Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:52:54.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bierwisch's analysis as a test of the SFH

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Geraldine McDonald
Geraldine McDonald
Affiliation:
New Zealand Council for Educational Research
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There has been continuing interest in the Semantic Feature Hypothesis (SFH) over the last ten years but there appears to have been no experimental study which explores a complete semantic field nor one which uses a cross-cultural sample. Eighty New Zealand children, Maori and non-Maori, aged between 4; 0 and 4; 11, were tested for word recognition of the spatial adjectives following Bierwisch's (1967) componential analysis. The study extended previous work on the SFH by comparing performance on feature recognition, and by examining effect of word context on ease of discrimination. Results supported the view that word meaning is learned in bits, but failed to support any other predictions based on SFH. There was difference between the samples in performance on word recognition but no difference on features. It is suggested that more attention should be given to the characteristics of individual words as agents for the acquisition of other words.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , February 1983 , pp. 167 - 186
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

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

Bartlett, E. J. (1976). Sizing things up. JChLang 3. 205–19.Google Scholar
Benton, R. (1966). Research into the English language difficulties of Maori school children 1963–1964. Wellington: Maori Education Foundation.Google Scholar
Bierwisch, M. (1967). Some semantic universals of German adjectivals. FL 3. 5–36.Google Scholar
Brewer, W. F. & Stone, J. B. (1975). Acquisition of spatial antonym pairs. JExpChPsychol 19. 469–91.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1972). On the child's acquisition of antonyms in two semantic fields. JVLVB 11. 750–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1973 a). What's in a word? On the child's acquisition of semantics in his first language. In Moore, T. E.. (ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1973 b). Non-linguistic strategies and the acquisition of word meanings. Cognition 2. 161–82.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1974). Some aspects of the conceptual basis for first language acquisition. In Schiefelbusch, R. L.. & Lloyd, L. L.. (eds), Language perspectives: acquisition, retardation and intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1970). The primitive nature of children's relational concepts. In Hayes, J. R.. (ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1973). Space, time, semantics, and the child. In Moore, T. E.. (ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Donaldson, M. & Balfour, G. (1968). Less is more: a study of language comprehension in children. BJPsychol 4. 461–71.Google Scholar
Donaldson, M. & Wales, R. (1970). On the acquisition of some relational terms. In Hayes, J. R.. (ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Hamilton, H. W. & Deese, J. (1971). Does linguistic marking have a psychological correlate? JVLVB 10. 707–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maratsos, M. P. (1973). Decrease in the understanding of the word ‘big’ in pre-school children. ChDev. 747–52.Google Scholar
Marsh, R. W. (1967). Tables for testing for significance of difference between proportion. AustJPsychol 19. 223–29.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1974). Concept word and sentence: interrelations in acquisition and development. PsychRev 81. 267–85.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1979). Features, contrasts and the FCH: some comments on Barrett's lexical development hypothesis. JChLang 6. 139–46.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. & Benedict, H. (1974). The comprehension of relative, absolute, and contrastive adjectives by young children. JPsycholingRes 3. 333–42.Google Scholar
Reich, P. A. (1976). The early acquisition of word meaning. JChLang 3. 117–23.Google Scholar
Saltz, E., Soller, E. & Sigel, I. E. (1972). The development of natural language concepts. ChDev 46. 913–21.Google Scholar
Teller, P. (1969). Some discussion and extension of Manfred Bierwisch's work on German adjectivals. FL 5. 185–217.Google Scholar
Tyler, S. A. (ed.) (1969). Cognitive anthropology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Wales, R. & Campbell, R. (1970). On the development of comparison and the comparison of development. In d'Arcais, C. B. Flores & Levelt, W. M.. (eds), Advances in psycholinguistics. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Williams, H. W. (1971). A dictionary of the Maori language. Wellington: Government Printer.Google Scholar
Winner, E. (1979). New names for old things: the emergence of metaphoric language. JChLang 6. 469–91.Google Scholar