Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T23:29:35.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Children's comprehension of ‘because’ in reversible and non-reversible sentences*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Harriet F. Emerson
Harriet F. Emerson
Affiliation:
McGill University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Comprehension of event order was compared for reversible ‘X because Y’ (‘Y because X’ is also logical) and non-reversible ‘X because Y’ sentences. Children aged 5; 8–10; 11 chose one of two picture sequences, differing in event order, and put two pictures in first/last order to match a sentence ‘X because Y’ (order of mention violates temporal order) or ‘Because Y, X’ (order of mention preserves temporal order). Reversibility and clause order effects reflected the use of semantic probability cues and order-of-mention strategies for comprehension. Judgements were also made of grammatical acceptability for correct and reversed ‘X because Y’ sentences. Response strategies used in the two experiments suggest that development of comprehension of the role of because reflects acquired independence from contextual support and acquisition of a meaning component: ORDER.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , June 1979 , pp. 279 - 300
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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

Amidon, A. (1976). Children's understanding of sentences with contingent relations. JExpChPsychol 22. 423–37.Google Scholar
Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In Hayes, J. R. (ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clancy, P., Jacobsen, T. & Silva, M. (1976). The acquisition of conjunction. PRCLD 12. 71–80.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1971). On the acquisition of the meaning of before and after. JVLVB 10. 266–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corrigan, R. (1975). A scalogram analysis of the development of the use and comprehension of ‘because’ in children. ChDev 46. 195–201.Google Scholar
De Villiers, P. A. & De Villiers, J. G. (1972). Early judgments of semantic and syntactic acceptability by children. JPsycholingRes 1. 299–310.Google ScholarPubMed
French, L. A. & Brown, A. L. (1977). Comprehension of before and after in logical and arbitrary sequences. JChLang 4. 247–56.Google Scholar
Howe, H. E. Jr & Hillman, D. (1973). The acquisition of semantic restrictions in children. JVLVB 12. 132–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutson, B., Moyer, S. & Powers, J. (1973). Reversing irreversible sentences: semantic constraints on syntactic comprehension. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association,New Orleans.Google Scholar
James, S. L. & Miller, J. F. (1973). Children's awareness of semantic constraints in sentences. ChDev 44. 69–76.Google Scholar
Katz, E. & Brent, S. (1968). Understanding connectives. JVLVB 7. 501–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, D. & Phelps, H. (1976). The development of children's comprehension of causal direction. ChDev 47. 248–51.Google Scholar
Menyuk, P. (1969). Sentences children use. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1976). Language and perception. Cambridge: C.U.P.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. (1928). Judgment and reasoning in the child. New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Werner, H. & Kaplan, B. (1967). Symbol formation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar