PSY 403 Exam 2 Flashcards
poverty of the stimulus (POS) problem
words themselves don’t contain enough info to imply their meaning (functions of arbitrariness); children must overcome this to learn to word meanings
solving the POS problem: point and say
i. would work EXCEPT that words don’t often occur in isolation
ii. there aren’t concrete objects for every word (ex. abstract nouns)
iii. meanings often change based on context
iv. blind children learn words at the same rate as seeing children!
solving the POS problem: superordinate and subordinate categories
i. superordinate: treat every new word as general, and applying to various objects (ex. mammal)
ii. subordinate: treat every word as specific, only referring to that specific object (ex. golden retriever)
basic level categories
i. children’s default assumption for levels of meaning;
ex. mammal – dog** – golden retriever
ii. help in the formation of categories, give background info based on similarities in shape/color/size; ex. “if a daisy is a flower, then a rose, a tulip is too”
meaning errors (2)
i. overextension: overgeneralizing; using a general term to describe varying objects (ex. all farm animals –> “pigs”)
ii. under-extension: use of words in restrictive manner; (ex. only prototypical looking dogs are called dogs, chihuahuas are not)
solving the POS problem: whole object bias
(Hollich exp.) babies shown 2 part removable block pieces, told they are called a “modi” –> test phase, asked to id “which is modi?” —> looked longer at the whole objects that the removable parts on their own
ii. IMPORTANT: measured baseline looking preference between whole or part pieces, and they did not differ
solving the POS problem: mutual exclusivity
i. kids’ assumption that 2 different labels must apply to 2 different objects (ex. kids will assign an unfamiliar word with an unfamiliar object)
ii. different for BILINGUAL children, who are used to having 2+ words for a single object –> they don’t show this bias
violations of arbitrariness (3)
i. signed langs: more iconicity (iconic signs are easier to learn)
ii. onomatopoeia
iii. ideophones: words in which certain syllables, consonant voicing, reduplication, or vowel location imply sensory info (ex. size, texture, motion)
associative vs social learning (exp.)
i. associative: learning based on coincidence of events/actions (ex. in animals, “sit” —> get a reward)
ii. language learning requires social context
ex. “Dawnoo” exp: children playing with a toy in an empty room, hear the word “dawnoo” played over a speaker –> later they DONT exhibit any association between the toy and the word –> they don’t perceive a link between the pairing and the speakers intentions
theory of mind / mentalizing
i. knowing that other people have different knowledge and beliefs than you; knowing other people’s state of mind; being able to read people’s intentions
(ex. exhibiting joint attention and communicative intent)
ii. children with ASDs struggle with this (Sally-Anne exp)
solving the POS problem: principle of contrast
kids’ assumption that if 2 labels apply to the same object –> they must have different meanings
ex. “this is a bunny” –> “these are his ears”
verb learning: the utility of linguistic content
- USEFUL in VERB learning
- SENTENCES reveal argument structures, provide a “syntactic frame”
argument structure of verbs: types
i. intransitive: ONE argument (the subject)
- “he sleeps”
ii. transitive: TWO Arguments (subject, direct object)
- “he eats ice cream”
iii. ditransitive: THREE arguments (subject, direct object, indirect object)
- “he gave an ice cream to his sister”
- verbs also reveal the SEMANTIC properties of arguments. i.e. whether the subject is a person or an object/whether the direct object is a person or an object
argument structure of verbs: “glorp” exp
- indicated that toddlers (2 yrs) pick up on properties of transitive verbs
“duck is gorping the bunny” (looked longer at pushing video)
vs
“the duck and the bunny are gorping” (looked longer at waving video)
syntactic bootstrapping
using sentence structure to determine meaning of words
un morfema
la unidad más pequeña que lleva el significado o función gramatical en un idioma
english word formation processes: compounding
reunir 2+ palabras (o morfemas libres) para crear una nueva –> palabras compuestas
english word formation processes: affixation
añadir sufijos, prefijos, infijos, para crear nuevas palabras ej. (des+hacer=deshacer)
the acquisition of morphology
- is the acquisition of morphological RULES not just memorization of specific word forms
- acquisition is confirmed by a child’s ability to apply inflectional rules to NOVEL words (ex. WUG TEST)
acquisition of irregular verb forms: phases
i. phase 1: child uses irregular forms CORRECTLY because of explicit exposure; they’re just mimicking/repeating from memory what they’ve heard —> “brought”, “broke”
ii. phase 2: child has now learned morphological rules and will apply thm to irregular forms, or “OVERGENERALIZE”; will appear to make ERRORS—> “broughted”, “brokeded”
iii. phase 3: child learns the exceptions to the morphological rules and now uses the standard irregular forms CORRECTLY (again) —> “brought”, “broke”
morphological development: influencing factors (6)
i. frequency: esp. in final position; the, -ing, plural s
ii. syllabicity: morfemes that form syllables are more noticable and so learned earlier (ex. “-ing”)
iii. absence of homophony: morphemes that have homophones (ex. plural s (boys) and possesive s (boy’s) sound the same, cannot distinguish) are more difficult to learn
iv. few exceptions to morphological rules (ex. no irregulars)
v. allomorphic invariance: morphemes that DON’T have many allomorphs (ex. different pronunciations in different contexts ex. -ed –> “t”/”d”/”ed”) are learned easier
vi. clearly discernible semantic functions: ex. plural s has clearer meaning than 3rd person singular s –> plural s is learned easier
comprehension vs production: speed
in young children, COMPREHENSION develops FASTER than production; barely verbal children still show understanding of the meanings of different sentences
critical period hypothesis
the idea that normal lang acquisition is only possible within a certain time frame [from birth –> around 6years for a 1st language]
the critical period hypothesis: evolutionary explanation
a critical period is evolutionary useful because the brain hogs lots of resources and energy –> learning language is useful as a “one shot” skill bc once lang is learned (or not learned) the brain can then redirect that energy to other cognitive tasks
sound spectrograms
represent the pattern/distribution of acoustic energy during speech; frequency on Y / time on X
formants (features of sound spectrograms)
periods of steady acoustic energy over time (i.e. straight lines on the spectrogram)
