Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T21:01:43.729Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Do children's omissions leave traces?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2004

ALLYSON CARTER
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
LOUANN GERKEN
Affiliation:
University of Arizona

Abstract

When English-speaking two-year-olds begin producing polysyllabic words, they often omit unstressed syllables that precede syllables with primary stress (Allen & Hawkins, 1980; Klein, 1981; Gerken, 1994a). One proposed mechanism for these omissions is that children omit syllables at a phonological level, due to prosodic constraints that act on outputs. Under such accounts, it has been largely assumed that these syllables are simply missing, or deleted, from children's outputs. The present research consists of a pair of experiments that tested this assumption by investigating the acoustic properties of utterances manifesting or lacking weak initial syllable omissions. In the two experiments, 33 two-year-old children were asked to imitate sentences like ‘He kissed Lucinda’ (often reduced as expected to a disyllabic trochaic form, e.g. ‘He kissed _cinda’) and ‘He kissed Cindy’. Durations of each child's imitations were measured from the onset of the verb to the onset of the name, for each pair of sentences containing the reduced or unreduced disyllabic forms, for example, ‘kissed _cinda’ vs. ‘kissed Cindy’. Our results yielded a significantly longer duration for the verb-onset to name-onset portion of sentences containing reduced ‘_cinda’-type names than for sentences with ‘Cindy’-type names. This finding provides evidence that children do not completely delete weak syllables. Rather, the data from the phonetic analysis indicate that some prosodic trace exists of the omitted syllable.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
2004 Cambridge University Press

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

This research was supported by NSF dissertation grant SBR981149. We would like to thank Katie Blackmar, Sharon Bean, Keziah Conrad, Michelle Fanger, Andrea Hilden, Carrie King, Cindy Lichty, Jessica Maye, Tanya Noth, Mercy Reyes, Rachel Wilson, and Tania Zamuner, for help with data collection, transcription, and analysis. We are grateful to parents and children who participated in this research. We also wish to thank Tania Zamuner, Jessica Maye, and anonymous reviewers, who provided helpful feedback on earlier versions of this paper, and the audience at the Boston University Conference on Language Development 2000 for comments and discussion.