Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:52:24.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Limits on negative information in language input*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

James L. Morgan  and
Lisa L. Travis
James L. Morgan*
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Lisa L. Travis
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
*
Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota, 51 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hirsh-Pasek, Treiman & Schneiderman (1984).and Demetras, Post & Snow (1986).have recently suggested that certain types of parental repetitions and clarification questions may provide children with subtle cues to their grammatical errors. We further investigated this possibility by examining parental responses to inflectional over-regularizations and wh-question auxiliary-verb omission errors in the sets of transcripts from Adam, Eve and Sarah (Brown 1973). These errors were chosen because they are exemplars of overgeneralization, the type of mistake for which negative information is, in theory, most critically needed. Expansions and Clarification Questions occurred more often following ill-formed utterances in Adam's and Eve's input, but not in Sarah's. However, these corrective responses formed only a small proportion of all adult responses following Adam's and Eve's grammatical errors. Moreover, corrective responses appear to drop out of children's input while they continue to make overgeneralization errors. Whereas negative feedback may occasionally be available, in the light of these findings the contention that language input generally incorporates negative information appears to be unfounded.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , October 1989 , pp. 531 - 552
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported in part by NICHD grant T32-HD07151 to the Center for Research in Learning, Perception and Cognition, University of Minnesota. We thank Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, Susan Goldin-Meadow, Elissa Newport, Tom Trabasso, and an anonymous reviewer for thoughtful comments on drafts of this paper, and Elizabeth Greene for her diligent assistance.

References

REFERENCES

Brown, R. (1968). The development of wh-questions in each child speech. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 7. 274–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A first language. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R., Cazden, C. & Bellugi, U. (1969). The child's grammar from I to III. In Hill, J. P. (ed.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology, Vol. II. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Brown, R. & Hanlon, C. (1970). Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child speech. In Hayes, J. R. (ed.) Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. & Slobin, D. I. (1982). Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense. Language 58. 265–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cazden, C. B. (1968). The acquisition of noun and verb inflections. Child Development 39. 433–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Demetras, M. J., Post, K. N. & Snow, C. E. (1986). Feedback to first language learners: the role of repetitions and clarification questions. Journal of Child Language 13. 275–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gold, E. M. (1967). Language identification in the limit. Information and Control 10. 447–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Braidi, S. M. & McNally, L. (1986). ‘Daddy throw’: on the existence of implicit negative evidence for subcategorization errors. Paper presented at the Boston Child Language Conference.Google Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Treiman, R. & Schneiderman, M. (1984). Brown and Hanlon revisited: mothers' sensitivity to ungrammatical forms. Journal of Child Language 11. 81–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuczaj, S. A. (1977). The acquisition of regular and iregular past tense forms. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 16. 589–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuczaj, S. A. & Brannick, N. (1979). Children's use of the wh-question modal auxiliary placement rule. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 28. 43–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. & Snow, C. E. (1985). The child language data exchange system. Journal of Child Language 12. 271–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nelson, K. E. (1977). Facilitating children's syntax acquisition. Developmental Psychology 13. 101–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K. E., Carskaddon, G. & Bonvillian, J. D. (1973). Syntax acquisition: impact of experimental variation in adult verbal interaction with the child. Child Development 44. 497–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newport, E. L., Gleitman, H. & Gleitman, L. R. (1977). Mother, I'd rather do it myself: some effects and non effects of maternal speech style. In Snow, C. -E. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children: language input and acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schieffelin, B. B. (1979). Getting it together: an ethnographic approach to the study of the development of communicative competence. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. B. (eds), Developmental pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wexler, K. & Culicover, P. W. (1980). Formal principles of language acquisition. Cambridge MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar