Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-hzqq2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-17T16:33:12.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Developmental psycholinguistics teaches us that we need multi-method, not single-method, approaches to the study of linguistic representation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2017

Caroline F. Rowland  and
Padraic Monaghan
Caroline F. Rowland
Affiliation:
Language Development Department, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, 6525 XD Nijmegen, Netherlands. caroline.rowland@mpi.nl http://www.mpi.nl/people/rowland-caroline
Padraic Monaghan
Affiliation:
Psychology of Language Department, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, 6525 XD Nijmegen, Netherlands. ESRC LuCiD Centre, Department of Psychology, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YF, United Kingdom. p.monaghan@lancaster.ac.uk http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/staff/monaghan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In developmental psycholinguistics, we have, for many years, been generating and testing theories that propose both descriptions of adult representations and explanations of how those representations develop. We have learnt that restricting ourselves to any one methodology yields only incomplete data about the nature of linguistic representations. We argue that we need a multi-method approach to the study of representation.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e308
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Campbell, A. L. & Tomasello, M. (2001) The acquisition of English dativeconstructions. Applied Psycholinguistics 22:253–67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716401002065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, F., Dell, G. S. & Bock, K. (2006) Becoming syntactic. Psychological Review 113(2):234–72. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conwell, E. & Demuth, K. (2007) Early syntactic productivity: Evidence from dative shift. Cognition 103:163–79. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2006.03.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, A. E. (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Monaghan, P. & Rowland, C. F. (2017) Combining language corpora with experimental and computational approaches for language acquisition research. Language Learning 67(S1):14–39. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peter, M., Chang, F., Pine, J. M., Blything, R. & Rowland, C. F. (2015) When and how do children develop knowledge of verb argument structure? Evidence from verb bias effects in a structural priming task. Journal of Memory and Language 81:1–15. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2014.12.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. (1984) Language learnability and language development. Harvard University Press. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2.Google Scholar
Rowland, C. F., Chang, F., Ambridge, B., Pine, J. M. & Lieven, E. V. M. (2012) The development of abstract syntax: Evidence from structural priming and the lexical boost. Cognition 125(1):49–63. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowland, C. F. & Noble, C. L. (2011) The role of syntactic structure in children's sentence comprehension: Evidence from the dative. Language Learning and Development 7(1):55–75. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441003769411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. C., Monaghan, P. & Huettig, F. (2017a) Complex word recognition behaviour emerges from the richness of the word learning environment. In: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Neural Computation and Psychology Workshop, vol. 22, ed. Twomey, K., Smith, A. C. S., Westermann, G. & Monaghan, P., pp. 99–114. World Scientific.Google Scholar
Smith, A. C., Monaghan, P. & Huettig, F. (2017b) The multimodal nature of spoken word processing in the visual world: Testing the predictions of alternative models of multimodal integration. Journal of Memory and Language 93:276–303. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.08.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, W. & Stromswold, K. (1997) The structure and acquisition of English dative constructions. Linguistic Inquiry 28(2):281–317. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/4178978.Google Scholar
Thothathiri, M. & Snedeker, J. (2008b) Syntactic priming during language comprehension in three- and four-year-old children. Journal of Memory and Language 58(2):188–213. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.06.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2000) Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition 74(3):209–53. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00069-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar