Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-5zjcf Total loading time: 0.341 Render date: 2022-08-08T08:37:52.655Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Phonological selectivity in the acquisition of English clusters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2019

Itamar SHATZ*
Affiliation:
Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Cambridge University
*
9 West Road, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB3 9DP, United Kingdom. E-mail: is442@cam.ac.uk

Abstract

Phonological selectivity is a phenomenon where children preselect which target words they attempt to produce. The present study examines selectivity in the acquisition of complex onsets and codas in English, and specifically in the acquisition of biconsonantal (CC) clusters in each position compared to triconsonantal (CCC) clusters. The data come from the naturalistic productions of three English-speaking children. The results indicate that children only attempt to produce target tokens with a CCC onset after they have successfully produced target tokens with a CC onset, and that the same occurs in the case of codas. Frequency, morphological complexity, sonority, and /s/ clusters were examined and ruled out as possible explanations of these acquisition patterns. Overall, this suggests that children are selective in their target words, and only attempt to produce words that contain a cluster after they have produced words containing a shorter cluster of the same type (i.e., onset/coda).

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

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

Adam, G., & Bat-El, O. (2009). When do universal preferences emerge in language development? The acquisition of Hebrew stress. Brill's Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 1, 255–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B., Kidd, E., Rowland, C. F., & Theakston, A. L. (2015). The ubiquity of frequency effects in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 42, 239–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barlow, J. A. (2001). The structure of /s/-sequences: evidence from a disordered system. Journal of Child Language, 28, 291324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bat-El, O. (2012). The Sonority Dispersion Principle in the acquisition of Hebrew word-final codas. In Parker, S. (Ed.), The sonority controversy (pp. 319–44). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, M. (2012). Target selection in Error Selective Learning. Brill's Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 4, 120–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, M., & Tessier, A.-M. (2011). Trajectories of faithfulness in child-specific phonology. Phonology, 28, 163–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borowsky, T. J. (1989). Structure preservation and the syllable coda in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 7, 145–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braginsky, M., Yurovsky, D., Marchman, V. A., & Frank, M. C. (2016). From uh-oh to tomorrow: predicting age of acquisition for early words across languages. In Papafragou, A., Grodner, D., Mirman, D., & Trueswell, J. C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 16911696). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society. Online <https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2016/index.html>.Google Scholar
Brown, T. (2012). The role of syllable structure in the acquisition of American English by three native Amharic speakers. Linguistic Portfolios, 1, 118.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N. (1992). The sonority cycle and syllable organization. In Dressler, W. U., Luschützky, H. C., Pfeiffer, O. E., & Rennison, J. R. (Eds.), Phonologica 1988: proceedings of the 6th International Phonology Meeting (pp. 6376). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clements, G. N., & Keyser, S. J. (1983). Cv phonology: a generative theory of the syllable. Cambridge, MA: Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, MIT Press.Google Scholar
CMU Pronouncing Dictionary. (2014). Version 0.7b. Carnegie Mellon University. Available at <http://www.speech.cs.cmu.edu/cgi-bin/cmudict> .+.>Google Scholar
Cohen, E.-G. (2012). Vowel harmony and universality in Hebrew acquisition. Brill's Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 4, 729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, E.-G. (2015). Phoneme complexity and frequency in the acquisition of Hebrew rhotics. Journal of Child Language Acquisition and Development, 3, 111.Google Scholar
Compton, A. J., & Streeter, M. (1977). Child phonology: data collection and preliminary analyses (Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 13). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Dobrich, W., & Scarborough, H. (1992). Phonological characteristics of words young children say. Journal of Child Language, 19, 597616.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferguson, C. A., & Farwell, C. B. (1975). Words and sounds in early language acquisition. Language, 51, 419–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, P., Chan, C., Wong, P., Stokes, S., Tardif, T., & Leung, S. (2004). The interface between phonetic and lexical abilities in early Cantonese language development. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 18, 535–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gafni, C. (2015). Child Phonology Analyzer: processing and analyzing transcribed speech. In Proceedings of the 18th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 15). University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Gafni, C. (2019). Child Phonology Analyzer [computer program]. Retrieved from <https://chengafni.wordpress.com/cpa>..>Google Scholar
Gierut, J. A., & Dale, R. A. (2007). Comparability of lexical corpora: word frequency in phonological generalization. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 21, 423–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gnanadesikan, A. (2004). Markedness and faithfulness constraints in child phonology. In Kager, R., Pater, J., & Zonneveld, W. (Eds.), Constraints in phonological acquisition (pp. 73108). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goad, H., & Rose, Y. (2004). Acquisition of left-edge clusters in West Germanic. In Kager, R., Pater, J., & Zonneveld, W. (Eds.), Constraints in phonological acquisition (pp. 109–57). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goad, H., & Shimada, A. (2014). /s/ can be a vocoid. In Iyer, J. & Kusmer, L. (Eds.), NELS 44: Proceedings of the Forty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (pp. 135–48). Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Gordon, P. (1985). Level-ordering in lexical development. Cognition, 21, 7393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gregová, R. (2006). The generative and the structuralist approach to the syllable: a comparative analysis of English and Slovak. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Gregová, R. (2010). A comparative analysis of consonant clusters in English and in Slovak. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov, 3, 7984.Google Scholar
Hall, T. A. (2002). Against extrasyllabic consonants in German and English. Phonology, 19, 3375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ito, J. (1986). Syllable theory in prosodic phonology (Doctoral dissertation). University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Retrieved from <https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations/AAI8701171>..>Google Scholar
Kay-Raining, E., & Robin, S. (1998). Partial representations and phonological selectivity in the comprehension of 13- to 16-month-olds. First Language, 18, 105–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiparsky, P., & Menn, L. (1977). On the acquisition of phonology. In Macnamara, J. (Ed.), Language learning and thought (pp. 4778). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kirk, C., & Demuth, K. (2003). Onset/Coda asymmetries in the acquisition of clusters. In Beachley, B., Brown, A., & Conlin, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Online <http://www.cascadilla.com/bucld27toc.html>.Google Scholar
Kuperman, V., Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H., & Brysbaert, M. (2012). Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 978–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leonard, L. B., Schwartz, R. G., Chapman, K., Rowan, L. E., Prelock, P. A., Terrell, B., … & Messick, C. (1982). Early lexical acquisition in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 25, 554–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levelt, C. C., Schiller, N. O., & Levelt, W. J. (2000). The acquisition of syllable types. Language Acquisition, 8, 237–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, P., & Shirai, Y. (2000). The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieven, E. (2010). Input and first language acquisition: evaluating the role of frequency. Lingua, 120, 2546–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: the neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19, 136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macken, M., & Ferguson, C. A. (1983). Cognitive aspects of phonological development: model, evidence, and issue. In Nelson, K. (Ed.), Children's language (pp. 256–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
McLeod, S., Doorn, J. Van, & Reed, V. A. (2001). Normal acquisition of consonant clusters. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 10, 99110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mel’čuk, I. (2006). Explanatory combinatorial dictionary. In Sica, G. (Ed.), Open problems in linguistics and lexicography (pp. 225355). Monza: Polimetrica.Google Scholar
Mel’čuk, I. (2013). Semantics: from meaning to text. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ota, M., & Green, S. J. (2013). Input frequency and lexical variability in phonological development: a survival analysis of word-initial cluster production. Journal of Child Language, 40, 539–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oz, H. (2014). Morphological awareness and some implications for English language teaching. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 136, 98103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pater, J. (1997). Minimal violation and phonological development. Language Acquisition, 6, 201–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redford, M. A., & Miikkulainen, R. (2007). Effects of acquisition rate on emergent structure in phonological development. Language, 83, 737–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, R. G. (1988). Phonological factors in early lexical acquisition. In Smith, M. D. & Locke, J. L. (Eds.), The emergent lexicon: the child's development of a linguistic vocabulary (Developmental Psychology Series) (pp. 185222). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Shibimoto, J. S., & Olmsted, D. L. (1978). Lexical and syllabic patterns in phonological acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 5, 417–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, A. B., Hand, L., Freilinger, J. J., Bernthal, J. E., & Bird, A. (1991). The Iowa Articulation Norms Project and its Nebraska replication. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 34, 779–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosa, A. V., & Stoel-Gammon, C. (2012). Lexical and phonological effects in early word production. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55, 596608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steriade, D. (1982). Greek prosidies and the nature of syllabification. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Storkel, H. L. (2004). Do children acquire dense neighborhoods? An investigation of similarity neighborhoods in lexical acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 201–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundara, M., Demuth, K., & Kuhl, P. K. (2011). Sentence-position effects on children's perception and production of English third person singular –s. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 5571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tessier, A.-M. (2006). Stages of phonological acquisition and error-selective learning. In Baumer, D., Montero, D., & Scanlon, M. (Eds.), Proceedings of WCCFL25 (pp. 408–16). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Tessier, A.-M. (2009). Frequency of violation and constraint-based phonological learning. Lingua, 119, 638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vihman, M. M., Depaolis, R. A., & Keren-Portnoy, T. (2014). The role of production in infant word learning. Language Learning, 64, 121–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wickham, H. (2009). ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yavaş, M. (1995). Phonological selectivity in the first fifty words of a bilingual child. Language and Speech, 38, 189202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Shatz supplementary material

Shatz supplementary material 1

Download Shatz supplementary material(File)
File 284 KB
Supplementary material: File

Shatz supplementary material

Shatz supplementary material 2

Download Shatz supplementary material(File)
File 17 KB

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Phonological selectivity in the acquisition of English clusters
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Phonological selectivity in the acquisition of English clusters
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Phonological selectivity in the acquisition of English clusters
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *