Skip to main content Accessibility help

Early object labels: the case for a developmental lexical principles framework[*]

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Roberta Michnick Golinkoff
University of Delaware
Carolyn B. Mervis
Emory University
Kathryn Hirsh-Pasek
Temple University
E-mail address:


Universally, object names make up the largest proportion of any word type found in children's early lexicons. Here we present and critically evaluate a set of six lexical principles (some previously proposed and some new) for making object label learning a manageable task. Overall, the principles have the effect of reducing the amount of information that language-learning children must consider for what a new word might mean. These principles are constructed by children in a two-tiered developmental sequence, as a function of their sensitivity to linguistic input, contextual information, and social-interactional cues. Thus, the process of lexical acquisition changes as a result of the particular principles a given child has at his or her disposal. For children who have only the principles of the first tier (REFERENCE, EXTENDIBILITY, and OBJECT SCOPE), word learning has a deliberate and laborious look. The principles of the second tier (CATEGORICAL SCOPE, NOVEL NAME – NAMELESS CATEGORY’ or N3C, and CONVENTIONALITY) enable the child to acquire many new labels rapidly. The present unified account is argued to have a number of advantages over treating such principles separately and non-developmentally. Further, the explicit recognition that the acquisition and operation of these principles is influenced by the child's interpretation of both linguistic and non-linguistic input is seen as an advance.

Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.



A version of this paper was presented at the Society for Research in Child Development meetings in 1993. The research described herein was supported by a fellowship from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation and a James McKeen Cattell Sabbatical Award to Golinkoff, and grant No. HD 19568 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development awarded to Golinkoff and Hirsh-Pasek. Mervis's participation also was supported by grants from that Institute (HD27042 and HD20892) and from the National Science Foundation (BNS84–19036). We wish to thank Jacquelyn Bertrand, Lois Bloom, Bill Frawley, Gaby Hermon and our long-standing MLU group for their helpful comments on various drafts of this manuscript.


Aslin, R. N. (1981). Experiential influences and sensitive periods in perceptual development: a unified model. In Aslin, R. N., Alberts, J. R. & Petersen, M. R., M. R. (eds), Development of perception. Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Aslin, R. N. (1992). Segmentation of fluent speech into words: learning models and the role of maternal input. In de Boysson-Bardies, B., de Schonen, S., Jusczyk, P., MacNeilage, P. & Morton, J. (eds), Developmental neurocognition: speech and face processing in the first year of life. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Au, T. K. (1985). Children's word-learning strategies. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 24, 22–9.Google Scholar
Baldwin, D. A. (1989). Priorities in children's expectations about object label reference: form over color. Child Development 60, 1291–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baldwin, D. A. (1993). Infants' ability to consult the speaker for clues to word reference. Journal of Child Language 20, 377–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baldwin, D. A. & Markman, E. M. (1989). Establishing word-object relations: a first step. Child Development 60, 381–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Banigan, R. L. & Mervis, C. B. (1988). Role of adult input in young children's category evolution: II an experimental study. Journal of Child Language 15, 493504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barrett, M. D. (1978). Lexical development and overextension in child language. Journal of Child Language 5, 205–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, M. D. (1982). Distinguishing between prototypes: the early acquisition of the meanings of object names. In Kuczaj, S. A. (ed.), Language development. Vol. I. Syntax and semantics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bates, E., Camaioni, L. & Volterra, V. (1975). The acquisition of performatives prior to speech. Merrill Palmer Quarterly 21, 205–26.Google Scholar
Bauer, P. J. & Mandler, J. M. (1989). Taxonomies and triads: conceptual organization in one- to two-year-olds. Cognitive Psychology 21, 156–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behrend, D. A. (1990). Constraints and development: a reply to Nelson (1988). Cognitive Development 5, 313–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blewitt, P. (1983). Dog versus collie: vocabulary in speech to young children. Developmental Psychology 19, 602–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L. (1973). One word at a time: the use of single word utterances before syntax. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bloom, L. (1974). Talking, understanding and thinking: developmental relationship between receptive and expressive language. In Schiefelbusch, R. L. & Lloyd, L. (eds), Language perspectives – acquisition, retardation and intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, L. & Capatides, J. B. (1987). Expression of affect and the emergence of language. Child Development 58, 1513–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L. & Lahey, M. (1978). Language development and language disorders. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., Tinker, E. & Margulis, C. (1993). The words children learn. Cognitive Development (in press).Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1958). Words and things. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Carey, S. (1982). Semantic development: the state of the art. In Wanner, E. & Gleitman, L. R. (eds), Language acquisition: the state of the art. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Carey, S. & Gelman, R. (1990). Description of their forthcoming edited book, Biology and knowledge: structural constraints on development. The Genetic Epistemologist, Fall issue, p. 7.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Foris: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1983). Meanings and concepts. In Flavell, J. H. & Markman, E. M. (eds), Handbook of child psychology. Vol. III. Cognitive development. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1990). On the pragmatics of contrast. Journal of Child Language 17, 417–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dockrell, J. & Campbell, R. (1986). Lexical acquisition strategies in the preschool child. In Kuczaj, S. & Barrett, M. (eds), The development of word meaning. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Dore, J., Franklin, M., Miller, R. & Ramer, A. (1975). Transitional phenomena in early language acquisition. Journal of Child Language 3, 1328.Google Scholar
Dromi, E. (1987). Early lexical development. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Echols, C. H. (1992). Developmental changes in attention to labeled events during the transition to language. Paper presented at the International Conference for Infant Studies, Miami Beach, FL.Google Scholar
Fernald, A. & Morikawa, H. (1993). Common themes and cultural variations in Japanese and American mothers' speech to infants. Child Development 64, 637–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franco, F. & Butterworth, G. (1991). Infant pointing: prelinguistic references and co-reference. Paper presented at meeting of Society for Research in Child Development, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
Gathercole, V. C. (1989). Contrast: a semantic constraint. Journal of Child Language 16, 685702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gauker, C. (1990). How to learn a language like a chimpanzee. Philosophical Psychology 3, 3153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, R. (1990). Structural constraints on cognitive development. Cognitive Science 14, 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, S. & Markman, E. (1986). Categories and induction in young children. Cognition 23, 183209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gentner, D. (1983). Why nouns are learned before verbs: linguistic relativity versus natural partitioning. In Kuczaj, S. (ed), Language development. Vol. 2. Language, cognition, and culture. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Glass, A. L., Holyoak, K. J. & Santa, J. L. (1979). Cognition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google ScholarPubMed
Gleitman, L. (1990). Structural sources of verb meaning. Language Acquisition 1, 355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldfield, B. A. (1993). Noun bias in maternal speech to one-year-olds. Journal of Child Language 20, 8599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldin-Meadow, S. & Mylander, C. (1984). Gestural communication in deaf children: the effects and non-effects of parental input on early language development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 49 (3–4, Serial No. 207).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M. (1986). ‘I beg your pardon?’: the preverbal negotiation of failed messages. Journal of Child Language 13, 455–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Golinkoff, R. M. (1993). When is communication a ‘meeting of minds’? Journal of Child Language 20, 199207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Bailey, L. M. & Wenger, R. N. (1992). Young children and adults use lexical principles to learn new nouns. Developmental Psychology 28, 99108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Mervis, C. B., Frawley, W. & Parillo, M. (in press). Lexical principles can be extended to the acquisition of verbs. In Tomasello, M. & Merriman, W. (eds), Beyond names for things: young children's acquisition of verbs. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M., Kenealy, L. & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (1993). Object scope: labels promote attention to whole objects. Unpublished manuscript, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M., Shuff-Bailey, M., Olguin, K. & Ruan, W. (1993). Young children extend novel words at the basic level: evidence for the principle of categorical scope. Unpublished manuscript, University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Gopnik, A. & Meltzoff, A. (1987). The development of categorization in the second year and its relation to other cognitive and linguistic developments. Child Development 58, 1523–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guillaume, P. (1927). Les débuts de la phrase dans le language de l'enfant. Journal de Psychologie 24, 115.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean: explorations in the development of language. London: Edward Arnold.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, D. G. & Waxman, S. R. (in press). Assumptions about word meaning: individuation and basic-level kinds. Child Development.Google Scholar
Hall, D. G., Waxman, S. R. & Hurwitz, W. M. (in press). How two- and four-year-old children interpret adjectives and count nouns. Child Development.Google Scholar
Harris, M. B., Barrett, M., Jones, D. & Brookes, S. (1988). Linguistic input and early word mappings. Journal of Child Language 15, 7794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heibeck, T. & Markman, E. M. (1987). Word learning in children: an examination of fast mapping. Child Development 58, 1021–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huttenlocher, J. & Smiley, P. (1987). Early word meanings: the case of object names. Cognitive Psychology 19, 6389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keil, , Frank, C. (1989). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kuczaj, S. A. (1990). Constraining constraint theories. Cognitive Development 5, 341–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieberman, P. (1991). Uniquely human. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lock, A. (1978). (ed.) Action, gesture and symbol: the emergence of language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Vol. I. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1982). Names for things. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Maratsos, M. (1991). How the acquisition of nouns may be different from that of verbs. In Krasnegor, A., Rumbaugh, D. M., Schiefelbusch, R. L. & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (eds), Biological and behavioral determinants of language development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M. (1989). Categorization and naming in children. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M. & Hutchinson, J. E. (1984). Children's sensitivity to constraints on word meaning: taxonomic vs. thematic relations. Cognitive Psychology 16, 127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, E. M. & Wachtel, G. F. (1988). Children's use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meaning of words. Cognitive Psychology 20, 121–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriman, W. E. & Bowman, L. (1989). The mutual exclusivity bias in children's word learning. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 54 (Serial No. 220).Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B. (1983). Acquisition of a lexicon. Contemporary Educational Psychology 8, 210–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mervis, C. B. (1987). Child-basic object categories and early lexical development. In Neisser, U. (ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: ecological and intellectual factors in categorisation. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B. (1990). Operating principles, input, and early lexical development. Communicazioni Scientifiche di Psicologia Generala 4, 3148.Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B. & Bertrand, J. (in press). Acquisition of the novel name – nameless category (N3C) principle. Child Development.Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B. & Bertrand, J. (1993). Acquisition of early object labels: the roles of operating principles and input. In Kaiser, A. P. & Gray, D. B. (eds), Enhancing children's communication: research foundations for interventions. Vol. II. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B. & Crisafi, M. A. (1982). Order of acquisition of subordinate, basic and superordinate level categories. Child Development 53, 258–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mervis, C. B., Golinkoff, R. M. & Bertrand, J. (1994). Two-year-olds readily learn multiple labels for the same basic level category. Child Development (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mervis, C. B. & Long, L. M. (1987). Words refer to whole objects: young children's interpretation of the referent of a novel word. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B., Mervis, C. A., Johnson, K. E. & Bertrand, J. (1992). Studying early lexical development: the value of the systematic diary method. In Rovee-Collier, C. (ed.), Advances in infancy research. Vol. 7. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B. & Ramos, E. (1990). Non-mutual exclusivity in early comprehension vocabularies of bilingual children. Unpublished manuscript, Emory University.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1988). Constraints on word learning? Cognitive Development 3, 221–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K., Hampson, J. & Shaw, L. (1993). Nouns in early lexicons: evidence, explanations and implications. Journal of Child Language 20, 6184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ninio, A. (1980). Ostensive definition in vocabulary teaching. Journal of Child Language 7, 565–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. (1960). Word and object. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Roberts, K. & Cuff, M. (1989). Categorization studies of 9- to 15-month-old infants: evidence for superordinate categorization? Infant Behavior and Development 12, 265–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, K. & Jacobs, M. (1992). Linguistic versus attentional influences on nonlinguistic categorization in 15-month-old infants. Cognitive Development 6, 355–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M. & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8, 382439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scaife, M. & Bruner, J. S. (1975). The capacity for joint visual attention in the infant. Nature 253, 265–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slobin, D. I. (1985). Cross-linguistic evidence for the language making capacity. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The cross-linguistic study of language acquisition. Vol. 2. Theoretical issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smith, L. B., Jones, S. S. & Landau, B. (1992). Count nouns, adjectives, and perceptual properties in children's novel word interpretations. Developmental Psychology 28, 273–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soja, N., Carey, S. & Spelke, E. (1991). Ontological categories guide young children's inductions of word meaning: object terms and substance terms. Cognition 38, 179211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spelke, E. S. (1990). Principles of object perception. Cognitive Science 14, 2956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, M. & Gelman, S. A. (1988). Adjectives and nouns: children's strategies for learning new words. Child Development 59, 411–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terrace, H. S. (1985). In the beginning was the ‘name’. American Psychologist 40, 1011–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomikawa, S. A. & Dodd, D. H. (1980). Early word meanings: perceptually or functionally based? Child Development 51, 1103–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waxman, S. R. (1989). Linking language and conceptual development: linguistic cues and the construction of conceptual hierarchies. The Genetic Epistemologist 17, 1320.Google Scholar
Waxman, S. R. & Balaban, M. T. (1992). The influence of words vs. tones on 9-month-old infants' object categorization. Paper presented at International Conference for Infant Studies, Miami Beach, FL.Google Scholar
Waxman, S. R. & Gelman, R. (1986). Preschoolers' use of superordinate relations in classification. Cognitive Development 1, 139–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waxman, S. R. & Kosowski, T. D. (1990). Nouns mark category relations: toddlers' and preschoolers' word-learning biases. Child Development 61, 1461–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waxman, S. R. & Senghas, A. (1992). Relations among word meanings in early lexical development. Developmental Psychology 28, 862–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wellman, H. M. (1990). The child's theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Younger, B. A. & Cohen, L. B. (1986). Developmental change in infants' perception of correlations among attributes. Child Development 57, 803–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 692 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 26th November 2020. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-57c975d4c7-9dlk2 Total loading time: 0.583 Render date: 2020-11-26T07:20:34.758Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags last update: Thu Nov 26 2020 07:11:07 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) Feature Flags: { "metrics": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "peerReview": true, "crossMark": true, "comments": false, "relatedCommentaries": false, "subject": true, "clr": false, "languageSwitch": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure 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 sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ 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.

Early object labels: the case for a developmental lexical principles framework[*]
Available formats

Send article to Dropbox

To send 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 use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Early object labels: the case for a developmental lexical principles framework[*]
Available formats

Send article to Google Drive

To send 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 use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Early object labels: the case for a developmental lexical principles framework[*]
Available formats

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *