The effect of sampling on estimates of lexical specificity and error rates

Studies based on naturalistic data are a core tool in the field of language acquisition research and have provided thorough descriptions of children's speech. However, these descriptions are inevitably confounded by differences in the relative frequency with which children use words and language structures. The purpose of the present work was to investigate the impact of sampling constraints on estimates of the productivity of children's utterances, and on the validity of error rates. Comparisons were made between five different sized samples of wh-question data produced by one child aged 2;8. First, we assessed whether sampling constraints undermined the claim (e.g. Tomasello, 2000) that the restricted nature of early child speech reflects a lack of adultlike grammatical knowledge. We demonstrated that small samples were equally likely to under- as overestimate lexical specificity in children's speech, and that the reliability of estimates varies according to sample size. We argued that reliable analyses require a comparison with a control sample, such as that from an adult speaker. Second, we investigated the validity of estimates of error rates based on small samples. The results showed that overall error rates underestimate the incidence of error in some rarely produced parts of the system and that analyses on small samples were likely to substantially over- or underestimate error rates in infrequently produced constructions. We concluded that caution must be used when basing arguments about the scope and nature of errors in children's early multi-word productions on analyses of samples of spontaneous speech.

[1]  B. MacWhinney The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk , 1992 .

[2]  M. Maratsos More overregularizations after all: new data and discussion on Marcus, Pinker, Ullman, Hollander, Rosen & Xu , 2000, Journal of Child Language.

[3]  M. Tomasello First Verbs: A Case Study of Early Grammatical Development , 1994 .

[4]  Anna L. Theakston,et al.  The incidence of error in young children's Wh-questions. , 2005, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[5]  M Rispoli,et al.  Patterns of pronoun case error , 1998, Journal of Child Language.

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

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

[8]  R. Brown,et al.  A First Language , 1973 .

[9]  Ewa Dabrowska,et al.  From formula to schema: The acquisition of English questions , 2001 .

[10]  William Labov,et al.  Learning the Syntax of Questions , 1978 .

[11]  S Pinker,et al.  Overregularization in language acquisition. , 1992, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development.

[12]  M. Tomasello Do young children have adult syntactic competence? , 2000, Cognition.

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

[14]  Letitia R. Naigles,et al.  Form is easy, meaning is hard: resolving a paradox in early child language , 2002, Cognition.

[15]  Anna L. Theakston,et al.  A dense corpus study of past tense and plural overregularization in English. , 2004, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[16]  Julian M. Pine,et al.  Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. , 2004 .

[17]  A Erreich,et al.  Learning how to ask: patterns of inversion in yes–no and wh-questions , 1984, Journal of Child Language.

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

[19]  Michael Tomasello,et al.  Sampling children's spontaneous speech: how much is enough? , 2004, Journal of child language.

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

[21]  Robert D. Van Valin, The development of subject–auxiliary inversion in English wh-questions: an alternative analysis , 2002, Journal of Child Language.

[22]  D Ingram,et al.  Inversion of subject NP and aux in children's questions , 1979, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[23]  J. Pine,et al.  Subject–auxiliary inversion errors and wh-question acquisition: ‘what children do know?’ , 2000, Journal of Child Language.

[24]  Andrew Mellor,et al.  Distinctiveness : a new measure of lexical diversity , 2006 .

[25]  Virginia Valian Syntactic categories in the speech of young children. , 1986 .

[26]  Paul Fletcher,et al.  A Child's Learning of English , 1985 .

[27]  J. Pine,et al.  Slot and frame patterns and the development of the determiner category , 1997, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[28]  J. Pine,et al.  Comparing different models of the development of the English verb category , 1998 .

[29]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Young children's productivity with word order and verb morphology. , 1997, Developmental psychology.

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