Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T19:51:15.903Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How referential are ‘referential’ children? Relationships between maternal-report and observational measures of vocabulary composition and usage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Julian M. Pine
Julian M. Pine*
Affiliation:
University of Dundee
*
Department of Psychology, University of Dundee, DD1 4HN, Scotland.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between maternal-report measures of referential vocabulary and observational measures of referential vocabulary and usage in eight first-born middle-class children at 50 and loo words. The results indicate that although maternal-report measures of vocabulary composition can be reasonably reliable, provided some attempt is made to restrict variation in the number of vocabulary items upon which they are based, such measures tend to exaggerate the relative importance of common nouns for the child in two ways; firstly, in the sense that they reflect differential maternal sensitivity to such word-types in comparison with other less-‘referential’ items; and, secondly, in the sense that they overestimate the extent to which such word-types actually occur in the child's spontaneous speech.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , February 1992 , pp. 75 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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

REFERENCES

Bates, E., Bretherton, I. & Snyder, L. (1988). From first words to grammar: individual differences and dissociable mechanisms. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Bretherton, I., McNew, S., Snyder, L. & Bates, E. (1983). Individual differences at twenty months: analytic and holistic strategies in language acquisition. Journal of Child Language 10, 293–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, P., Bates, E., Reznick, J. & Morisset, C. (1989). The validity of a parent report instrument of child language at twenty months. Journal of Child Language 16, 239–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hampson, J. (1989). Elements of style: maternal and child contributions to referential and expressive styles of language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. City University of New York.Google Scholar
Lieven, E. V. M. (1980). Language development in young children: children's speech and speech to children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 38 (1–2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, S. L., Bayles, K. & Bates, J. E. (1986). Mother and child interaction and children's speech progress: a longitudinal study of the first two years. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 32, 1–20.Google Scholar
Pine, J. M. & Lieven, E. V. M. (1990). Referential style at thirteen months: why age-defined cross-sectional measures are inappropriate for the study of strategy differences in early language development. Journal of Child Language 17, 625–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, L., Bates, E. & Bretherton, I. (1981). Content and context in early lexical development. Journal of Child Language 8, 565–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, M. & Todd, J. (1983). Joint attention and lexical acquisition style. First Language 4, 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar