Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-s6l46 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T01:28:01.085Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Children's sentence planning: Syntactic correlates of fluency variations*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2009

DANA MCDANIEL ,
CECILE MCKEE  and
MERRILL F. GARRETT
DANA MCDANIEL*
Affiliation:
University of Southern Maine
CECILE MCKEE
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
MERRILL F. GARRETT
Affiliation:
University of Arizona
*
Address for correspondence: Dana McDaniel, University of Southern Maine – Linguistics, PO Box 9300, Portland, Maine 04104-9300, USA. e-mail: dana.mcdaniel@usm.maine.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper argues for broader consideration of children's language production systems and, in that context, describes research on children's planning of syntactic structures. The research presented here measures non-fluency patterns in elicited utterances of varied syntactic type. We describe and interpret several regularities in these patterns for two groups of children (‘young’: three–five-year-olds; and ‘older’: six–eight-year-olds) and an adult comparison group. The evidence indicates a strong correspondence of adult and child responses to structural complexity, both in terms of global fluency measures and in terms of more detailed indicators of planning load. In addition, we report some specific contrasts in the patterning for children and adults that suggest disparities in processing resources and/or in local planning strategies.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , January 2010 , pp. 59 - 94
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Cambridge University Press

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

[*]

The authors wish to thank the tree spirits and the weather gods for maintaining a breathable atmosphere and bearable temperatures. We also thank research assistants Elizabeth O'Malley, Mary Ellen McAllister and Alicia Ouellette from the University of Southern Maine for help in conducting the experiment and coding the data; and Sally Olderbak from the University of Arizona EGAD Laboratory for statistical assistance. Cooperation of the children, parents, teachers and administrators of the Nathan Clifford School and of the USM Child and Family Center in Portland, Maine, is also gratefully acknowledged. Partial support for this research was provided by National Science Foundation grants BCS-0341051 and BCS-0439943.

References

REFERENCES

Beattie, G. (1980). The role of language production processes in the organization of behaviour in face to face interaction. In Butterworth, B. (ed.), Language production: vol. 1, speech and talk, 69–107. London: Academic.Google Scholar
Bernstein, N. E. (1981). Are there constraints on childhood disfluency? Journal of Fluency Disorders 6, 341–50.Google Scholar
Bloodstein, O. (1974). The rules of early stuttering. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 39, 379–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, J. K. (1987). Coordinating words and syntax in speech plans. In Ellis, A. (ed.), Progress in the psychology of language, vol. 3, 337–90. London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bock, J. K. (1991). A sketchbook of production problems. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 20, 141–60.Google Scholar
Bock, J. K. (1996). Language production: Methods and methodologies. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 3, 395–421.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boomer, D. (1965). Hesitation and grammatical encoding. Language and Speech 8, 145–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butterworth, B. (1980). Some constraints on models of language production. In Butterworth, B. (ed.), Language production: vol. 1, speech and talk, 423–59. London: Academic.Google Scholar
Dell, G. (1986). A spreading activation theory retrieval in language production. Psychological Review 93, 283–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, V. & Dell, G. S. (2000). Effect of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production. Cognitive Psychology 40, 296–340.Google Scholar
Ford, M. (1978). Planning units and syntax in sentence production. Doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, M. & Holmes, V. M. (1978). Planning units and syntax in sentence production. Cognition 6, 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, M. F. (1980). Levels of processing in sentence production. In Butterworth, B. (ed.), Language production, vol. 1: speech and talk, 177–220. London: Academic.Google Scholar
Garrett, M. (1982). Production of speech: Observations from normal and pathological language use. In Ellis, A. (ed.), Normality and pathology in cognitive functions, 19–76. London: Academic.Google Scholar
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1972). Pauses, clauses, sentences. Language and Speech 15, 103–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hairer, Martin (2008). Amadeus Pro (Version 1.3.3) [Computer software]. New York: HairerSoft.Google Scholar
Hawkins, P. R. (1971). The syntactic location of hesitation pauses. Language and Speech 14, 277–88.Google Scholar
Jaeger, J. J. (1992). Not by the hair of my hinny hin hin: Some general properties of slips of the tongue in young children. Journal of Child Language 19, 335–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaeger, J. J. (2004). Kids' slips: What young children's slips of the tongue reveal about language development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition 14, 41–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking. From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
Maclay, H. & Osgood, C. (1959). Hesitation phenomena in English speech. Word 15, 19–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, J. C. (1979). Language acquisition in a biological frame of reference. In Fletcher, P. & Garman, M. (eds), Language acquisition, 437–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McDaniel, D., Chiu, B. & Maxfield, T. L. (1995). Parameters for wh-movement types: Evidence from child English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13, 709–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, D. & Lech, D. (2003). The production system's formulation of relative clause structures: Evidence from Polish. Language Acquisition 11, 63–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, D., McKee, C. & Bernstein, J. B. (1998). How children's relatives solve a problem for Minimalism. Language 74, 308–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKee, C. & McDaniel, D. (2001). Resumptive pronouns in English relative clauses. Language Acquisition 9, 113–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKee, C., McDaniel, D. & Snedeker, J. (1998). Relatives children say. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 27, 573–96.Google Scholar
Postma, A. & Kolk, H. (1993). The covert repair hypothesis: Prearticulatory repair processes in normal and stuttered disfluencies. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 36, 472–87.Google Scholar
Rispoli, M. (2003). Changes in the nature of sentence production during the period of grammatical development. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 46, 818–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, L., Marinis, T., Felser, C. & Clahsen, H. (2007). Antecedent priming at trace positions in children's sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 36, 175–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, V. L. & Clark, H. H. (1993). On the course of answering questions. Journal of Memory and Language 32, 25–38.Google Scholar
Stemberger, J. P. (1989). Speech errors in early child language production. Journal of Memory and Language 28, 164–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sturm, J. A. & Seery, C. H. (2007). Speech and articulatory rates of school-age children in conversation and narrative contexts. Language and Speech and Hearing Services in Schools 38, 47–59.Google Scholar
Thornton, R. (1990). Adventures in long-distance moving: The acquisition of complex wh-questions. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Wall, M. J., Starkweather, C. W. & Cairns, H. S. (1981). Syntactic influences on stuttering in young child stutterers. Journal of Fluency Disorders 6, 283–98.Google Scholar
Wijnen, F. (1990). The development of sentence planning. Journal of Child Language 17, 651–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wijnen, F. (1992). Niet vloeiende spraak bij kinderen: planningsproblemen op verschillende niveaus [Disfluent speech in children: Planning difficulties at different levels]. Stem, Spraak, en Taalpathologie 1, 23–41.Google Scholar