Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-72crv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T02:54:02.467Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transitivity in child language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2026

David Ingram
David Ingram*
Affiliation:
Institute for Childhood Aphasia Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The holophrastic nature of children's one-word utterances has long been recognized by linguists. The child will use gesture, intonation, and a single word to convey a variety of messages. Syntactic models of grammar, however, are not equipped to capture adequately this early stage of language development. Fillmore's case grammar comes closer, but is still based on the syntactic category of verb in the deep structure. It is suggested that Fillmore's model can be adapted to account for this early stage if verb is replaced by a semantic category. This category is semantic transitivity, which designates a proposition as communicating either an act or a state. With this adaptation made, it is also suggested how gestures and intonation can be formally included in the semantic model for representing one-word utterances. An analysis is then presented of the one-word utterances recorded by Leopold. The results show that children's early one-word utterances convey states, while later ones refer to actions.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 47 , Issue 4 , December 1971 , pp. 888 - 910
Copyright
Copyright © 1971 by Linguistic Society of America

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

Anderson, John. 1968. Ergative and nominative in English. Journal of Linguistics 4.1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bach, Emmon. 1968. Nouns and noun phrases. In Bach and Harms, 91–122.Google Scholar
Bach, Emmon, and Harms, Robert (eds.) 1968. Universals in linguistic theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Bellugi, Ursula, and Brown, Roger (eds.) 1964. The acquisition of language. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 29:1.Google Scholar
Bloom, Lois. 1970. Language development: form and function in emerging grammars. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Braine, Martin. 1963. The ontogeny of English phrase structure: the first phase. Lg. 39.1–13.Google Scholar
Brown, Roger. 1957. Linguistic determinism and the parts of speech. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology 55.1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger, and Bellugi, Ursula. 1966. Three processes in the child's acquisition of syntax. New directions in the study of language, ed. by Lenneberg, Eric, 131–61. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, John, and Fraser, Colin. 1964. The acquisition of syntax. In Bellugi & Brown, 79–92.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, D. 1900. The child. New York: Scribner's.Google Scholar
Champneys, F. 1881. Notes on an infant. Mind 6.104–7.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1964. Formal discussion. In Bellugi and Brown, 35–39.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Decroly, O. 1932. Études de psychogenèse. Bruxelles: Lamertin.Google Scholar
Deville, G. 1890. Notes sur le développement du langage. Revue de Linguistique et de Philologie Comparée 23.330–43, 24.10–42, 128-43, 242-57, 300–20.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles. 1968. The case for case. In Bach and Harms, 1–88.Google Scholar
Gruber, Jeffrey. 1966. Playing with distinctive features in the babbling of infants. Quarterly Progress Report, MIT Research Laboratory of Electronics, 81.181–6.Google Scholar
Hall, Robert S. 1891. Notes on the study of infants. Pedagogical Seminary 1.127–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, M. 1880. A contribution to infantile linguistics. Transactions of the American Philological Society 11.5–17.Google Scholar
Ingram, David. 1971. Toward a theory of person deixis. Papers in Linguistics 4.37–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, O. 1924. The philosophy of grammar. New York.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Eleanor. 1969. The role of intonation in the acquisition of language. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1968. Linguistic universals and linguistic change. In Bach and Harms, 171–202.Google Scholar
Leopold, Werner. 1939-49. Speech development of a bilingual child. 3 vols. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. 1951. Infant speech. 2nd edition. New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Lukens, H. 1896. Preliminary report on the learning of language. Pedagogical Seminary 3.424–60.Google Scholar
Lynip, A. 1951. The use of magnetic devices in the collection and analysis of preverbal utterances of an infant. Genetic Psychology Monographs 44.221–62.Google ScholarPubMed
Lyons, John. 1968. Theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Wick, and Ervin, Susan. 1964. The development of grammar in child language. In Bellugi and Brown, 9–34.Google Scholar
Moore, K. 1896. The mental development of a child. Psychological Review, Monograph Supplements 1:3, part 4, 115–45.Google Scholar
Murai, J. 1960. Speech development of infants. Psychologia 3.29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelsma, J. 1910. A child's vocabulary and its development. Pedagogical Seminary 17.328–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollock, F. 1878. An infant's progress in language. Mind 3.392–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preyer, W. 1890. The mind of the child: part 2, The development of the intellect. Translated by H. W. Brown. New York: Appleton. (Originally published as Die Seele des Kindes, Leipzig, 1882.)Google Scholar
Romanes, G. J. 1889. Mental evolution in man; origin of human faculty. New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts: an essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, Dan. 1966. The acquisition of Russian as a native language. The genesis of language, ed. by Smith, Frank and Miller, George, 129–48. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan. 1967. A field manual for the cross-cultural study of communicative competence. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Sozinskey, T. 1882. Mental aspects of infantile unfoldment. Medical and Surgical Reporter 46.309–13.Google Scholar
Stern, W. 1924. Psychology of early childhood. London: Unwin.Google Scholar
Stevenson, A. 1893. The speech of children. Science 21.118–20.Google ScholarPubMed
Sully, J. 1896. Studies in childhood. New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
Taine, H. 1876. On the acquisition of language by children. Mind 1.252–9.Google Scholar
Tissie, P. 1901. La science du geste. Revue Scientifique 16.289–300.Google Scholar
Tracy, F. 1893. The psychology of childhood. Boston: Heath.Google Scholar
Trettien, A. 1904. Psychology of the language interest of children. Pedagogical Seminary 11.113–77.Google Scholar
Truby, H., and Lind, J. 1965. Cry sounds of the newborn infant. (Acta Pediatrica Scandinavica, Supplement 163, ed. by Lind, J..) Sweden: Almquist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, P. 1969. The natural history of crying and other vocalizations in early infancy. Determinants of infant behavior, 4, ed. by Foss, B. M., 81–109. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Wyma. 1881. The mental development of the infant of today. Journal of Psychological Medicine and Mental Pathology 7.62–9.Google Scholar