Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T21:54:02.793Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Autonomous Languages of Twins

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Peter Bakker
Peter Bakker*
Affiliation:
Institute of General Linguistics, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
*
Institute of General Linguistics, Spuistraat 210, 1012 VT Amsterdam, Netherlands

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Twins are regularly reported to invent languages of their own, unintelligible to others. These languages are known as autonomous languages, cryptophasia or idioglossia. Despite current belief, this is not a rare phenomenon. Autonomous languages exist in about 40% of all twins, but often disappear soon. In this study, nine autonomous languages are compared: the circumstances in which they emerge, how these languages relate to the parents' language (the model language) and how they are structured. The prototypical situation is one in which two or more close siblings (not necessarily twins) grow up closely together during the language acquisition period. If an adult model language is frequently absent, the children use each other as a model and acquire the language imperfectly. The language may stabilise at that level. If a model is completely absent, the children probably do not create a language. In all cases known, the language consists of onomatopoeic expressions, some invented words, but for the greatest part of words from the adult language adopted to the constrained phonological possibilities of young children. These words being hardly recognizable, the language may turn out to be completely unintelligible to speakers of the model languages, but they resemble each other in that they lack morphology and that word order is based on pragmatic principles such as saliency and the semantic scope of words. Neither the structure of the languages nor its emergence can be explained by other than situational factors.

Keywords

Autonomous languagesLanguage acquisitionLanguage disorders
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , April 1987 , pp. 233 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1987

References

REFERENCES

1.Bakker, P (1986): Autonomous languages. Signed and spoken languages created by children in the light of Bickerton's Bioprogram Hypothesis. Publications of the Institute of General Linguistics, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
2.Campbell, RN, Grieve, R (1982): Royal investigations into the origins of language. Historiographia Linguistica 9:43–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Day, EJ (1932): The development of twins. I. A comparison of single children. II. Their resemblances and differences. Child Dev 3:179-199, 298–316.Google Scholar
4.Eliasberg, W (1928): Ueber autonome Kindersprache. Monatsschr Ohrenheilkd Laryngo-Rhinol 62:779–783.Google Scholar
5.Forchhammer, E (1939): Ueber einige Fälle von eigentümlichen Sprachbildungen bei Kindern. Arch Ges Psychol 104:395–438.Google Scholar
6.Hale, H (1886): The origin of languages, and the antiquity of speaking man. Proc Am Assoc Advancement of Science 1886:279–323.Google Scholar
7.Howard, RW (1946): The language development in a group of triplets. J Genet Psychol 69:181–188.Google Scholar
8.Jespersen, O (1922): Language, Its Nature, Development and Origin. London: Allan & Unwin.Google Scholar
9.Lübbe, H (1984): Soziologische Aspekte einer Theorie des Spracherwerbs. Eine empirische Studie über den verzögerten Spracherwerbs eines Zwillingspaares. Freiburg/Breisgau: Hochschulverlag.Google Scholar
10.Luria, AR, Yudovich, FI (1959): Speech and the Development of Mental Processes in the Child. London: Staples Press.Google Scholar
11.Mittler, P (1971): The Study of Twins. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
12.Matheny, AP, Bruggemann, CH (1972): Articulation proficiency in twins and singletons from families of twins. J Speech Hearing Res 15:845–851.Google Scholar
13.Nice, MM (1922): A child would not talk. The Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology 32:105–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Saareste, A (1936): Language Enfantin Conservé par Trois Jeunes Estoniens de Onze, Neuf et Huit Ans. Tartu: Publications des Archives de la Langue Estonienne.Google Scholar
15.Sandbank, AC (1986): The effect of twins on family relationships. Paper presented at the Fifth International Congress on Twin Studies, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
16.Savic, S (1980): How Twins Learn to Talk. A Study of the Speech Development of Twins from 1 to 3. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
17.Stumpf, C (1901): Eigenartige Sprachentwicklung eines Kindes. Zeitschrift fuer Paedagogische Psychologie und Pathologie 3:419–447.Google Scholar
18.Wallace, M (1986): The Silent Twins. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
19.Zazzo, R (1960): Les Jumeaux. Le Couple et la Personne. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar