Syntactic priming in 3- and 4-year-old children: evidence for abstract representations of transitive and dative forms.

The current studies used a syntactic priming paradigm with 3- and 4-year-old children. In Experiment 1, children were asked to describe a series of drawings depicting transitive and dative relations to establish baseline production levels. In Experiment 2, an experimenter described a similar series of drawings using one of two syntactic forms (i.e., active/passive for transitive; double-object/prepositional for dative). Children were then asked to describe pictures identical to those shown in the corresponding baseline procedure. In both transitive and dative conditions, 4-year-old children were more likely to use a particular syntactic form if it had been used by the experimenter. Three-year-old children did not show priming effects, but their production of transitive sentences was higher following transitive primes than in Experiment 1. In Experiment 3, an additional group of 3-year-olds participated in a procedure in which they repeated the experimenter's sentences before describing the pictures. This procedure yielded significant priming effects for transitive and dative forms. These results indicate that very young children possess abstract syntactic representations, but that their access to these representations is sensitive to task demands.

[1]  Grover J. Whitehurst,et al.  Selective imitation of the passive construction through modeling , 1974 .

[2]  June A. Flora,et al.  Children's use ofGet passives , 1982 .

[3]  J. K. Bock Syntactic persistence in language production , 1986, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  L. Gleitman,et al.  Language and Experience: Evidence from the Blind Child , 1988 .

[5]  Michelle A. Hollander,et al.  The learnability and acquisition of the dative alternation , 1989 .

[6]  Henrietta Lempert,et al.  Animacy constraints on preschool children's acquisition of syntax , 1989 .

[7]  K. Bock,et al.  Structure in language. Creating form in talk. , 1990, The American psychologist.

[8]  Letitia R. Naigles,et al.  Children use syntax to learn verb meanings , 1990, Journal of Child Language.

[9]  L. Gleitman The Structural Sources of Verb Meanings , 2020, Sentence First, Arguments Afterward.

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

[11]  K. Bock,et al.  From conceptual roles to structural relations: bridging the syntactic cleft. , 1992 .

[12]  E. Kako,et al.  First contact in verb acquisition: defining a role for syntax. , 1993, Child development.

[13]  A D Baddeley,et al.  The Children's Test of Nonword Repetition: a test of phonological working memory. , 1994, Memory.

[14]  S. Gathercole,et al.  Phonological working memory and speech production in preschool children. , 1995, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[15]  Andrew J. Stewart,et al.  Syntactic priming: Investigating the mental representation of language , 1995 .

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

[17]  M. Pickering,et al.  The Representation of Verbs: Evidence from Syntactic Priming in Language Production , 1998 .

[18]  MICHAEL TOMASELLO,et al.  Young children's earliest transitive and intransitive constructions , 1998 .

[19]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Young children learn to produce passives with nonce verbs. , 1999, Developmental psychology.

[20]  J. Jonides,et al.  Perception, cognition, and language : essays in honor of Henry and Lila Gleitman , 2000 .

[21]  Zenzi M. Griffin,et al.  The persistence of structural priming: transient activation or implicit learning? , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[22]  Alexandra A. Cleland,et al.  Syntactic co-ordination in dialogue , 2000, Cognition.

[23]  Dana McDaniel,et al.  Methods for assessing children's syntax , 2000 .

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

[25]  Jane B. Childers,et al.  The role of pronouns in young children's acquisition of the English transitive construction. , 2001, Developmental psychology.

[26]  Michael Israel,et al.  From states to events: The acquisition of English passive participles* , 2001 .

[27]  M. Tomasello,et al.  A tale of two theories: response to Fisher , 2002, Cognition.

[28]  Cynthia Fisher,et al.  The role of abstract syntactic knowledge in language acquisition: a reply to Tomasello (2000) , 2002, Cognition.

[29]  Cynthia L Fisher,et al.  Structural limits on verb mapping: the role of abstract structure in 2.5‐year‐olds’ interpretations of novel verbs , 2002 .

[30]  Michael Tomasello,et al.  What paradox? A response to Naigles , 2003 .

[31]  Anna L. Theakston,et al.  Testing the abstractness of children's linguistic representations: lexical and structural priming of syntactic constructions in young children. , 2003, Developmental science.

[32]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Training 2;6-year-olds to produce the transitive construction: the role of frequency, semantic similarity and shared syntactic distribution. , 2004, Developmental science.

[33]  J. Huttenlocher,et al.  Syntactic priming in young children , 2004 .

[34]  C. Fisher,et al.  Learning Words and Rules , 2006, Psychological science.

[35]  J. Huttenlocher,et al.  Effects of language intervention on syntactic skill levels in preschoolers. , 2006, Developmental psychology.

[36]  Gary F. Marcus,et al.  From semantics to syntax and back again: Argument structure in the third year of life , 2006, Cognition.

[37]  J. Pine,et al.  Investigating the abstractness of children's early knowledge of argument structure , 2006, Journal of Child Language.

[38]  E. Conwell,et al.  Early syntactic productivity: Evidence from dative shift , 2007, Cognition.