Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:07:37.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relation between order of acquisition, segmental frequency and function: the case of word-initial consonants in Dutch*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2012

LIEVE VAN SEVEREN ,
JORIS J. M. GILLIS ,
INGE MOLEMANS ,
RENATE VAN DEN BERG ,
SVEN DE MAEYER  and
STEVEN GILLIS
LIEVE VAN SEVEREN
Affiliation:
University of Antwerp, Department of Linguistics, CLiPS Research Center
JORIS J. M. GILLIS
Affiliation:
Hasselt University, Database and Theoretical Computer Sciences Research Group
INGE MOLEMANS
Affiliation:
University of Antwerp, Department of Linguistics, CLiPS Research Center
RENATE VAN DEN BERG
Affiliation:
University of Antwerp, Department of Linguistics, CLiPS Research Center
SVEN DE MAEYER
Affiliation:
University of Antwerp, Institute for Education and Information Sciences and Statistical Centre of the University of Antwerp (StatuUA)
STEVEN GILLIS*
Affiliation:
University of Antwerp, Department of Linguistics, CLiPS Research Center
*
Address for correspondence: Steven Gillis, University of Antwerp, Department of Linguistics, CLiPS Research Center, Prinsstraat 13, 2000 Antwerpen, Belgium. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The impact of input frequency (IF) and functional load (FL) of segments in the ambient language on the acquisition order of word-initial consonants is investigated. Several definitions of IF/FL are compared and implemented. The impact of IF/FL and their components are computed using a longitudinal corpus of interactions between thirty Dutch-speaking children (age range: 0 ; 6–2 ; 0) and their primary caretaker(s). The corpus study reveals significant correlations between IF/FL and acquisition order. The highest predictive values are found for the token frequency of segments, and for FL computed on minimally different word types in child-directed speech. Although IF and FL significantly correlate, they do have a different impact on the order of acquisition of word-initial consonants. When the impact of IF is partialed out, FL still has a significant correlation with acquisition order. The reverse is not true, suggesting that the acquisition of word-initial consonants is mainly influenced by their discriminating function.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 40 , Issue 4 , September 2013 , pp. 703 - 740
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

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 would like to thank the children and their families who participated in this study. The research reported in this article was supported by a TOP-BOF grant of the Research Council of the University of Antwerp and by a PhD fellowship of the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO) to the second author. Thanks are also due to two reviewers for many helpful comments.

References

REFERENCES

Amayreh, M. & Dyson, A. (2000). The acquisition of Arabic consonants. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research 41, 642–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellinger, D. (1980). Consistency in the pattern of change in mother's speech: Some discriminant analysis. Journal of Child Language 7, 469–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. (1995). The phonology of Dutch. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Brown, A. (1988). Functional load and the teaching of pronunciation. Tesol Quarterly 22, 593–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Catano, L., Barlow, J. & Moyna, M. (2009). A retrospective study of phonetic inventory complexity in the acquisition of Spanish: Implications for phonological universals. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 23, 446–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, J., Beckman, M. & Munson, B. (2004). The interaction between vocabulary size and phonotactic probability effects on children's production accuracy and fluency in nonword repetition. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research 47, 421–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elffers, C., Van Bael, C. & Strik, H. (2005). ADAPT: Algorithm for Dynamic Alignment of Phonetic Transcriptions. Nijmegen: Departement of Language & Speech, Radboud University.Google Scholar
Ernestus, M. (2000). Voice assimilation and segment reduction in casual Dutch. Unpublished PhD, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. & Garnica, O. (1975). Theories of phonological development. In Lenneberg, E. H. & Lenneberg, E. (eds), Foundations of language development, Vol. 1, 153–80. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallaway, C. & Richards, B. (eds)1994. Input and interaction in language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garnica, O. (1977). Some prosodic and paralinguistic features of speech to young children. In Snow, C. & Ferguson, C. (eds), Talking to children: Language input and acquisition, 63–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gerken, L. (2002). Early sensitivity to linguistic form. Annual Review of Language Acquisition 2, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbers, D. & van der Linde, K. (1999). On the acquisition of segments in Optimality Theory: The acquisition of segments as a conflict between correspondence and markedness constraints. In Beers, M. & Peters, S. (eds), Phonological development: Different perspectives [=Antwerp papers in linguistics Vol. 96], 33–68. Antwerp: University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
Gillis, S. (2000). Fonologische ontwikkeling. In Gillis, S. & Schaerlaekens, A. (eds), Kindertaalverwerving: een handboek voor het Nederlands, 131–84. Groningen: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Goodman, J., Dale, P. & Li, P. (2008). Does frequency count? Parental input and acquisition of vocabulary. Journal of Child Language 35, 515–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenberg, J. (1966). Synchronic and diachronic universals in phonology. Language 42, 508–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, C. (1967). The quantification of functional load: A linguistic problem. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoff, E., Core, C. & Bridges, K. (2008). Non-word repetition assesses phonological memory and is related to vocabulary development in 20- to 24-month-olds. Journal of Child Language 35, 903–916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ingram, D. (1989). First language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jusczyk, P. & Aslin, R. (1995). Infants' detection of sound patterns of words in fluent speech. Cognitive Psychology 29, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kent, R. (1992). The biology of phonological development. In Ferguson, C., Menn, L. & Stoel-Gammon, C. (eds), Phonological development: Models, research, implications, 65–90. Timonium: York Press.Google Scholar
Kent, R. & Miolo, G. (1995). Phonetic abilities in the first year of life. In Fletcher, P. & MacWhinney, B. (eds), The handbook of child language, 303–334. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
King, R. D. (1967). Functional load and sound change. Language 43, 831–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, S. & Davis, B. (2010). Segmental distribution patterns of English infant- and adult-directed speech. Journal of Child Language 38, 767–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, C., Schiller, N. & Levelt, W. (2000). The acquisition of syllable types. Language Acquisition 8, 237–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, C. & van Oostendorp, M. (2007). Feature co-occurrence constraints in L1 acquisition. In Los, B. & van Koppen, M. (eds), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2007, 162–72. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishers.Google Scholar
Lieven, E. (2010). Input and first language acquisition: Evaluating the role of frequency. Lingua 120, 2546–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk: transcription format and programs. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Martinet, A. (1955). Economie des changements phonétiques. Bern: Francke.Google Scholar
Munro, M. & Derwing, T. (2006). The functional load principle in ESL pronunciation instruction: An exploratory study. System 34, 520–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naigles, L. & Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1998). Why are some verbs learned before other verbs? Effects of input frequency and structure on children's early verb use. Journal of Child Language 25, 95–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paschall, L. (1983). Development at 18 months. In Irwin, J. & Wong, S. (eds), Phonological development in children 18–72 months, 27–54. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Pye, C., Ingram, D. & List, H. (1987). A comparison of initial consonant acquisition in English and Quiché. In Nelson, K. & van Kleek, A. (eds), Children's language, Vol. 6, 175–90. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Richtsmeier, P., Gerken, L. & Ohala, D. (2009). Induction of phonotactics from word-types and word-tokens. In Chandlee, J., Franchini, M., Lord, S. & Rheiner, M. (eds), Proceedings of the 33rd Boston University Conference on Language Development, 432–43. Sommerville: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Richtsmeier, P., Gerken, L. & Ohala, D. (2011). Contributions of phonetic token variability and word-type frequency to phonological representations. Journal of Child Language 38, 951–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, Y. (2009). Internal and external influences on child language productions. In Pellegrino, F., Marsico, E., Chitoran, I. & Coupé, C. (eds), Approaches to phonological complexity, 329–51. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheskin, D. (2004). Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
Snow, C. & Ferguson, C. (1977). Talking to children: Language input and acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
So, L. & Dodd, B. (1995). The acquisition of phonology by Cantonese-speaking children. Journal of Child Language 22, 473–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stager, C. & Werker, J. (1997). Infants listen for more phonetic detail in speech perception than in word-learning tasks. Nature 388, 381–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stites, J., Demuth, K. & Kirk, C. (2004). Markedness vs. frequency effects in coda acquisition. In Brugos, A., Micciulla, L. & Smith, C. (eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 565–76. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Stoel-Gammon, C. (2011). Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children. Journal of Child Language 38, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stokes, S. & Surendran, D. (2005). Articulatory complexity, ambient frequency and functional load as predictors of consonant development in children. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research 48, 577–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stokes, S. & Wong, I.-M. (2002). Vowel and diphthong development in Cantonese-speaking children. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 16, 597–617.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Surendran, D. & Niyogi, P. (2003). Measuring the functional load of phonological contrasts. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Swingley, D. (2009). Onsets and codas in 1·5-year-olds' word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 60, 252–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swingley, D. & Aslin, R. (2002). Lexical neighborhoods and the word form representations of 14-month-olds. Psychological Science 13, 480–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Theakston, A., Lieven, E., Pine, J. & Rowland, C. (2004). Semantic generality, input frequency and the acquisition of syntax. Journal of Child Language 31, 61–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tsurutani, C. (2007). Early acquisition of palato-alveolar consonants in Japanese: Phoneme frequencies in child-directed speech. Journal of the Phonetic Society of Japan 11, 102–110.Google Scholar
van de Weijer, J. (1999). Language input for word discovery. Unpublished PhD, University of Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Van Severen, L., Molemans, I., van den Berg, R. & Gillis, S. (2012). Consonant inventories in the spontaneous speech of young children: A bootstrapping procedure. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 26(2), 164–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Severen, L., van den Berg, R., Molemans, I., Govaerts, P. & Gillis, S. (2010). Betrouwbaarheid van spontane kindertaalanalyses: consonantinventarissen. Toegepaste Taalkunde in Artikelen 83, 67–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vihman, M. & Croft, W. (2007). Phonological development: toward a ‘radical’ templatic phonology. Linguistics 45, 683–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vihman, M. & McCune, L. (1994). When is a word a word? Journal of Child Language 21, 517–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, W. (1967). The measurement of functional load. Phonetika 16, 36–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshida, K., Fennel, C., Swingley, D. & Werker, J. (2009). Fourteen-month-old infants learn similar-sounding words. Developmental Science 12, 412–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zamuner, T., Gerken, L. & Hammond, M. (2005). The acquisition of phonology based on input: A closer look at the relation of cross-linguistic and child language data. Lingua 115, 1403–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, H. (2002). Phonological development in specific contexts. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Zink, I. & Lejaegere, M. (2002). N-CDI's: lijsten voor communicatieve ontwikkeling: Aanpassing en hernormering van de MacArthur CDIs van Ferguson et al. Leuven: Acco.Google Scholar