Learning language from within: Children use semantic generalizations to infer word meanings

Abstract

One reason that word learning presents a challenge for children is because pairings between word forms and meanings are arbitrary conventions that children must learn via observation - e.g., the fact that "shovel" labels shovels. The present studies explore cases in which children might bypass observational learning and spontaneously infer new word meanings: By exploiting the fact that many words are flexible and systematically encode multiple, related meanings. For example, words like shovel and hammer are nouns for instruments, and verbs for activities involving those instruments. The present studies explored whether 3- to 5-year-old children possess semantic generalizations about lexical flexibility, and can use these generalizations to infer new word meanings: Upon learning that dax labels an activity involving an instrument, do children spontaneously infer that dax can also label the instrument itself? Across four studies, we show that at least by age four, children spontaneously generalize instrument-activity flexibility to new words. Together, our findings point to a powerful way in which children may build their vocabulary, by leveraging the fact that words are linked to multiple meanings in systematic ways.

Children’s use of polysemy to structure new word meanings

“…Consistent with this, prior studies suggest that -in contrast to the case of homophones -children do not have difficulty establishing reference for a new, polysemous use of a word (Rabagliati, Marcus, & Pylkkänen, 2010;Srinivasan et al, 2017;Srinivasan & Snedeker, 2011, 2014. For example, upon learning a novel word for an animal (e.g., that 'tima' labels a chicken), four-and five-yearolds readily shift their interpretation of the label to refer to the meat derived from the animal (e.g., such that 'tima' labels chicken meat; Srinivasan & Snedeker, 2014), and preschoolers are similarly flexible at shifting new words between representational objects and their abstract content (e.g., 'heavy book' vs. 'interesting book'; Srinivasan & Snedeker, 2011), physical containers and their contents (e.g., 'wash the pot', 'stir the pot'; Rabagliati et al, 2010), actions and tools enabling those actions (e.g., 'She shoveled the snow' vs. 'She picked up a shovel'; Srinivasan et al, 2017), and more. Strikingly, children are not only able to understand new uses of polysemous words when presented with them, but also spontaneously anticipate the different ways that polysemous words can be used to refer (Srinivasan et al, 2017).…”

“…Instead, the most prevalent form of ambiguity in natural language is polysemy -cases in which the same word expresses multiple, related senses (e.g., 'tin' and 'glass' can each label materials or objects made from those materials). Critically, in contrast to homophones, which express unrelated meanings, polysemous senses are related, raising the possibility that children's knowledge of one sense of a polysemous word might actually facilitate -rather than hinder -their acquisition of other polysemous senses (Rabagliati & Srinivasan, in press; Srinivasan, Al-Mughairy, Foushee, & Barner, 2017;Srinivasan & Rabagliati, 2015).…”

“…For example, upon learning a novel word for an animal (e.g., that 'tima' labels a chicken), four-and five-yearolds readily shift their interpretation of the label to refer to the meat derived from the animal (e.g., such that 'tima' labels chicken meat; Srinivasan & Snedeker, 2014), and preschoolers are similarly flexible at shifting new words between representational objects and their abstract content (e.g., 'heavy book' vs. 'interesting book'; Srinivasan & Snedeker, 2011), physical containers and their contents (e.g., 'wash the pot', 'stir the pot'; Rabagliati et al, 2010), actions and tools enabling those actions (e.g., 'She shoveled the snow' vs. 'She picked up a shovel'; Srinivasan et al, 2017), and more. Strikingly, children are not only able to understand new uses of polysemous words when presented with them, but also spontaneously anticipate the different ways that polysemous words can be used to refer (Srinivasan et al, 2017). For example, in one study, preschoolers watched an agent use a novel tool to perform an action on a novel substance, and learned a novel verb that labeled the action: 'Look, he's daxing it.'…”

“…For example, Rodd, Gaskell, & Marslen-Wilson (2004) report that in the Wordsmyth English dictionary (Parks, Ray, & Bland, 1998), while only 7.4% of words can be classified as homonyms, 84% can be classified as polysemous. It may be easier for children to learn a polysemous lexicon in which words are linked to multiple meanings in predictable ways, than an unambiguous lexicon in which each meaning has its own unique word, or a lexicon in which words have multiple unrelated, homophonous meanings (Rabagliati & Srinivasan, in press;Srinivasan & Rabagliati, 2015;Srinivasan et al, 2017). (butter, salt, water, etc.…”

Hoe jong Afrikaanssprekende kinders betekenis aan hul vroeë taalgebruik verbind

“…Verder word daar ook internasionaal heelwat vergelykende studies uitgevoer van eerstetaalverwerwing in verskillende tale (vergelyk Bassano & Hickmann 2013;Kail & Hickmann 2010;Küntay et al 2014). Beskrywende studies waarin ondersoek ingestel word na fonologiese (Archer & Curtin 2016;Kaur & Rau 2015;Swingley 2017;Tribushinina 2013), semantiese (Abend et al 2017;Srinivasan et al 2017) en morfosintaktiese (Cuza 2016;Legendre et al 2014;Lustigman 2013) …”