Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:01:14.802Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does comprehension precede production? The development of children's responses to telegraphic sentences of varying grammatical adequacy*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Patricia A. Petretic  and
Ryan D. Tweney
Patricia A. Petretic
Affiliation:
Bowling Green State University
Ryan D. Tweney
Affiliation:
Bowling Green State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The comprehension ability of 36 children at three stages of telegraphic speech (mean length of utterance 1·45, 2·03, and 2·76 morphemes) was assessed using active behavioural responses to declarative and imperative sentences. Both forms were varied in syntactic and semantic complexity. The responses were scored in terms of objects used by the child, whether or not the child's actions were appropriate, and whether or not appropriate verbalization accompanied the actions. A significant increase in verbal and behavioural appropriateness with age was found for both imperative and declarative forms. Consistent with Shipley, Smith & Gleitman's (1969) results, advanced telegraphic speakers responded most often to adult stimulus forms. However, contrary to Shipley et al.'s findings, all children, even the earliest telegraphic speakers, were more accurate in responding to adult forms than to child forms, suggesting that ability to comprehend adult linguistic forms is present even at the earliest stages of telegraphic speech. The findings imply that re-evaluation of the development of comprehension ability in telegraphic speakers is necessary.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , June 1977 , pp. 201 - 209
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

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

[*]

Requests for reprints should be sent to the second author, whose address is Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio 43403, U.S.A.

References

REFERENCES

Bloom, L. M. (1974). Talking, understanding and thinking. In Schiefelbusch, R. & Lloyd, L. (eds), Language perspectives – acquisition, retardation, and intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: the early stages. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1964). Formal discussion of Wick Miller and Susan Ervin – the development of grammar in child language. In Bellugi, U. & Brown, R. (eds), The acquisition of language. Monogr. Soc. Res. Ch. Devel. 29. 35–40.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
Fernald, C. D. (1972). Control of grammar in imitation, comprehension and production: problems in replication. JVLVB 11. 606–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingram, D. (1974). The relationship between comprehension and production. In Schiefelbusch, R. & Lloyd, L. (eds), Language perspectives – acquisition, retardation and intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, J. R. (1970). Syntax and vocabulary of mothers' speech to young children: age and sex comparisons. ChDev 44. 182–5.Google Scholar
Scholes, R. J. (1970). On functors and contentives in children's imitation of word strings. JVLVB 9. 167–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shipley, E. F., Smith, C. S. & Gleitman, L. R. (1969). A study in the acquisition of language: free responses to commands. Lg 45. 322–42.Google Scholar
Sinclair, H. & Bronckart, J. P. (1972). S.V.O. – a linguistic universal? A study in developmental psycholinguistics. JExpChPsych 14. 329–48.Google Scholar
Smith, C. (1970). An experimental approach to children's linguistic competence. In Hayes, J. R. (ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Snow, C. E. (1972). Mothers' speech to children learning language. ChDev 43. 549–65.Google Scholar
Wetstone, H. S. & Friedlander, B. Z. (1973). The effect of word order on young children's responses to simple questions and commands. ChDev 44. 734–40.Google Scholar