Abstract
In order to identify the role of language in extracting a particular referential property which was involved in a reference situation but which was not expressed as relevant, in the linguistic structure of the subjects' native language, three experiments were performed. Forty subjects were exposed to the same referential situations but to different linguistic structures, each encoding a particular referential property that was, relevant. Miniature artificial languages were used. The referential properties examined were prototypical transitivity as defined by Slobin (1980) and plurality. The results showed that prototypical transitivity was extracted more readily than plurality, even though the subjects were more familiar with the latter property. The discussion emphasized how language serves to promote, the extraction and encoding of linguistically relevant properties that underlie referential situations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Archer, E. J. (1960). A re-evaluation of the meaningfulness of all possible CVC trigrams.Psychological Monograph,74, (10).
Braine, M. D. S. (1966). Learning the positions of words relative to a marker element.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 532–540.
Brown, R. (1973).A first language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Clark, H. H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335–359.
Gibson, E. J. (1969).Principles of perceptual learning and development. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Golinkoff, R. M., & Gordon, L. (1983). In the beginning was the word: A history of the study of language acquisition. In R. M. Golinkoff (Ed.),The transition from prelinguistic to linguistic communication (pp. 1–25). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Herriot, P. (1970).An introduction to the psychology of language. London: Methuen.
Miller, G. A. (1967). Project grammarama. In G. A. Miller,The psychology of communication: Seven essays (pp. 125–187). New York: Basic Books.
Moeser, S. D., & Bregman, A. S. (1972). The role of reference in the acquisition of a miniature artificial language.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 759–769.
Moeser, S. D., & Bregman A. S. (1973). Imagery and language acquisition.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 91–98.
Moeser, S. D., & Olson, A. J. (1974). The role of reference in children's acquisition of a miniature artifical language.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 17, 204–218.
Mori, K. (1980a). The effect of irrelevant factors in the reference field on the acquisition of a miniature artificial language.Japanese Psychological Research, 22, 72–81.
Mori, K. (1980b). [The effect of mistakes in the input on the acquisition of a miniature artificial language].Japanese Journal of Psychology, 51, 179–187. (In Japanese with English summary).
Mori, K. (1981). The effect of mistakes in the input on the, acquisition of a miniature artificial language (II): Using a subject-paced procedure.Japanese Psychological Research, 23, 113–117.
Mori, K., & Moeser, S. D. (1983). The role of syntax markers and semantic referents in learning an artificial language.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 701–718.
Nagata, H. (1976). Quantitative and qualitative analysis of experience in acquisition of a miniature artificial language.Japanese Psychological Research, 18, 174–182.
Nagata, H. (1977). The interaction between syntactic complexity and semantic reference in acquisition of a miniature artificial language.Japanese Psychological Research, 19, 90–96.
Nagata, H. (1979). Syntax internalization: A methodological reexamination.Bulletin of the Faculty of Law and Literature, Okayama University, 39, 73–80.
Nagata, H. (1981). Effectiveness of word order and grammatical markers as syntactic indicators of, semantic relations.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 10, 471–486.
Nagata, H. (1983a). Effectiveness of word order and grammatical markers as syntactic indicators of semantic relations in opaque input conditions.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 12, 157–169.
Nagata, H. (1983b). Richness of input data as condition of the acquisition of prototypical transitivity in language.American Journal of Psychology, 96, 477–489.
Nagata, H. (1984). Effectiveness of word order over grammatical markers as a syntactic indicator of semantic relation in an opaque partial description situation.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 13, 281–293.
Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes.Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44–64.
Osgood, C. E. (1980).Lectures on language performance. New York: Springer.
Reber, A. S. (1967). Implicit learning of artificial grammars.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 855–863.
Reber, A. S. (1969). Transfer of syntactic structures in simple synthetic languages.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 115–119.
Sapir, E. (1924). The grammarian and his language.American Mercury, 1, 149–155.
Saporta, S., Blumenthal, A. L., Lackowski, P., & Reiff, D. G. (1965). Grammatical models and language learning. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.),Directions in psycholinguistics (pp. 15–28) New York: Macmillan.
Schlesinger, I. M. (1977).Production and comprehension of utterances. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Segal, E. M., & Halwes, T. G. (1965). Learning of letter pairs as a prototype of first language learning.Psychonomic Science, 3, 451–452.
Segal, E. M., & Halwes, T. G., (1966). The influence of frequency of exposure on the learning of a phrase structural grammar.Psychonomic Science, 4, 157–158.
Slobin, D. I. (1973). Cognitive prerequisites for the development of grammar. In C. A. Ferguson & D. I. Slobin (Eds.),Studies of child language development (pp. 175–208). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Slobin, D. I. (1979).Psycholinguistics (2nd ed.), Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company.
Slobin, D. I. (1980). The repeated path between transparency and opacity in language. In U. Bellugi & M. Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.),Signed and spoken language: Biological constraints on linguistic form. Dahlem Konferenzen (pp. 229–243). Weinheim: Verlag Chemi GmbH.
Slobin, D. I. (1981). Psychology without linguistics= Language without grammar.Cognition, 10, 275–280.
Slobin, D. I. (1982). Universal and particular in the acquisition of language. In E. Wanner & L. R. Gleitman (Eds.),Language, acquisition: The state of the art (pp. 128–170). London: Cambridge University Press.
Smith, K. H. (1965). Mediation and position learning in the recall of structured letter pairs.Psychonomic Science, 2, 293–294.
Smith, K. H. (1966a). Grammatical intrusions, in the recall of structured letter pairs: Mediated transfer or position learning?Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 580–588.
Smith, K. H. (1966b). Grammatical intrusion in the free recall of, structured letter pairs.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5, 447–454.
Smith, K. H. (1969). Learning co-occurrence restrictions: Rule induction or rote learning?Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8, 319–321.
Steinberg, D. D. (1982).Psycholinguistics: Language, mind, and world. New York: Longman.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Deep gratitude is due to Prof. D. D. Steinberg for his cogent and critical reading of the earlier version of the paper.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nagata, H. Extraction of linguistically relevant referential properties through language learning. J Psycholinguist Res 14, 447–464 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01666720
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01666720