This article analyses longitudinal diary data from one infant acquiring German to seek a better understanding of the role of onomatopoeia in early language development. Onomatopoeic words (OWs) are traced over time in relation to their corresponding conventional forms (CWs), and an analysis of their phonological transitions is considered in relation to the infant’s wider language development. OWs are found to serve as a bootstrapping mechanism on a lexical as well as a phonological level, and a lexical OW ‘template’ is proposed, which is found to support phonological development throughout the infant’s output.
BehrensH. (2007). The input–output relationship in first language acquisition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 2–24.
2.
CaselliM. C.RinaldiP.StefaniniS.VolterraV. (2012). Early action and gesture ‘Vocabulary’ and its relation with word comprehension and production. Child Development, 83, 526–542.
3.
ElsenH. (1991). Erstspracherwerb, Der Erwerb des deutschen Lautsystems. Wiesbaden, Germany: Deutscher Universitaets Verlag.
4.
ElsenH. (1994). Phonological constraints and overextensions. First Language, 14, 305–315.
5.
ElsenH. (1996). Two routes to language: Stylistic variation in one child. First Language, 16, 141–158.
6.
FergusonC. A.FarwellC. B. (1975). Words and sounds in early language acquisition. Language, 51, 419–439.
IversonJ. M.Goldin-MeadowS. (2005). Gesture paves the way for language development. Psychological Science, 16, 367–371.
9.
JespersenO. (1950). Language: Its nature, development and origin (8th ed.). London, England: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
10.
KauschkeC.HofmeisterC. (2002). Early lexical development in German: A study on vocabulary growth and vocabulary composition during the second and third year of life. Journal of Child Language, 29, 735–757.
11.
KernS. (2010). Les premiers mots du jeune enfant français: analyse quantitative et qualitative du vocabulaire réceptif et productif des deux premières années de vie. Rééducation orthophonique, 244, 149–165.
12.
KunnariS. (2002). Word length in syllables: Evidence from early word production in Finnish. First Language, 22, 119–135.
13.
LaingC. E. (2014). Phonological ‘wildness’ in early language development: Exploring the role of onomatopoeia. In PARLAY Proceedings 2013 (York Papers in Linguistics), University of York, UK, 6 September 2013, pp. 48–62.
14.
LeopoldW. F. (1970). Speech development of a bilingual child (Vol. 1): Vocabulary growth in the first two years. New York, NY: AMS Press.
15.
MeierR. P.MaukC. E.CheekA.MorelandC. J. (2008). The form of children’s early signs: Iconic or motoric determinants?Language Learning and Development, 4, 63–98.
16.
MennL.VihmanM. (2011). Features in child phonology: Inherent, emergent, or artefacts of analysis? In ClementsN.RidouaneR. (Eds.), Where do phonological features come from? The nature and sources of phonological primitives (Language Faculty and Beyond 6.) (pp. 261–301). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
17.
NygaardN. C.CookA. E.NamyL. L. (2009). Sound to meaning correspondences facilitate word learning. Cognition, 112, 181–186.
18.
OrlanskyM. D.BonvillianJ. D. (1984). The role of iconicity in early sign language acquisition. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 49, 287–292.
19.
RhodesR. (1994). Aural images. In OhalaJ.HintonL.NicholsJ. (Eds.), Sound symbolism (pp. 276–301). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20.
SapirE. (1921). Language. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc.
21.
Savinainen-MakkonenT. (2007). Geminate template: A model for first Finnish words. First Language, 27, 347–359.
22.
SlobinD. I. (1980). The repeated path between transparency and opacity in language. In BellugiU.Studdert-KennedyM. (Eds.), Signed and spoken language: Biological constraints on linguistic form (pp. 229–246). Weinheim, Germany: Verlag Chemie.
