Acquiring Linguistic Constructions

Tomasello, Michael

doi:10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0206

Cited by 92 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 145 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Generally speaking, syntactic development in children progresses from a stage in which constructions are largely item-based (e.g., frames such as, "give X") to an endpoint where knowledge of those constructions is abstracted away from the use of particular lexical items (see Tomasello, 2003, for a detailed review). The extent to which children show structural priming for a given construction (i.e., increased likelihood of using a construction after hearing or producing another token of the same construction) that is independent of any lexical priming is an indicator of the extent to which children have an abstract representation of that construction (see Tomasello, 2006, for a discussion). Beyond providing a tool through which to measure syntactic development, the mechanisms that give rise to structural priming may also be responsible for driving syntactic development itself (for a discussion of this point, see Bock & Griffin, 2000, among others).…”

Section: Author Manuscript Author Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is long-term structural priming affected by patterns of experience with individual verbs?☆

Kaschak

Borreggine

2008

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several recent papers have reported long-term structural priming effects in experiments where previous patterns of experience with the double object and prepositional object constructions are shown to affect later patterns of language production for those constructions. The experiments reported in this paper address the extent to which these long-term priming effects are modulated by the participants' patterns of experience with particular verbs within the double object and prepositional object constructions. The results of three experiments show that patterns of experience with particular verbs using the double object or prepositional object constructions do not have much effect on the shape of the longterm structural priming effects reported elsewhere in the literature. These findings lend support to the claim that structural priming is the result of adaptations to the language production system that occur on an abstract, structural level of representation that is separate from representations regarding the behavior of particular lexical items in particular constructions [e.g., Chang, F., Dell, G. S., & Bock, K. (2006). Becoming syntactic. Psychological Review, 113,. 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. KeywordsLanguage production; Structural priming; Lexical effects Structural priming refers to the tendency for speakers (or writers) to repeat syntactic structures across utterances (Bock, 1986). As one particularly well-studied example of this phenomenon, language producers who have recently produced (or comprehended) a double object construction ("Meghan gave her mom a kiss") are more likely to produce another double object construction to describe a transfer event ("Mike sent his boss a postcard") than to produce a prepositional object construction to describe the same event ("Mike sent a postcard to his boss"; see Bock, 1986;Bock & Griffin, 2000;Pickering & Branigan, 1998). Structural priming has been observed with a range of syntactic constructions (e.g., Corley & Scheepers, 2002;Griffin & Weinstein-Tull, 2003;Hartsuiker & Kolk, 1998;Hartsuiker & Westenberg, 2000), and has been observed both in lab tasks (e.g., Bock, 1986;Pickering & Branigan, 1998) and in samples of naturally occurring speech (e.g., Gries, 2005;Weiner & Labov, 1983). Although the repetition of lexical items (e.g., verbs) across utterances has been shown to affect the strength of the priming effects that are observed (e.g., Cleland & Corresponding author. Fax: +1 850 644 7739. kaschak@psy.fsu.edu (M.P. Kaschak). HHS Public Access Author Manuscript Author ManuscriptAuthor ManuscriptAuthor Manuscript Pickering, 2003;Pickering & Branigan, 1998), the hallmark of structural priming effects is that they arise in the absence of such lexical repetition (Bock, 1986(Bock, , 1989.Structural priming is of interest to psycholinguists (and other cognitive scientists) for several reasons. First, the presence (or absence) of structural priming between different kinds of sentences provides insight into the nature of the representations that und...

show abstract

Section: Author Manuscript Author Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is long-term structural priming affected by patterns of experience with individual verbs?☆

Kaschak

Borreggine

2008

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Laks (2005) défend d'ailleurs l'idée que des éléments orthographiques sont présents dans les représentations phonologiques de la liaison chez l'adulte francophone (la liaison réalisée /tropεʒyst/ pour "trop injuste" serait inaccessible à une personne en situation d'illettrisme). Par ailleurs, l'input oral est limité en classe de langue alors qu'il est massif pour l'enfant qui, selon Tomasello (2006), entendrait 5000 à 7000 énoncés par jour. Enfin, si les apprenants de FLE ont l'avantage de la connaissance préalable de leur langue et de son écriture, ils peuvent également opérer des transferts.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

L’acquisition de la liaison en L2 : étude longitudinale chez des apprenants  coréens de FLE et comparaison avec enfants francophones natifs

Harnois-Delpiano

Cavalla

Chevrot

2012

SHS Web of Conferences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLa liaison a déjà fait l'objet de nombreuses études dans le domaine de la phonologie mais ce n'est que récemment que l'on s'est intéressé à son acquisition (pour un bilan général Chevrot, Fayol & Laks, 2005).Les nouvelles avancées concernent notamment l'élaboration de scénarii développementaux impliquant la liaison et la segmentation des mots chez l'enfant (Wauquier-Gravelines & Braud, 2005 ;Chevrot, Dugua & Fayol, 2009). Lorsqu'il apprend les liaisons, l'enfant francophone n'a d'autre choix que de construire cet apprentissage sur l'analyse des flux de parole continue et variable qui l'environnent. Cette analyse le place dans une contradiction. D'un côté, puisque la consonne de liaison est enchaînée au mot de droite, elle forme une syllabe CV -Consonne-Voyelle -à l'initiale de ce mot : "les amis" est perçu comme /le.zami/. Cependant cette syllabation crée une disjonction entre césure lexicale et frontière syllabique puisque, dans /le.zami/, la frontière entre le mot1 et le mot2 est après le /z/ alors que la frontière syllabique est avant le /z/. Dans ce cas, l'enfant va privilégier la césure syllabique et attacher la consonnede liaison au mot2. D'un autre côté, l'enfant remarque que l'initiale du mot2 est conditionnée par le mot1.En effet, la nature phonétique de la consonne de liaison (/n/, /z/ ou /t/) est déterminée par le mot1 « comme si elle lui appartenait » (Tranel, 2000) (la forme /n/ suit le déterminant "un", /z/ suit "deux", /t/ suit "petit", etc). L'enfant va donc percevoir un lien entre la consonne de liaison et le mot de gauche.Précocement, l'acquisition de la liaison est donc influencée par deux tendances qui peuvent sembler contradictoires : la syllabation avec le mot2 qui l'attire vers la droite et la détermination de sa nature (1996), « (cette écriture) se fonde sur une analyse très précise de la phonologie de la langue, et (sa)précision, sa parfaite adéquation à la langue coréenne, font que le han'gûl est souvent présenté comme le meilleur alphabet du monde. » On peut donc supposer que les apprenants seront tentés de s'appuyer sur les valeurs phonographiques de base des graphèmes du français puisqu'ils considéreront la forme graphique comme un guide sûr pour prononcer la prononciation. Ils devraient tenter par exemple de faire la liaison en prononçant /grãdɔm/ au lieu de /grãtɔm/ pour "grand homme", /lesami/ au lieu de /lezami/ pour "les amis" ou /bɔñami/ au lieu de /bɔnami/ pour "bon ami". En outre, il semblerait qu'en coréen L1, Dans un cadre psycholinguistique, quelques études se sont intéressées à l'influence de la liaison sur la reconnaissance des mots. Matter (1986) a ainsi montré que si la liaison ne retarde pas la reconnaissance des mots, ni chez des locuteurs natifs ni chez des apprenants hollandais, ce n'est pas le cas pour la liaison potentielle, où la consonne de liaison induite par le mot1 concorde avec la consonne initiale du mot2, comme dans "un petit tableau", qui amène une ambiguïté quant au mot de droite (il peut commencer par /ta/ ou /a/).Dejean de la Bâtie & Brad...

show abstract

“…Children initially learn item-based chunks and then various 'constructions ', where different lexical items may be inserted (Tomasello, 2006). This means that, in children's early production, there is little or no syntactic structure.…”

Section: T H E S T R U C T U R E O F T H E T a R G E T L A N G U A G E Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Usage-based vs. rule-based learning: the acquisition of word order inwh-questions in English and Norwegian

Westergaard

2009

J. Child Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TThis paper discusses different approaches to language acquisition in relation to children's acquisition of word order in wh-questions in English and Norwegian. While generative models assert that children set major word order parameters and thus acquire a rule of subject-auxiliary inversion or generalized verb second (V2) at an early stage, some constructivist work argues that English-speaking children are simply reproducing frequent wh-word+auxiliary combinations in the input. The paper questions both approaches, re-evaluates some previous work, and provides some further data, concluding that the acquisition of wh-questions must be the result of a rule-based process. Based on variation in adult grammars, a cue-based model to language acquisition is presented, according to which children are sensitive to minor cues in the input, called micro-cues. V2 is not considered to be one major parameter, but several smaller-scale cues, which are responsible for children's lack of syntactic (over-)generalization in the acquisition process. I N T R O D U C T I O NChildren's acquisition of word order in non-subject wh-questions in English has been studied extensively, and in Ambridge, Rowland, Theakston & Tomasello (2006) this is described as a topic which 'represents an ideal '' test case'' for both movement-based generativist accounts and competing constructivist accounts of language acquisition' (p. 520). The present paper takes a fresh look at some child data on word order in wh-questions in English and a dialect of Norwegian, at the same time comparing a generative and a constructivist approach.

show abstract

Acquiring Linguistic Constructions

Cited by 92 publications

References 145 publications

Is long-term structural priming affected by patterns of experience with individual verbs?☆

Is long-term structural priming affected by patterns of experience with individual verbs?☆

L’acquisition de la liaison en L2 : étude longitudinale chez des apprenants  coréens de FLE et comparaison avec enfants francophones natifs

Usage-based vs. rule-based learning: the acquisition of word order inwh-questions in English and Norwegian

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Acquiring Linguistic Constructions

Cited by 92 publications

References 145 publications

Is long-term structural priming affected by patterns of experience with individual verbs?☆

Is long-term structural priming affected by patterns of experience with individual verbs?☆

L’acquisition de la liaison en L2 : étude longitudinale chez des apprenants coréens de FLE et comparaison avec enfants francophones natifs

Usage-based vs. rule-based learning: the acquisition of word order inwh-questions in English and Norwegian

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

L’acquisition de la liaison en L2 : étude longitudinale chez des apprenants  coréens de FLE et comparaison avec enfants francophones natifs