The growth of tense productivity.

PURPOSE This study tests empirical predictions of a maturational model for the growth of tense in children younger than 36 months using a type-based productivity measure. METHOD Caregiver-child language samples were collected from 20 typically developing children every 3 months from 21 to 33 months of age. Growth in the productivity of tense morphemes, centered at 21 months, was examined using hierarchical linear modeling. The empirical Bayes residuals from 21- to 30-month productivity growth trajectories predicted children's accuracy of tense marking at 33 months. RESULTS A random effects quadratic growth model with no intercept best characterized the growth of tense marking between 21 and 30 months. Average development was characterized by slow instantaneous linear growth of less than 1 morpheme per month at 21 months and acceleration overall. Significant variation around this trend was also evident. Children's linear and quadratic empirical Bayes residuals together predicted 33-month accuracy scores (r = .672, p = .008). CONCLUSIONS Acceleration and variation about this trend are consistent with maturational models of language acquisition. With an empirically sound characterization of early variation in morphosyntactic growth rates, future investigations can more rigorously test hypotheses regarding biological, environmental, and developmental contributions to the acquisition of morphosyntax.

[1]  L. Bloom Language Development: Form and Function in Emerging Grammars , 1970 .

[2]  R. Brown A First Language , 1973 .

[3]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  Rules, rote, and analogy in morphological formations by Hungarian children , 1975, Journal of Child Language.

[4]  M. Braine Children's First Word Combinations. , 1976 .

[5]  R S Chapman,et al.  The relation between age and mean length of utterance in morphemes. , 1981, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[6]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Toward a Cognitive Psychology of Syntax: Information Processing Contributions to Sentence Formulation , 1982 .

[7]  Steven Pinker,et al.  Language learnability and language development , 1985 .

[8]  K. Stromswold Learnability and the acquisition of auxiliaries , 1990 .

[9]  Andrew Radford,et al.  Syntactic Theory and the Acquisition of English Syntax: The Nature of Early Child Grammars of English , 1990 .

[10]  Philip S. Dale,et al.  Macarthur Communicative Development Inventories , 1992 .

[11]  Anthony S. Bryk,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods , 1992 .

[12]  J. Pine,et al.  Reanalysing rote-learned phrases: individual differences in the transition to multi-word speech , 1993, Journal of Child Language.

[13]  J. Elman Learning and development in neural networks: the importance of starting small , 1993, Cognition.

[14]  E. Bates,et al.  Continuity in lexical and morphological development: a test of the critical mass hypothesis , 1994, Journal of Child Language.

[15]  Kathryn Bock,et al.  Language production : Grammatical encoding , 1994 .

[16]  P. Sprent,et al.  19. Applied Nonparametric Statistical Methods , 1995 .

[17]  K. Wexler,et al.  Toward tense as a clinical marker of specific language impairment in English-speaking children. , 1996, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[18]  Pamela Ann Hadley,et al.  Emergent Uses of BE and DO: Evidence from Children with Specific Language Impairment. , 1996 .

[19]  Andrew Radford,et al.  Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English: A Minimalist Approach , 1997 .

[20]  Andrew Radford,et al.  Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English: Index , 1997 .

[21]  P. Dale,et al.  Productivity of Emerging Word Combinations in Toddlers With Specific Expressive Language Impairment , 1997 .

[22]  J. Locke A Theory of Neurolinguistic Development , 1997, Brain and Language.

[23]  J. Pine,et al.  Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development , 1997, Journal of Child Language.

[24]  K. Wexler Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage , 1998 .

[25]  M L Rice,et al.  Tense over time: the longitudinal course of tense acquisition in children with specific language impairment. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[26]  M. Rispoli,et al.  Case and agreement in English language development , 1999, Journal of Child Language.

[27]  Brian MacWhinney,et al.  The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (third edition): Volume I: Transcription format and programs, Volume II: The database , 2000, Computational Linguistics.

[28]  L. Goffman,et al.  Growth of Language Skills in Preschool Children With Specific Language Impairment: Implications for Assessment and Intervention , 2000 .

[29]  Yasuhiro Shirai,et al.  The Acquisition of Lexical and Grammatical Aspect , 2000 .

[30]  M. Rispoli,et al.  The leading-edge: the significance of sentence disruptions in the development of grammar. , 2001, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[31]  C. Dollaghan,et al.  Grammatical morpheme production in 4-year-old children. , 2002, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[32]  T. Regier Emergent constraints on word-learning: a computational perspective , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[33]  Stephen Wilson Lexically specific constructions in the acquisition of inflection in English , 2003, Journal of Child Language.

[34]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Connectionist models of development , 2003 .

[35]  Matthew Rispoli,et al.  Changes in the nature of sentence production during the period of grammatical development. , 2003, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[36]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Early syntactic creativity: a usage-based approach. , 2003, Journal of child language.

[37]  L. Leonard,et al.  Tense and agreement in the speech of children with specific language impairment: patterns of generalization through intervention. , 2004, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[38]  Matthew Rispoli When children reach beyond their grasp: why some children make pronoun case errors and others don't , 2005, Journal of Child Language.

[39]  Pamela A Hadley,et al.  The onset of tense marking in children at risk for specific language impairment. , 2005, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[40]  Anna L. Theakston,et al.  The acquisition of auxiliary syntax: BE and HAVE , 2005 .

[41]  Elena Lieven Producing multiword utterances , 2006 .

[42]  P. Hadley,et al.  Individual differences in the onset of tense marking: a growth-curve analysis. , 2006, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[43]  L. Leonard,et al.  Tense and agreement morphemes in the speech of children with specific language impairment during intervention: phase 2. , 2006, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[44]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  From Usage to Grammar: The Mind's Response to Repetition , 2007 .

[45]  Charles D. Yang,et al.  Morphosyntactic Learning and the Development of Tense , 2007 .

[46]  V. Marchman,et al.  Grammar and the lexicon: developmental ordering in language acquisition. , 2007, Child development.

[47]  C. Mervis,et al.  Vocabulary abilities of children with Williams syndrome: strengths, weaknesses, and relation to visuospatial construction ability. , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[48]  Matthew Rispoli,et al.  Stalls and revisions: a developmental perspective on sentence production. , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[49]  L. Leonard,et al.  The acquisition of tense and agreement morphemes by children with specific language impairment during intervention: phase 3. , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[50]  J. Pine,et al.  Tense over time: testing the Agreement/Tense Omission Model as an account of the pattern of tense-marking provision in early child English* , 2008, Journal of Child Language.

[51]  On paradigms, principles, and predictions , 2008 .