Literature DB >> 9141906

A cross-linguistic study of early word meaning: universal ontology and linguistic influence.

M Imai1, D Gentner.   

Abstract

This research concerns how children learn the distinction between substance names and object names. Quine (1969) proposed that children learn the distinction through learning the syntactic distinctions inherent in count/mass grammar. However, Soja et al. (1991) found that English-speaking 2-year-olds, who did not seem to have acquired count/mass grammar, distinguished objects from substances in a word extension task, suggesting a pre-linguistic ontological distinction. To test whether the distinction between object names and substance names is conceptually or linguistically driven, we repeated Soja et al.'s study with English- and Japanese-speaking 2-, 2.5-, and 4-year-olds and adults. Japanese does not make a count-mass grammatical distinction: all inanimate nouns are treated alike. Thus if young Japanese children made the object-substance distinction in word meaning, this would support the early ontology position over the linguistic influence position. We used three types of standards: substances (e.g., sand in an S-shape), simple objects (e.g., a kidney-shaped piece of paraffin) and complex objects (e.g., a wood whisk). The subjects learned novel nouns in neutral syntax denoting each standard entity. They were then asked which of the two alternatives--one matching in shape but not material and the other matching in material but not shape--would also be named by the same label. The results suggest the universal use of ontological knowledge in early word learning. Children in both languages showed differentiation between (complex) objects and substances as early as 2 years of age. However, there were also early cross-linguistic differences. American and Japanese children generalized the simple object instances and the substance instances differently. We speculate that children universally make a distinction between individuals and non-individuals in word learning but that the nature of the categories and the boundary between them is influenced by language.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9141906     DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(96)00784-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  42 in total

1.  Attention to context: U.S. and Japanese children's emotional judgments.

Authors:  Megumi Kuwabara; Ji Y Son; Linda B Smith
Journal:  J Cogn Dev       Date:  2011-11-02

2.  Linguistic cues enhance the learning of perceptual cues.

Authors:  Hanako Yoshida; Linda B Smith
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2005-02

3.  Cultural differences in neural function associated with object processing.

Authors:  Angela H Gutchess; Robert C Welsh; Aysecan Boduroglu; Denise C Park
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.282

4.  When we think about thinking: the acquisition of belief verbs.

Authors:  Anna Papafragou; Kimberly Cassidy; Lila Gleitman
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2006-11-13

5.  Words can slow down category learning.

Authors:  Chandra L Brojde; Chelsea Porter; Eliana Colunga
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-08

6.  Classifiers as Count Syntax: Individuation and Measurement in the Acquisition of Mandarin Chinese.

Authors:  Peggy Li; David Barner; Becky H Huang
Journal:  Lang Learn Dev       Date:  2008-10-01

7.  A single word in a population of words.

Authors:  Shohei Hidaka; Linda B Smith
Journal:  Lang Learn Dev       Date:  2010

8.  How Persistent are Grammatical Gender Effects? The Case of German and Tamil.

Authors:  Peter Sedlmeier; Arun Tipandjan; Anastasia Jänchen
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2016-04

9.  Of substance: the nature of language effects on entity construal.

Authors:  Peggy Li; Yarrow Dunham; Susan Carey
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2009-02-23       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Words as windows to thought: The case of object representation.

Authors:  David Barner; Peggy Li; Jesse Snedeker
Journal:  Curr Dir Psychol Sci       Date:  2010-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.