Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T19:14:57.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A little goes a long way: evidence for a perceptual basis of learning for the noun categories COUNT and Mass*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Leslie Maggie Perrin McPherson
Leslie Maggie Perrin McPherson*
Affiliation:
McGill University
*
Department of Psychology, McGill University, Stewart Biological Sciences Building, 1205 Avenue Docteur Penfield, Montréal, Québec, H3A 1B1, Canada.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Various theories of learning for the categories COUNT NOUN and MASS NOUN are compared. It is argued that children assign words to these categories on the basis of intuitions arising from perception that are relevant to Macnamara's (1986) semantic definitions of the categories. These definitions rest on the centrality of identity in the meaning of nouns and the centrality of individuation in the meaning of count nouns but not mass nouns. Empirical evidence is presented that supports the hypothesis that young children classify words as count nouns or mass nouns on the basis of perceptual information about the extension of the words, that is, whether or not the extension consists exclusively of enduring individuals whose discreteness from one another is perceptually salient (count nouns) or not (mass nouns). In an experiment, 48 children with a mean age of 2;10 (S.D. = 0;5) were taught a word for a kind of object (i.e. a perceptually distinct individual) or for a kind of substance (i.e. a collection of small granules). For some children the word was syntactically COUNT and for others it was syntactically MASS. Half of the children received incongruous perceptual and syntactic cues. For most of these children, classification of the word was guided by the object- or substance-like appearance of the stimulus despite the presence of incongruent syntactic cues. Syntactic cues influenced classification of the word for a minority of subjects, most of whom were among the oldest in the sample. It is concluded that perceptual information is critical in early decisions about membership in the categories COUNT NOUN and MASS NOUN.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 315 - 338
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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 article is based on a Master's thesis done in the Department of Psychology at McGill University. I thank John Macnamara for extensive discussion about the ideas in this article and many useful suggestions for improving the manuscript. I am grateful to an anonymous reviewer for thoughtful comments, I am greatly indebted to Boel Nilsson for her good-natured dedication in helping me to solicit and run subjects. Her assistance greatly facilitated the process. I also thank Paul Bloom and Laura Petitto for valuable suggestions and comments on an earlier version of this paper. I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the staff, parents, and children of the following institutions for their gracious co-operation: Big Step Day Care Center, Family Play Group Cooperative, McGill Community Family Centre, Garderie Narnia, Parents-Children Drop-In Centre Cooperative, Royal Victoria Hospital Day Care Center, Small Wishes Nursery, Snowdon Tottlers Day Nursery, and the Westmount YMCA. The research reported here was supported by a McGill University Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research grant to John Macnamara on behalf of the author. Preparation of this article was facilitated by support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

References

REFERENCES

Akiyama, M. M. (1989). Children's understanding of identity as a function of names and their referents. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Kansas City, Missouri.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1973). Early syntactic development: a cross-linguistic study with special reference to Finnish. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Braine, M. D. S. (1987). What is learned in acquiring word classes – a step toward an acquisition theory. In MacWhinney, B. (ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Brown, M. B. & Forsythe, A. B. (1974 a). Robust tests for the equality of variances. Journal of the American Statistical Association 69, 364–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, M. B. & Forsythe, A. B. (1974 b). The small sample behavior of some statistics which test the equality of several means. Technometrics 16, 129–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. W. (1957). Linguistic determinism and the part of speech. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 55, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carey, S. (1982). Semantic development: the state of the art. In Wanner, E. & Gleitman, L. R. (eds), Language acquisition: the state of the art. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Dickinson, D. K. (1988). Learning names for materials: factors constraining and limiting hypotheses about word meaning. Cognitive Development 3, 15–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, P. (1982). Early encoding of the count/mass distinction: semantic or syntactic? Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 21, 71–8.Google Scholar
Gordon, P. (1985). Evaluating the semantic categories hypothesis: the case of the count/mass distinction. Cognition 20, 209–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, P. (1988). Count/mass category acquisition: distributional distinctions in children's speech. Journal of Child Language 15, 109–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grimshaw, J. (1981). Form, function, and the language acquisition device. In Baker, C. L. & McCarthy, J. J. (eds), The logical problem of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Gupta, A. K. (1980). The logic of common nouns: an investigation in quantified modal logic. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Laycock, H. (1972). Some questions of ontology. Philosophical Review 81, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Y. (1983 a). The acquisition of Hebrew plurals: the case of the missing gender category. Journal of Child Language 10, 107–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levy, Y. (1983 b). It's frogs all the way down. Cognition 15, 75–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levy, Y. (1988). On the early learning of formal grammatical systems: evidence from studies of the acquisition of gender and countability. Journal of Child Language 15, 179–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lyons, J. (1966). Towards a ‘notional’ theory of the ‘parts of speech’. Journal of Linguistics 2, 209–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1972). Cognitive basis of language learning in infants. Psychological Review 79, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macnamara, J. (1982). Names for things. Cambridge, MA: Bradford/M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1986). A border dispute: the place of logic in psychology. Cambridge, MA: Bradford/M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1991). Linguistic relativity revisited. In Cooper, R. L. & Spolsky, B. (eds), Language, society and thought. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M. (1987). How children constrain the possible meanings of words. In Neisser, U. (ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: ecological and intellectual factors in categorization. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
McCawley, J. D. (1979). Adverbs, vowels, and other objects of wonder. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S. S. (1984). The count/mass distinction and the English lexicon. In Testen, D., Mishra, V. & Drogo, J. (eds), Papers from the parasession on lexical semantics. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Neisser, U. (1987). From direct perception to conceptual structure. In Neisser, U., Concepts and conceptual development: ecological and intellectual factors in categorization. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 38, No. 149. 1–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelletier, F. J. (1975). Non-singular reference: some preliminaries. Philosophia 5, 451–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. (1979). Formal models of language learning. Cognition 7, 217–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinker, S. (1982). A theory of the acquisition of lexical interpretive grammars. In Bresnan, J. (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1987). The bootstrapping problem in language acquisition. In MacWhinney, B. (ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: the acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: Bradford/M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M. & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8, 382–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheffé, H. (1959). The analysis of variance. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Smith, C., Carey, S. & Wiser, M. (1985). On differentiation: a case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density. Cognition 21, 177–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Soja, N. N. (1987). Ontological constraints on 2-year-olds' induction of word meanings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, A. (1985). Oats and wheat: the fallacy of arbitrariness. In Haiman, J. (ed.), Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar