Cover not available
Article published In:
Language, Interaction and Acquisition
Vol. 13:1 (2022) ► pp.93–124

Word order in the input to Argentinian Spanish-learning children

How reliable as a cue to clause transitivity?

 | Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET, Argentina)
 | Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET, Argentina)
 | Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET, Argentina)
 | Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET, Argentina)
Languages express events in the world by means of transitive and intransitive constructions, whose properties differ according to language typology. Children witness how specific languages express transitivity by listening to linguistic input, which varies according to contextual variables (such as the age of the speaker and the addressee). In this study, we investigated word order, one feature that typically helps discriminate between transitive and intransitive constructions but is more reliable in some languages than others. The frequency and consistency of word order as a cue towards clause transitivity was analysed in the input to 19 monolingual Spanish-learning children from Argentina (20 months old on average, SD = 0.3), diverse in terms of socioeconomic status (SES). We found that some word orders occur far more frequently and/or indicate clause transitivity much more reliably than others. In addition, their consistency as transitivity cues varied across the registers and was crucially affected by SES.
Keywords: word order, language input, transitivity, cue frequency, cue reliability
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Acquisition of transitive vs. intransitive patterns in production and comprehension
    • 1.2The acquisition of word order across languages
    • 1.3The role of the input registers and SES level
  • 2.The present study
  • 3.Methods
    • 3.1Data
    • 3.2Procedures
      • 3.2.1Sample selection
      • 3.2.2Clause segmentation
      • 3.2.3Coding
    • 3.3Analysis
      • 3.3.1Cue frequency
      • 3.3.2Cue reliability
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Cue frequency
      • 4.1.1Socioeconomic status (SES)
      • 4.1.2Speaker
      • 4.1.3Addressee
    • 4.2Cue consistency
      • 4.2.1Socioeconomic status (SES)
      • 4.2.2Speaker
      • 4.2.3Addressee
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Variability in reliability and consistency of word order cues in the input
    • 5.2The role of SES in the reliability and frequency of word order cues
    • 5.3The role of the speaker and the addressee in the reliability and frequency of word order cues
    • 5.4The combined effect of SES and input register on the frequency and reliability of word order cues: Some settings are more favourable than others
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 August 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.21016.aud
References (79)
References
Abbot-Smith, K., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2001). What preschool children do and do not do with ungrammatical word orders. Cognitive Development, 16 (2), 679–692. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aguado-Orea, J. J., Witherstone, H., Bourgeois, L., & Baselga, A. (2019). Learning to construct sentences in Spanish: A replication of the Weird Word Order technique. Journal of Child Language, 46 (6), 1249–1259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Akhtar, N. (1999). Acquiring basic word order: Evidence for data-driven learning of syntactic structure. Journal of Child Language, 26 (2), 339–356. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). The robustness of learning through overhearing. Developmental Science, 8 (2), 199–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alam, F., Rosemberg, C., Garber, L., & Stein, A. (2021). Variation sets in the speech directed to toddlers in Argentinian households. SES and type of activity effects. Journal of Child Language, 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Audisio, C. P., & Migdalek, M. J. (2020). Do simple syntactic heuristics to verb meaning hold up? Testing the structure mapping account over spontaneous speech to Spanish-learning children. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique, 65 (4), 556–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67 (1), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar. In E. Wanner & L. Gleitman (Eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art, (pp. 173–218). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1989). Functionalism and the competition model. In B. MacWhinney, & E. Bates (Eds.). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 3–73). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E., MacWhinney, B., Caselli, C., Devescovi, A., Natale, F., & Venza, V. (1984). A cross-linguistic study of the development of sentence interpretation strategies. Child Development, 55 1, 341–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bavin, E., & Growcott, C. (2000). Infants of 24– 30 months understand verb frames. In M. Perkins & S. Howard (Eds.), New directions in language development and disorders (pp. 169–177). Kluwer Academic Publishing/Plenum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, R. A. (1993). Marking of verb transitivity by Hebrew-speaking children. Journal of Child Language, 20 1, 641–641. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernard, C., & Gervain, J. (2012). Prosodic cues to word order: What level of representation? Frontiers in Psychology, 31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brooks, P. J., & Tomasello, M. (1999). How children constrain their argument structure constructions. Language, 75 (4), 720–738. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Casillas, M., Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (2020). Early language experience in a Tzeltal Mayan village. Child Development, 91 (5), 1819–1835. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021). Early language experience in a Papuan community. Journal of Child Language, 48 (4), 792–814. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charvillat, A., & Kail, M. (1991). The status of ‘canonical SVO sentences’ in French: A developmental study of the on-line processing of dislocated sentences. Journal of Child Language, 18 (3), 591–608. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cherici, A., Chang, Y., & Tanaka, N. (2019). Evaluation of cues in L1 Chinese input and output: A competition model approach to corpus data [Poster presentation]. NINJAL-UHM Linguistics Workshop on Syntax-Semantics Interface, Language Acquisition and Naturalistic Data Analysis, Mānoa, Honolulu, Hawai’i, United States.
Devescovi, A., D’Amico, S., Smith, S., Mimica, I., & Bates, E. (1998). The development of sentence comprehension in Italian and Serbo-Croatian: Local versus distributed cues. In D. Hillert (Ed.), Sentence processing: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 345–377). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M., & Aikhenvald, A. Y. (Eds.). (2000). Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, J. W. (1987). The discourse basis of ergativity. Language, 63 (4), 805–855. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fisher, C., Gertner, Y., Scott, R. M., & Yuan, S. (2010). Syntactic bootstrapping. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 1 (2), 143–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fleiss, J. L. (1971). Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin, 76 (5), 378. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Franck, J., Millotte, S., & Lassotta, R. (2011). Early word order representations: Novel arguments against old contradictions. Language Acquisition, 18 (2), 121–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friedman, J., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2010). Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent. Journal of Statistical Software, 33 (1), 1–22. URL [URL]. DOI logo
Garcia, R., Roeser, J., & Höhle, B. (2019). Thematic role assignment in the L1 acquisition of Tagalog: Use of word order and morphosyntactic markers. Language Acquisition, 26 (3), 235–261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020). Children’s online use of word order and morphosyntactic markers in Tagalog thematic role assignment: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Child Language, 47 (3), 533–555. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gertner, Y., Fisher, C., & Eisengart, J. (2006). Learning words and rules: Abstract knowledge of word order in early sentence comprehension. Psychological Science, 17 (8), 684–691. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gervain, J., Nespor, M., Mazuka, R., Horie, R., & Mehler, J. (2008). Bootstrapping word order in prelexical infants: A Japanese–Italian cross-linguistic study. Cognitive Psychology, 57 (1), 56–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldfield, B. A. (2000). Nouns before verbs in comprehension vs. production: The view from pragmatics. Journal of Child Language, 27 (3), 501–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Cauley, K. M., & Gordon, L. (1987). The eyes have it: Lexical and syntactic comprehension in a new paradigm. Journal of Child Language, 14 (1), 23–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Paul H Brookes Publishing.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (2015). Transitivity prominence. In A. Malchukov & B. Comrie (Eds.), Introducing the framework, and case studies from Africa and Eurasia (Vol. 11) (pp. 131–148). Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hernández, A. E., Sierra, I., & Bates, E. (2000). Sentence interpretation in bilingual and monolingual Spanish speakers: Grammatical processing in a monolingual mode. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 4 (2), 179–213.Google Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. (1991). Language comprehension: A new look at some old themes. In N. A. Krasnegor, D. M. Rumbaugh, R. L. Schiefelbusch, & M. Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.), Biological and behavioral determinants for language development (pp. 301–320). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (1996). The intermodal preferential looking paradigm: A window onto emerging language comprehension. In D. McDaniel, C. McKee, & H. S. Cairns (Eds.), Methods for assessing children’s syntax (pp. 105–124). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R., & Naigles, L. (1996). Young children’s ability to use syntactic frames to derive meaning. In K. Hirsh-Pasek & R. Golinkoff (Eds.), The origins of grammar: Evidence from early language comprehension (pp. 123–158). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hoff-Ginsberg, E. (1986). Function and structure in maternal speech: Their relation to the child’s development of syntax. Developmental Psychology, 22 (2), 155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1991). Mother-child conversation in different social classes and communicative settings. Child Development, 62 (4), 782–796. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998). The relation of birth order and socioeconomic status to children’s language experience and language development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19 (4), 603–629. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, P. J., & Thompson, S. A. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56 (2), 251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huttenlocher, J., Waterfall, H., Vasilyeva, M., Vevea, J., & Hedges, L. V. (2010). Sources of variability in children’s language growth. Cognitive Psychology, 61 (4), 343–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackson-Maldonado, D., Peña, E., & Aghara, R. (2011). Funciones de lenguaje y tipos de palabras en la interacción entre madres y sus hijos e hijas. In C. Rojas Nieto & D. Jackson-Maldonado (Eds.), Interacción y uso lingüístico en el desarrollo de la lengua materna (pp. 27–61). UNAM-UAQ.Google Scholar
Kahane, H., & Kahane, R. (1950). The position of the actor expression in colloquial Mexican Spanish. Language, 26 (2), 236–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M. (1989). Cue validity, cue cost and processing types in sentence comprehension in French and Spanish. In B. MacWhinney & E. Bates (Eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 77–117). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2004). On-line grammaticality judgments in French children and adults: A crosslinguistic perspective. Journal of Child Language, 31 (3), 713–737. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M., Boibieux, M., & Coulaud, H. (2005). Early comprehension of transitive and intransitive French sentences. In B. Bokus (Ed.). Studies in the psychology of child language (pp. 195–226). Matrix.Google Scholar
Kail, M., & Charvillat, A. (1988). Local and topological processing in sentence comprehension by French and Spanish children. Journal of Child Language, 15 1, 637–662. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kulikov, L., Malchukov, A., & de Swart, P. (Eds.). (2006). Case, valency and transitivity. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, P., Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1993). Processing a language without inflections: A reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language, 32 (2), 169–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lieven, E. (2010). Input and first language acquisition: Evaluating the role of frequency. Lingua, 120 (11), 2546–2556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1987). The competition model. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 249–308). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. 3rd Edition. Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGoogle Scholar
(2005). Extending the competition model. International Journal of Bilingualism, 9 (1), 69–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E., & Kliegl, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23 (2), 127–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (Eds) (1989). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Pleh, C., & Bates, E. (1985). The development of sentence interpretation in Hungarian. Cognitive Psychology, 17 (2), 178–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mastin, J. D., Marchman, V., Elwood-Lowe, M., & Fernald, A. (2016). Quantity & quality of child-directed speech (CDS) predict children’s vocabulary size and language processing abilities. 20th Biennial Meeting of the International Conference on Infant Studies. Louisiana, USA.Google Scholar
Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2005). The role of frequency in the acquisition of English word order. Cognitive Development, 20 (1), 121–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). French children’s use and correction of weird word orders: A constructivist account. Journal of Child Language, 34 (2), 381. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morgan, L., & Goldstein, H. (2004). Teaching mothers of low socioeconomic status to use decontextualized language during storybook reading. Journal of Early Intervention, 26 (4), 235–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oshima-Takane, Y., Goodz, E., & Derevensky, J. L. (1996). Birth order effects on early language development: Do second born children learn from overheard speech? Child Development, 67 (2), 621–634. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parisse, C., & Le Normand, M. T. (2000). How children build their morphosyntax: The case of French. Journal of Child Language, 27 (2), 267–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Phillips, J. R. (1973). Syntax and vocabulary of mothers’ speech to young children: Age and sex comparisons. Child Development, 44 1, 182–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pye, C. (1983). Mayan telegraphese: Intonational determinants of inflectional development in Quiche Mayan. Language, 59 (3), 583–604. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL [URL]
Ramírez, M. L., Ibañez, M. I., Migdalek, M., Stein, A., Mealla, M., & Rosemberg, C. (2019). La función pragmática de las emisiones dirigidas al niño en el entorno del hogar: el impacto de la educación materna. Lingüística, 35 (2), 271–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reyes, I. (2003). A study of sentence interpretation in Spanish monolingual children. First Language, 23 (3), 285–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosemberg, C. R., Alam, F., Audisio, C. P., Ramirez, M. L., Garber, L., & Migdalek, M. J. (2020). Nouns and verbs in the linguistic environment of Argentinian toddlers: Socioeconomic and context-related differences. First Language, 22 (3), 192–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosemberg, C. R., Alam, F., Stein, A., Migdalek, M., Menti, A., & Ojea, G. (2015–2016). El entorno lingüístico de niños pequeños argentinos [Language environments of young Argentinian children]. CONICET. [dataset]Google Scholar
Rowe, M. L. (2008). Child-directed speech: Relation to socioeconomic status, knowledge of child development and child vocabulary skill. Journal of Child Language, 35 (1), 185–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). A longitudinal investigation of the role of quantity and quality of child-directed speech in vocabulary development. Child Development, 83 (5), 1762–1774. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snow, C. E., Arlman-Rupp, A., Hassing, Y., Jobse, J., Joosten, J., & Vorster, J. (1976). Mothers’ speech in three social classes. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 5 (1), 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soderstrom, M. (2007). Beyond babytalk: Re-evaluating the nature and content of speech input to preverbal infants. Developmental Review, 27 (4), 501–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soderstrom, M., Blossom, M., Foygel, R., & Morgan, J. L. (2008). Acoustical cues and grammatical units in speech to two preverbal infants. Journal of Child Language, 35 (4), 869–902. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sperry, D. E., Sperry, L. L., & Miller, P. J. (2019). Reexamining the verbal environments of children from different socioeconomic backgrounds. Child Development, 90 (4), 1303–1318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stein, A., Menti, A. B., & Rosemberg, C. R. (2021). Socioeconomic status differences in the linguistic environment: A study with Spanish-speaking populations in Argentina. Early Years, 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Quiroga, Macarena Sol, Celia Renata Rosemberg & Florencia Alam
2023. Impacto de las actividades cotidianas, las circunstancias socioeconómicas y el input lingüístico en el vocabulario de niños argentinos de 4 años. Lingüística y Literatura 44:84 ► pp. 205 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.