Abstract
Some research in child language suggests that semantically general verbs appear in grammatical structures earlier than semantically complex, specific ones. The present study examines whether this was the case in nouns, using imageability as a proxy measure of semantic generality. Longitudinal corpus data from 12 children from the Manchester corpus in CHILDES were used to obtain information on the first occurrence of plurals. A total of 3,560 uninflected nouns were identified in the corpora, of which 1,202 were observed in the plural. Survival analyses indicated that the chance of observing a plural form increases with the imageability rating of the noun, even after accounting for the age of acquisition of the uninflected noun, maternal input frequency, and word length. Noun imageability thus facilitates the acquisition of plural forms. This finding contradicts the observations from verbs, and indicates that the acquisition of grammar is facilitated by high imageability rather than semantic generality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D., & Bates, D. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412.
Bloom, L., Lahey, M., Hood, L., Lifter, K., & Fiess, K. (1980). Complex sentences: Acquisition of syntactic connectives and the semantic relations they encode. Journal of Child Language, 7, 235–261.
Bloom, L., Lifter, K., & Hafitz, J. (1980). Semantics of verbs and the development of verb inflection in child language. Language, 56, 386–412.
Bloom, L., Merkin, S., & Wootten, J. (1982). Wh-questions: Linguistic factors that contribute to the sequence of acquisition. Child Development, 53, 1084–1092.
Brown, P. (2008). Verb specificity and argument realization in Tzeltal child language. In M. Bowerman & P. Brown (Eds.), Crosslinguistic perspectives on argument structure: Implications for learnability (pp. 167–189). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Cameirão, M. L., & Vicente, S. G. (2010). Age-of-acquisition norms for a set of 1,749 Portuguese words. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 474–480.
Clark, E. V. (1978). Discovering what words can do. In D. Farkas, W. M. Jacobsen, & K. W. Todrys (Eds.), Papers from the parasession on the lexicon (pp. 34–57). Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
de Groot, A. M. (1989). Representational aspects of word imageability and word frequency as assessed through word association. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 824–845.
de Villiers, J. G., & de Villiers, P. A. (1973). A cross-sectional study of the acquisition of grammatical morphemes in child speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2, 267–278.
Gentner, D., & Bowerman, M. (2009). Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The typological prevalence hypothesis. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, N. Budwig, S. Ervin-Tripp, K. Nakamura, & S. Ozcaliskannm (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 465–480). New York: Psychology Press.
Gilhooly, K., & Logie, R. (1980). Age of acquisition, imagery, concreteness, familiarity and ambiguity measures for 1944 words. Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 12, 395–427.
Gillette, J., Gleitman, H., Gleitman, L., & Lederer, A. (1999). Human simulations of vocabulary learning. Cognition, 73, 135–176.
Goodman, J. C., Dale, P. S., & Li, P. (2008). Does frequency count? Parental input and the acquisition of vocabulary. Journal of Child Language, 35, 515–531.
Kroll, J. F., & Merves, J. S. (1986). Lexical access for concrete and abstract words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12, 92–107.
Li, P., & Bowerman, M. (1998). The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect in Chinese. First Language, 18, 311–350.
Ma, W., Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., McDonough, C., & Tardif, T. (2009). Imageability predicts the age of acquisition of verbs in Chinese children. Journal of Child Language, 36, 405–423.
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
MacWhinney, B. (2008). Enriching CHILDES for morphosyntactic analysis. In H. Behrens (Ed.), Corpora in language acquisition research: history, methods, perspectives. New York: Benjamins.
Maouene, J., Laakso, A., & Smith, L. B. (2011). Object associations of early-learned light and heavy English verbs. First Language, 31, 109–132.
Marcus, G. F., Pinker, S., Ullman, M., Hollander, M., Rosen, T. J., & Xu, F. (1992). Overregularization in language acquisition. Monogrraphs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 57, 1–182.
Masterson, J., Druks, J., & Gallienne, D. (2008). Object and action picture naming in three- and five-year-old children. Journal of Child Language, 35, 373–402.
McFalls, E. L., Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Stahl, S. A. (1996). Influence of word meaning on the acquisition of a reading vocabulary in second-grade children. Reading and Writing, 8, 235–250.
Morrison, C. M., Chappell, T. D., & Ellis, A. W. (1997). Age of acquisition norms for a large set of object names and their relation to adult estimates and other variables. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (Section A): Human Experimental Psychology, 50, 528–559.
Ninio, A. (1999). Pathbreaking verbs in syntactic development and the question of prototypical transitivity. Journal Of Child Language, 26, 619–653.
Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C., & Madigan, S. A. (1968) Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology 76(1, Pt. 2):1–25.
Parisi, D., & Antinucci, F. (1970). Lexical competence. In W. J. M. Levelt & G B Fd d’ Arcais (Eds.), Advances in psycholinguistics (pp. 197–210). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Prado, E. L., & Ullman, M. T. (2009). Can imageability help us draw the line between storage and composition? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 35, 849–866.
Ramscar, M. (2002). The role of meaning in inflection: Why the past tense does not require a rule. Cognitive Psychology, 45(1), 45–94.
Reilly, J., & Kean, J. (2007). Formal distinctiveness of high- and low-imageability nouns: Analyses and theoretical implications. Cognitive Science, 31, 157–168.
Rice, M. L., & Bode, J. V. (1993). GAPS in the verb lexicons of children with specific language impairment. First Language, 13, 113–131.
Rowland, C. F., Pine, J. M., Lieven, E. V. M., & Theakston, A. L. (2003). Determinants of acquisition order in wh-questions: Re-evaluating the role of caregiver speech. Journal of Child Language, 30, 609–635.
Serratrice, L., Joseph, K. L., & Conti-Ramsden, G. (2003). The acquisition of past tense in preschool children with specific language impairment and unaffected controls: Regular and irregular forms. Linguistics, 41, 321–349.
Shirai, Y. (2010). Semantic bias and morphological regularity in the acquisition of tense-aspect morphology: what is the relation? Linguistics, 48, 171–194.
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.
Stephany, U. (1981). Verbal grammar in modern Greek early child language. In P. S. Dale & D. Ingram (Eds.), Child language: An international perspective (pp. 45–57). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Strain, E., Patterson, K., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1995). Semantic effects in single-word naming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1140–1154.
Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Bornstein, M. H., & Baumwell, L. (2001). Maternal responsiveness and children’s achievement of language milestones. Child Development, 72, 748–767.
Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Bornstein, M. H., Kahana-Kalman, R., Baumwell, L., & Cyphers, L. (1998). Predicting variation in the timing of language milestones in the second year: An events history approach. Journal of Child Language, 25, 675–700.
Theakston, A. L., Lieven, E. V. M., Pine, J. M., & Rowland, C. F. (2001). The role of performance limitations in the acquisition of verb-argument structure: An alternative account. Journal of Child Language, 28, 127–152.
Theakston, A. L., Lieven, E. V. M., Pine, J. M., & Rowland, C. F. (2004). Semantic generality, input frequency and the acquisition of syntax. Journal of Child Language, 31, 61–99.
Therneau, T. M., & Grambsch, P. M. (2000). Modeling survival data: Extending the Cox model. New York: Springer.
Therneau, T. M., & Lumley, T. (2009) Survival: Survival analysis, including penalised likelihood. [Computer software manual]. (Available from: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survival)
Toglia, M., & Battig, W. (1978). Handbook of semantic word norms. New York: Erlbaum.
Wilson, M. (1988). The MRC psycholinguistic database: Machine readable dictionary, version 2. Behavioural Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 20, 6–11.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The study was supported by the Czech Science Foundation (GA ČR) award No. P407/10/2047 Comprehension of grammar and lexicon in toddlers
Appendix
Appendix
A. List of top 21 words in imageability in the analyzed sample (imageability \(>\) 632): apple, banana, beach, bed, beetle, car, dog, father, fire, girl, gorilla, ice, kitten, milk, pickle, pig, puppy, skin, squirrel, sun, telephone.
B. List of words with imageability \(<\) 500 (excluded in the first reanalysis from Table 4): age, answer, back, balance, bang, belt, bit, block, blow, bottom, brave, break, build, bump, buy, care, clean, cool, count, course, cover, crawl, creature, crumb, crush, cry, cut, cymbal, damage, die, dip, down, dream, drop, end, escape, fault, feel, find, finish, front, germ, give, guess, help, hide, hold, hurt, idea, inch, job, keep, last, lead, lie, life, lift, line, load, look, lorry, manner, march, mark, match, matter, mean, measure, mind, minute, miss, move, name, need, number, open, pass, pat, pattern, peck, peel, peep, piece, place, play, present, pull, push, race, reach, repair, rescue, rest, ride, roll, rush, shape, shoot, shout, show, side, slide, slip, smell, snap, sound, squeak, squirt, stand, stay, step, still, stop, story, stroke, surprise, sweet, take, talk, taste, thing, throw, till, time, tip, top, touch, tow, track, trick, trouble, try, tumble, turn, vacuum, wait, way, wear, week, whack, win, wish, work, wrong, year.
C. List of the semantically or categorically suspicious words excluded in second reanalysis from Table 4: blue, boat, care, cook, down, drink, end, fall, find, fire, fly, give, green, jump, keep, kiss, light, look, love, move, need, open, paint, post, rain, slide, stay, step, stick, stop, sweet, take, top, turn, walk, wear, whistle, white, work, yellow, drill, hurt, idea, pan, pea, pin, bubble, squeak, pump, try, puzzle, cover, matter, clock.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Smolík, F. Noun Imageability Facilitates the Acquisition of Plurals: Survival Analysis of Plural Emergence in Children. J Psycholinguist Res 43, 335–350 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-013-9255-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-013-9255-5