Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T20:09:53.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Speech sound characteristics of early words: influence of phonological factors across vocabulary development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2017

Barbara DAVIS ,
Suzanne VAN DER FEEST  and
Hoyoung YI
Barbara DAVIS*
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Austin, USA
Suzanne VAN DER FEEST
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Austin, USA
Hoyoung YI
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Austin, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Barbara Davis, Suzanne van der Feest, University of Texas at Austin – Department of Linguistics, 2504A Whitis Ave. Stop A1100, Austin Texas 78712, United States. e-mail: babs@mail.utexas.edu; suzanne@austin.utexas.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates whether the earliest words children choose to say are mainly words containing sounds they can produce (cf. ‘phonological dominance’ hypotheses), or whether children choose words without regard to their phonological characteristics (cf. ‘lexical dominance’ hypotheses). Phonological properties of words in spontaneous speech from six children age 0;8 to 2;11 were analyzed by comparing sound distributions of consonant place and manner. Word-initial and word-final consonant patterns in children's Word Targets versus Actual Word Forms were analyzed as a function of vocabulary size. Word-initial results showed more overall evidence for phonological dominance. In word-final position, at lower vocabulary sizes, results showed several differences between Word Targets and Actual Word Forms, consistent with lexical dominance. These findings challenge an ‘either–or’ phonological versus lexical dominance approach, and support consideration of a multifactorial set of influences, including different phonological dimensions and word positions, on the words that young children choose to say.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , May 2018 , pp. 673 - 702
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

This work was supported in part by NICHD R-01 HD27733-03 to the first author. We appreciate the statistical support of Sally Amen and Erika Hale of UT Austin's Statistics and Data Science Department. Special thanks to Yvan Rose and the PhonBank team for implementation of Phon analyses and ongoing Phon support. Last, we would like to express our deep appreciation to the children and their families without whom this work would not have been possible. Part of the data from this study was presented at IASCL 2014 in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, at BUCLD 2015 in Boston, Massachusetts, and at ICPC 2016 in Flagstaff, Arizona at the International Child Phonology Conference, 2016.

