Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T20:01:21.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Children aged 2 ; 1 use transitive syntax to make a semantic-role interpretation in a pointing task*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2011

MIRIAM DITTMAR ,
KIRSTEN ABBOT-SMITH ,
ELENA LIEVEN  and
MICHAEL TOMASELLO
MIRIAM DITTMAR*
Affiliation:
Psychologisches Institut, University of Zurich, Switzerland
KIRSTEN ABBOT-SMITH
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Kent, UK
ELENA LIEVEN
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for EvolutionaryAnthropology, Germany
MICHAEL TOMASELLO
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for EvolutionaryAnthropology, Germany
*
Address for correspondence: Miriam Dittmar, Universität Zürich, Psychologisches Institut, Allgemeine und Entwicklungspsychologie, Binzmühlestrasse 14/21, CH-8050 Zürich. e-mail: m.dittmar@psychologie.uzh.ch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The current study used a forced choice pointing paradigm to examine whether English children aged 2 ; 1 can use abstract knowledge of the relationship between word order position and semantic roles to make an active behavioural decision when interpreting active transitive sentences with novel verbs, when the actions are identical in the target and foil video clips. The children pointed significantly above chance with novel verbs but only if the final trial was excluded. With familiar verbs the children pointed consistently above chance. Children aged 2 ; 7 did not show these tiring effects and their performance in the familiar and novel verb conditions was always equivalent.

Type
Brief Research Reports
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 38 , Issue 5 , November 2011 , pp. 1109 - 1123
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

[*]

Many thanks to Elena Rossi, Linda Konnerth and Anna Roby for assistance in testing and for organizing appointments; to Kristin Wolter for coding reliabilities; to Petra Jahn for technical assistance; and to Daniel Stahl for help with counterbalancing and statistics. Particular thanks to a hard-working anonymous reviewer, for comments about order effects and also to Edith Bavin for all her helpful comments. Thank you also to Sabine Stoll for suggesting that we use a pointing study. A special ‘thank you’ to the parents and children and to Franklin Chang for helpful comments throughout all stages of the study.

References

REFERENCES

Chan, A., Meints, K., Lieven, E. & Tomasello, M. (2010). Young children's comprehension of English SVO word order revisited: Testing the same children in act-out and intermodal preferential looking tasks. Cognitive Development 25, 30–45.Google Scholar
Chang, F., Dell, G. S. & Bock, K. (2006). Becoming syntactic. Psychological Review 113(2), 234–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dittmar, M., Abbot-Smith, K., Lieven, E. & Tomasello, M. (2008a). German children's comprehension of word order and case marking in causative sentences. Child Development 79(4), 1152–67.Google Scholar
Dittmar, M., Abbot-Smith, K., Lieven, E. & Tomasello, M. (2008b). Young German children's early syntactic competence: A preferential looking study. Developmental Science 11(4), 575–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fenson, L., Dale, P., Reznick, J., Bates, E., Thal, D. & Pethnick, S. (1994). Variability in early communicative development. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernandes, K., Marcus, G. F., DiNubila, J. A. & Vouloumanos, A. (2006). From semantics to syntax and back again: Argument structure in the third year of life. Cognition 100(2), B10–B20.Google Scholar
Fisher, C. (2002). The role of abstract syntactic knowledge in language acquisition: A reply to Tomasello (2000). Cognition 82, 259–78.Google Scholar
Gertner, Y., Fisher, C. & Eisengart, J. (2006). Learning words and rules: Abstract knowledge of word order in early sentence comprehension. Psychological Science 17(8), 684–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grimm, H. (2000). Sprachentwicklungstest für zweijährige Kinder. Diagnose rezeptiver und produktiver Sprachverarbeitungsfähigkeiten. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J. & Thompson, S. A. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56(2), 251–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kidd, E., Bavin, E. L. & Rhodes, B. (2001). Two-year-olds' knowledge of verbs and argument structures. In Almgren, M., Barreña, A., Ezeizabarrena, M.-J., Idiazabal, I. & MacWhinney, B. (eds), Research on child language acquisition. Proceedings of the 8th conference of the International Association for the Study of Child Language, vol. 2, 1368–82. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Liszkowski, U., Carpenter, M., Striano, T. & Tomasello, M. (2006). 12-and 18-month-olds point to provide information for others. Journal of Cognition and Development 7(2), 173–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meints, K. (1999). Prototypes and the acquisition of English passives. In Kokinov, B. (ed.), Perspectives on cognitive science, vol. 4, 67–77. Sofia: NBU Press.Google Scholar
Naigles, L. R. (1990). Children use syntax to learn verb meaning. Journal of Child Language 17, 357–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naigles, L. R. (2002). Form is easy, meaning is hard: Resolving a paradox in early child language. Cognition 86, 157–99.Google Scholar
Noble, C. H., Rowland, C. & Pine, J. M. (in press). Comprehension of argument structure and semantic roles: Evidence from infants and the forced-choice pointing paradigm. Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1992). First verbs: A case study of early grammatical development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language. Cambridge, MA & London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Townsend, D. J. & Bever, T. G. (2001). Sentence comprehension. The integration of habits and rules. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar