Can object names and functions act as cues to categories for infants? In Study 1, 14-and 18-month-old infants were shown novel category exemplars along with a function, a name, or no cues. Infants were then asked to "find another one," choosing between 2 novel objects (1 from the familiar category and the other not). Infants at both ages were more likely to select the category match in the function than in the no-cue condition. However, only at 18 months did naming the objects enhance categorization. Study 2 shows that names can facilitate categorization for 14-month-olds as well when a hint regarding the core meaning of the objects (the function of a single familiarization object) is provided.

No abstract

Three experiments document that conceptual knowledge influences lexical acquisition in infancy. A novel target object was initially labeled with a novel word. In both yes-no (Experiment 1) and forced-choice (Experiment 2) tasks, 2-year-olds' subsequent extensions were mediated by the conceptual description of the targets. When targets were described as artifacts, infants extended on the basis of shape. When targets were described as animates, infants extended on the basis of both shape and texture. Experiment 3 revealed similar results for 1.5-year-olds. These results challenge the notion that expectations in word learning (e.g., the "shape bias") (a) emerge late and (b) rest entirely on correlations between perceptual object features and words. Instead, the results indicate that both perceptual and conceptual information permeate word learning in infancy.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

A precisely controlled automated procedure confirms a developmental decalage: infants acquiring English link count nouns to object categories well before they link adjectives to properties. Fourteen-and 18-month-olds (n = 48 at each age) extended novel words presented as count nouns based on category membership, rather than shared properties. When the same words were presented as adjectives, infants revealed no preference for either category-or property-based extensions. The convergence between performance in this automated procedure and in more interactive tasks is striking. Perhaps more importantly, the automated task provides a methodological foundation for (1) exploring the development of form-meaning links in infants acquiring languages other than English, and (2) investigating the time-course underlying infants' mapping of novel words to meaning.Infants' first words are greeted with special joy, perhaps because we share with Confucious the intuition that "The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right name." This, after all, is no simple matter. Many different words can be applied to the same scene, and different kinds of words (e.g., nouns, adjectives, verbs) highlight different aspects of that scene (e.g., object categories, object properties, and events). Successful word-learning therefore requires identification of a novel words' grammatical form, discovery of its appropriate referent, and its appropriate extension to new referents.Some propose that an early link between nouns and object categories provides the foundation for the acquisition of other links between grammatical forms and meanings (Dixon, 1982;Gentner, 1982;Gleitman, 1990;Huttenlocher & Smiley, 1987;Maratsos, 1998;Talmy, 1985;Waxman, 1999a; Waxman & Lidz, 2006;Wierzbicka, 1986). Because adjectives regularly derive meaning from the nouns they modify (e.g., a hard mattress vs. a hard test), and because verbs derive meaning from the relations among nouns (e.g., A chases B vs. B chases A), predicates (both adjectives and verbs) are interpreted in conjunction with accompanying nouns (Dixon, 1982).There is now considerable empirical support for this theoretical perspective (e.g. Childers & Tomasello, 2006;Echols & Marti, 2004;Gasser & Smith, 1998;Gentner, 1982;Hall & Moore, 1997;Imai, Haryu, & Okada, 2005;Smith, Jones, & Landau, 1992;Waxman & Booth, 2001; Waxman, Lidz, Braun, & Lavin, under review). Take for example, Booth and Waxman (2003). In this study, 14-month-old infants were introduced to four toy objects, all from the same object category and embodying the same property (e.g., purple horses). The experimenter labeled these objects either with novel nouns (e.g., "These are blickets") or adjectives ("These are blickish"). Next, in a contrast phase, infants viewed an object from a different category and embodying a different property (e.g., an orange carrot experimenter noted that this contrast object was "..not a blicket" (noun condition) or " …not a blickish one" (adjective condition). Finally, the experimenter introdu...

No abstract