Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-v4w92 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-21T11:43:37.594Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Identifying formulas in first language acquisition*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Tina Hickey
Tina Hickey*
Affiliation:
Linguistics Institute of Ireland
*
Institiúid Teangeolaíochta Éireann/Linguistics Institute of Ireland, 31 Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

With the increase in interest in formulas, or apparently non-productive utterances in children's speech, a range of definitions has emerged and sometimes conflicting criteria have been proposed for their identification. These definitions of formulas are compared, and the criteria of Brown (1973), Wong Fillmore (1976), Peters (1983) and Plunkett (1990) for the recognition of formulas are reviewed. A preference rule System is proposed, which distinguishes necessary, typical and graded conditions for the recognition of formulas. Using these conditions, some of the formulas found in the data of one child acquiring Irish between 1;4 and 2;1 are examined. Issues such as length of units, frequency of occurrence and appropriateness of use are discussed. The methods developed in this study could be used to assess the importance of formulas in the language acquisition of other children.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , February 1993 , pp. 27 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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

[*]

Earlier versions of this article were presented at the Ninth World Congress of the International Association of Applied Linguistics (AILA) 1990 and the Fifth International Congress for the Study of Child Language 1990. I am grateful to Michael Garman, Bernard Spolsky and other conference participants for their comments.

References

REFERENCES

Bates, E., Bretherton, I. & Snyder, L. (1988). From first words to grammar: individual differences and dissociable mechanisms. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Bloom, L. (1970). Language development: form and function in emerging grammars. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., Lightbown, P. & Hood, L. (1975). Structure and variation in child language. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 40, (Serial No. 160).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1976). Meaning and memory. Forum Linguisticum 1, 1–14.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. & Sears, D. (1981). Aspects of language. (3rd edn) New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Bretherton, I., McNew, S., Snyder, L. & Bates, E. (1983). Individual differences at 20 months: analytic and holistic strategies in language acquisition. Journal of Child Language 10, 293–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: the early stages. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Brown, R. & Hanlon, C. (1970). Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child speech. In Hayes, J. R. (ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clark, R. (1974). Performing without competence. Journal of Child Language 1, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R. (1982). Theory and method in child language research: are we assuming too much? In Kuczaj, S. (ed.), Language development, Vol. I: Syntax and semantics. New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, A. (1981). Item learning and System learning. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 10, 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dale, P. (1985). Productivity analysis of early child language (PANEL): user's guide. IBM versions. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
Elbers, L. (1990). Language acquisition: blends, overgeneralizations and self-produced input. In Coopmans, P., Schouten, B. & Lonneveld, W. (eds), OTS Yearbook 1900. Dordrecht: ICG.Google Scholar
Garman, M. (1987). The role of linguistics in speech therapy: from assessment to remediation. In Grunwell, P. & Jones, A. (eds), The functional evaluation of language disorder. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Hakuta, K. (1974). Prefabricated patterns and the emergence of structure in second language learning. Language Learning 24, 287–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampson, J. & Nelson, K. (1990). Early relations between mother talk and language development: masked and unmasked. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 29, 78–85.Google Scholar
Hatch, E. (1972). Some studies in language learning. UCLA Workpapers in Teaching English as a Second Language 6, 29–36.Google Scholar
Ingram, D. (1981). Early patterns of grammatical development. In Stark, R. (ed.), Language behavior in infancy and early childhood. New York: Elsevier North-Holland.Google Scholar
Ingram, D. (1989). First language acquisition: method, description and explanation. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Jesperson, D. (1924). The philosophy of grammar. (Reprinted 1965.) New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. & Scarcella, S. (1978). On routines and patterns in language acquisition and performance. Language Learning 28, 283–300.Google Scholar
Lindblom, B. (1985). Phonetic universals in vowel Systems. In Ohala, J. J. (ed.), Experimental phonology. San Francisco: Academic Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1978). The acquisition of morphophonology. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 43, Serial no. 174.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 38, Serial no. 149.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1981). Individual differences in language development: implications for acquisition and development. Developmental Psychology 17, 170–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, A. (1983). The units of language acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Peters, A. (1990). The morphosyntactic development of a phrasal child. Paper presented at the Fifth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, Budapest.Google Scholar
Pine, J. (1990). Non-referential children: slow or different? Paper presented at the Fifth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, Budapest.Google Scholar
Pine, J. & Lieven, E. (1990). Referential style at 13 months: why age-defined cross-sectional measures are inappropriate for the study of strategy differences in early language development. Journal of Child Language 17, 625–31.Google Scholar
Plunkett, K. (1990). The segmentation problem in early language acquisition. Center for Research in Language Newsletter 5, No. 1.Google Scholar
Snow, C. (1986). Conversations with children. In Fletcher, P. & Garman, M. (eds), Language acquisition (2nd edn) Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Wong Fillmore, L. (1976). The second time round: cognitive and social strategies in second language learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar