Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:25:57.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘What says meow?’. The role of context and linguistic experience in very young children's responses to what-questions*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Rhianon Allen  and
Marilyn Shatz
Rhianon Allen
Affiliation:
New York State Psychiatric Institute and City University of New York
Marilyn Shatz
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Children aged 1; 4 to 1; 6 were asked common what/-questions under four different contextual conditions. The presence of a gesture was found to have a significant effect on the nonverbal components of children's responses, while linguistic sophistication and type of question asked affected vocal responses, but did not produce any consistent effects on nonverbal responses. Results are interpreted as suggesting that, at this early age, gestural information is processed relatively independently of speech. These findings cast doubt on the likelihood that maternal gestures facilitate early language responding. Case-study observations of the children's interactional behaviour with mothers suggest instead that prior experience with verbal routines was a factor in the children's experimental vocal performance.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , June 1983 , pp. 321 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

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 thank Elizabeth Schnur for her help in data collection and transcription and her comments on an earlier version of the work. We also thank Clare Raizman for assistance in coding. The research was supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada doctoral fellowship to R. Allen and by NIMH grants R 03 MH 2874 and R 01 MH 30996 and a Guggenheim fellowship to M. Shatz. We also wish to thank Bolt, Beranek and Newman for assistance in preparing the manuscript. Address for correspondence: R. Allen, Department of Child Psychiatry, New York State Psychiatric Institute, 722 West 168th St, New York, NY 10032.

References

REFERENCES

Benedict, H. E. (1976). Language comprehension in 10 to 16 month-old infants. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Yale University.Google Scholar
Carter, A. L. (1978). The development of systematic vocalizations prior to words: a case study. In Waterson, N. & Snow, C. (eds), The development of communication. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gleason, J. B. & Weintraub, S. (1976). The acquisition of routinein child language. LiS 5. 137–51.Google Scholar
Grief, E. B. & Gleason, J. B. (1980). Hi, thanks, and goodbye: more routine information. LiS 9. 150–66.Google Scholar
Kramer, P. E. (1977). Young children's free responses to anomalous commands. JExpChPsychol 24. 219–34.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1961). The role of speech in the regulation of normal and abnormal behaviour. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1977). From sign to language. In Macnamara, J. (ed.), Language learning and thought. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ratner, N. & Bruner, J. (1978). Games, social exchange and the acquisition of language. JChLang 5. 391–401.Google ScholarPubMed
Shatz, M. (1978). On the development of communicative understandings: an early strategy for interpreting and responding to messages. CogPsych 10. 271–301.Google Scholar
Shatz, M. (1979). How to do things by asking: form-function pairings in mothers' questions and their relationship to children's responses. ChDev 50. 1093–9.Google Scholar
Shatz, M. (1982). On mechanisms of language acquisition: can features of the communicative environment account for development? In Gleitman, L. & Wanner, E. (eds), Language acquisition: the state of the art. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Shatz, M., Allen, R. & Raizman, C. (in prep.). Show doesn't lead to tell: the effect of dual input on children's responses to what-questions.Google Scholar