Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T23:21:06.704Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phonological selection patterns in early words: A preliminary cross-linguistic investigation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2018

Barbara L. Davis ,
Florence Chenu  and
Hoyoung Yi
Barbara L. Davis*
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Texas at Austin
Florence Chenu*
Affiliation:
Laboratoire Dynamique Du Langage - UMR5596 CNRS / Université de Lyon
Hoyoung Yi*
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Texas at Austin
*
babs@mail.utexas.edu
florence.chenu@cnrs.fr
hoyoung@utexas.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Some researchers have suggested that young children choose to say mainly words containing sounds they can produce and avoid words with sounds they find difficult to produce. This proposed pattern of ‘selection’ supports a hypothesis of dominance of phonological factors in words children choose to say. Based on longitudinal spontaneous data samples during their first 50 word period, word-based tokens produced by two English and two French monolingual children were analyzed. Token frequencies in spontaneously produced word targets (SW-T) were compared to children's actual productions (SW-A) of those target words to understand relationships between targets children choose to say and their patterns in actual productions, (i.e., to evaluate the presence of ‘selection’). Place of articulation (i.e., labial, coronal and dorsal) in initial word position within CV, CVC, and CVCV word forms was compared. Analysis of spontaneous output in daily interactions in children learning two languages with differing phonological systems enables a more general evaluation of issues related to the interface of phonological and lexical aspects during the earliest period of language acquisition.

Résumé

Un certain nombre de chercheurs ont suggéré que les jeunes enfants choisiraient de dire principalement des mots contenant des sons qu'ils peuvent produire et d’éviter les mots avec des sons qu'ils trouvent difficiles à produire. Cette possibilité de « sélection » consolide l'hypothèse de la dominance des facteurs phonologiques sur les mots que les enfants choisissent de dire. À partir de données spontanées longitudinales recueillies durant la période des 50 premiers mots, les occurrences de mots produits par deux enfants monolingues anglophones et deux enfants monolingues francophones ont été analysées. Les fréquences d'occurrences des mots cibles produits spontanément (SW-T) ont été comparées aux formes réellement produites par les enfants (SW-A) pour ces cibles, afin de comprendre les relations entre les cibles et les formes effectivement produites (c'est-à-dire évaluer la présence ou l'absence de « sélection »). En position initiale de mot, le lieu d'articulation (c'est-à-dire labial, coronal ou dorsal) a été examiné dans les formes de mot CV, CVC et CVCV. L'analyse des productions spontanées dans les interactions quotidiennes, chez des enfants monolingues de deux langues différentes, qui ont des systèmes phonologiques différents, permet une estimation plus générale des questions liées à l'interface entre les aspects phonologiques et lexicaux pendant la période la plus précoce de l'acquisition du langage.

Keywords

phonological developmentearly wordsplace of articulationsyllable shapedéveloppement phonologiquepremiers motslieu d'articulationstructures syllabiques
Type
Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 63 , Issue 4: Phonetic/phonological development and input characteristics in early lexical acquisition/Le développement phonétique/phonologique et les caractéristiques de l'apport linguistique dans l'acquisition lexicale précoce , December 2018 , pp. 556 - 579
Copyright
© Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2018 

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

de Boysson-Bardies, Bénédicte, Vihman, Marilyn M., Roug-Hellichius, Liselotte, Durand, Catherine, Landberg, Ingrid, and Arao, Fumiko. 1992. Material evidence of infant selection from the target language. In Phonological development, ed. Ferguson, Charles A., Menn, Lise, and Stoel-Gammon, Carol, 369–392. Parkton: York Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Barbara L., MacNeilage, Peter F., and Matyear, Christine. 2002. Acquisition of serial complexity in speech production: A comparison of phonetic and phonological approaches to first word production. Phonetica 59(2): 75–107.Google Scholar
Davis, Barbara L., van der Feest, Suzanne, and Yi, Hoyoung. 2018. Phonological versus lexical factors: Selection and avoidance in early word forms? Journal of Child Language, in press.Google Scholar
Delattre, Pierre. 1965. Comparing the phonetic features of English, French, German and Spanish. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A., and Farwell, Carol B.. 1975. Words and sounds in early language acquisition. Language 51(2): 419–439.Google Scholar
Fournier, David A., Skaug, Hans. J., Ancheta, Johnoel, Ianelli, James, Magnusson, Arni, Maunder, Mark N., Nielsen, Anders, and Sibert, John. 2012. AD Model Builder: Using automatic differentiation for statistical inference of highly parameterized complex nonlinear models. Optimization Methods and Software 27(2): 233–249.Google Scholar
French, Norman, Carter, Charles, and Koenig, Walter. 1930. The words and sounds of telephone conversations. Bell System Technical Journal 9(2): 290–324.Google Scholar
Gildersleeve-Neumann, Christina, Davis, Barbara L., and MacNeilage, Peter F.. 2013. Syllabic patterns in the early vocalizations of Quichua children. Applied Psycholinguistics 34(1): 111–134.Google Scholar
Guidubaldi, John, Newborg, Jean, Stock, John R., Svinicki, John, and Wneck, Linda. 1984. Battelle Developmental Inventory. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.Google Scholar
Kent, Raymond D., and Bauer, Harold R.. 1985. Vocalizations of one-year-olds. Journal of Child Language 12(3): 491–526.Google Scholar
Kern, Sophie, Davis, Barbara L., and Zink, Inge. 2010. From babbling to first words in four languages: Common trends across languages and individual differences. In Becoming eloquent, ed. d'Errico, Francesco and Hombert, Jean-Marie, 205–232. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kim, Namhee, and Davis, , Barbara, L. 2015. A Phonetic Approach to Consonant Assimilation in Early Words, Infant Behavior and Development 40, 193–203.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, Peter, and Maddieson, Ian. 1996. The sounds of the world's languages. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lee, Soyoung, Davis, Barbara L., and MacNeilage, Peter F.. 2007. ‘Frame Dominance’ and the serial organization of babbling, and first words in Korean-learning infants. Phonetica 64(4): 217–236.Google Scholar
Leonard, Laurence B., Schwartz, Richard, Morris, Barbara, and Chapman, Kathy. 1981. Factors influencing early lexical acquisition: Lexical orientation and phonological composition. Child Development 52(3): 882–887.Google Scholar
MacNeilage, Peter F., Davis, Barbara L., Kinney, Ashlynn, and Matyear, Christine L. 2000. The motor core of speech: A comparison of serial organization patterns in infants and languages. Child Development 71(1): 153–163.Google Scholar
Marchello-Nizia, Christiane. 2011. Le français. In Dictionnaire des langues du monde, ed. Bonvini, Emilio, Busuttil, Joëlle, and Peyraube, Alain, 575–582. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
Mines, M. Ardussi, Hanson, Barbara F., and Shoup, June E.. 1978. Frequency of occurrence of phonemes in conversational English. Language and Speech 21(3): 221–241.Google Scholar
Munson, Benjamin, Edwards, Jan, and Beckman, Mary E.. 2011. Phonological representations in language acquisition: Climbing the ladder of abstraction. In The Oxford handbook of laboratory phonology, ed. Cohn, Abigail, Fougeron, Cécile, and Huffman, Marie K., 288–309. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
New, Boris, Brysbaert, Marc, Veronis, Jean, and Pallier, Christophe. 2007. The use of film subtitles to estimate word frequencies. Applied Psycholinguistics 28(4): 661–677.Google Scholar
Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 2001. Lenition and contrast. In Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, ed. Bybee, Joan L. and Hopper, Paul J., 137–158. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Roberts, Aaron Hood. 1965. A statistical linguistic analysis of American English. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Rose, Yvan, MacWhinney, Brian, Byrne, Rodrigue, Hedlund, Gregory, Maddocks, Keith, O'Brien, Philip, and Wareham, Todd. 2006. Introducing Phon: A software solution for the study of phonological acquisition. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, ed. Bamman, David, Magnitskaia, Tatiana and Zaller, Colleen, 489–500. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Rousset, Isabelle. 2004. Structures syllabiques et lexicales des langues du monde. Données, typologies, tendances universelles et contraintes substantielles. Thèse de doctorat, Université Stendhal-Grenoble III.Google Scholar
Sander, Eric. 1972. When are speech sounds learned? Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 37(12): 55–63.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Richard, and Leonard, Laurence. 1982. Do children pick and choose? An examination of phonological selection and avoidance in early lexical acquisition. Journal of Child Language 9(2): 319–336.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Richard G., Leonard, Laurence B., Frome Loeb, Diane M., and Swanson, Lori A.. 1987. Attempted sounds are sometimes not: An expanded view of phonological selection and avoidance. Journal of Child Language 14(3): 411–418.Google Scholar
Stoel-Gammon, Carol. 1985. Phonetic inventories, 15–24 months: A longitudinal study. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 28(4): 505–512.Google Scholar
Stoel-Gammon, Carol. 2011. Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children. Journal of Child Language 38(1): 1–34.Google Scholar
Stokes, Stephanie. 2010. Neighborhood density and word frequency predict vocabulary size in toddlers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 53(3): 670–683.Google Scholar
Stokes, Stephanie. 2014. The impact of phonological neighborhood density on typical and atypical emerging lexicons. Journal of Child Language 41(3): 634–657.Google Scholar
Storkel, Holly L. 2009. Developmental differences in the effects of phonological, lexical and semantic variables on word learning by infants. Journal of Child Language 36(2): 291–321.Google Scholar
Storkel, Holly, and Lee, Seung Yong. 2011. The independent effects of phonotactic probability and neighborhood density on lexical acquisition by preschool children. Language and Cognitive Processes 26(2): 191–211.Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. 1992. Early syllables and the construction of phonology. In Phonological development: Models, research, implications, ed. Ferguson, Charles A., Menn, Lise, and Stoel-Gammon, Carol, 393–422. Parkton, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. 2016. Phonological templates in development. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics, ed. Aronoff, Mark. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi <10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.0.13.99>>Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M., and Croft, William. 2007. Phonological development: Toward a “radical” templatic phonology. Linguistics 45(4): 683–725.Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M., Ferguson, Charles A., and Elbert, Mary. 1986. Phonological development from babbling to speech: Common tendencies and individual differences. Applied Psycholinguistics 7(1): 3–40.Google Scholar
Waugh, Linda R., and Monville-Burston, Monique. 2011. French. In The world's major languages, ed. Comrie, Bernard. 171–196. London: Routledge.Google Scholar