Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:21:44.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cluster reduction and compensatory lengthening in the acquisition of possessive -s*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2013

KIRI TRENGOVE MEALINGS  and
KATHERINE DEMUTH
KIRI TRENGOVE MEALINGS*
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University
KATHERINE DEMUTH
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University
*
Address for correspondence: Kiri T. Mealings, Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous research shows that two-year-olds' third person singular -s and plural -s are produced more accurately in utterance-final compared to utterance-medial position. However, only the third person singular is affected by coda complexity. This study explores these effects with possessive -s. Acoustic analysis of twelve two-year-olds' elicited imitations examined the use of simple versus complex codas (e.g. Sue's vs. Doug's) both utterance-medially and utterance-finally. Morpheme production was surprisingly robust across contexts, though coda clusters were often simplified to a lengthened -s morpheme utterance-medially (e.g., Dou's [dɐz]). The findings raise many questions about the development of speech planning processes across populations.

Type
Brief Research Reports
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , May 2014 , pp. 690 - 704
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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.)

Footnotes

[*]

We thank Ben Davies, Kelly Miles, Ekaterina Tomas, Nan Xu, Ivan Yuen, and the Child Language Lab at Macquarie University for helpful assistance and feedback. This research was supported by funding from the following grants: ARC DP110102479, ARC CE110001021, and NIH R01 HD057606.

References

REFERENCES

Bååth, R. (2010). ChildFreq: an online tool to explore word frequencies in child language. LUCS Minor 16.Google Scholar
Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2011). Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.2.23) [Computer program]. Retrieved 4 May 2011, from http://www.praat.org.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: the early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Pethick, S., Renda, C., Cox, J. L., Dale, P. S. & Reznick, J. S. (2000). Short-form versions of the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories. Applied Psycholinguistics 21, 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, J., Cox, F. & Evans, Z. (1997). An acoustic phonetic study of broad, general, and cultivated Australian English vowels. Australian Journal of Linguistics 17, 155–84.Google Scholar
Hsieh, L., Leonard, L. B. & Swanson, L. A. (1999). Some differences between English plural noun inflections and third singular verb inflections in the input: the contribution of frequency, sentence position, and duration. Journal of Child Language 26, 531–43.Google Scholar
Koenig, L. L., Lucero, J. C. & Perlman, E. (2008). Speech production variability in fricatives of children and adults: results of functional data analysis. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 124(5), 3158–70.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B., Eyer, J. A., Bedore, L. M. & Grela, B. G. (1997). Three accounts of the grammatical morpheme difficulties of English-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 40, 741–53.Google Scholar
McLeod, S. (2007). Australian English speech acquisition. In McLeod, S. (ed.), The international guide to speech acquisition, 241–56. Clifton Park, NY: Thomson Delmar Learning.Google Scholar
Mealings, K. T., Cox, F. & Demuth, K. (in press). Acoustic investigations into the later acquisition of syllabic -es plurals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.Google Scholar
Oller, D. K. (1973). The effect of position in utterance on speech segment duration in English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 54, 1235–37.Google Scholar
Scobbie, J. M. (1998). Interactions between the acquisition of phonetics and phonology. In Gruber, C., Higgins, D., Olson, K. & Wysocki, T. (eds.), Papers from the 34th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, vol. II: the panels, 343–58. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (1985). Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In Slobin, D. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, vol. 2: theoretical issues, 1157–256. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smit, A. B. (1993). Phonologic error distributions in the Iowa-Nebraska articulation norms project: consonant singletons. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 36, 533–47.Google Scholar
Snow, D. (1994). Phrase-final syllable lengthening and intonation in early child speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 37, 831–40.Google Scholar
Song, J. Y. & Demuth, K. (2008). Compensatory vowel lengthening for omitted coda consonants: a phonetic investigation of children's early representations of prosodic words. Language & Speech 51, 382–99.Google ScholarPubMed
Song, J. Y., Sundara, M. & Demuth, K. (2009). Phonological constraints on children's production of English third person singular -s. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 52, 623–42.Google Scholar
Stelmachowicz, P. G., Pittman, A. L., Hoover, B. M., Lewis, D. E. & Moeller, M. P. (2004). The importance of high-frequency audibility in the speech and language development of children with hearing loss. Archives of Otolaryngology – Head & Neck Surgery 130(5), 556–62.Google Scholar
Stevens, K. N. (2002). Toward a model for lexical access based on acoustic landmarks and distinctive features. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 111(4), 1872–91.Google Scholar
Theodore, R., Demuth, K. & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2011). Acoustic evidence for position and complexity effects on children's production of plural -s. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 54, 539–48.Google Scholar
Theodore, R., Demuth, K. & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2012). Segmental and positional effects on children's coda production: comparing evidence from perceptual judgments and acoustic analysis. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 26(9), 755–73.Google Scholar
Tomas, E., Demuth, K. & Smith-Lock, K. (2012). Errors of omission and commission in verbal and nominal inflectional morphemes by children with SLI: phonological effects and acoustic analysis. In Cox, F., Demuth, K., Lin, S., Miles, K., Palethorpe, S., Shaw, J. & Yuen, I. (eds.), Proceedings of the 14th Speech Science and Technology Conference, 101–04. Sydney: ASSTA.Google Scholar