The importance of lexical verbs in the acquisition of spatial prepositions: The case of in and on

The prepositions in and on appear early in children's descriptions of simple containment and support relations, such as "apple in the bowl" and "cup on the table". However, mature use of these basic terms extends across a very broad range of object configurations, raising the question of whether children and adults share the same underlying semantic space, and if so, how children's use of in and on comes to match that of adults. With a new battery containing diverse object configurations, we asked how 4 and 6 year-olds and adults distribute basic spatial expressions (isin, is on) and lexical verbs (hang, attach, etc.) across subtypes of containment and support. Our results reveal probabilistic distributions of in and on in both adult and child language, with similar distributions among adults and children for in but different patterns for on. Moreover, we find substantial differences in the use of lexical verbs across the two spatial domains and across ages. We propose that children and adults share a structured semantic space for both containment and support relations, but larger portions of this space are described by in and on early in development because alternative descriptions employing lexical verbs are inhibited. Using computational modeling along with experimental data, we link developmental changes in the scope of basic spatial expressions to increasing use of lexical verbs in parts of the space that reflect less central relations of containment or support. This result supports a nuanced view of spatial language acquisition that shifts the focus from how children learn basic expressions to how they learn to distribute expressions of varying content and complexity across the semantic space.

[1]  Kazuhiro Kawachi Korean putting verbs do not categorize space contrastively in terms of “tightness of fit” , 2007 .

[2]  Leonard Talmy,et al.  (1) Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms; and , 1987 .

[3]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  The English Lexicon Project , 2007, Behavior research methods.

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

[5]  S. Levinson,et al.  'Natural Concepts' in the Spatial Topologial Domain--Adpositional Meanings in Crosslinguistic Perspective: An Exercise in Semantic Typology , 2003 .

[6]  Judith Aissen,et al.  Optimality and Functionality: Objections and Refutations , 2002 .

[7]  Annette Herskovits Language and Spatial Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Study of the Prepositions in English , 2009 .

[8]  Michele I. Feist On IN and ON : an investigation into the linguistic encoding of spatial scenes , 2000 .

[9]  D. Slobin,et al.  The development of locative expressions in English, Italian, Serbo-Croatian and Turkish , 1977, Journal of Child Language.

[10]  H. Bergh,et al.  Examples of Mixed-Effects Modeling with Crossed Random Effects and with Binomial Data. , 2008 .

[11]  T. Givón,et al.  On Understanding Grammar , 1979 .

[12]  Marianella Casasola,et al.  The Development of Infants' Spatial Categories , 2008 .

[13]  Sarah Depaoli,et al.  Just Another Gibbs Sampler (JAGS) , 2016 .

[14]  Susan J. Hespos,et al.  Precursors to spatial language: The case of containment , 2007 .

[15]  Soonja Choi,et al.  Space under construction: Language-specific spatial categorization in first language acquisition , 2003 .

[16]  Susan J. Hespos,et al.  Conceptual precursors to language , 2004, Nature.

[17]  Melissa Bowerman,et al.  Topological relations picture series , 1992 .

[18]  B. Landau,et al.  “What” and “where” in spatial language and spatial cognition , 1993 .

[19]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The typological prevalence hypothesis , 2009 .

[20]  David B. Dunson,et al.  Bayesian Data Analysis , 2010 .

[21]  Susan J. Hespos,et al.  Reasoning about containment events in very young infants , 2001, Cognition.

[22]  K. Coventry,et al.  Spatial demonstratives and perceptual space: Describing and remembering object location , 2014, Cognitive Psychology.

[23]  Eve V. Clark,et al.  WHAT'S IN A WORD? ON THE CHILD'S ACQUISITION OF SEMANTICS IN HIS FIRST LANGUAGE , 1973 .

[24]  Jarrod Had MCMC Methods for Multi-Response Generalized Linear Mixed Models: The MCMCglmm R Package , 2010 .

[25]  M. Bowerman Learning how to structure space for language: A crosslinguistic perspective , 1996 .

[26]  Seungjin Choi,et al.  Shaping meanings for language: universal and language-specific in the acquisition of spatial semanti , 2001 .

[27]  Luna Filipović,et al.  Grammars of Space: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity: Stephen C. Levinson, David Wilkins (Eds.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 621 pp., ISBN-10 0-521-67178-7 (paperback) , 2008 .

[28]  John K. Kruschke,et al.  Doing Bayesian Data Analysis: A Tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan , 2014 .

[29]  Claude Vandeloise Genesis of spatial terms , 2017 .

[30]  Amy Needham,et al.  Intuitions about support in 4.5-month-old infants , 1993, Cognition.

[31]  David P. Wilkins,et al.  Semantic typology and spatial conceptualization , 1998 .

[32]  Terry Regier,et al.  Spatial terms reflect near-optimal spatial categories , 2009 .

[33]  Susan J. Hespos,et al.  Young infants’ actions reveal their developing knowledge of support variables: Converging evidence for violation-of-expectation findings , 2008, Cognition.

[34]  T. Jaeger,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[35]  M. Bowerman,et al.  Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns , 1991, Cognition.

[36]  Sandra R. Waxman,et al.  Tight and loose are not created equal: An asymmetry underlying the representation of fit in English- and Korean-speakers , 2008, Cognition.

[37]  T. Regier A model of the human capacity for categorizing spatial relations , 1995 .

[38]  David C. Bennett,et al.  Spatial and temporal uses of English prepositions : an essay in stratificational semantics , 1979 .

[39]  Marianella Casasola,et al.  When less is more: how infants learn to form an abstract categorical representation of support. , 2005, Child development.

[40]  S. Levinson Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity , 2003 .

[41]  Christopher D. Manning,et al.  Soft Constraints Mirror Hard Constraints: Voice and Person in English and Lummi , 2002 .

[42]  M. Casasola,et al.  Infant categorization of containment, support and tight‐fit spatial relationships , 2002 .

[43]  M. Casasola,et al.  Six-month-old infants' categorization of containment spatial relations. , 2003, Child development.

[44]  Barbara Landau,et al.  Containment and Support: Core and Complexity in Spatial Language Learning. , 2017, Cognitive science.