Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-npwhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T08:18:40.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do children really acquire dense neighbourhoods?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2019

Samuel David JONES  and
Silke BRANDT
Samuel David JONES*
Affiliation:
Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Silke BRANDT
Affiliation:
Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
*
*Corresponding author. Sam Jones, Department of Linguistics and English Language, County South, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK, LA1 4YL. E-mail: sam.jones@lancs.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Children learn high phonological neighbourhood density words more easily than low phonological neighbourhood density words (Storkel, 2004). However, the strength of this effect relative to alternative predictors of word acquisition is unclear. We addressed this issue using communicative inventory data from 300 British English-speaking children aged 12 to 25 months. Using Bayesian regression, we modelled word understanding and production as a function of: (i) phonological neighbourhood density, (ii) frequency, (iii) length, (iv) babiness, (v) concreteness, (vi) valence, (vii) arousal, and (viii) dominance. Phonological neighbourhood density predicted word production but not word comprehension, and this effect was stronger in younger children.

Keywords

phonological neighbourhood densityword learningcorpus analysis

Information

Type
Brief Research Reports
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 46 , Issue 6 , November 2019 , pp. 1260 - 1273
Check for updates
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., … Treiman, R. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39(3), 445–59.Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48.Google Scholar
Bennetts, S. K., Mensah, F. K., Westrupp, E. M., Hackworth, N. J., & Reilly, S. (2016). The agreement between parent-reported and directly measured child language and parenting behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1710 <http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01710>..>Google 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. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Retrieved from <http://langcog.stanford.edu/papers_new/braginsky-2016-cogsci.pdf>>Google Scholar
Braginsky, M., Yurovsky, D., Marchman, V., & Frank, M. C. (2018). Consistency and variability in word learning across languages. Retrieved from <https://psyarxiv.com/cg6ah/>..>Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., Warriner, A. B., & Kuperman, V. (2014).Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 904–11.Google Scholar
Bürkner, P.-C. (2017). brms: Bayesian Regression Models using ‘Stan’. CRAN repository. Retrieved from <https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/brms/index.html>..>Google Scholar
Buuren, S. V., & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2010). mice: multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 1–68. Retrieved from <https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mice/mice.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Floccia, C. (2017). Data collected with the Oxford CDI over a course of 5 years in Plymouth Babylab, UK. With the permission of Plunkett, K. and the Oxford CDI from Hamilton, A., Plunkett, K., & Schafer, G., (2000). Infant vocabulary development assessed with a British Communicative Development Inventory: lower scores in the UK than the USA. Journal of Child Language, 27, 689–705.Google Scholar
Fox, J., & Weisberg, S. (2011). An {R} companion to applied regression (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Frank, M. C., Braginsky, M., Yurovsky, D., & Marchman, V. A. (2017). Wordbank: an open repository for developmental vocabulary data. Journal of Child Language, 44(3), 677–94.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. E., Frankish, C. R., Pickering, S. J., & Peaker, S. (1999). Phonotactic influences on short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 25(1), 84–95.Google Scholar
Goodman, J. C., Dale, P. S., & Li, P. (2008). Does frequency count? Parental input and the acquisition of vocabulary. Journal of Child Language, 35(3), 515–31.Google Scholar
Hamilton, A., Plunkett, K., & Schafer, G. (2000). Infant vocabulary development assessed with a British Communicative Development Inventory: lower scores in the UK than the USA. Journal of Child Language, 27, 689–705.Google Scholar
Hoover, J. R., Storkel, H. L., & Hogan, T. P. (2010). A cross-sectional comparison of the effects of phonotactic probability and neighborhood density on word learning by preschool children. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(1), 100–16.Google Scholar
Hunt, R. R., & Worthen, J. B. (Eds.) (2006). Distinctiveness and memory. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. L., & Frank, M. C. (2016). The length of words reflects their conceptual complexity. Cognition, 153, 182–95.Google Scholar
Luce, P. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1998). Recognizing spoken words: the neighborhood activation model. Ear and Hearing, 19(1), 1–36.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Metsala, J. L., & Walley, A. C. (1998). Spoken vocabulary growth and the segmental restructuring of lexical representations: precursors to phonemic awareness and early reading ability. In Metsala, J. L. & Ehri, L. C. (Eds.), Word recognition in beginning literacy (pp. 89–120). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Moors, A., De Houwer, J., Hermans, D., Wanmaker, S., Van Schie, K., Van Harmelen, A.-L., … Brysbaert, M. (2013). Norms of valence, arousal, dominance, and age of acquisuisition for 4,300 Dutch words. Behaviour Research Methods, 45(1), 169–77.Google Scholar
Perry, L. K., Perlman, M., & Lupyan, G. (2015). Iconicity in English and Spanish and its relation to lexical category and age of acquisition. PLoS ONE 10(9). Retrieved from <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0137147>..>Google Scholar
R Core Team (2016). R. Retrieved from <http://www.R-project.org/>>Google Scholar
Sosa, A. V., & Stoel-Gammon, C. (2012). Lexical and phonological effects in early word production. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55(2), 596–608.Google Scholar
Stokes, S. F. (2010). Neighborhood density and word frequency predict vocabulary size in toddlers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53(3), 670–83.Google Scholar
Stokes, S. F. (2014). The impact of phonological neighbourhood density on typical and atypical emerging lexicons. Journal of Child Language, 41(3), 634–57.Google Scholar
Stokes, S. F., Kern, S., & Dos Santos, C. (2012). Extended statistical learning as an account for slow vocabulary growth. Journal of Child Language, 39(1), 105–29.Google Scholar
Storkel, H. L. (2004). Do children acquire dense neighbourhoods? An investigation of similarity neighbourhoods in lexical acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25(2), 201–21.Google Scholar
Storkel, H. L., & Lee, S. (2011). The independent effects of phonotactic probability and neighbourhood density on lexical acquisition by preschool children. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(2), 191–211.Google Scholar
Suárez, L., Tan, S. H., Yap, M. J., & Goh, W. D. (2011). Observing neighborhood effects without neighbors. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 18(3), 605–11.Google Scholar
Takac, M., Knott, A., & Stokes, S. F. (2017). What can neighbourhood density effects tell us about word learning? Insights from a connectionist model of vocabulary development. Journal of Child Language, 44(2), 346–79.Google Scholar
Theakston, A. L., Lieven, E. V, 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(1), 127–52.Google Scholar
Walley, A. C., Metsala, J. L., & Garlock, V. M. (2003). Spoken vocabulary growth: its role in the development of phoneme awareness and early reading ability. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16(1), 5–20.Google Scholar
Warriner, A. B., Kuperman, V., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 English lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 45(4), 1191–207.Google Scholar