Search

The purpose of this paper is to review recent Soviet research on the child's development of Russian grammar, with detailed information on valuable methods for investigating this process. Cross-linguistic comparisons are made where applicable in view of their relevance for the study of universal aspects of language acquisition and linguistic competence. Specific aspects of linguistic ontogenesis are discussed: (1) the structure of two-word sentences; (2) word order; (3) inflections and word classes; and (4) comprehension. A brief history of developmental psycholinguistics in the USSR is included. Listed are diaries and observational studies of monolingual and bilingual children, and a bibliography which includes these and general background materials. (KL)

This paper represents a preliminary attempt to determine universals of grammatical development in children. On the basis of language acquisition data, a limited number of findings are presented in the form of suggested developmental universals. These universals are grouped according to the psychological variables which may determine them, in the hope that it may someday be possible to predict facts of linguistic development from principles of mental development. The underlying assumption of this work is that the child brings certain operating principles to bear on the task of learning to speak. Some of these principles stem from his general cognitive development and some are a product of his psychological capacity to process and store information. Some of the latter principles may be specific to the manipulation of language but no particular claim is made here as to their innateness. Two broad aspects of mental development are considered. The first section of the paper deals with developing cognition of the social and material worlds (cognitive variables); the second section deals with the particular abilities of the human mind to deal with linguistic structures (language processing variables). The discussion is limited to the development of grammar. (Author/FWB)

SUBJECTS OF AGES 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, AND 20 RETOLD STORIES PRESENTED IN FULL PASSIVE SENTENCES (WITH MENTION OF ACTOR) AND TRUNCATED PASSIVES (WITHOUT MENTION OF ACTOR). WHILE THERE WAS A GENERAL TENDENCY TO RETELL STORIES IN THE ACTIVE VOICE, THIS TENDENCY WAS MUCH MORE EVIDENT IN THE CASE OF FULL THAN TRUNCATED PASSIVES. IT IS PROPOSED THAT THE SIGNIFICANCE ATTRIBUTED TO ACTIVE AFFIRMATIVE DECLARATIVE SENTENCES BY EARLIER PSYCHOLINGUISTIC RESEARCH BE MODIFIED, ALLOWING FOR INFLUENCE OF SEMANTIC CONTENT UPON SELECTION OF A PARTICULAR GRAMMATICAL FORM IN ENCODING A SENTENCE. THE TENDENCY TO RETELL TRUNCATED PASSIVES WITHOUT A ALTERATION OF SYNTACTIC FORM WAS MOST STRONGLY MARKED IN OLDER SUBJECTS. IRREGULAR VERB FORMS POSE DIFFICULTIES TO YOUNG CHILDREN IN ATTEMPTING TO PRODUCE PASSIVE SENTENCES. OTHER STRIKING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN AGE GROUPS WERE NOT NOTED. (AUTHOR/AMM)

A contribution to the debate on innate factors in children's language acquisition is rendered by cross-linguistic comparisons of children's languages. Russian, for example, is sufficiently different from English to serve as a useful contrast. Early syntactic development is very much the same in both languages. A small class of "pivot words" and a larger open class of words are used first. Word order is quite inflexible at each of the early stages of syntactic development. Two-word sentences appear at about 1:8 (1 year, 8 months); three- or four-word sentences appear at about 1:10. Morphological markers enter with the three- and four-word sentences. The learning of morphology goes on longer than the learning of syntactic patterns. A major Russian work on language development contends that the Russian child does not master his morphology until several years beyond the age at which the American child completes his primary grammatical learning. This factor suggests that it may be more difficult to learn to speak one language natively than another, although in both, basic learning is accomplished rapidly. (WD)

ONE APPROACH TO CHILD LANGUAGE ACQUISITION IS THAT OF TRANSFORMATIONAL, GENERATIVE GRAMMAR WHICH EMPHASIZES MAN'S ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND AND PRODUCE AN UNLIMITED VARIETY OF SENTENCES THROUGH CONTROL OF A LIMITED NUMBER OF LANGUAGE RULES. THUS, A CHILD LEARNS TO SPEAK BY DEVELOPING HIS OWN THEORIES OF THE STRUCTURE OF HIS LANGUAGE. STUDIES OF RUSSIAN AND ENGLISH CHILD LANGUAGE ACQUISITION SHOW THAT THE PROCESS OF MAKING THESE RULES IS QUITE SIMILAR, IN SPITE OF THE IMPORTANT STRUCTURAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO LANGUAGES. IN BOTH LANGUAGES, FOR EXAMPLE, THE UNMARKED FORMS OF LEXICAL ITEMS ARE LEARNED FIRST, SIMPLE SENTENCES NEXT, AND MORPHOLOGY LAST. BOTH RUSSIAN AND ENGLISH CHILDREN LEARN THIS WAY, IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT WORD ORDER IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN INFLECTION IN RUSSIAN. IT WOULD SEEM THEN THAT EVERY CHILD'S BUILT-IN "LANGUAGE ACQUISITION DEVICE" FAVORS BEGINNING LANGUAGE WITH ORDERED UNMARKED CLASSES, REGARDLESS OF THE DEGREE OF CORRESPONDENCE OF SUCH A SYSTEM WITH THE INPUT LANGUAGE. SIMILAR PATTERNS OF GENERALIZATION, OVERGENERALIZATION, AND LEARNING OF GRAMMATICAL DISTINCTIONS CAN ALSO BE FOUND IN ENGLISH AND RUSSIAN LANGUAGE ACQUISITION. THESE OBSERVATIONS INDICATE THAT A GREAT DEAL MAY BE LEARNED ABOUT GENERAL CHILD LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THROUGH COMPARING RESULTS OF STUDIES DONE IN DIFFERENT LANGUAGE FAMILIES. THIS PAPER WAS READ AT A SYMPOSIUM ON GRAMMAR AND VERBAL BEHAVIOR IN CHILDREN, CONVENTION OF WESTERN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION (HONOLULU, JUNE 18, 1965). (JD)

THE AUTHORS HAVE CONCERNED THEMSELVES IN THIS STUDY WITH IMITATION AS A DEVICE BY WHICH THE INVESTIGATOR CAN LEARN ABOUT CHILD LANGUAGE. THE DATA EXAMINED ARE PART OF A LONGITUDINAL THREE-MONTH STUDY OF LINGUISTIC DEVELOPMENT IN A TWO-YEAR-OLD CHILD. THE REPORT IS BASED ON 1,000 ELICITED IMITATIONS. CERTAIN PHENOMONA WERE OBSERVED GENERALLY WHEN THE MODEL SENTENCES WERE SOMEWHAT BEYOND THE CHILD'S NORMAL SENTENCE PROCESSING SPAN AND WERE NOT ANOMALOUS. THESE SEEMED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT SENTENCE RECOGNITION AND IMITATION ARE FILTERED THROUGH THE INDIVIDUAL'S PRODUCTIVE LINGUISTIC SYSTEM. WHILE THE CHILD COULD UTTER SENTENCES SPONTANEOUSLY WHICH SHE COULD NOT IMITATE, SHE COULD ALSO GIVE "RECODED" IMITATIONS OF MODEL SENTENCES WHICH EXCEEDED HER PRODUCTIVE CAPACITIES. SOME INTERESTING SIDE-PHENOMONA WERE OBSERVED--(1) OMITTED ITEMS, SUCH AS ARTICLES, COPULA, EMBEDDED CLAUSES, MAY SIMPLY NOT HAVE BEEN HEARD, (2) HESITATION PAUSES WERE IMPORTANT CUES, (3) PRESERVATION OF STRESS SEEMED TO BE GENERAL THOUGH ITS POSITION WAS NOT ALWAYS PREDICTABLE, AND (4) THE PRESERVATION OF RHYTHMIC AND INTONATIONAL ASPECTS IN IMITATION MAY BE BASIC. AN IMPORTANT EXCEPTION TO THE LAST OBSERVATION WAS THAT THE CHILD IGNORED REPEATED WORDS UNLESS THE REPEATED WORD COULD BE INTERPRETED AS AN APPROPRIATE LEXICAL ITEM IN THE SENTENCE. THIS PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS INCLUDES A REFERENCE LIST OF STUDIES IN CHILD LANGUAGE. (AM)

THIS FIELD MANUAL WAS DEVELOPED AS PART OF A PROGRAM TO TRAIN INVESTIGATORS IN THE COLLECTION OF COMPARABLE CROSS-LINGUISTIC AND CROSS-CULTURAL DATA ON CHILDREN'S ACQUISITION OF LINGUISTIC CODES AND SOCIAL RULES FOR THE USE OF SUCH CODES. ALTHOUGH COMPARATIVE RESEARCH REQUIRES PROCEDURAL STANDARDIZATION, THE PHYSICAL AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS IN THE VARIOUS FIELD SETTINGS INTERFERE WITH STANDARDS SET PRIOR TO ARRIVAL IN THE FIELD. THIS MANUAL CONSTITUTES A COMMON FRAME OF REFERENCE FOR INVESTIGATORS COLLECTING DATA THAT IS TO BE USED IN COMPARATIVE REPORTS. PART I OF THIS MANUAL DEFINES THE MAJOR TOPICS TO BE INVESTIGATED AND SETS UP A RESEARCH SCHEDULE. PART II DISCUSSES SUCH METHODOLOGICAL FACTORS AS CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF LANGUAGES AND CULTURES, RECORDING APPARATUS AND TECHNIQUES, AND NATIVE INFORMANTS, ASSISTANTS AND INTERPRETERS. THE THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS INCLUDED IN PART III ARE PHONOLOGY, GRAMMAR, SEMANTICS, THE SOCIAL SETTING OF LINGUISTIC BEHAVIOR, AND LANGUAGE USAGES AND STYLES. APPENDED ARE EXTENSIVE REFERENCES AND ADDITIONAL SUGGESTED FIELD TECHNIQUES. THE READER OF THE MANUAL SHOULD HAVE SOME KNOWLEDGE OF LINGUISTICS BUT NEED NOT HAVE CONDUCTED PREVIOUS FIELD WORK. REQUESTS FOR COPIES OF THE MANUAL AND FOR TAPES TO BE USED IN PHONOLOGICAL IMITATION PROCEDURES, AND INFORMATION ABOUT RELEATED STUDIES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO DR. DAN I. SLOBIN, DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94720. (JD)