Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-04T04:20:35.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The allative bias in three-year-olds is almost proof against task naturalness*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

N. H. Freeman ,
C. G. Sinha  and
J. A. Stedmon
N. H. Freeman
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
C. G. Sinha
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
J. A. Stedmon
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An allative bias has been noted in children's comprehension of deictic verbs and directional prepositions. This study investigates the allative bias and its susceptibility to contextual modification. Three-year-olds were asked to act according to requests to move one object to or from another, and to identify where an object had come from or gone to. A reliable bias was found whereby ‘to’ was easier than ‘from’. Attempts to make the utterance more naturally related to the task, by using movement and fronted objects, modulated the bias to a small extent, but did not abolish it. An analysis of directional expressions in terms of the components SOURCE, PATH and GOAL is presented in relation to the task-demands.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , June 1981 , pp. 283 - 296
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Bennett, D. C. (1974). Egocentrism and the child's understanding of English prepositions. Paper presented at 1st International Salzburg Colloquium on Child Language.Google Scholar
Bennett, D. C. (1975). Spatial and temporal uses of English prepositions: an essay in stratificational semantics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bower, T. G. R. (1974). Development in infancy. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1973). Non-linguistic strategies and the acquisition of word meanings. Cognition 2. 161–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V. & Garnica, O. K. (1974). Is he coming or going? On the acquisition of deictic verbs. JVLVB. 13. 559–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V. & Sengul, C. J. (1978). Strategies in the acquisition of deixis. JCLang 5. 457–75.Google Scholar
Cross, T. G. (1977). Mothers' speech adjustments: the contribution of selected listener variables. In Snow, C. E. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
de Villiers, P. A. & de Villiers, J. G. (1974). On this, that and the other: nonegocentrism in very young children. JExpChPsych 18. 438–47.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1971). Lectures on deixis. University of California Summer Program in Linguistics, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Garman, M. A., Griffiths, P. D. & Wales, R. J. (1970). Murut (Lun Bawang) prepositions and noun particles in children's speech. Sarawak Museum Journal. 18. 214–25.Google Scholar
Gopnik, A. (1978). The development of that and there in the one-word period. Paper presented to Child Language Seminar, University of York.Google Scholar
Grieve, R., Hoogenraad, R. & Murray, D. (1977). On the young child's use of lexis and syntax in understanding locative instructions. Cognition 5. 235–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, M. (1975). Egocentrism in pre-school children. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Light, P. H. (1979). The development of social sensitivity. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1973). The ivorking brain. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. (1978). Semantics. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Macrae, A. J. (1976 a). Meaning relations in language development: a study of some converse pairs and directional opposites. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Macrae, A. J. (1976 b). Movement and location in the acquisition of deictic verbs. JChLang 3. 191–204.Google Scholar
Maratsos, M. P. (1976). The use of definite and indefinite reference in young children. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
McGarrigle, J. & Donaldson, M. (1975). Conservation accidents. Cognition 3. 341–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. (1955). The child's construction of reality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1970). The child's conception of movement and speed. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Reich, P. A., Rice, K. & Preissner, U. S. (1974). Acquisition of ambiguous prepositions. University of Toronto Centre for Linguistic Studies.Google Scholar
Richards, M. M. (1976). ‘Come’ and ‘go’ reconsidered: children's use of deictic verbs in contrived situations. JVLVB 15. 655–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sachs, J. & Devin, J. (1976). Young children's use of age-appropriate speech styles in social interaction and role-playing. JChLang 3. 81–98.Google Scholar
Shatz, M. & Gelman, R. (1973). The development of communication skills: modification in the speech of young children as a function of listener. Monogr.Soc.Res.Ch.Devel. 38.Google ScholarPubMed
Shields, M. (1974). Some cognitive aspects of children's language acquisition. University of London Institute of Education.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1973). Cognitive prerequisites for the acquisition of grammar. In Ferguson, C. A. & Slobin, D. I. (eds), Studies of child language development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Takala, M. (1951). Asymmetries of the visual space. xylHelsinki: Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae, volume 72 (2).Google Scholar
Wales, R. J. (1979). Deixis. In Fletcher, P. & Garman, M. (eds), Language acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Wales, R. J., Garman, M. A. G. & Griffiths, P. D. (1976). More or less the same: a markedly different view of children's comparative judgements in three cultures. In Wales, R. J. & Walker, E. (eds), New approaches to language mechanisms. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Walkerdine, V. & Sinha, C. G. (1978). The internal triangle: language, reasoning and the social context. In Markova, I. (ed.), The social context of language. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Webb, P. A. & Abrahamson, A. A. (1976). Stages of egocentrism in children's use of ‘this’ and ‘that’: a different point of view. JChLang 3. 349–67.Google Scholar
Wilcox, S. & Palermo, D. S. (1975). ‘In’, ‘on’ and ‘under’ revisited. Cognition 3. 245–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wills, D. D. (1977). Participant deixis in English and baby talk. In Snow, C. E. & Ferguson, C. A. (eds), Talking to children. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar