Dialogical beginnings of anaphora: The use of third person pronouns before the age of 3

Orvig, Anne Salazar; Marcos, Haydée; Morgenstern, Aliyah; Hassan, Rouba; Leber-Marin, Jocelyne; Parès, Jacques

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.020

Cited by 59 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Relying on such awareness, children omit from their sentences arguments of a verb in languages such as Korean (Clancy, 1993), Inuktitut (Allen, 2000), and Turkish (Ateş, Demir, & Küntay, 2011;Küntay & Slobin, 2002). English and French-learners, on the other hand, learn to supply pronouns following reference by nouns by age 3 (Ervin-Tripp, 1977;Demir, So, Özyürek, & Goldin-Meadow, 2012;Salazar Orvig et al, 2010). For all types of languages, patterns of omissions take into account how informative sentence elements are for their addressees.…”

Section: Development Of Referential Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crosslinguistic and crosscultural approaches to pragmatic development

Küntay

Nakamura

Şen

2014

Trends in Language Acquisition Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pragmatic development involves learning to use linguistic code and nonlinguistic action in a well-integrated way in relation to an ongoing interaction. Given how different languages encode meaning distinctions differently and how different cultures might organize social interactions differently, comparative studies are crucially relevant for understanding pragmatic development. This chapter focuses on currently available crosslinguistic and crosscultural research about (1) nonverbal interaction, (2) referential communication, (3) speech acts and politeness, and (4) extended discourse such as conflicts. We also including a section on how children learning different languages are socialized to use language in varied ways by families, peers and schools. Future directions are suggested on the basis of this current research.

show abstract

Section: Development Of Referential Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crosslinguistic and crosscultural approaches to pragmatic development

Küntay

Nakamura

Şen

2014

Trends in Language Acquisition Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both of the studies are experimental. We should note, however, that there is a rich cross‐linguistic literature investigating children’s production of referring expressions in naturalistic and narrative contexts (e.g., Allen, 2007; Bamberg, 1987; Bates, 1976; Clancy, 2003; Greenfield, 1979; Hickmann & Hendriks, 1999; Küntay, 2002; Küntay & Özyürek, 2006; Rozendaal & Baker, 2008; Salazar Orvig et al., 2010; Serratrice, 2004; Skarabela, 2007). Naturalistic studies suggest that, from the onset of multiword speech (approximately 24 months), children adapt their production of referring expressions according to whether something is accessible for the listener.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Two‐ and Four‐Year‐Olds Learn to Adapt Referring Expressions to Context: Effects of Distracters and Feedback on Referential Communication

Matthews

Butcher

Lieven

et al. 2012

Topics in Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children often refer to things ambiguously but learn not to from responding to clarification requests. We review and explore this learning process here. In Study 1, eighty-four 2-and 4-year-olds were tested for their ability to request stickers from either (a) a small array with one dissimilar distracter or (b) a large array containing similar distracters. When children made ambiguous requests, they received either general feedback or specific questions about which of two options they wanted. With training, children learned to produce more complex object descriptions and did so faster in the specific feedback condition. They also tended to provide more information when requesting stickers from large arrays. In Study 2, we varied only distracter similarity during training and then varied array size in a generalization test. Children found it harder to learn in this case. In the generalization test, 4-year-olds were more likely to provide information (a) when it was needed because distracters were similar to the target and (b) when the array size was greater (regardless of need for information). We discuss how clear cues to potential ambiguity are needed for children to learn to tailor their referring expression to context and how several cues of heuristic value (e.g., more distracters > say more) can promote the efficiency of communication while language is developing. Finally, we consider whether it would be worthwhile drawing on the human learning process when developing algorithms for the production of referring expressions.

show abstract

“…According to the theoretical framework above mentioned, in the present study we assume: the existence of close relationships between thought and language (VYGOTSKY, 1980); the regulatory function of language over human cognition (MORATO, 1996); the role of the initial adult-child interactions in the origin of meta-cognition (WERTSCH, 1978), interactive context essentially being the place where language acquisition takes place (FRANCOIS, 2006;ROMMETVEIT, 1992;SALAZAR-ORVIG, 2010). We assume, as does Vygotsky (1980Vygotsky ( , 2012, that the newborn baby is initially endowed with basic psychic processes, reflexes and elementary ways of psychic functioning, that allow him/her to act in a direct way (immediate) over the environment, being oriented by external environmental stimuli and without any auto-regulation resource.…”

Section: Theoretical Framework: Language and Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Desenvolvimento da protoargumentação na interação adulto-bebê

Vasconcelos

Leitão

2016

Alfa, rev. linguíst. (São José Rio Preto)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMO O presente artigo focaliza a gênese de produções proto-opositivas infantis, definidas como movimentos corporais, gestuais e vocalizações infantis interpretadas como oposições a comandos, vontades e ações. Assume-se, como proposto em Leitão (2010; LEITÃO; FERREIRA, 2006), que tais produções constituam antecedentes remotos da contraposição e da resposta à oposição, vistas como constituintes centrais da argumentação. Fundamentando-se em referências que inserem a gênese da ação e cognição humanas no âmbito das relações dialogicamente constituídas (BAKHTIN; VOLOCHINOV, 2009; VYGOTSKY, 1998, 2001; WERTSCH, 1978), este estudo analisa registros videográficos produzidos com duas crianças, entre a quarta semana e os seis meses de vida, em interação com adultos, em contexto doméstico. Com base em análises micro e macrogenéticas desses registros (GRANOTT; PARZIALE, 2002), três momentos foram identificados no processo de desenvolvimento de produções proto-opositivas: atribuição de sentido opositivo ao choro; construção de produções infantis como ‘recusa’ e, por fim, interpretação da ação infantil como contraposição complexa. Neste último, que implica um deslocamento do lugar discursivo atribuído à criança (LEITÃO, 2012), esta passa a ser vista não só como oponente de ações iniciadas pelo adulto, mas, também, como proponente de novas ações.

show abstract

Dialogical beginnings of anaphora: The use of third person pronouns before the age of 3

Cited by 59 publications

References 26 publications

Crosslinguistic and crosscultural approaches to pragmatic development

Crosslinguistic and crosscultural approaches to pragmatic development

Two‐ and Four‐Year‐Olds Learn to Adapt Referring Expressions to Context: Effects of Distracters and Feedback on Referential Communication

Desenvolvimento da protoargumentação na interação adulto-bebê

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About