Semantic cues in language learning: an artificial language study with adult and child learners

Helen Brown,Kenny Smith,Anna Samara,Elizabeth Wonnacott

doi:10.1080/23273798.2021.1995612

Abstract

ABSTRACT Grammatical regularities may correlate with semantics; e.g. grammatical gender is often partially predictable from the noun's semantics. We explore whether learners generalise over semantic cues, and whether the extent of exposure (1 versus 4 sessions) and number of exemplars for each semantic class (type-frequency) affect this. Six-year-olds and adults were exposed to semi-artificial languages where nouns co-occurred with novel particles, with particle usage fully or partially determined by the semantics of the nouns. Both adults and children generalised to novel nouns when semantic cues were fully consistent. Adults (but not children) also generalised when cues were partially consistent. Generalisation increased with exposure, however there was no evidence that increasing type-frequency (i.e. more nouns per semantic class) increased generalisation. Post-experiment interviews also suggested that successful generalisation depended on explicit awareness. These results suggest that semantic cues are particularly difficult for children to exploit during the early stages of language acquisition.

Highlights

Language acquisition involves generalisation, which enables us to use words in novel, yet grammatically well-formed ways
We further probed the novel noun data for any evidence of above chance generalisation when those participants who reported noticing the semantic cues in the post-experiment interview were excluded
Generalisation of semantic cues to new nouns was not greater in the high type-frequency conditions, for either children or adults, and generalisation appeared to depend on explicit awareness of the cues in question

Summary

Introduction

Language acquisition involves generalisation, which enables us to use words in novel, yet grammatically well-formed ways. Young children may rely more on phonological cues than semantic cues because of their earlier availability (i.e., infants are exposed to word forms before they successfully acquire formmeaning mappings; Gagliardi, Feldman, & Lidz, 2017). These two explanations are consistent with Bates and MacWhinney’s (1989) competition model of syntactic processing. Children are clearly capable of learning how semantic properties link to lexical items They may know how natural gender relates to the superordinate terms for man and woman. It is relating these cues to grammatical gender that appears to be difficult

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion