Biomedical subjects

Victoria A Murphy

Publications and source records attributed to Victoria A Murphy.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

When answer-phone makes a difference in children's acquisition of English compounds.

Over the course of acquiring deverbal compounds like truck driver, English-speaking children pass through a stage when they produce ungrammatical compounds like drive-truck. These errors have been attributed to canonical phrasal ordering (Clark, Hecht & Mulford, 1986). In this study, we compared British and Canadian children's compound production. Both dialects have the same phrasal ordering but some different lexical items (e.g. answer-phone exists only in British English). If influenced by these lexical differences, British children would produce more ungrammatical Verb-Object (VO) compounds in trying to produce the more complex deverbal (Object-Verb-er) than the Canadian children. 36 British children between the ages of 3;6 and 5;6 and 36 age-matched Canadian children were asked to produce novel compounds (like sun juggler). The British children produced more ungrammatical compounds and fewer grammatical compounds than the Canadian children. We argue that children's errors in deverbal compounds may be due in part to competing lexical structures.

Canada↗

PubMed2005

Modality effects in compounding with English inflectional morphology.

The treatment of plural morphemes in English noun-noun compounds is significant because it provides a test case for competing theories of language acquisition and representation. Even when the first noun in a compound refers to plural items, native speakers frequently use the singular form (Murphy, 2000). Sometimes, they will use the irregular plural form ('mice chaser') but very rarely are regular plurals ('rats chaser') used as the first noun in a compound. This effect has been found with native English-speaking children (Gordon, 1985; Nicoladis, 2000; Oetting & Rice, 1993; van der Lely & Christian, 2000); native English-speaking teenagers (van der Lely & Christian, 2000); and native English-speaking adults (Lardiere & Schwartz, 1997; Murphy, 2000). The apparent dissociation between regular and irregular plurals (i.e.that irregular plurals are included before a second noun but regular plurals are almost never included before a second noun) is thought to be due to innate morphological constraints (Marcus, Brinkmann, Clahsen, Weise, & Pinker, 1995). Such constraints predict that all items of regular morphology should be treated differently from all items of irregular morphology by language users in all situations. However, if external factors such as input and response modality affect the number of plurals included in compounds, then this questions the internal constraint-based explanations of compounding and encourages investigation of how external factors might influence the number of plurals included in compounds.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

Serial order of conditional stimuli as a discriminative cue for Pavlovian conditioning.

The serial order in which events occur can be a signal for different outcomes and therefore might be a determinant of how an animal should respond. In this report, we propose a novel design for studying serial order learning in Pavlovian conditioning. In both Experiments 1a and 1b, hungry rats were trained with successively presented pairs of auditory and visual stimuli (e.g., A --> B) using four different stimuli (A-D). Four orders were paired with food (A --> B, B --> C, C --> D, D --> A) while the reversals were extinguished (B --> A, C --> B, D --> C, A --> D). An analysis of responding from the second element of each pair showed that the rats discriminated trial types that preceded food from those that did not. A replication of the effect using a completely counterbalanced design is described in Experiment 1b. These results suggest that rats can use the serial or temporal order of two sequentially presented non-overlapping elements as the basis for discrimination. Two associative accounts are suggested as possible mechanisms for solving the discrimination.

Animals↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Level-ordering does not constrain children's ungrammatical compounds.

English-speaking children typically avoid using regular plurals in novel grammatical deverbal compounds as in rat eater but allow irregular plurals as in mice eater (Gordon, 19985). To explain these data, it has been argued that level-ordering model constrains the production of morphologically complex words, including those with which children have had little to no experience. If level-ordering can be supported, children should avoid regular plurals in their ungrammatical deverbal compounds like a breaker-bottle. Seventy-two English-speaking children were included in the present study, 36 from Britain and 36 from Canada. The results showed that 50% of the children who produced ungrammatical compounds included regular plurals in the compounds they produced. Conversely, none of the children who produced grammatical compounds included regular plurals. These results indicate that level-ordering does not constrain children's production of ungrammatical compounds. These results raise the possibility that level-ordering may not be a valid constraint of children's compounding in general.

Canada↗