Literature DB >> 19427039

Language specific prosodic preferences during the first half year of life: evidence from German and French infants.

Barbara Höhle1, Ranka Bijeljac-Babic, Birgit Herold, Jürgen Weissenborn, Thierry Nazzi.   

Abstract

There is converging evidence that infants are sensitive to prosodic cues from birth onwards and use this kind of information in their earliest steps into the acquisition of words and syntactic regularities of their target language. Regarding word segmentation, it has been found that English-learning infants segment trochaic words by 7.5 months of age, and iambic words only by 10.5 months of age [Jusczyk, P. W., Houston, D. M., & Newsome, M. (1999). The beginnings of word segmentation in English-learning infants. Cognitive Psychology, 39, 159-207]. The question remains how to interpret this finding in relation to results showing that English-learning infants develop a preference for trochaic over iambic words between 6 and 9 months of age [Jusczyk, P. W., Cutler, A., & Redanz, N. (1993). Preference for the predominant stress patterns of English words. Child Development, 64, 675-687]. In the following, we report the results of four experiments using the headturn preference procedure (HPP) to explore the trochaic bias issue in German- and French-learning infants. For German, a trochaic preference was found at 6 but not at 4 months, suggesting an emergence of this preference between both ages (Experiments 1 and 2). For French, 6-month-old infants did not show a preference for either stress pattern (Experiment 3) while they were found to discriminate between the two stress patterns (Experiment 4). Our findings are the first to demonstrate that the trochaic bias is acquired by 6 months of age, is language specific and can be predicted by the rhythmic properties of the language in acquisition. We discuss the implications of this very early acquisition for our understanding of the emergence of segmentation abilities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19427039     DOI: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2009.03.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Infant Behav Dev        ISSN: 0163-6383


  31 in total

1.  Infant-directed speech reduces English-learning infants' preference for trochaic words.

Authors:  Yuanyuan Wang; Christopher S Lee; Derek M Houston
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Abstract rule learning in 11- and 14-month-old infants.

Authors:  Elena Koulaguina; Rushen Shi
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2013-02

3.  Preverbal Infants Infer Third-Party Social Relationships Based on Language.

Authors:  Zoe Liberman; Amanda L Woodward; Katherine D Kinzler
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2016-07-29

4.  Transitional probabilities and positional frequency phonotactics in a hierarchical model of speech segmentation.

Authors:  Karima Mersad; Thierry Nazzi
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-08

5.  Rhythmic grouping biases constrain infant statistical learning.

Authors:  Jessica F Hay; Jenny R Saffran
Journal:  Infancy       Date:  2012-11

6.  Processing of lexical stress cues by young children.

Authors:  Carolyn Quam; Daniel Swingley
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2014-04-03

7.  Do humans and nonhuman animals share the grouping principles of the iambic-trochaic law?

Authors:  Daniela M de la Mora; Marina Nespor; Juan M Toro
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Reply to comment on "Nonadjacent dependency processing in monkeys, apes, and humans".

Authors:  Stuart K Watson; Judith M Burkart; Steven J Schapiro; Susan P Lambeth; Jutta L Mueller; Simon W Townsend
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 14.136

9.  Disentangling the influence of salience and familiarity on infant word learning: methodological advances.

Authors:  Heather Bortfeld; Katie Shaw; Nicole Depowski
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-04-17

10.  A "bat" is easier to learn than a "tab": effects of relative phonotactic frequency on infant word learning.

Authors:  Nayeli Gonzalez-Gomez; Silvana Poltrock; Thierry Nazzi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.