Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-6c7dr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-11T10:12:48.050Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phonological Variation in Child-Directed Speech

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2026

Paul Foulkes ,
Gerard Docherty  and
Dominic Watt
Paul Foulkes*
Affiliation:
University of York
Gerard Docherty*
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
Dominic Watt*
Affiliation:
University of Aberdeen
*
Foulkes, Department of Language and Linguistic Science University of York York YO10 5DD, UK [pf11@york.ac.uk]
Docherty, School of Education, Communication and Language Sciences University of Newcastle upon Tyne Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK [g.j.docherty@ncl.ac.uk]
Watt, School of Language and Literature University of Aberdeen Aberdeen AB24 3UB, UK [d.watt@abdn.ac.uk]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Segmental features of child-directed speech (CDS) were studied in a corpus drawn from thirty-nine mothers living in Tyneside, England. Focus was on the phonetic variants used for (t) in word-medial and word-final prevocalic contexts since it is known that these variants display clear sociolinguistic patterning in the adult community. Variant usage in CDS was found to differ markedly from that in interadult speech. Effects were also found with respect to the age and gender of the children being addressed. Speech to girls generally contained more standard variants than speech to boys, which, by contrast, contained higher rates of vernacular variants. The differentiation by gender was most apparent for the youngest children. The findings are assessed in comparison to other studies of CDS. It has previously been claimed that modifications made in the CDS register help children to learn linguistic structures and also to learn that speech is a social activity. Our findings suggest that CDS may play an additional role, providing boys and girls as young as 2;0 with differential opportunities to learn the social-indexical values of sociolinguistic variables.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 81 , Issue 1 , March 2005 , pp. 177 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 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

Allen, William. 2005. Phonological variation and change in the speech of Tyne side adolescents. Newcastle, UK: University of Newcastle dissertation, to appear.Google Scholar
Andruski, Jean E., Kuhl, Patricia K.; and Hayashi, Akiko. 1999. The acoustics of vowels in Japanese women’s speech to infants and adults. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, 2177–79. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Baran, Jane A., Laufer, Marsha Z.; and Daniloff, Ray. 1977. Phonological contrastivity in conversation: A comparative study of voice onset time. Journal of Phonetics 5. 339–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bard, Ellen Gurman, and Anderson, Anne H.. 1994. The unintelligibility of speech to children: Effects of referent availability. Journal of Child Language 21. 623–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barton, Michelle E., and Tomasello, Michael. 1994. The rest of the family: The role of fathers and siblings in early language development. In Gallaway & Richards, 109–34.Google Scholar
Bellinger, David. 1980. Consistency in the pattern of change in mothers’ speech: Some discriminant analyses. Journal of Child Language 7. 469–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernstein Ratner, Nan. 1984a. Patterns of vowel modification in mother-child speech. Journal of Child Language 11. 557–78.Google Scholar
Bernstein Ratner, Nan. 1984b. Phonological rule usage in mother-child speech. Journal of Phonetics 12. 245–54.Google Scholar
Bernstein Ratner, Nan. 1986. Durational cues which mark clause boundaries in mother-child speech. Journal of Phonetics 14. 303–9.Google Scholar
Block, Jeanne H. 1983. Differential premises arising from differential socialization of the sexes: Some conjectures. Child Development 54. 1335–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, Roger. 1977. Introduction. In Snow & Ferguson, 1–27.Google Scholar
Chambers, Jack K. 2003. Sociolinguistic theory. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, Alan. 1994. Phonetic and prosodic aspects of baby talk. In Gallaway & Richards, 135–52.Google Scholar
Davis, Barbara L., and Lindblom, Björn. 2001. Phonetic variability in baby talk and development of vowel categories. Emerging cognitive abilities in early infancy, ed. by Lacerda, Francisco, Hofsten, Claes von, and Heimann, Mikael, 135–71. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J., and Foulkes, Paul. 1999. Derby and Newcastle: Instrumental phonetics and variationist studies. In Foulkes & Docherty, 47–71.Google Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J., and Foulkes, Paul. 2000. Speaker, speech, and knowledge of sounds. Phonological knowledge: Conceptual and empirical issues, ed. by Noël Burton-Roberts, Carr, Philip, and Docherty, Gerard J., 105–29. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J., and Foulkes, Paul. 2005. Glottal variants of (t) in the Tyneside variety of English: An acoustic profiling study. A figure of speech: A festschrift for John Laver, ed. by Beck, Janet Mackenzie and Hardcastle, William J.. London: Lawrence Erlbaum, to appear.Google Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J., Foulkes, Paul, Dodd, Barbara; and Milroy, Lesley. 2002. The emergence of structured variation in the speech of Tyneside infants. Final report to the United Kingdom Economic and Social Research Council, grant R000 237417. Online: http://www.regard.ac.uk.Google Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J., Foulkes, Paul, Milroy, James, Milroy, Lesley; and Walshaw, David. 1997. Descriptive adequacy in phonology: A variationist perspective. Journal of Linguistics 33. 275–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Docherty, Gerard J., Foulkes, Paul, Tillotson, Jennifer; and Watt, Dominic J. L.. 2005. On the scope of phonological learning: Issues arising from socially structured variation. Papers in laboratory phonology 8, ed. by Best, Catherine T., Goldstein, Louis, and Whalen, Douglas H.. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, to appear.Google Scholar
Ely, Richard, Gleason, Jean Berko; and McCabe, Allyssa. 1996. ‘Why didn’t you talk to your mommy, honey?’: Parents’ and children’s talk about talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction 29. 7–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ely, Richard, Gleason, Jean Berko, Narasimhan, Bhuvaneswari; and McCabe, Allyssa. 1995. Family talk about talk: Mothers lead the way. Discourse Processes 19. 201–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. 1977. Baby talk as a simplified register. In Snow & Ferguson, 209–35.Google Scholar
Fernald, Anne. 2000. Speech to infants as hyperspeech: Knowledge-driven processes in early word recognition. Phonetica 57. 242–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foulkes, Paul, and Docherty, Gerard J. (eds.) 1999. Urban voices: Accent studies in the British Isles. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Foulkes, Paul, Docherty, Gerard J.; and Watt, Dominic J. L.. 1999. Tracking the emergence of structured variation. Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics 7. 1–25.Google Scholar
Foulkes, Paul, Docherty, Gerard J.; and Watt, Dominic J. L.. 2001. The emergence of structured variation. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 7. 67–84.Google Scholar
Galla way, Clare, and Richards, Brian J. (eds.) 1994. Input and interaction in language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garnica, Olga K. 1977. Some prosodic and paralinguistic features of speech to young children. In Snow & Ferguson, 63–88.Google Scholar
Gleason, Jean Berko, and Greif, E. B.. 1983. Men’s speech to young children. Language, gender and society, ed. by Thorne, Barrie, Kramarae, Cheris, and Henley, Nancy, 140–50. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Gleason, Jean Berko, Perlmann, Rivka Y., Ely, Richard; and Evans, D. W.. 1994. The baby talk register: Parents’ use of diminutives. Handbook of research in language using CHILDES, ed. by Sokolov, Jeffrey L. and Snow, Catherine E., 50–76. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Greif, Esther B. 1980. Sex differences in parent-child conversations. Women’s Studies International Quarterly 3. 253–58.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Allen D. 1977. A sociologist’s point of view. In Snow & Ferguson, 319–33.Google Scholar
Johnson, Joanne. 2003. Phonetic differences in child-directed speech to opposite sex twins. Newcastle, UK: University of Newcastle BSc dissertation.Google Scholar
Kuhl, Patricia K. 1994. Learning and representation in speech and language. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 4. 812–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhl, Patricia K., Andruski, Jean E., Chistovich, I. A., Chistovich, L. A., Kozhevnikova, E. V., Ryskina, V. L., Stolyarova, E. I., Sundberg, Ulla; and Lacerda, Francisco. 1997. Cross-language analysis of phonetic units in language addressed to infants. Science 277. 684–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Labov, William. 1990. The intersection of sex and social class in the course of linguistic change. Language Variation and Change 2. 205–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change, vol I: Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lieven, Elena V. M. 1994. Cross-linguistic and cross-cultural aspects of language addressed to children. In Gallaway & Richards, 56–73.Google Scholar
Lindblom, Björn. 1990. Explaining phonetic variation: A sketch of the H&H theory. Speech production and speech modelling, ed. by Hardcastle, William J. and Marchal, Alain, 403–39. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Local, John K. 1983. How many vowels in a vowel? Journal of Child Language 10. 449–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lytton, Hugh, and Romney, David M.. 1991. Parents’ differential socialization of boys and girls: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 109. 267–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malsheen, Bathsheba J. 1980. Two hypotheses for phonetic clarification in the speech of mothers to children. Child phonology, vol. 2: Perception, ed. by Yeni-Komshian, Grace H., Kavanagh, James F., and Ferguson, Charles A., 173–84. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mannle, Sara, and Tomasello, Michael. 1987. Fathers, siblings, and the bridge hypothesis. Children’s language, vol. 6, ed. by Nelson, Keith E. and Kleeck, Anne van, 23–42. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Menyuk, Paula. 1963. Syntactic structures in the language of children. Child Development 18. 407–22.Google Scholar
Milroy, Lesley, Milroy, James; and Docherty, Gerard J.. 1997. Phonological variation and change in contemporary spoken British English. Final report to the United Kingdom Economic and Social Research Council, grant R000 234892. Online: http://www.regard.ac.uk.Google Scholar
Newport, Elissa L., Gleitman, Henry; and Gleitman, Lila R.. 1977. Mother, I’d rather do it myself: Some effects and non-effects of maternal speech style. In Snow & Ferguson, 109–49.Google Scholar
Parsons, Elizabeth. 2000. Child directed speech and the realisation patterns of a sociolinguistically governed variant: Evidence of (t) realisation in Tyneside mothers. Newcastle, UK: University of Newcastle BSc dissertation.Google Scholar
Pine, Julian M. 1994. The language of primary caregivers. In Gallaway & Richards, 15–37.Google Scholar
Reese, Elaine, Haden, Catherine A.; and Fivush, Robyn. 1996. Mothers, fathers, daughters, sons: Gender differences in autobiographical reminiscing. Research on Language and Social interaction 29. 27–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Julie. 2002. Child language variation. The handbook of language variation and change, ed. by Chambers, Jack K., Trudgill, Peter, and Schilling-Estes, Natalie, 333–48. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Roberts, Julie, and Labov, William. 1995. Learning to talk Philadelphian. Language Variation and Change 7. 101–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shockey, Linda, and Bond, Z. S.. 1980. Phonological processes in speech addressed to children. Phonetica 37. 267–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, Catherine E. 1994. Introduction. In Gallaway & Richards, 3–12.Google Scholar
Snow, Catherine E. 1995. Issues in the study of input: Finetuning, universality, individual and developmental differences, and necessary causes. The handbook of child language, ed. by Fletcher, Paul and MacWhinney, Brian, 180–93. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Snow, Catherine E., and Ferguson, Charles A. (eds.) 1977. Talking to children: Language input and acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stoneman, Zolinda, and Brody, Gene H.. 1981. Two’s company, three makes a difference: An examination of mothers’ and fathers’ speech to their young children. Child Development 52. 705–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stow, Carol, Pert, Sean; and Watt, Dominic J. L.. 1998. Rochdale assessment of Mirpuri phonology with Punjabi, Urdu and English. Rochdale: S. Pert.Google Scholar
Thorne, Barrie, Kramarae, Cheris; and Henley, Nancy (eds.) 1983. Language, gender and society. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. 1996. Phonological development. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Watt, Dominic J. L. 2000. Phonetic parallels between the close-mid vowels of Tyneside English: Are they internally or externally motivated? Language Variation and Change 12. 69–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, Dominic J. L., and Milroy, Lesley. 1999. Patterns of variation and change in three Newcastle vowels: Is this dialect levelling? In Foulkes & Docherty, 25–46.Google Scholar
Wells, John C. 1982. Accents of English (3 vols.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar