Cover not available
Part of
Sources of Variation in First Language Acquisition: Languages, contexts, and learners
Edited by Maya Hickmann †, Edy Veneziano and Harriet Jisa
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 22] 2018
► pp. 1–24

Introduction
What can variation tell us about first language acquisition?

| Laboratoire Structures Formelles du Langage, CNRS & Université Paris 8
| Laboratoire Modèles, Dynamique, Corpus & Laboratoire de Psychopathologie et Processus de Santé, Université Paris Descartes & CNRS
| Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, Université Lyon 2 & CNRS
After years of research focusing on universal regularities in child language, the study of variation has enriched our understanding of language development. Variation stems from exogenous and endogenous factors that can all influence the development of communicative capacities. This volume focuses on three main sources of variation considered from a large multimodal perspective that includes speech, gesture, and signs. First, research suggests that development partly varies with linguistic and/or cultural environments. A second source of variation stems from the input to which children are exposed across contexts. Finally, learners themselves differ along many dimensions, such as cognitive maturity, exposure to language(s), relative reliance on the visuo-gestural modality, and language impairments. The discussion highlights the need for more research on inter- and intra-individual variation within comparative perspectives allying complementary methodologies.
Keywords: exogenous/endogenous factors, input, discourse type, language impairment, linguistic and cultural environment, inter/intraindividual variation, morphosyntax, semantics
Article outline
  • 1.Why variation in language acquisition?
  • 2.Factors and types of variation
    • 2.1Exogenous and endogenous factors
    • 2.2Inter- and intra-individual variation
    • 2.3Developmental periods
    • 2.4Multimodality
  • 3.The organization of this volume
    • 3.1Universals and cross-linguistic variation in acquisition
      • Phonology
      • Nouns and verbs: Prosody, morphosyntax, and semantics
      • Syntax and semantics of motion expression
      • Speech and co-verbal gesture
    • 3.2Variation in input and in contexts during acquisition
      • Common ground
      • Input properties
      • Discourse types and registers
      • Input-output relationships
    • 3.3Variation in types of acquisition and types of learners
      • L1, 2L1 and L2 acquisition
      • Speech, gesture and sign
      • Language impairments
  • 4.Concluding remarks and future perspectives
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 22 February 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.22.01hic
References (93)
References
Allen S. E. M., Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Brown, A., Furman, R. & Ishizuka, T. 2007. Language-specific and universal influences in children’s syntactic packaging of manner and path: A comparison of English, Japanese, and Turkish. Cognition 102: 16–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alibali, M. W. & Goldin-Meadow, S. 1993. Gesture-speech mismatch and mechanisms of learning: What the hands reveal about a child's state of mind. Cognitive Psychology 25(4): 468–523. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Antinoro Pizzuto, E., Rossini, P., Sallandre, M. -A. & Wilkinson, E. 2008. Deixis, anaphora and Highly Iconic Structures: Cross-linguistic evidence on American (ASL), French (LSF) and Italian (LIS) Signed Languages. In Sign Languages: Spinning and Unraveling the Past, Present and Future [Proceedings of TISLR 9], R.M. de Quadros (ed.), 475–495. Florianapolis, Brazil: Editora Arara Azul.Google Scholar
Baillargeon, R. 1987. Object permanence in 3.5 and 4.5 month-old infants. Developmental Psychology 23: 655–664. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bassano, D., Maillochon, I., Korecky-Kröll, K., van Dijk, M., Laaha, S., Dressler, W. U. & van Geert, P. 2011. A comparative and dynamic approach to the development of determiner use in three children acquiring different languages. First Language 31(3): 253–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., Benigni, L., Bretherton, I., Camaioni, L. & Volterra, V. 1979. The Emergence of Symbols. Cognition and Communication in Infancy. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Behrens, H. 2006. The input-output relationship in first language acquisition. Language and Cognitive Processes 21: 2–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, R. 2015. Language development and use beyond the sentence. In The Cambridge Handbook of Child Language, 2nd edn, E. Bavin & L. Naigles (eds), 355–376. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, R. & Slobin, D. I. (eds). 1994. Relating Events in Narrative: A Cross-linguistic Development Study. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bloom, L. 1971. Why not pivot grammar? Journal of Speech and Disorder 36: 40–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1973. One Word at a Time. The Hague: Mouton & Co.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. & Choi, S. 2001. Shaping meanings for language: Universal and language-specific in the acquisition of spatial semantic categories. In Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development, M. Bowerman & S. C. Levinson (eds), 475–511. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowerman, M. & Levinson, S. (eds). 2001. Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braine, M. D. S. 1963. The ontogeny of English phrase structure: The first phase. Language 39: 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braine, M. 1976. Children's First Word Combinations. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 41 (serial no. 164).Google Scholar
Brown, R. 1973. A First Language: The Early Stages. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brusini, P., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Dutat, M., Goffinet, F. & Christophe, A. 2016. ERP evidence for online syntactic computations in 2-year-olds. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience 19: 164–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Capirci, O., Iverson, J. M., Pizzuto, E. & Volterra, V. 1996. Gestures and words during the transition to two-word speech. Journal of Child Language 23(3): 645–675. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carlucci, L. & Case J. 2013. On the necessity of U-shaped learning. Topics in Cognitive Science 5(1): 56–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choi, S. & Hattrup, K. 2012. Relative contribution of perception/cognition and language on spatial categorization. Cognitive Science 36: 102–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. V. 2015. Common ground. In The Handbook of Language Emergence, B. MacWhinney & W. O’Grady (eds), 328–353. London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cohen, M. 1952. Sur l'étude du langage enfantin. Enfance 3: 181–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuxac, C. 2000. La Langue des Signes Française: Les voies de l'iconicité. Faits de Langues 15–16. Paris: Ophrys.Google Scholar
Edelman, S. & Waterfall, H. 2007. Behavioral and computational aspects of language and its acquisition. Physics of Life Reviews 4(4): 253–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engemann Evans, N. & Levinson, S. C. 2009. The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32(5): 429–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Engemann, H., Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M., Soroli, E. & Vincent, C. 2015. How language impacts memory of motion events in English and French. Cognitive Processing 16(1), 209–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freudenthal, D., Pine, J., Aguado-Orea, J. & Gobet, F. 2007. Modeling the developmental patterning of finiteness marking in English, Dutch, German, and Spanish using mosaic. Cognitive Science 31(2): 311–341.Google Scholar
Friederici, A. D., Friedrich, M. & Christophe, A. 2007. Brain responses in 4-month-old infants are already language-specific. Current Biology 17: 1208–1211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friederici, A. D. & Thierry, G. (eds). 2008. Early Language Development: Bridging Brain and Behaviour [Trends in Language Acquisition Research 5]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallaway, C. & Richards, B. 1994. Input and Interaction in Language Acquisition. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gennari, S. P., Sloman, S., Malt, B. & Fitch, T. 2002. Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition 83: 49–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D. & Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds). 2003. Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S. 2003a. Thought before language: Do we think ergative? In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 493–522). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
2003b. Hearing Gesture: How Our Hands Help Us Think. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
2003c. The Resilience of Language. New York NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M., Ma, W., Song, L. & Hirsh-Pasek, K. 2013. Twenty-five years using the intermodal preferential looking paradigm to study language acquisition: What have we learned? Perspectives on Psychological Science 8(3): 316–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gullberg M. & de Bot, K. (eds). 2010. Gestures in Language Development [Benjamins Current Topics 28]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. & Levinson, S. C. (eds). 1996. Rethinking Linguistic Relativity. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M. 2003. Children’s Discourse: Person, Space, and Time across Languages. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M., Hendriks, H. & Champaud, C. 2009. Typological constraints on motion in French and English child language. In Crosslinguistic Approaches to the Psychology of Language: Research in the Tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin, J. Guo, E. Lieven, N. Budwig, S. Ervin-Tripp, K. Nakamura & S. Ozcaliskan (eds), 209–224. New York NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M., Tarrane, P. & Bonnet, P. 2009. Motion in first language acquisition: Manner and Path in French and in English. Journal of Child Language 36(4): 705–741. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jisa, H. 2005. Developing alternatives for indicating discourse stance. In Perspectives on Language and Language Development: Essays in Honor of Ruth A. Berman, D. Ravid & H. Shyldkrot (eds), 357–374. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kail, M. 2004. Online grammaticality judgments in French children and adults: A crosslinguistic perspective. Journal of Child Language 31: 713–737. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Coût du traitement chez les sujets bilingues: Perspective développementale et comparative. In Nada na Linguagem Ihe E Estranho, A. Costa & I. Duarte (eds), 633–650. Porto: Ediçoes Afrontamento.Google Scholar
Kail, M., Kihlstedt, M. & Bonnet, P. 2012. Online sentence processing in Swedish: Crosslinguistic developmental comparisons with French. Journal of Child Language 39(1): 28–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kita, S. & Özyürek A. 2003. What does cross-linguistic variation in semantic coordination of speech and gesture reveal? Evidence for an interface representation of spatial thinking and speaking. Journal of Memory and Language 48(1): 16–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klima, E. & Bellugi, U. (eds). 1979. The Signs of Language. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Landau, B. & Jackendoff, R. 1993. “What” and “Where” in spatial language and cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16: 217–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Landau, B. & Lakusta, L. 2006. Spatial language and spatial representation: Autonomy and interaction. In Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories [Typological Studies in Language 66], M. Hickmann & S. Robert (eds), 309–333. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C. 2003. Space in Language and Cognition: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lieven, E. V. 2010. Input and first language acquisition. Evaluating the role of frequency. Lingua 120: 2546–2556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. 1991/2000. The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk, (1st/3rd edn. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (eds). 1989. The Crosslinguistic Study of Sentence Processing. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Mandler J. M. 1998. Representation. In Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 2, W. Damon, D. Kuhn & R. S. Siegler (eds), 255–308. New York NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Marcus, G., Pinker, S., Ullman, M., Hollander, M., Rosen, J. & Fei Xu, F. 1992. Overregularization in Language Acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 57(4): 1–182.Google Scholar
Mazur-Palandre, A., Fayol, M. & Jisa, H. 2012. Information Flow across Modalities and Text Types. In Past, Present, and Future Contributions of Cognitive Writing Research to Cognitive Psychology, V. Berninger (ed.), 423–437. New York NY: Taylor Francis.Google Scholar
McNeill, D. 1992. Hand and Mind. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
2005. Gesture and Thought. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. Gesture – speech unity: Phylogenesis, ontogenesis, and microgenesis. Language, Interaction, Acquisition 5(2): 37–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, W. & Ervin, S. 1964. The development of grammar in child language. In The Acquisition of Language. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 29(1): 9–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Munnich, E. & Landau, B. 2003. The effect of spatial language on spatial representations: setting some boundaries. In Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (eds), 113–155. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. 1973. Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 38(1–2): 1–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1981. Individual differences in language development: Implications for development and language. Developmental Psychology 17(2): 170–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicoladis, E., Mayberry, R. I. & Genesee, F. 1999. Gesture and early bilingual development. Developmental Psychology 35(2): 514–526. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş. & Goldin-Meadow, S. 2005. Gesture is at the cutting edge of early language development. Cognition 96(3): B101–B113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Allen, S., Furman, R. & Brown, A. 2005. How does linguistic framing of events influence co-speech gestures? Insights from crosslinguistic variations and similarities. Gesture 5(1–2): 219–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özyürek, A., Kita S., Allen, S., Furman, R., Brown, A. & Ishizuka, T. 2008. Development of cross-linguistic variation in speech and gesture: Motion events in English and Turkish. Developmental Psychology 44(4): 1040–1050. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C. & Gleitman, L. 2002. Shake, rattle, ‘n’ roll: The representation of motion in thought and language. Cognition 84: 189–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A., Hulbert, J. & Trueswell, J. 2008. Does language guide event perception? Evidence from eye movements. Cognition 108: 155–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pearl, L. 2010. Using computational modeling in language acquisition research. In Experimental Methods in Language Acquisition Research [Language Learning & Language Teaching 27], E. Blom & S. Unsworth (eds), 163–183. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perniss, P. & Özyürek, A. 2008. Representations of action, motion, and location in sign space: A comparison of German (DGS) and Turkish (TID) Sign Language narratives. In Signs of the time [Proceedings of TISLR 8], J. Quer (ed.), 353–376. Hamburg: Signum Press.Google Scholar
Pine, K. J., Bird, H. & Kirk, E. 2007. The effects of prohibiting gestures on children's lexical retrieval ability. Developmental Science 10(6): 747–754. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plunkett, K. & Marchman, V. 1991. U-shaped learning and frequency effects in a multi-layered perceptron: implications for child language acquisition. Cognition 38(1): 43–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Serratrice, L. & Allen, S. E. M. (eds). 2015. The Acquisition of Reference [Trends in Language Acquisition Research 15]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shi, R. 2014. Functional morphemes and early language acquisition. Child Development Perspectives 8(1): 6–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siegler, R. 2004. U-shaped interest in U-shaped development – and what it means. Journal of Cognition & Development 5: 1–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. 1985. Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition, D. I. Slobin (ed.), 1157–1249. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
1996. From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (eds), 70–96. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
2004. The many ways to search for a frog: linguistic typology & the expression of motion events. In Relating Events in Narrative, Vol. 2, S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (eds), 219–257. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I., Hoiting, N., Kuntze, K., Lindert, R., Weinberg, A., Pyers, J., Anthony, M., Biederman, Y. & Thumann, H. 2003. A cognitive/functional perspective on the acquisition of “classifiers.” In Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Languages, K. Emmorey (ed.), 271–296. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Snow, C. E. 1972. Mothers’ speech to children learning language. Child Development 43: 549–565. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snow, C. E., Lawrence, J. F. & White, C. 2009. Generating knowledge of academic language among urban middle school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness 2(4): 325–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spelke, E. S., Breinlinger, K., Macomber, J. & Jacobson, K. 1992. Origins of knowledge. Psychological Review, Vol. 99, N° 4, 605–632.Google Scholar
Strömqvist, S. & Verhoeven, L. (eds). 2004. Relating Events in Narrative, Vol. 2: Typological and Contextual Perspectives. New York NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, Vol. 1: Concept Structuring Systems; Vol. 2: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
2003. The representation of spatial structure in spoken and signed language. In Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Language, K. Emmorey (ed.), 169–195. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
van Dijk, M. & van Geert, P. 2013. Exploring patterns of adaptation in child-directed speech during the process of early grammaticalization in child language. In Grammaticalization and First Language Acquisition: Crosslinguistic Perspectives [Benjamins Current Topics 50], D. Bassano & M. Hickmann (eds), 61–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Geert, P. 1991. A dynamic systems model of cognitive and language growth. Psychological Review 98: 3–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010. Dynamic systems methods in the study of language acquisition: Modeling and the search for trends, transitions and fluctuations. In Language Acquisition across Linguistic and Cognitive Systems [ Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 52], M. Kail & M. Hickmann (eds), 1–17. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Veneziano, E. 2016. The development of narrative discourse in French by 5 to 10 years old children: Some insights from a conversational interaction method. In Written and Spoken Language Development across the Lifespan: Essays in Honour of Liliana Tolchinsky [Literacy Studies Series], J. Perera, M. Aparici, E. Rosado & N. Salas (eds), 141–160. Heidelberg: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
In press. Learning conversational skills and learning from conversation. In Handbook of Communication Disorders: Theoretical, Empirical, and Applied Linguistic Perspectives, A. Bar-On & D. Ravid (eds). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Veneziano, E. & Hudelot, C. 2009. Explaining events in narratives: The impact of scaffolding in 4 to 12 old-year children. Psychology of Language and Communication 13(1): 3–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Werker, J. F. & Gervain, J. 2013. Language acquisition: Perceptual foundations in infancy. In The Oxford Handbook of Developmental Psychology, P. Zelazo (ed.), 909–925. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar