Language acquisition 11/18/11 Michael Frank Department of Psychology
Tuned towards communication
Hierarchical organization of language S VP NP syntactic det N V the dog snapped the dog snap +[past] morphological/lexical /d əӚ d ɔ g snæpt/ phonological
Language development through YouTube Single-word speech Babbling 1 year 1.5 years “ga” “cheese!” Multi-word speech with Telegraphic speech occasional morphology errors 2 years 3 years “annie big shoes” “I no like mustard”
Language development through YouTube Single-word speech Babbling 1 year 1.5 years “ga” “cheese!” Multi-word speech with Telegraphic speech occasional morphology errors 2 years 3 years “annie big shoes” “I no like mustard”
Recognizing mom’s voice Individual neonates’ preference for mother’s voice 2.5 2 1.5 Sucking preference 1 0.5 0 -0.5 More for mom -1 Less for mom -1.5 -2 -2.5 DeCasper & Fifer (1980)
Recognizing specific phrases High-amplitude sucking preference DKASPER AND SPENCE 142 target Mothers read “The Cat in the Hat” to .60 their babies over the last 6 weeks of pregnancy, then the resulting novel newborns were tested on their preference for the target story experimental control IBI BIN Ct - sec1 Figure 2. Mean reinforcement ratios of the target (hatched bars) and novel (open DeCasper & Spence (1986) bars) stories for Experienced infants in the 161 <f condition (left side) and in the 161 >t condition (right side). The means are based on a total of 400 baseline and 1040 reinforced interburst intervals. during the baseline and reinforcement phases revealed no effect of Contingency, F(1) 10) < 1 .O, a significant effect of Bin, F(9,90) = 5.19, p< .OOl, and a signifi- cant Contingency x Bin interaction, F(9,90) = 3.48, p c .005. However, none of the follow-up tests of simple effects were statistically reliable; the inter- action seemed to result from unsystematic variation in the difference scores of the two contingency conditions in Bins 1-5. Subsequent analysis of conditional probabilities confirmed that the pre- ceding interaction did not result from systematic effects of target-story rein- forcement. The baseline conditional probabilities of target and novel stories did not differ, t( 11) < 1 .O; neither did their reinforcement ratios computed for the intervals O.Ot-0.4t and 1 .Ot-1.41. The mixed ANOVA with Contingency and Interval as factors revealed no reliable effects whatever, p values of all F statistics > .10 (Figure 3). A comparison of the reinforcement ratios of matched-subject pairs re- vealed that experienced newborns had larger target-story ratios than their matched naive counterparts, t(l1) =2.68, p< .05, but that their novel-story ratios did not differ, t(1 1)~ 1 .O. DISCUSSION Three implications of the prenatal-experience hypothesis were confirmed: (1) For experienced subjects the target story was more reinforcing than the novel
Categorical perception Phonetic boundary at +30 msec VOT % PA Adult BA Judgments Voice-onset time (VOT) Many phonemes differ only on some continuum. • /b/ & /p/: voice onset time • Question : /b/ & /d/ & /g/ differ on place of articulation. • Categorical? Reviewed in Kuhl (2004)
Infant categorical perception Eimas et al. (1971) Kuhl et al. (1975)
Universal vs. specific • /b/ vs. /p/ is close to universal • But many sound contrasts are not – Any Hindi speakers here? beat lentil branch shield
Conditioned head-turn procedure a = one b = another Hindi sound Hindi sound a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a b b b a a a a “ Control ” trial Test trial
Changes in speech perception Werker & Tees (1984)
Language development through YouTube Single-word speech Babbling 1 year 1.5 years “ga” “cheese!” Multi-word speech with Telegraphic speech occasional morphology errors 2 years 3 years “annie big shoes” “I no like mustard”
Baby’s first words Table 4 Rank-Ordered Top 20 Words for Children Who Can Say 1–10 Words on CDI and Percentage of Children Producing Them, by Language United States ( n � 264) Hong Kong ( n � 367) Beijing ( n � 336) Daddy (54) Daddy (54) Mommy (87) First words are Mommy (50) Aah (60) Daddy (85) BaaBaa (33) Mommy (57) Grandma — Paternal (40) high frequency, Bye (25) YumYum (36) Grandpa — Paternal (17) Hi (24) Sister — Older (21) Hello?/Wei? (14) grounded in UhOh (20) UhOh (Aiyou) (20) Hit (12) Grr (16) Hit (18) Uncle—Paternal (11) social context Bottle (13) Hello?/Wei? (13) Grab/Grasp (9) YumYum (13) Milk (13) Auntie — Maternal (8) and routine Dog (12) Naughty (8) Bye (8) No (12) Brother — Older (7) UhOh (Aiyou) (7) WoofWoof (11) Grandma — Maternal (6) Ya/Wow (7) Vroom (11) Grandma — Paternal (6) Sister — Older (7) Kitty (10) Bye (5) WoofWoof (7) Ball (10) Bread (5) Brother — Older (6) Baby (7) Auntie — Maternal (4) Hug/Hold (6) Duck (6) Ball (4) Light (4) Cat (5) Grandma — Maternal (3) Grandpa—Paternal (4) Ouch (5) Car (3) Egg (3) WoofWoof (2) Banana (3) Vroom (3) Tardiff et al. (2008)
The meanings of the first words Underextensions “ doggie ” only means Fido Overextensions “ ball ” means anything round (ball, balloon, moon, apple, egg…)
Yet kids learn tons of words! Words understood Words produced Fenson et al. (1994)
The importance of early experience Total words known Total words heard Hart & Risley (1995)
Associative word learning • Raise your left hand when you know what a hiftam is • And your right when you know what a gensim is Smith & Yu (2008)
Intentions, not cues Coincide 2 100 Conflict Percent Correct 75 1 50 25 • Coincide : child 0 "Which one is the "Which one is your looks at 1 after modi?" favorite?" hearing 1’s name • Conflict : child Children represent speakers’ looks at 2 after intentions! hearing 1’s name Baldwin (1993)
Language development through YouTube Single-word speech Babbling 1 year 1.5 years “ga” “cheese!” Multi-word speech with Telegraphic speech occasional morphology errors 2 years 3 years “annie big shoes” “I no like mustard”
English morphology • English past tense – Mostly regular: walk -> walked – Occasionally (~100 forms) irregular: go -> went, run -> ran, sing -> sang • English plural – Almost entirely regular: book -> books – Very few irregulars (~10 forms): mice, geese, teeth, feet, cacti, children, men, etc.
Morphological generalization Today I spling. Lun Yesterday I ___ +/z/ Tor Today I gude. Yesterday I ___ Tass Today I scride. +/ Əә z/ Gutch Yesterday I ___ Berko (1958)
Overregularization Development of a “blocking rule”? Or consequence of gradually increasing evidence? 1. Some irregulars learned by rote – Most irregulars tend to be very high frequency 2. Then over-generalization of predominant pattern 3. Finally, correct performance on regulars Marcus et al. (1992)
Theoretical positions Principles and Item-based Parameters acquisition • Principles of syntax are • Syntax is learned innately given piecemeal through individual words • A small set of • Cross-linguistic parameters vary cross- linguistically similarities caused by cognitive similarities • Children determine these parameter • Children learn and settings from the input change all parts of languages • Developmental errors • Developmental errors are caused by the course of maturation are caused by mistakes in generalization
Transitive vs. intransitive • Transitive takes an agent/subject and a patient/object – Pat ate snails. – Kim drew spirals. – Alex likes running. • Intransitive just takes a subject – Pat ate. – Kim drew. – * Alex likes. • Many verbs can move between the two but not all.
Gradual generalization of syntax Here’s fudding! Look at fudding! Kiwi is fudding! What is kiwi doing to the dough? Kiwi is fudding it! (transitive) 100 Percent correct generalizations 75 transitive 50 25 0 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Age (years) Tomasello & Brooks, 1999
Early abstract knowledge Duck is gorping bunny! Success at 2 years, even younger for “the girl is gorping the boy.” Gertner, Fisher, & Eisengart, 2006
Learning to sign without native input T = transitive actor, I = intransitive actor, P = patient T P I T P I You eat (I) Mom Child You eat [chocolate] (T) [You] eat chocolate (P) Production probability You eat chocolate (T P) Young deaf children who were unable to acquire oral language naturally and had not been exposed to a conventional manual language were found to use spontaneously a gesture system that has some of the structural characteristics of early child language. Goldin-Meadow & Mylander, 1983
Conclusions • Early perceptual abilities – Learning rhythms, discriminating sounds • Building a vocabulary through social word learning – Importance of input – And of mechanisms of learning • Then gradual generalization of syntactic structure – Early comprehension, later production
Recommend
More recommend
