Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T02:39:12.875Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variability in children's use of grammatical morphemes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Margaret Lahey ,
Jacqueline Liebergott ,
Marie Chesnick ,
Paula Menyuk  and
Janet Adams
Margaret Lahey*
Affiliation:
Emerson College
Jacqueline Liebergott
Affiliation:
Emerson College
Marie Chesnick
Affiliation:
Boston University
Paula Menyuk
Affiliation:
Boston University
Janet Adams
Affiliation:
New Brunswick School District #14
*
Margaret Lahey, Emerson College, 168 Beacon Street, Boston, MA 02116. e-mail: PLAHEY@EMERSON
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The authors analyzed 104 language samples, obtained from 42 different normal language learning children at 25, 29, and 35 months of age, for the proportional use of 11 grammatical morphemes: plural -s, possessive 's, progressive -ing, regular and irregular past, and regular and irregular present, as well as the contractible and uncontractible forms of the copula and auxiliary to be. Wide variability was found among the samples in the proportional use of each morpheme, whether the samples were grouped by age or mean length of utterance (MLU). At ages 25 and 29 months, the range of proportional use was over .95 for 9 of the 11 morphemes, and at 35 months, it was .50 or greater for 8. At an MLU level of 2.50–2.99, the range of scores was .90 or greater for 8 of the morphemes, and over .65 for the remaining 3. By MLUs of 4.00 or more, ranges had narrowed but were still .50 or greater for 4 of the morphemes. Rank order of acquisition by MLU level varied somewhat from that previously reported in the literature (e.g., contractible copula was ranked higher and irregular past was ranked lower than has been reported in other studies). Correlations of MLU and morpheme use ranged from .11 to .74, with rho > .60 for only 3 and <.35 for 4 morphemes. Comparisons of these data with those reported in the literature on specifically language-impaired (SLI) children indicated that group means were generally lower for SLI children, but that many of the SLI children's scores overlapped with those of the children studied here.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , July 1992 , pp. 373 - 398
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, L., Bretherton, I., & Snyder, L. (1988). From first words to grammar: Individual differences and dissociable mechanisms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bellugi-Klima, U. (1968). Linguistic mechanisms underlying child speech. In Zale, E. M. (Ed.), Proceedings of the conference on language and language behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., & Capatides, J. (1989). Sources of meaning in the acquisition of complex syntax: The sample case of causality. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 43, 112–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L., Hood, L., & Lightbown, P. (1974). Imitation in language development: If, when and why. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 380–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L., & Lahey, M. (1978). Language development and language disorders. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., Lifter, K., & Hafitz, J. (1980). Semantics of verbs and the development of verb inflection in child language. Language, 56, 386–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L., Lightbown, P., & Hood, L. (1975). Structure and variation in child language. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 40 (Serial No. 160).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, L., Miller, P., & Hood, L. (1975). Variation and reduction as aspects of competence in language development. In Pick, A. (Ed.), Minnesota symposia on child psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 3–55). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A first language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cazden, C. (1968). The acquisition of noun and verb inflections. Child Development, 39, 433–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clahsen, H. (1989). The grammatical characterization of developmental dysphasia. Linguistics, 27, 897–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de, Villiers J., & de, Villiers P. (1973). A cross-sectional study of the acquisition of grammatical morphemes in child speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 3, 267–278.Google Scholar
Dunn, L. M. (1965). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. Circle Pines, MI: American Guidance Services.Google Scholar
Feintuch, F. (1985). A cross-sectional study of the development of verb inflections in child language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A., & Farwell, C. (1975). Words and sounds in early language acquisition. Language. 51, 419–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furrow, D., Nelson, K., & Benedict, H. (1979). Mothers' speech to children and syntactic development: Some simple relationships. Journal of Child Language, 6, 423–442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gleitman, L., Newport, M., & Gleitman, H. (1984). The current status of the motherese hypothesis. Journal of Child Language, 11, 43–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopnik, K. M. (1990). Genetic dysphasia. Unpublished manuscript, McGill University, Montreal.Google Scholar
Hedrick, D., Prather, E., & Tobin, A. R. (1975). Sequenced Inventory of Communication Development. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Ingram, D. (1972, 06). The acquisition of the English verbal auxiliary and copula in normal and linguistically deviant children. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, pp. 79–93. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
James, S. L., & Khan, M. L. (1982). Grammatical morpheme acquisition: An approximately invariant order? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 11, 381–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, J., & Schery, T. (1976). The use of grammatical morphemes by children with communication disorders. In Morehead, D. & Morehead, A. (Eds.), Normal and deficient child language (pp. 239–258). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Khan, L., & James, S. (1983). Grammatical morpheme development in three language disordered children. Journal of Childhood Communication Disorders, 6, 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahey, M. (1988). Language disorders and language development. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lahey, M. (1990). Who shall be called language disordered? Some reflections and one perspective. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 612–620.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, L. (1971). Northwestern Syntax Screening Test (NSST). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. (1976). Meaning in child language. New York: Grune Stratton.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. (1989). Language Jearnability and specific language impairment in children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 179–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, L. B., Sabbadini, L., Leonard, J. S., & Volterra, V. (1987). Specific language impairment in children: A cross-linguistic study. Brain and Language, 32, 233–252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liebergott, J., Schultz, M., & Menyuk, P. (1985). A prescriptive manual for parents and teachers of children at-risk for language disorders from zero to three years of age. Final Report on U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services Field-Initiated Research Grant G008006727.Google Scholar
McCarthy, D. (1970). McCarthy Scales of Children's Ability. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Menyuk, P., Liebergott, J., Schultz, M., Chesnick, M., & Ferrier, L. (1990). Patterns of early lexical and cognitive development in premature and full-term infants. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 88–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, J. (1981). Assessing language production in children. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Miller, J., & Chapman, R. (1981). The relation between age and mean length of utterance in morphemes. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 24, 154–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moerk, E. L. (1980). Relationships between parental input frequencies and children's language acquisition: A reanalysis of Brown's data. Journal of Child Language, 7, 105–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moerk, E. L. (1981). To attend or not to attend to unwelcome reanalyses? A reply to Pinker. Journal of Child Language, 8,627–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 38 (Serial No. 149).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K. (1975). The nominal shift in semantic-syntactic development. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 461–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, R., & Shriberg, L. (1982). Associations between phonology and syntax in speech-delayed children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 25, 536–547.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peters, A. (1983). The units of language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reynell, J. K. (1969). Reynell Developmental Language Scales. Windsor, Ontario: N.F.E.R.Google Scholar
Rice, M., & Oetting, J. (1991, 11). Grammatical morphemes of SLI preschoolers. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Atlanta, Georgia.Google Scholar
Rollins, P. R. (1990). An inquiry into the language profiles of specific language impaired children. Unpublished qualifying paper, Harvard University School of Education.Google Scholar
Scarborough, H., Wyckoff, J., & Davidson, R. (1986). A reconsideration of the relation between age and mean utterance length. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 29, 394–399.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slobin, D. (1985). Introduction: Why study acquisition crosslinguistically? In Slobin, D. (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Vol. 1. The data (pp. 3–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaurn.Google Scholar
Steckol, K. F., & Leonard, L. B. (1979). The use of grammatical morphemes by normal and language-impaired children. Journal of Communication Disorders, 12, 291–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trantham, C. R., & Pedersen, J. K. (1976). Normal language development: The key to diagnosis and therapy for language disordered children. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Tyack, D., & Gottsleben, R. (1974). Language sampling, analysis, and training: A handbook for teachers and clinicians. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar