Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-mm7gn Total loading time: 0.378 Render date: 2022-08-15T10:30:54.996Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

The development of locative comprehension in Spanish*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Peggy S. Conner
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison
Robin S. Chapman
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin–Madison

Abstract

Forty monolingual Spanish-speaking Peruvian children ages 3; 6–5; 5 were given a search task to test comprehension of six locative phrases depicting the four spatial relations in front of, in back of, beside and under. Performance improved with age and was best for under (debajo de) and poorest on beside (al costado de, al lado de). There was no evidence that locatives lacking object part terms (delante de for in front of and al costado de for beside) resulted in poorer performance than locatives that included the object part labels (enfrente de, al lado de). Nor was there evidence to support the positive pole hypothesis that in front of items would be easier than behind. Performance was best when the children themselves were the reference object, next best with a fronted object, and poorest with a nonfronted object, suggesting that preschoolers may understand projective locatives with respect to the reference object's intrinsic orientation, rather than imposing their own point of view.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abkarian, G. G. (1982). Comprehension of deictic locatives: the object ‘behind’ it. JPsycholingRes 11. 229–45.Google Scholar
Abkarian, G. G. (1983). More negative findings for positive prepositions. JChLang 10. 415–30.Google ScholarPubMed
Chapman, R. S. (1978). Comprehension strategies in children. In Kavanagh, J. F. & Strange, W. (eds), Speech and language in the laboratory, school, and clinic. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1973). Non-linguistic strategies and the acquisition of meanings. Cognition 2. 161–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1977). Strategies and the mapping problem in first language acquisition. In Macnamara, J. (ed.), Language, learning and thought. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1980). Here's the top: nonlinguistic strategies in the acquisition of orientational terms. ChDev 51. 329–38.Google Scholar
Clark, H. (1973). Space, time, semantics, and the child. In Moore, T. E. (ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Cook, N. (1978). In, on and under revisited again. PRCLD 15. 3845.Google Scholar
Fisher, C. B. & Braine, L. G. (1981). Children's left–right concepts: generalization across figure and location. ChDev 52. 451–6.Google Scholar
Flavell, J., Shipstead, S. & Craft, K. (1978). Young children's knowledge about visual perception: hiding objects from others. ChDev 49. 1208–11.Google ScholarPubMed
Harris, L. & Strommen, E. (1972). The role of front–back features in children's ‘front’, ‘back’ and ‘beside’ placements of objects. MPQ 18. 259–71.Google Scholar
Hodun, A. (1975). Comprehension and the development of spatial and temporal sequence terms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin–Madison.Google Scholar
Holzman, M. (1981). Where is under: from memories of instances to abstract featural concepts. JPsycholingRes 10. 421–39.Google Scholar
Hoogenraad, R., Grieve, R., Baldwin, P. & Campbell, R. (1978). Comprehension as an interactive process. In Campbell, R. & Smith, P. (eds), Recent advances in the psychology of language. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (1973). Spatial notions and the child's use of locatives in an elicitation task. Paper presented at the Stanford Child Language Research Forum, Stanford, California.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (1979). A study of spatial thought and expression: in back and in front. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. (in press). Cognitive prerequisites: the evidence from children learning English. In Slobin, D. (ed.), Cross-linguistic studies of language acquisition. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, J. & Slobin, D. (1978). The development of locative expressions in English, Italian, Serbo-Croatian, and Turkish. JChLang 6. 529–45.Google ScholarPubMed
Kuczaj, S. A. & Maratsos, M. P. (1975). On the acquisition of front, back and side. ChDev 46. 202–10.Google Scholar
Levine, S. C. & Carey, S. (1982). Up front; the acquisition of a concept and a word. JChLang 9. 645–58.Google ScholarPubMed
McNeil, M. & Prescott, T. (1979). The revised token test. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Piaget, J. & Inhelder, B. (1963). The child's conception of space. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Wanska, S. K. (1977). The relationship of the development of spatial concepts to the acquisition of locative meaning. Technical Report N. 415, Wisconsin Center for Cognitive Learning, University of Wisconsin–Madison.Google Scholar
Washington, D. S. & Naremore, R. C. (1978). Children's use of spatial prepositions in two- and three-dimensional tasks. JSHR 21. 151–65.Google ScholarPubMed
Wilcox, S. & Palermo, D. (1975). ‘In’, ‘on’, and ‘under’ revisited. Cognition 3. 245–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcox, S. (1982). Children's use of lexical and non-lexical information in responding to commands. JChLang 9. 139–50.Google Scholar
Windmiller, M. (1974). The relationship between a child's conception of space and his comprehension and production of spatial locatives. In Lubin, G., Magary, J. & Poulsen, M. (eds), Piagetian theory and the helping professions. Los Angeles: University of Southern California Press.Google Scholar
4
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The development of locative comprehension in Spanish*
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The development of locative comprehension in Spanish*
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The development of locative comprehension in Spanish*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *