Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wbk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-21T05:15:14.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response coincidence analysis as evidence for language acquisition strategies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Wm J. Baker  and
Bruce L. Derwing
Wm J. Baker*
Affiliation:
University of Alberta
Bruce L. Derwing
Affiliation:
University of Alberta
*
Prof. Wm J. Baker, Centre for Advanced Study in Theoretical Psychology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2E9
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

New analytical techniques were developed for the identification of subject groups based on within-subject patterns of cooccurrences of responses. These “response coincidence analyses” provided an empirical basis for conjectures about stages or strategies in terms of the rules which characterize group performances. The nature of the operative rules was inferred from an analysis of item response similarities within the subject groups. These techniques were applied to a data set originally obtained by Innes (1974) from 120 children (20 at each age from 2 to 7 years), for a study of the acquisition of the English inflectional morphology for pluralization. The results show quite clearly how the pluralization system is acquired and indicate how such data can be used to develop the specification of rules sensitive to psycholinguistic evidence.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , September 1982 , pp. 193 - 221
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Anisfeld, M., & Tucker, G. R.The English pluralization rules of six-year-old children. Child Development, 1967, 38, 1201–1217.Google Scholar
Baker, W. J.An ‘information structure’ view of language. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 1976, 21, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berko, J.The child's learning of English morphology. Word, 1958, 14, 150–177.Google Scholar
Bever, T. G. The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In Hayes, J. R. (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley, 1970.Google Scholar
Borg, I. (Ed.) Multidimensional data representations: when and why. Ann Arbor: Mathesis Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Brown, R. W.A first language. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. D. Individual differences in multidimensional scaling. In Shepard, R. et al. (Eds.), Multidimensional scaling: theory and applications in the behavioral sciences. New York: Seminar Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. D., & Chang, J. J.Analysis of individual differences in multidimensional scaling via an N-way generalization of Eckart-Young decomposition. Psychometrika, 1970, 35, 283–320.Google Scholar
Cazden, C.The acquisition of noun and verb inflections. Child Development, 1968, 39, 433–438.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, H., & Clark, E.Psychology and language: an introduction to psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977.Google Scholar
Crystal, D.Review of A first language by R. W. Brown. Journal of Child Language, 1974, 1, 289–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derwing, B. L.Transformational grammar as a theory of language acquisition. Cambridge University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Derwing, B. L. English pluralization: a testing ground for rule evaluation. In Prideaux, G., Derwing, B., & Baker, W. (Eds.), Experimental linguistics, Part I, Chap. 5. Ghent: E. Story-Scientia, 1979.Google Scholar
Derwing, B. L., & Baker, W. J. The psychological basis for morphological rules. In Macnamara, J. (Ed.), Language, Learning, and Thought, Chap. 6. New York: Academic Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Derwing, B. L., & Baker, W. J. Rule learning and the English inflections (with emphasis on the plural). In Prideaux, G., Derwing, B., & Baker, W. (Eds.), Experimental Linguistics, Part II, Chap. 9. Ghent: E. Story-Scientia, 1979.Google Scholar
Ervin, S. Imitation and structural change in children's language. In Lenneberg, E. H. (Ed.), New directions in the study of language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1964.Google Scholar
Carman, M. Early grammatical development. In Fletcher, P. & Garman, M. (Eds.), Language acquisition: studies in first language development. Chap. 10. Cambridge University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Harshman, R.Foundations of the PARAFAC procedure: models and conditions for an “explanatory” multi-mode factor analysis. UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics, 1970, 16.Google Scholar
Hays, W. L.Statistics for psychologists. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1963.Google Scholar
Innes, S. J. Developmental aspects of plural formation in English. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Alberta, 1974.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. C.A simple cluster statistic. (Tech. Rep.) Murray Hill, N.J.: Bell Telephone Laboratories, 1968a.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. C.Metric clustering. (Tech. Rep.) Murray Hills, N.J.: Bell Telephone Laboratories, 1968b.Google Scholar
Koziol, D. S. The development of noun plural rules during the primary grades. Papers and reports on child language development. Committee on Linguistics, Stanford University, 1970, No. 2 (December), 76–96.Google Scholar
Maratsos, M. How to get from words to sentences. In Aaronson, D. & Rieber, R. (Eds.), Psycholinguistic research: implications and applications, Chap. 11. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1979.Google Scholar
Menyuk, P., & Menn, L. Early strategies for the perception and production of words and sounds. In Fletcher, P. & Garman, M. (Eds.), Language acquisition: studies in first language development. Cambridge University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Miller, W., & Ervin, S. The development of grammar in child language. In Bellugi, U. & Brown, R. (Eds.), The acquisition of language. Monograph of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1964, 29, 9–34.Google Scholar
Natalicio, D. S. Formation of the plural in English: a study of native speakers of English and native speakers of Spanish. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas, Austin, 1969.Google Scholar
Piaget, J. Piaget's theory. In Mussen, P. (Ed.), Carmichael's manual of child psychology. Vol. 1, Chap. 9. New York: Wiley, 1970.Google Scholar
Scandura, J.Structural learning I. Theory and research. New York: Gordon & Breash, 1973.Google Scholar
Shepard, R., Romney, A., & Nerlove, S. (Eds.) Multidimensional scaling: theory and applications in the behavioral sciences. New York: Seminar Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Takane, Y., Young, F., & De Leeuw, J.Nonmetric individual differences scaling: an alternating least squares method with optimal scaling features. Psychometrika, 1977, 42, 7–68.Google Scholar
Tucker, L. R. The extension of factor analysis to three-dimensional matrices. In Frederiksen, N. & Gulliksen, H. (Eds.), Contributions to mathematical psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1964.Google Scholar
Wishart, D.CLUSTAN: user manual. (3rd ed.) Program Library Unit, Edinburgh University, 1978.Google Scholar
Wohlwill, J. F.The study of behavioral development. New York: Academic Press, 1973.Google Scholar