strategy is shaped by children's individual language exposure and experience with language use.

Abstract

We report a large‐scale electrophysiological study of infant speech segmentation, in which over 100 English‐acquiring 9‐month‐olds were exposed to unfamiliar bisyllabic words embedded in sentences (e.g., He saw a wild eagle up there), after which their brain responses to either the just‐familiarized word (eagle) or a control word (coral) were recorded. When initial exposure occurs in continuous speech, as here, past studies have reported that even somewhat older infants do not reliably recognize target words, but that successful segmentation varies across children. Here, we both confirm and further uncover the nature of this variation. The segmentation response systematically varied across individuals and was related to their vocabulary development. About one‐third of the group showed a left‐frontally located relative negativity in response to familiar versus control targets, which has previously been described as a mature response. Another third showed a similarly located positive‐going reaction (a previously described immature response), and the remaining third formed an intermediate grouping that was primarily characterized by an initial response delay. A fine‐grained group‐level analysis suggested that a developmental shift to a lexical mode of processing occurs toward the end of the first year, with variation across individual infants in the exact timing of this shift.

Abstract

Humans differ in innumerable ways, with considerable variation observable at every level of description, from the molecular to the social. Traditionally, linguistic and psycholinguistic theory has downplayed the possibility of meaningful differences in language across individuals. However, it is becoming increasingly evident that there is
significant variation among speakers at any age as well as across the lifespan. In this paper, we review recent research in psycholinguistics, and argue that a focus on individual differences provides a crucial source of evidence that bears strongly upon core issues in theories of the acquisition and processing of language; specifically, the role of experience in language acquisition, processing, and attainment, and the architecture of the language faculty.

Abstract

A developmental relationship between symbolic play and language has been long proposed, going as far back as the writings of Piaget and Vygotsky. In the current paper we build on recent qualitative reviews of the literature by reporting the first quantitative analysis of the relationship. We conducted a three-level meta-analysis of past studies that have investigated the relationship between symbolic play and language acquisition. Thirty-five studies (N = 6848) met the criteria for inclusion. Overall, we observed a significant small-to-medium association between the two domains (r = .35). Several moderating variables were included in the analyses, including: (i) study design (longitudinal, concurrent), (ii) the manner in which language was measured (comprehension, production), and (iii) the age at which this relationship is measured. The effect was weakly moderated by these three variables, but overall the association was robust, suggesting that symbolic play and language are closely related in development.

Abstract

Our target paper argued for the ubiquity of frequency effects in acquisition, and that any comprehensive theory must take into account the multiplicity of ways that frequently occurring and co-occurring linguistic units affect the acquisition process. The commentaries on the paper provide a largely unanimous endorsement of this position, but raise additional issues likely to frame further discussion and theoretical development. Specifically, while most commentators did not deny the importance of frequency effects, all saw this as the tip of the theoretical iceberg. In this short response we discuss common themes raised in the commentaries, focusing on the broader issue of what frequency effects mean for language acquisition.

Abstract

This review article presents evidence for the claim that frequency effects are pervasive in children's first language acquisition, and hence constitute a phenomenon that any successful account must explain. The article is organized around four key domains of research: children's acquisition of single words, inflectional morphology, simple syntactic constructions, and more advanced constructions. In presenting this evidence, we develop five theses. (i) There exist different types of frequency effect, from effects at the level of concrete lexical strings to effects at the level of abstract cues to thematic-role assignment, as well as effects of both token and type, and absolute and relative, frequency. High-frequency forms are (ii) early acquired and (iii) prevent errors in contexts where they are the target, but also (iv) cause errors in contexts in which a competing lower-frequency form is the target. (v) Frequency effects interact with other factors (e.g. serial position, utterance length), and the patterning of these interactions is generally informative with regard to the nature of the learning mechanism. We conclude by arguing that any successful account of language acquisition, from whatever theoretical standpoint, must be frequency sensitive to the extent that it can explain the effects documented in this review, and outline some types of account that do and do not meet this criterion.

Abstract

A comprehensive theory of language acquisition must explain how human infants can learn any one of the world’s 7000 or so languages. As such, an important part of understanding how languages are learned is to investigate acquisition across a range of diverse languages and sociocultural contexts. To this end, cross-linguistic and cross-cultural language research has been pervasive in the field of first language acquisition since the early 1980s. In groundbreaking work, Slobin (1985) noted that the study of acquisition in cross-linguistic perspective can be used to reveal both developmental universals and language-specific acquisition patterns. Since this observation there have been several waves of cross-linguistic first language acquisition research, and more recently we have seen a rise in research investigating lesser-known languages. This special issue brings together work on several such languages, spoken in minority contexts. It is the first collection of language development research dedicated to the acquisition of under-studied or little-known languages and by extension, different cultures. Why lesser-known languages, and why minority contexts? First and foremost, acquisition theories need data from different languages, language families and cultural groups across the broadest typological array possible, and yet many theories of acquisition have been developed through analyses of English and other major world languages. Thus they are likely to be skewed by sampling bias. Languages of European origin constitute a small percentage of the total number of languages spoken worldwide. The Ethnologue (2015) lists 7102 languages spoken across the world. Of these, only 286 languages are languages of European origin, a mere 4% of the total number of languages spoken across the planet, and representing approximately only 26% of the total number of language speakers alive today. Compare this to the languages of the Pacific. The Ethnologue lists 1313 languages spoken in the Pacific, constituting 18.5% of the world’s languages. Of these, very few have been described, and even fewer have child language data available. Lieven and Stoll (2010) note that only around 70–80 languages have been the focus of acquisition studies (around 1% of the world’s languages). This somewhat alarming statistic suggests that the time is now ripe for researchers working on lesser-known languages to contribute to the field’s knowledge about how children learn a range of very different languages across differing cultures, and in doing so, for this research to make a contribution to language acquisition theory. The potential benefits are many. First, decades of descriptive work in linguistic typology have culminated in strong challenges to the existence of a Universal Grammar (Evans & Levinson, 2009), a long-held axiom of formal language acquisition theory. To be sure, cross-linguistic work in acquisition has long fuelled this debate (e.g. MacWhinney & Bates, 1989), but only as we collect a greater number of data points will we move closer toward a better understanding of the initial state of the human capacity for language and the types of social and cultural contexts in which language is successfully transmitted. A focus on linguistic diversity enables the investigation and postulation of universals in language acquisition, if and in whatever form they exist. In doing so, we can determine the sorts of things that are evident in child-directed speech, in children’s language production and in adult language, teasing out the threads at the intersection of language, culture and cognition. The study and dissemination of research into lesser-known, under-described languages with small communities significantly contributes to this aim because it not only reflects the diversity of languages present in the world, but provides a better representation of the social and economic conditions under which the majority of the world’s population acquire language (Heinrich, Heins, & Norenzayan, 2010). Related to this point, the study of smaller languages has taken on intense urgency in the past few decades due to the rapid extinction of these languages (Evans, 2010). The Language Documentation movement has toiled tirelessly in the pursuit of documenting languages before they disappear, an effort to which child language researchers have much to offer. Many children acquire smaller and minority languages in rich multilingual environments, where the influence of dominant languages affects acquisition (e.g., Stoll, Zakharko, Moran, Schikowski, & Bickel, 2015). Understanding the acquisition process where systems compete and may be in flux due to language contact, while no small task, will help us understand the social and economic conditions which favour successful preservation of minority languages, which could ultimately equip communities with the tools to stem the flow of language loss. With these points in mind we now turn to the articles in this special issue.

Abstract

The current study investigated the role of cross-linguistic influence in Cantonese–English bilingual children's comprehension of subject- and object-extracted relative clauses (RCs). Twenty simultaneous Cantonese–English bilingual children (Mage = 8;11, SD = 2;6) and 20 vocabulary-matched Cantonese monolingual children (Mage = 6;4, SD = 1;3) completed a test of Cantonese RC comprehension. The bilingual children also completed a test of English RC comprehension. The results showed that, whereas the monolingual children were equally competent on subject and object RCs, the bilingual children performed significantly better on subject RCs. Error analyses suggested that the bilingual children were most often correctly assigning thematic roles in object RCs, but were incorrectly choosing the RC subject as the head referent. This pervasive error was interpreted to be due to the fact that both Cantonese and English have canonical SVO word order, which creates competition with structures that compete with an object RC analysis.

Abstract

Although there is strong evidence for shared abstract grammatical structure in bilingual speakers from studies of sentence production, comparable evidence from studies of comprehension is lacking. Twenty-seven (N = 27) English-German bilingual adults participated in a structural priming study where unambiguous English subject and object relative clause (RC) structures were used to prime corresponding subject and object RC interpretations of structurally ambiguous German RCs. The results showed that English object RCs primed significantly greater object RC interpretations in German in comparison to baseline and subject RC prime conditions, but that English subject RC primes did not change the participants’ baseline preferences. This is the first study to report abstract crosslinguistic priming in comprehension. The results specifically suggest that word order overlap supports the integration of syntactic structures from different languages in bilingual speakers, and that these shared representations are used in comprehension as well as production