1932

Abstract

Evidence of children’s sensitivity to statistical features of their input in language acquisition is often used to argue against learning mechanisms driven by innate knowledge. At the same time, evidence of children acquiring knowledge that is richer than the input supports arguments in favor of such mechanisms. This tension can be resolved by separating the inferential and deductive components of the language learning mechanism. Universal Grammar provides representations that support deductions about sentences that fall outside of experience. In addition, these representations define the evidence that learners use to infer a particular grammar. The input is compared with the expected evidence to drive statistical inference. In support of this model, we review evidence of () children’s sensitivity to the environment, () mismatches between input and intake, () the need for learning mechanisms beyond innate representations, and () the deductive consequences of children’s acquired syntactic representations.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-125236
2015-01-14
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/linguistics/1/1/annurev-linguist-030514-125236.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-125236&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Arriaga RK, Fenson L, Cronan T, Pethick SJ. 1998. Scores on the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory of children from low- and middle-income families. Appl. Psycholinguist. 19:209–25 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aslin RN, Newport EL. 2012. Statistical learning: from learning items to generalizing rules. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 21:170–76 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barss A. 2001. Syntactic reconstruction effects. Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory Baltin M, Collins C. 670–96 Cambridge, MA: Blackwell [Google Scholar]
  4. Bleam T. 2001. Properties of the double object constructions in Spanish. A Romance Perspective on Language Knowledge and Use Nuñez-Cedeño R, López L, Cameron R. 235–52. Amsterdam: Benjamins [Google Scholar]
  5. Chomsky N. 1959. Review of B.F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. Language 35:26–58 [Google Scholar]
  6. Chomsky N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  7. Chomsky N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding Dordrecht, Neth.: Foris
  8. Cole P, Huang CTJ, Hermon G. 2001. Long-Distance Reflexives New York: Academic
  9. Crain S. 1991. Language acquisition in the absence of experience. Behav. Brain Sci. 14:597–612 [Google Scholar]
  10. Elman JL, Bates EA, Johnson M, Karmiloff-Smith A, Parisi D, Plunkett K. 1996. Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  11. Fodor JD. 1998. Parsing to learn. J. Psycholinguist. Res. 27:339–74 [Google Scholar]
  12. Frank R, Kapur S. 1996. On the use of triggers in parameter setting. Linguist. Inq. 27:623–60 [Google Scholar]
  13. Frank R, Mathis D, Badecker W. 2013. The acquisition of anaphora by simple recurrent networks. Lang. Acquis. 20:181–227 [Google Scholar]
  14. Frank MC, Tenenbaum JB. 2011. Three ideal observer models for rule learning in simple languages. Cognition 120:360–71 [Google Scholar]
  15. Freeze R. 1992. Existentials and other locatives. Language 68:553–95 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gagliardi A, Feldman NH, Lidz J. 2012. When suboptimal behavior is optimal and why: modeling the acquisition of noun classes in Tsez. Presented at Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc., 34th, Sapporo, Jpn
  17. Gagliardi A, Lidz J. 2014. Statistical insensitivity in the acquisition of Tsez noun classes. Language 90:1–32 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gennari SP, MacDonald MC. 2006. Acquisition of negation and quantification: insights from adult production and comprehension. Lang. Acquis. 13:125–68 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gibson E, Wexler K. 1991. Triggers. Linguist. Inq. 25:403–54 [Google Scholar]
  20. Gleitman LR. 1990. The structural sources of verb meanings. Lang. Acquis. 1:3–55 [Google Scholar]
  21. Goldberg A. 2006. Constructions at Work Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  22. Gómez RL. 2002. Variability and detection of invariant structure. Psychol. Sci. 13:431–36 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gómez RL, Gerken LA. 1999. Artificial grammar learning by one-year-olds leads to specific and abstract knowledge. Cognition 70:109–35 [Google Scholar]
  24. Gómez RL, Maye J. 2005. The developmental trajectory of nonadjacent dependency learning. Infancy 7:183–206 [Google Scholar]
  25. Guasti MT. 2002. Language Acquisition: The Growth of Grammar Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  26. Han CH, Lidz J, Musolino J. 2007. Verb-movement and grammar competition in Korean: evidence from quantification and negation. Linguist. Inq. 38:1–47 [Google Scholar]
  27. Harley H. 2002. Possession and the double object construction. Linguist. Var. Yearb 2:31–70 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hart B, Risley T. 1995. Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children Baltimore: Brookes
  29. Heycock C. 1995. Asymmetries in reconstruction. Linguist. Inq. 26:547–70 [Google Scholar]
  30. Hoff E. 2003. The specificity of environmental influence: Socioeconomic status affects early vocabulary development via maternal speech. Child Dev. 74:1368–78 [Google Scholar]
  31. Hoff E, Naigles L. 2002. How children use input to acquire a lexicon. Child Dev. 73:418–33 [Google Scholar]
  32. Huang J. 1993. Reconstruction and the structure of VP: some theoretical consequences. Linguist. Inq. 24:103–38 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hudson-Kam CL, Newport EL. 2009. Getting it right by getting it wrong: when learners change languages. Cogn. Psychol. 59:30–66 [Google Scholar]
  34. Huttenlocher J, Haight W, Bryk A, Seltzer M, Lyons T. 1991. Early vocabulary growth: relation to language input and gender. Dev. Psychol. 27:236–48 [Google Scholar]
  35. Huttenlocher J, Vasilyeva M, Cymerman E, Levine S. 2002. Language input at home and at school: relation to child syntax. Cogn. Psychol. 45:337–74 [Google Scholar]
  36. Huttenlocher J, Waterfall H, Vasilyeva M, Vevea J, Hedges LV. 2010. Sources of variability in children’s language growth. Cogn. Psychol. 61:343–65 [Google Scholar]
  37. Johnson EK, Tyler M. 2010. Testing the limits of statistical learning for word segmentation. Dev. Sci. 13:339–45 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kayne R. 1993. Toward a modular theory of auxiliary selection. Stud. Linguist. 47:3–31 [Google Scholar]
  39. Koster J, Reuland E. 1991. Long-Distance Anaphora Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  40. Lany JA, Gómez RL. 2008. Twelve-month-olds benefit from prior experience in statistical learning. Psychol. Sci. 19:1247–52 [Google Scholar]
  41. Leddon E, Lidz J. 2006. Reconstruction effects in child language. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, ed. D Bamman, T Magnitkaia, C Zaller, pp. 328–39. Cambridge, MA: Cascadilla
  42. Legate J, Yang C. 2007. Morphosyntactic learning and the development of tense: a new approach to root infinitives. Lang. Acquis. 14:315–44 [Google Scholar]
  43. Lidz J, Gleitman H, Gleitman LR. 2003. Understanding how input matters: the footprint of universal grammar on verb learning. Cognition 87:151–78 [Google Scholar]
  44. Lidz J, Musolino J. 2002. Children’s command of quantification. Cognition 84:113–54 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lidz J, Musolino J. 2006. On the quantificational status of indefinites: the view from child language. Lang. Acquis. 13:73–102 [Google Scholar]
  46. Lidz J, Williams A. 2006. On the lack of reflexive benefactives in Kannada. Yearbook of South Asian Languages and Linguistics Battacharya T. 237–54 Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter [Google Scholar]
  47. Lieven EV, Tomasello M. 2008. Children’s first language acquisition from a usage-based perspective. Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition Robinson P, Ellis N. 168–96 New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  48. Lightfoot D. 1991. How to Set Parameters Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  49. Lightfoot D. 1999. The Development of Language: Acquisition, Change and Evolution Cambridge, MA: Wiley-Blackwell
  50. Morgan JL, Newport EL. 1981. The role of constituent structure in the induction of an artificial language. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 20:67–85 [Google Scholar]
  51. Musolino J, Crain S, Thornton R. 2000. Navigating negative quantificational space. Linguistics 38:1–32 [Google Scholar]
  52. MacWhinney B. 2000. The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
  53. Naigles LR, Hoff-Ginsberg E. 1998. Why are some verbs learned before other verbs? Effects of input frequency and structure on children’s early verb use. J. Child Lang. 25:95–120 [Google Scholar]
  54. Newport EL, Gleitman H, Gleitman LR. 1977. Mother, I’d rather do it myself: some effects and noneffects of maternal speech style. Talking to Children: Language Input and Acquisitioned. Snow CE, Ferguson CA. 109–50 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  55. Oehrle R. 1976. The grammatical status of the English dative alternation. PhD thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA. 289 pp
  56. Omaki A, Lidz J. 2014. Linking parser development to the acquisition of syntactic knowledge. Lang. Acquis In press [Google Scholar]
  57. Orita N, McKeown R, Feldman N, Lidz J, Boyd-Graber J. 2013. Discovering pronoun categories using discourse information. Presented at Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc., 35th, Berlin
  58. Pearl LS. 2011. When unbiased probabilistic learning is not enough: acquiring a parametric system of metrical phonology. Lang. Acquis. 18:87–120 [Google Scholar]
  59. Pearl LS, Lidz J. 2009. When domain general learning fails and when it succeeds: identifying the contribution of domain specificity. Lang. Learn. Dev. 5:235–65 [Google Scholar]
  60. Pearl LS, Sprouse J. 2013. Syntactic islands and learning biases: combining experimental syntax and computational modeling to investigate the language acquisition problem. Lang. Acquis. 20:23–68 [Google Scholar]
  61. Pearl LS, Weinberg A. 2007. Input filtering in syntactic acquisition: answers from language change modeling. Lang. Learn. Dev. 3:43–72 [Google Scholar]
  62. Phillips C. 1995. Syntax at age two: cross-linguistic differences. MIT Work. Pap. Linguist 26:325–82 [Google Scholar]
  63. Pinker S. 1979. Formal models of language learning. Cognition 7:217–83 [Google Scholar]
  64. Pinker S. 1989. Learnability and Cognition Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  65. Plaster K, Polinsky M, Harizanov B. 2013. Noun classes grow on trees: noun classification in the North-East Caucasus. Language Typology and Historical Contingency: In Honor of Johanna Nicholsed. Bickel B, Grenoble LA, Peterson DA, Timberlake A. 153–70 Amsterdam: Benjamins [Google Scholar]
  66. Poeppel D, Wexler K. 1993. The full competence hypothesis of clause structure in early German. Language 69:1–33 [Google Scholar]
  67. Regier T, Gahl S. 2003. Learning the unlearnable: the role of missing evidence. Cognition 93:147–55 [Google Scholar]
  68. Rowe M. 2012. A longitudinal investigation of the role of quantity and quality of child-directed speech in vocabulary development. Child Dev. 83:1762–74 [Google Scholar]
  69. Saffran J. 2001. The use of predictive dependencies in language learning. J. Mem. Lang. 44:493–515 [Google Scholar]
  70. Saffran J, Aslin RN, Newport EL. 1996. Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science 274:1926–28 [Google Scholar]
  71. Sakas WG, Fodor JD. 2012. Disambiguating syntactic triggers. Lang. Acquis. 19:83–123 [Google Scholar]
  72. Shneidman L, Goldin-Meadow S. 2012. Language input and acquisition in a Mayan village: How important is directed speech?. Dev. Sci. 15:659–73 [Google Scholar]
  73. Shneidman L, Arroyo M, Levine S, Goldin-Meadow S. 2013. What counts as effective input for word learning?. J. Child Lang. 40:672–86 [Google Scholar]
  74. Snow CE. 1999. Social perspectives on the emergence of language. The Emergence of Language MacWhinney B. 257–76 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum [Google Scholar]
  75. Snyder W. 2007. Child Language Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  76. Sutton M, Fetters M, Lidz J. 2012. Parsing for Principle C at 30 months. In Proceedings of the 36th Boston University Conference on Language Development, ed. AK Biller, EY Chung, AE Kimball, pp. 577–89. Cambridge, MA: Cascadilla
  77. Takahashi E. 2009. Beyond statistical learning in the acquisition of syntax. PhD thesis. Univ. Md., College Park. 240 pp
  78. Takahashi E, Lidz J. 2008. Beyond statistical learning in syntax. In Proceedings of GALA 2007: Language Acquisition and Development, A Gavarró, MJ Freitas, pp. 444–54. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Sch
  79. Tenenbaum JB, Griffiths TL. 2001. Generalization, similarity, and Bayesian inference. Behav. Brain Sci. 24:629–40 [Google Scholar]
  80. Thelen E, Smith LB. 2006. Dynamic systems theories. Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical Models of Human Development, ed. W Damon, pp. 258–312. New York: Wiley. 6th ed
  81. Thompson SP, Newport EL. 2007. Statistical learning of syntax: the role of transitional probability. Lang. Learn. Dev. 3:1–42 [Google Scholar]
  82. Tomasello M. 2000. Do young children have adult syntactic competence. Cognition 74:209–53 [Google Scholar]
  83. Uriagereka J. 1988. On government. PhD thesis, Univ. Conn., Storrs. 555 pp
  84. Valian V. 1990. Logical and psychological constraints on the acquisition of syntax. In Language Processing and Language Acquisition, ed. L Frazier, J Villiers, pp. 119–45. Dordrecht, Neth.: Kluwer
  85. Valian V, Casey L. 2003. Young children’s acquisition of wh- questions: the role of structured input. J. Child Lang. 30:117–43 [Google Scholar]
  86. Viau J, Lidz J. 2011. Selective learning in the acquisition of Kannada ditransitives. Language 87:679–714 [Google Scholar]
  87. Weisleder A, Fernald A. 2013. Talking to children matters: Early language experience strengthens processing and builds vocabulary. Psychol. Sci. 24:2143–52 [Google Scholar]
  88. Wexler K, Culicover P. 1980. Formal Principles of Language Acquisition Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  89. Yang C. 2002. Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-125236
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-125236
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error