Lexically based learning and semantic analogy may both play a role in the learning of grammar. To investigate this, 5-year-old German children were trained on a miniature language (nominally English) involving two grammatical constructions, each of which was associated with a different semantic verb class.Training was followed by elicited production and grammaticality judgement tests with ‘trained verbs’ and a ‘generalization’ test, involving untrained verbs. In the ‘trained verbs’ judgement test the children were above chance at associating particular verbs with the constructions in which they had heard them. They did this significantly more often with verbs which they had heard especially frequently in particular constructions, indicating lexically based learning. There was also an interaction between frequency and semantic class (or the particular verbs). In the generalization judgement test the children were at chance overall. In the elicited production generalization test 75% of the children used the same construction for all items.
Abbot-Smith, K., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. ( 2004). Training 2;6-year-olds to produce the transitive construction: The role of frequency, semantic similarity and shared syntactic distribution . Developmental Science, 7, 48-55.
2.
Abbot-Smith, K., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. ( 2008). Graded representations in the acquisition of English and German transitive constructions. Cognitive Development , 23, 48-66.
3.
Ambridge, B., Pine, J., Rowland, C., & Young, C. ( 2008). The effect of verb semantic class and verb frequency (entrenchment) on children’s and adults’ graded judgments of argument-structure overgeneralization errors. Cognition, 106, 87-129.
4.
Bolander, M. ( 1989). Prefabs, patterns and rules in interaction? Formulaic speech in adult learners’ L2 Swedish. In K. Hyltenstam & L. Obler (Eds.), Bilingualism across the lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity and loss . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Boyd, J., & Goldberg, A.E. (in press). Children’s failure to generalise when exposed to the same input as adults and its benefits in language learning . Lingua.
6.
Braine, M.D.S. ( 1963). The ontogeny of English phrase structure - the 1st Phase . Language, 39, 1-13.
7.
Braine, M.D.S., Brody, R.E., Fisch, S.M., Weisberger, M.J., & Blum, M. ( 1990). Can children use a verb without exposure to its argument structure? Journal of Child Language, 17, 313-342.
8.
Brooks, P.J., & Tomasello, M. ( 1999). How children constrain their argument structure constructions . Language, 75, 720-738.
9.
Casenhiser, D.M., & Goldberg, A.E. (2005). Fast mapping between a phrasal form and meaning. Developmental Science, 8, 500-508.
10.
Childers, J.B., & Tomasello, M. ( 2001). The role of pronouns in young children’s acquisition of the English transitive construction. Developmental Psychology , 37, 739-748.
11.
Ellis, N. ( 2003). Constructions, chunking and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 33-68). Oxford: Blackwell.
12.
Fisher, C. ( 1996). Structural limits on verb mapping: The role of analogy in children’s interpretations of sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 31, 41-81.
13.
Fisher, C. ( 2002). The role of abstract syntactic knowledge in language acquisition: A reply to Tomasello (2000). Cognition, 82, 259-278.
14.
Flege, J., & Liu, S. ( 2001). The effect of experience on adults’ acquisition of a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 23, 527-552.
15.
Gentner, D., & Namy, L.L. ( 2006). Analogical processes in language learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 297-301.
16.
Gertner, Y., Fisher, C., & Eisengart, J. ( 2006). Learning words and rules: Abstract knowledge of word order in early sentence comprehension. Psychological Science , 17, 684-691.
17.
Gillette, J., Gleitman, H., Gleitman, L., & Lederer, A. ( 1999). Human simulations of vocabulary learning. Cognition, 73, 135-176.
18.
Gleitman, L., January, D., Nappa, R., & Trueswell, J.C. (2007). On the give and take between event apprehension and utterance formulation. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 544-569.
19.
Goldberg, A.E. ( 1999). The emergence of the semantics of argument structure constructions. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
Goldschneider, J., & DeKeyser, R. ( 2001). Explaining the ‘natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition’ in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51, 1-50.
21.
Grimm, H. ( 2001). Sprachentwicklungstest für drei- bis fünfjährige Kinder. Goettingen: Hogrefe.
22.
Hakuta, K., Bialystok, E., & Wiley, E. ( 2003). Critical evidence: A test of the critical-period hypothesis for second-language acquisition. Psychological Science, 14, 31-38.
23.
Hudson Kam, C.L., & Newport, E.L. ( 2005). Regularising unpredictable variation: The roles of adult and child learners in language formation and change. Language Learning and Development, 1, 151-195.
24.
Imai, M., Haryu, E., & Okada, H. ( 2005). Mapping novel nouns and verbs onto dynamic action events: Are verb meanings easier to learn than noun meanings for Japanese children ? Child Development, 76, 340-355.
25.
Johnson, E., & Jusczyk, P. ( 2001). Word segmentation by 8-month-olds: When speech cues count more than statistics. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 548-567.
26.
Johnson, J., & Newport, E.L. ( 1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60-90.
27.
Johnston, J., Blatchley, M., & Streit Olness, G. (1990). Miniature language system acquisition by children with different learning proficiencies. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 335-342.
28.
Kersten, A., & Smith, L. ( 2002). Attention to novel objects during verb learning. Child Development, 73, 93-109.
29.
Langacker, R. ( 2000). A dynamic usage-based model. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmerer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language. Stanford, CA: SLI Publications.
30.
Lieven, E. ( 2008). Learning the English auxiliary: A usage-based approach . In H. Behrens (Ed.), Trends in corpus research: Finding structure in data. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
31.
Loucks, J., & Baldwin, D. ( 2006). When is a grasp a grasp? Characterizing some basic components of human action processing. In K. Hirsh-Pasek & R. Golinkoff (Eds.), Action meets word: How children learn verbs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32.
MacWhinney, B. ( 1983). Miniature linguistic systems as tests of the use of universal operating principles in second-language learning by children and adults. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 12, 467-478.
33.
Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. ( 2005). The role of frequency in the acquisition of English word order. Cognitive Development, 20, 121-136.
34.
Meier, R., & Bower, G. ( 1986). Semantic reference and phrasal grouping in the acquisition of a miniature phrase structure language. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 492-505.
35.
Myles, F., Hooper, J., & Mitchell, R. ( 1998). Rote or rule? Exploring the role of formulaic language in classroom foreign language learning. Language Learning , 48, 323-363.
36.
Ninio, A. ( 2005). Testing the role of semantic similarity in syntactic development. Journal of Child Language, 32, 35-61.
37.
Papafragou, A., Cassidy, K., & Gleitman, L. ( 2007). When we think about thinking: The acquisition of belief verbs. Cognition, 105, 125-165.
38.
Pickering, M., & Branigan, H. ( 1998). The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language , 39, 633-651.
39.
Piller, I. ( 2002). Passing for a native speaker: Identity and success in second language learning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 6, 179-206.
40.
Pinker, S. ( 1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of verb-argument structure. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
41.
Richards, B.J. ( 1990). Language development and individual differences: A study of auxiliary verb learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42.
Stoll, S., Abbot-Smith, K., & Lieven, E. ( 2009). Lexically restricted utterances in Russian, German and English child-directed speech. Cognitive Science, 33, 75-103.
43.
Theakston, A. ( 2004). The role of entrenchment in constraining children’s verb argument structure overgeneralisations: A grammaticality judgment study . Cognitive Development, 19, 15-34.
44.
Tomasello, M. ( 2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
45.
Trueswell, J.C., Tanenhaus, M.K., & Kello, C. ( 1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 528-553.
46.
Weinert, R. ( 1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16, 180-205.
47.
Yorio, C. ( 1989). Idiomaticity as an indicator of second language proficiency . In K. Hyltenstam & L. Obler (Eds.), Bilingualism across the lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity and loss. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