References

Altvater-Mackensen, N., van der Feest, S. V .H., & Fikkert, P. (2014). Asymmetries in early word recognition: the case of stops and fricatives. Language Learning and Development, 10(2), 149–78.Google Scholar
Aoyama, K., & Davis, B. L. (unpublished observations). Consonant variegations in first words: infants’ actual productions of Consonant–Vowel–Consonant word forms. Journal of Child Language.Google Scholar
Aoyama, K., Peters, A. M., & Winchester, K. S. (2010). Phonological changes during the transition from one-word to productive word combination. Journal of Child Language, 37, 145–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beckman, M. E., Munson, B., & Edwards, J. (2007). The influence of vocabulary growth on developmental changes in types of phonological knowledge. In Cole, J. & Hualde, J. (Eds.), Laboratory Phonology 9 (pp. 241–64). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Creel, S. C., Aslin, R. N., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Heeding the voice of experience: the role of talker variation in lexical access. Cognition, 106(2), 633–64.Google Scholar
Davis, B. L. (2017). A complexity view of ontogeny as a window on phylogeny. In Mufwene, S. S., Coupé, C., & Pellegrino, F. (Eds.), Complexity in language: developmental and evolutionary perspectives (pp. 165–86). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, B. L., & Bedore, L. M. (2013). An emergence approach to phonological acquisition: knowing and doing. New York: Routledge, Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Davis, B. L., MacNeilage, P. F., & Matyear, C. (2002). Acquisition of serial complexity in speech production: a comparison of phonetic and phonological approaches to first word production. Phonetica, 59, 75–107.Google Scholar
De Boysson-Bardies, B., & Vihman, M. M. (1991). Adaptation to language: evidence from babbling and first words in four languages. Language, 67(2), 297–319.Google Scholar
Demuth, K., & Johnson, M. (2003). Truncation to subminimal words in early French. Canadian Journal of Linguistics / Revue canadienne de linguistique, 48(3/4), 211–41.Google Scholar
Edwards, J., Munson, B., & Beckman, M. E. (2011). Lexicon–phonology relationships and dynamics of early language development: a commentary on Stoel-Gammon's ‘Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children’. Journal of Child Language, 38(1), 35–40.Google Scholar
Feldman, H., Campbell, T. F., Kurs-Lasky, M., Dale, P., Colborn, D. K., & Paradise, J. L. (2005). Concurrent and predictive validity of parent reports of child language at ages 2 and 3 years. Child Development, 76(4), 856–68.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Bates, E., Dale, P., Goodman, J., Reznick, J. S., & Thal, D. (2000). Measuring variability in early child language: don't shoot the messenger: [Reply]. Child Development, 71(2), 323–8.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S., Bates, E., Thal, D. J., Pethick, S. J., … & Stiles, J. (1994). Variability in early communicative development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, i–185.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Dale, P. S., Reznick, J. S., Thal, D., Bates, E., & Hartung, J. P. (1993). The MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories: user's guide and technical manual. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Marchman, V., Thal, D., Dale, P., Reznick, S., & Bates, E. (2007). MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories: user's guide and technical manual, 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C., & Farewell, C., 1975. Words and sounds in early language acquisition. Language, 51, 419–39.Google Scholar
Fikkert, J. P. M., & Freitas, M. J. (2006). Allophony and allomorphy cue phonological development: evidence from the European Portuguese vowel system. Journal of Catalan Linguistics, 5, 83–108.Google Scholar
Fikkert, P. (1994). On the acquisition of prosodic structure (Doctoral dissertation). HIL Dissertations 6. Leiden University. Holland Academic Graphics, The Hague.Google Scholar
Fikkert, P., & Levelt, C.C. (2008). How does place fall into place? The lexicon and emergent constraints in children's developing phonological grammar. In Avery, P., Dresher, B. E., & Rice, K. (Eds.), Contrast in phonology: theory, perception, and acquisition, Volume 13 (pp. 231–68). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Fournier, D. A., Skaug, H. J., Ancheta, J., Ianelli, J., Magnusson, A., Maunder, M., Nielsen, A., & Sibert, J. (2012). AD Model Builder: using automatic differentiation for statistical inference of highly parameterized complex nonlinear models. Optimization Methods and Software, 27(2), 233–49.Google Scholar
Gildersleeve-Neumann, C. E., Davis, B. L., & MacNeilage, P. F. (2000). Contingencies governing the production of fricatives, affricates, and liquids in babbling. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21(3), 341–63.Google Scholar
Guidubaldi, J., Newborg, J., Stock, J. R., Svinicki, J., & Wneck, L. (1984). Battelle Developmental Inventory. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.Google Scholar
Kager, R., Pater, J., & Zonneveld, W. (Eds.) (2004). Constraints in phonological acquisition. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kager, R., van der Feest, S. V. H., Fikkert, P., Kerkhoff, A. O., & Zamuner, T. S. (2007). Representations of [Voice]: evidence from acquisition. In van de Weijer, J. & van der Torre, E. J. (Eds.), Voicing in Dutch: (de)voicing phonology, phonetics, and psycholinguistics (Vol. 286) (pp. 41–80). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Kent, R. D., & Bauer, H. R. (1985). Vocalizations of one-year-olds. Journal of Child Language, 12(3), 491–526.Google Scholar
Kern, S, Davis, B. L., & Zink, I. (2010). From babbling to first words in four languages: common trends, cross language and individual differences. In Hombert, J. M. & d'Errico, F. (Eds.), Becoming eloquent (pp. 205–32). Cambridge: John Benjamins Publishers.Google Scholar
Kim, N. (2010). Consonant assimilation in early phonological development: a phonetic perspective (Doctoral dissertation), The University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Kim, N., & Davis, B. L. (2015). A phonetic approach to consonant repetition in early words. Infant Behavior and Development, 40, 193–203.Google Scholar
Ladefoged, P., & Maddieson, I. (1996). The sounds of the world's languages. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Lee, S., Davis, B. L., & MacNeilage, P. F. (2010). Universal production patterns and ambient language influences in babbling: a cross-linguistic study of Korean- and English-learning infants. Journal of Child Language, 35, 591–617.Google Scholar
Lenth, R. V. (2015). lsmeans: Least-Squares Means. R package (version 2.21). Retrieved from <https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lsmeans/lsmeans.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Leonard, L. B., Schwartz, R. G., Morris, B., & Chapman, K. (1981). Factors influencing early lexical acquisition: lexical orientation and phonological composition. Child Development, 52(3), 882–7.Google Scholar
Levelt, C. (1994). On the acquisition of place (Doctoral dissertation). HIL Dissertations 8. Leiden University, Holland Academic Graphics, The Hague.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(1), 1–38.Google Scholar
Locke, J. L. (1983). Phonological acquisition and change. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Locke, J. L. (1989). Babbling and early speech: continuity and individual differences. First Language, 9, 191–205.Google Scholar
MacNeilage, P. F., & Davis, B. L. (2000). On the origin of internal structure of word forms. Science, 288(5465), 527–31.Google Scholar
Martinez, H. D. R. (2015). Analyzing interactions of fitted models. Retrieved from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/phia/vignettes/phia.pdf.Google Scholar
McCune, L., & Vihman, M. M. (2001). Early phonetic and lexical development: a productivity approach. Journal of Speech, Language, & Hearing Research, 44, 670–84.Google Scholar
Meltzoff, A. N., Kuhl, P. K., Movellan, J., & Sejnowski, T. J. (2009). Foundations for a new science of learning. Science, 325(5938), 284–8.Google Scholar
Munson, B., Edwards, J., Beckman, M. E., Cohn, A. C., Fougeron, C., & Huffman, M. K. (2011). Phonological representations in language acquisition: climbing the ladder of abstraction. In Cohn, A. C., Fougeron, C., & Huffman, M. K. (Eds.), Handbook of laboratory phonology (pp. 288–309). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nazzi, T., & Bertoncini, J. (2009). Phonetic specificity in early lexical acquisition: new evidence from consonants in coda positions. Language and Speech, 52(4), 463–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pierrehumbert, J. (2001). Exemplar dynamics: word frequency, lenition, and contrast. In Bybee, J. & Hopper, P. (Eds.), Frequency effects and the emergence of lexical structure (pp. 137–57). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Redford, M. A., & Diehl, R. L. (1999). The relative perceptual distinctiveness of initial and final consonants in CVC syllables. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 106(3), 1555–65.Google Scholar
Rose, Y., MacWhinney, B., Byrne, R., Hedlund, G., Maddocks, K., O'Brien, P., & Wareham, T. (2006). Introducing Phon: a software solution for the study of phonological acquisition. In Bamman, D., Magnitskaia, T., & Zaller, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 489–500). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Roug, L., Landberg, I., & Lundberg, L. J. (1989). Phonetic development in early infancy: a study of four Swedish children during the first eighteen months of life. Journal of Child Language, 16(1), 19–40.Google Scholar
Sander, E. K. (1972). When are speech sounds learned? Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 37(1), 55–63.Google Scholar
Schwartz, R. G., & Leonard, L. B. (1982). Do children pick and choose? An examination of phonological selection and avoidance in early lexical acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 9(2), 319–36.Google Scholar
Schwartz, R., Leonard, L., Frome Loeb, D., & Swanson, L. A. (1987). Attempted sounds are sometimes not: an expanded view of phonological selection and avoidance. Journal of Child Language, 14, 411–18.Google Scholar
Scobbie, J. M., Gibbon, F., & William, J. (2000). Covert contrast as a stage in the acquisition of phonetics and phonology. In Broe, M. B. & Pierrehumber, J. B. (Eds.), Papers in Laboratory Phonology V: Acquisition and the lexicon, 5 (pp. 303–14). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Song, J. Y., Demuth, K., & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2012). The development of acoustic cues to coda contrasts in young children learning American English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(4), 3036–50.Google Scholar
Stoel-Gammon, C. (1985). Phonetic inventories, 15–24 months: a longitudinal study. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 28, 505–12.Google Scholar
Stoel-Gammon, C. (2011). Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children. Journal of Child Language, 38, 1–34.Google Scholar
Stokes, S. F. (2010). Neighborhood density and word frequency predict vocabulary size in toddlers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53, 670–83.Google Scholar
Stokes, S. F. (2014). The impact of phonological neighborhood density on typical and atypical emerging lexicons. Journal of Child Language, 41(3), 634–57.Google Scholar
Storkel, H. L. (2009). Developmental differences in the effects of phonological, lexical, and semantic variables on word learning by infants. Journal of Child Language, 36, 291–321.Google Scholar
Storkel, H. L., & Hoover, J. R. (2011). The influence of part-word phonotactic probability / neighborhood density on word learning by preschool children varying in expressive vocabulary. Journal of Child Language, 38, 628–43.Google Scholar
Storkel, H. L., & Lee, S. Y. (2011). The independent effects of phonotactic probability and neighborhood density on lexical acquisition by preschool children. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26, 191–211.Google Scholar
Swingley, D. (2005). 11-month-olds’ knowledge of how familiar words sound. Developmental Science, 8(5), 432–43.Google Scholar
Swingley, D. (2009). Onsets and codas in 1.5-year-olds’ word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 252–69.Google Scholar
Teixeira, E. R., & Davis, B. L. (2002). Early sound patterns in the speech of two Brazilian Portuguese speakers, Language & Speech, 45, 179–204.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M. (1992). Early syllables and the construction of phonology. In Furguson, C. A., Menn, L., & Stoel-Gammon, C. (Eds.), Phonological development: models, research, implications (pp. 393–422). Timonium, MD: York Press.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M. (1996). Phonological development: the origins of language in the child. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M. (2009). Word learning and the origins of phonological system. In Foster-Cohen, S. (Ed.), Advances in language acquisition (pp. 235–67). Luton: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M. (2016). Phonological templates in development. In Aronoff, M. (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia (pp. 41–52). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M., & Croft, W. (2007). Phonological development: toward a ‘radical’ templatic phonology. Linguistics, 45(4), 683–725.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. M., Ferguson, C. E., & Elbert, M. (1986). Phonological development from babbling to speech: common tendencies and individual differences. Applied Psycholinguistics, 7, 3–40.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Davis et al. supplementary material

Appendix

Download Davis et al. supplementary material(File)
File 18.3 KB