Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T21:33:03.268Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The acquisition of morphology by a bilingual child: A whole-word approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Marilyn May Vihman
Marilyn May Vihman*
Affiliation:
Stanford University
*
Marilyn May Vihman, Department of Linguistics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The avoidance of inflectional markers, a kind of “macrodevelopment” in the acquisition of morphology, is described in this analysis of the strategies displayed by a bilingual child simultaneously exposed to Estonian and to English. A whole-word approach was manifested in: the acquisition of postpositions before case endings; the learning of pronominal case and other suppletive or irregular forms before regular markers were used; the borrowing of the analytic English construction with have into Estonian; and the preference for did + verb for the expression of the English past tense. In interpreting these data the factor of bilingualism per se is weighed against the possible existence of a whole-word approach to language in general as a manifestation of a particular cognitive style.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , June 1982 , pp. 141 - 160
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Bellugi, U. The acquisition of negation. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Harvard University, 1967.Google Scholar
Bendix, E. H.Componential analysis of general vocabulary: the semantic structure of a set of verbs in English, Hindi, and Japanese. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Bloom, L.Language development: form and function in emerging grammars. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., Lightbown, P., & Hood, L.Structure and variation in child language. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1975, 40 (1–2, Serial No. 160).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branigan, G. If this kid is in the one word period… so how come he's saying whole sentences? Paper presented at the Second Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 1977.Google Scholar
Braunwald, S. R., & Brislin, R. W. The diary method updated. In Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B. (Eds.), Developmental Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Brown, R.A first language: the early stages. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R., & Hanlon, C. Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child speech. In Hayes, J. R. (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1970.Google Scholar
Burling, R.Language development of a Garo and English-speaking child. Word, 1959, 15, 45–68. Reprinted in E. M. Hatch (Ed.), Second language acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cazden, C. B.The acquisition of noun and verb inflections. Child Development, 1968, 39, 435–558.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cazden, C. B.Child language and education. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. Locationals: a study of the relations between ‘existential’, ‘locative’ and ‘possessive’ constructions. Working Papers on Language Universals, Stanford University, 1970, 3, L1–L37.Google Scholar
Clark, R.Performing without competence. Journal of Child Language, 1974, 1, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R.What's the use of imitation? Journal of Child Language, 1977, 4, 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
deVilliers, J. G., & deVilliers, P. A.A cross sectional study of the acquisition of grammatical morphemes in child speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1973, 2, 267–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dore, J.A pragmatic description of early language development. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1974, 3, 343–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantini, A. E.Language acquisition of a bilingual child: A sociolinguistic perspective (to age 5). Brattleboro, Vt.: The Experimental Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A., Peizer, D. B., & Weeks, T. E.Model and replica phonological grammars of a child's first words. Lingua, 1973, 31, 35–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Kempler, D., & Wang, W. S-Y. (Eds.), Individual differences in language ability and language behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Garman, M. Early grammatical development. In Fletcher, P. & Garman, M. (Eds.), Language acquisition: Studies in first language development. Cambridge University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Haugen, E.The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language, 1950, 26, 210–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horgan, D. Nouns: Love 'em or leave 'em. In Teller, V. & White, S. J. (Eds.), Studies in child language and multilingualism. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1980, 345.Google Scholar
Imedadze, N.On the psychological nature of child speech formation under condition of exposure to two languages. International Journal of Psychology, 1967, 2, 129–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reprinted inHatch, E. M. (Ed.), Second language acquisition. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1978.Google Scholar
Lehiste, I.‘Being’ and ‘having’ in Estonian. Foundations of Language, 1969, 5, 324–341.Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B., Newhoff, M., & Mesalam, L.Individual differences in early child phonology. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1980, 1, 7–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leopold, W. F.Speech development of a bilingual child, IV: Diary from age 2. Evanston, II.: Northwestern University Press, 1949.Google Scholar
Macken, M. A.Permitted complexity in phonological development: one child's acquisition of Spanish consonants. Lingua, 1978, 44, 219–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macken, M. A.Developmental reorganization of phonology: a hierarchy of basic units of acquisition. Lingua, 1979, 49, 11–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masica, C. P.Defining a linguistic area: South Asia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976.Google Scholar
Murrell, M.Language acquisition in a trilingual environment: notes from a case study. Studia Linguistica, 1966, 20, 9–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K.Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1973, 38 (1–2, Serial no. 149).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K.Individual differences in language development: implications for development and language. Developmental Psychology, 1981, 17, 170–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, A.Language learning strategies. Language, 1977, 53, 560–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, A.The units of language acquisition. University of Hawaii Working Papers in Linguistics, 1980, 12, 1.Google Scholar
Pitthan, I. The German, English and mixed sentences of a two-year-old. Unpublished manuscript. Stanford University, 1980.Google Scholar
Ramer, A. L. H.Syntactic styles in emerging languages. Journal of Child Language, 1976, 3, 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robins, R. H.General linguistics: An introductory survey. Bloomington Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1964.Google Scholar
Schwartz, R. G., Leonard, L. B., Wilcox, M. J., & Folger, M. K.Again and again: reduplication in child phonology. Journal of Child Language, 1980, 7, 75–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slama-Cazacu, T.The oblique cases in the evolution of child language. Revue de Linguistique, 1962, 7, 71–89.Google Scholar
Snow, C. E., & Hoefnagel-Höhle, M.Individual differences in second-language ability: a factor-analytic study. Language and Speech, 1979, 22, 151–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Starr, S.The relationship of single words to two-word sentences. Child Development, 1975, 46, 701–708.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vihman, E.Estonian quantity re-viewed. Foundations of Language, 1974, 11, 415–432.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M.On the acquisition of Estonian. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 1971, 3, 51–94.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M.From pre-speech to speech: on early phonology. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development. 1976, 12, 230–243.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M. Sound change and child language. In Traugott, E. C., Lebrum, R., & Shepherd, S. (Eds.), Papers from the Fourth International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins BV, 1980.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M.Phonology and the development of the lexicon: evidence from children's errors. Journal of Child Language, 1981, 8, 239–264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vihman, M. M. Formulas in first and second language acquisition. In Obler, L. & Menn, L. (Eds.), Exceptional language and linguistics. New York: Academic Press, in press.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M., & McLaughlin, B. Bilingualism and second language acquisition in preschool children. In Brainerd, C. J. (Ed.), Verbal processes in children. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1982.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M., Macken, M., Miller, R., & Simmons, H. From babbling to speech: a reassessment of the continuity issue. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistics Society of America, New York, 1981.Google Scholar
Waterson, N.Child phonology: a prosodic view. Journal of Linguistics, 1971, 7, 177–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, U.Languages in contact: findings and problems. The Hague: Mouton, 1966.Google Scholar