PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11797539

Learning a morphological system without a default: the Polish genitive.

Abstract

The acquisition of the English past tense inflection is the paradigm example of rule learning in the child language literature and has become something of a test case for theories of language development. This is unfortunate, as the idiosyncratic properties of the English system of marking tense make it a rather unrepresentative example of morphological development. In this paper, I contrast this familiar inflection with a much more complex morphological subsystem, the Polish genitive. The genitive case has three different markers, each restricted to a different subset of nouns, in both the singular and the plural. Analysis of the spontaneous speech of three children between the ages of 1;4 and 4;11 showed that they generalized, and overgeneralized, all three singular endings. However, error rates were extremely low and there is no evidence that they treated any one ending as the 'default'. The genitive plural, on the other hand, showed a strikingly different pattern of acquisition, similar to that seen in English-speaking children learning the past tense. It is argued that in the latter two cases, the default-like character of one of the affixes is attributable to the properties of the relevant inflectional subsystems, not to the predispositions that children bring to the language-learning task.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E Dabrowska. 2001. Learning a morphological system without a default: the Polish genitive.. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000901004767

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Taxometric analyses of specific language impairment in 3- and 4-year-old children.

Specific language impairment (SLI), like many diagnostic labels for complex behavioral conditions, is often assumed to define a category of children who differ not only in degree but also in kind from children developing language normally. Although this assumption has important implications for theoretical models and clinical approaches, its validity has not been tested. In this study, distributions of language scores from children at ages 3 (N = 620) and 4 (N = 623) years were analyzed using a taxometric procedure known as "mean above minus below a cut" (MAMBAC; P. E. Meehl and L. J. Yonce, 1994). Language scores were distributed dimensionally at both ages, failing to support the hypothesis of a qualitatively distinct group corresponding to children with SLI.

Child Language↗

Individual differences in language performance after cochlear implantation at one to three years of age: child, family, and linguistic factors.

Language skills were investigated in a multicultural sample of 13 prelingually deaf children (11 profoundly deaf from birth) who received cochlear implants between 14 and 38 months of age; average duration of implant use was 49 months. Individual postimplant language skills ranged from extremely delayed to age appropriate. On average, skills varied across domains: on vocabulary, several children functioned in the average range compared with hearing peers, but all were below that range on a test emphasizing syntax (CELF-P). Children with preimplant hearing experience had the highest scores on all language measures. Excluding these children, age of implantation (range 14 to 27 months) associated inversely and significantly with CELF-P scores, even when nonverbal IQ was controlled. Qualitative analyses indicated higher child language achievement associated with parents' reports of lengthy, in-depth processes to decide about cochlear implantation. Such reports may indicate high levels of ongoing parent involvement with child and programming.

Child Language↗

The language-specific nature of grammatical development: evidence from bilingual language learners.

The fact that early lexical and grammatical acquisition are strongly correlated has been cited as evidence against the view that the language faculty is composed of dissociable and autonomous modules (Bates & Goodman, 1997). However, previous studies have not yet eliminated the possibility that lexical-grammar associations may be attributable to language-general individual differences (e.g. children who are good at learning words are good at learning grammar). Parent report assessments of toddlers who are simultaneously learning English and Spanish (n = 113) allow an examination of the specificity of lexical-grammar relationships while holding child factors constant. Within-language vocabulary-grammar associations were stronger than cross-language relationships, even after controlling for age, proportion of language exposure, general language skill and reporter bias. Similar patterns were found based on naturalistic language samples (n = 22), ruling out a methodological artifact. These results are consistent with the view that grammar learning is specifically tied to lexical progress in a given language and provide further support for strong lexical-grammatical continuity early in acquisition.

Child Language↗