The social-pragmatic theory of word learning

In order to successfully acquire a new word, young children must learn the correct associations between labels and their referents. For decades, word-learning researchers have explored how young children are able to form these associations. However, in addition to learning label-referent mappings, children must also remember them. Despite the importance of memory processes in forming a stable lexicon, there has been little integration of early memory research into the study of early word learning. After discussing what we know about how young children remember words over time, this paper reviews the infant memory development literature as it relates to early word learning, focusing on changes in retention duration, encoding, consolidation, and retrieval across the first 2 years of life. A third section applies this review to word learning and presents future directions, arguing that the integration of memory processes into the study of word learning will provide researchers with novel, useful insights into how young children acquire new words.

Learning about sounds contributes to learning about words: Effects of prosody and phonotactics on infant word learning

Capacities underlying word learning

List of Contributors. Preface. 1. On the Development of the Field of Language Development: Marilyn Shatz (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor). Part I: Basic Foundations and Theoretical Approaches to Language Development:. Introduction . 2. The Neurodevelopmental Bases of Language: Valerie L. Shafer (City University of New York) and Karen Garrido-Nag (City University of New York). 3. Formal and Computational Constraints on Language Development: Helen Goodluck (University of York). 4. Domain-General Learning Capacities: Jenny R. Saffran (University of Wisconsin-Madison) and Erik D. Thiessen (Carnegie Mellon University). 5. How Inherently Social is Language?: Dare Baldwin (University of Oregon, Eugene) and Meredith Meyer (University of Oregon, Eugene). 6. Input and the Acquisition of Language: Three Questions: Virginia C. Mueller Gathercole (University of Wales, Bangor) and Erika Hoff (Florida Atlantic University). 7. The Emergence of Language: A Dynamical Systems Account: Julia L. Evans (San Diego State University). Part II: Language Development in Infancy:. Introduction . 8. Experiential Influences on Speech Perception and Speech Production in Infancy: Linda Polka (McGill University, Montreal), Susan Rvachew (McGill University, Montreal), and Karen Mattock (McGill University, Montreal). 9. Acquiring Linguistic Structure: LouAnn Gerken (University of Arizona, Tucson). 10. Cognitive Processes in Early Word Learning: Diane Poulin-Dubois (Concordia University, Montreal) and Susan A. Graham (University of Calgary). 11. Syntactic Supports for Word Learning: Letitia R. Naigles (University of Connecticut, Storrs) and Lauren D. Swensen (University of Connecticut, Storrs). Part III: Language Development in Early Childhood:. Introduction . 12. Phonological Development: Carol Stoel-Gammon (University of Washington, Seattle) and Anna Vogel Sosa (University of Washington, Seattle). 13. Mechanisms of Word Learning: Gil Diesendruck (Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel). 14. The Abstract Nature of Syntactic Representations: Consequences for a Theory of Learning: Jeffrey Lidz (University of Maryland, College Park). 15. Conversational Understanding in Young Children: Michael Siegal (University of Trieste/University of Sheffield) and Luca Surian (University of Trieste). 16. Bilingual First Language Acquisition: Fred Genesee (McGill University, Montreal) and Elena Nicoladis (University of Alberta, Edmonton). Part IV: Language Development after Early Childhood:. Introduction . 17. Developing Linguistic Knowledge and Language Use Across Adolescence: Ruth A. Berman (Tel Aviv University). 18. Language and Literacy in Bilingual Children in the Early School Years: D. Kimbrough Oller (University of Memphis) and Linda Jarmulowicz (University of Memphis). 19. Second Language Acquisition in Childhood: Johanne Paradis (University of Alberta, Edmonton). Part V: Atypical Language Development:. Introduction . 20. Children with Specific Language Impairment: Bridging the Genetic and Developmental Perspectives: Mabel L. Rice (University of Kansas, Lawrence). 21. Atypical Language Development: Autism and Other Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Helen Tager-Flusberg (Boston University). 22. Reading and Reading Disorders: Heikki Lyytinen (University of Jyvaskyla, Finland), Jane Erskine (Niilo Maki Institute, Jyvaskyla, Finland), Mikko Aro (Niilo Maki Institute, Jyvaskyla, Finland), and Ulla Richardson (University of Jyvaskyla, Finland). Author Index. Subject Index

List of Contributors. Preface. 1. On the Development of the Field of Language Development: Marilyn Shatz (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor). Part I: Basic Foundations and Theoretical Approaches to Language Development:. Introduction . 2. The Neurodevelopmental Bases of Language: Valerie L. Shafer (City University of New York) and Karen Garrido-Nag (City University of New York). 3. Formal and Computational Constraints on Language Development: Helen Goodluck (University of York). 4. Domain-General Learning Capacities: Jenny R. Saffran (University of Wisconsin-Madison) and Erik D. Thiessen (Carnegie Mellon University). 5. How Inherently Social is Language?: Dare Baldwin (University of Oregon, Eugene) and Meredith Meyer (University of Oregon, Eugene). 6. Input and the Acquisition of Language: Three Questions: Virginia C. Mueller Gathercole (University of Wales, Bangor) and Erika Hoff (Florida Atlantic University). 7. The Emergence of Language: A Dynamical Systems Account: Julia L. Evans (San Diego State University). Part II: Language Development in Infancy:. Introduction . 8. Experiential Influences on Speech Perception and Speech Production in Infancy: Linda Polka (McGill University, Montreal), Susan Rvachew (McGill University, Montreal), and Karen Mattock (McGill University, Montreal). 9. Acquiring Linguistic Structure: LouAnn Gerken (University of Arizona, Tucson). 10. Cognitive Processes in Early Word Learning: Diane Poulin-Dubois (Concordia University, Montreal) and Susan A. Graham (University of Calgary). 11. Syntactic Supports for Word Learning: Letitia R. Naigles (University of Connecticut, Storrs) and Lauren D. Swensen (University of Connecticut, Storrs). Part III: Language Development in Early Childhood:. Introduction . 12. Phonological Development: Carol Stoel-Gammon (University of Washington, Seattle) and Anna Vogel Sosa (University of Washington, Seattle). 13. Mechanisms of Word Learning: Gil Diesendruck (Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel). 14. The Abstract Nature of Syntactic Representations: Consequences for a Theory of Learning: Jeffrey Lidz (University of Maryland, College Park). 15. Conversational Understanding in Young Children: Michael Siegal (University of Trieste/University of Sheffield) and Luca Surian (University of Trieste). 16. Bilingual First Language Acquisition: Fred Genesee (McGill University, Montreal) and Elena Nicoladis (University of Alberta, Edmonton). Part IV: Language Development after Early Childhood:. Introduction . 17. Developing Linguistic Knowledge and Language Use Across Adolescence: Ruth A. Berman (Tel Aviv University). 18. Language and Literacy in Bilingual Children in the Early School Years: D. Kimbrough Oller (University of Memphis) and Linda Jarmulowicz (University of Memphis). 19. Second Language Acquisition in Childhood: Johanne Paradis (University of Alberta, Edmonton). Part V: Atypical Language Development:. Introduction . 20. Children with Specific Language Impairment: Bridging the Genetic and Developmental Perspectives: Mabel L. Rice (University of Kansas, Lawrence). 21. Atypical Language Development: Autism and Other Neurodevelopmental Disorders: Helen Tager-Flusberg (Boston University). 22. Reading and Reading Disorders: Heikki Lyytinen (University of Jyvaskyla, Finland), Jane Erskine (Niilo Maki Institute, Jyvaskyla, Finland), Mikko Aro (Niilo Maki Institute, Jyvaskyla, Finland), and Ulla Richardson (University of Jyvaskyla, Finland). Author Index. Subject Index

ABSTRACTThe cognitive mechanisms and benefits of active learning in early child development are poorly understood. The current study investigated 20–23‐month‐old infants’ curiosity‐driven information selection in a novel word learning task, designed to identify any potential advantage for active learning over passive learning. In a gaze‐contingent eye‐tracking paradigm, infants in one condition were given the opportunity to structure their own information seeking to actively create word learning opportunities for themselves, while infants in two other conditions engaged in learning novel words passively. Infants’ learning of word‐object associations was compared across active and passive learning paradigms. The results indicate no advantage of active information selection on retention of novel words above and beyond passive learning, with infants across all conditions retaining novel words above chance. This study provides a crucial insight advancing our understanding of early word learning, and of the mechanisms and benefits of active, curiosity‐based learning in infants.SummaryWe investigated the effect of active, curiosity‐driven word learning, as compared to passive word learning, on infants’ label recognition.Infants’ self‐motivated information selection was tested using a novel word learning task in a gaze‐contingent eye‐tracking paradigm.Self‐motivated information selection had no effect on early word learning above and beyond passive learning, with infants across all conditions retaining novel words above chance.This provides novel insights into infants’ active and passive learning for language acquisition.

Chunks of phonological knowledge play a significant role in children’s word learning and explain effects of neighborhood size, phonotactic probability, word frequency and word length

Three studies investigated novel word learning, some requiring phonological production, each involving between 11 and 17 individuals with Down syndrome, and between 15 and 24 typically developing individuals matched for receptive vocabulary. The effect of stimuli wordlikeness and incidental procedure-based memory demands were examined to see whether these may account for an apparent impairment in word learning in Down syndrome demonstrated in earlier research. Paired associate word and nonword learning tasks were presented, requiring participants to learn the names of novel characters. The nonword stimuli varied in the degree of wordlikeness in 2 studies. A third study investigated extraneous task demand. Across 3 studies, there was no suggestion of a word learning deficit associated with Down syndrome (η(2)(p) for the main effect of group of .03, .11, and .03, respectively), despite the level of phonological representation required. There was evidence that novel word learning by participants with Down syndrome exceeded that which their verbal short-term memory capacity would predict. Vocabulary acquisition in Down syndrome may not rely on verbal short-term memory to the same extent as in typically developing children, lending support to the suggestion that new word learning may be underpinned by an additional memory process.

Early word learning in infants relies on statistical, prosodic, and social cues that support speech segmentation and the attachment of meaning to words. It is debated whether such early word knowledge represents mere associations between sound patterns and visual object features, or reflects referential understanding of words. By measuring an event-related brain potential component known as the N400, we demonstrated that 9-month-old infants can detect the mismatch between an object appearing from behind an occluder and a preceding label with which their mother introduces it. Differential N400 amplitudes have been shown to reflect semantic priming in adults, and its absence in infants has been interpreted as a sign of associative word learning. By setting up a live communicative situation for referring to objects, we demonstrated that a similar priming effect also occurs in young infants. This finding may indicate that word meaning is referential from the outset of word learning and that referential expectation drives, rather than results from, vocabulary acquisition in humans.

Children's linguistic knowledge and the learning mechanisms by which they acquire it grow substantially in infancy and toddlerhood, yet theories of word learning largely fail to incorporate these shifts. Moreover, researchers' often-siloed focus on either familiar word recognition or novel word learning limits the critical consideration of how these two relate. As a step toward a mechanistic theory of language acquisition, we present a framework of "learning through processing" and relate it to the prevailing methods used to assess children's early knowledge of words. Incorporating recent empirical work, we posit a specific, testable timeline of qualitative changes in the learning process in this interval. We conclude with several challenges and avenues for building a comprehensive theory of early word learning: better characterization of the input, reconciling results across approaches, and treating lexical knowledge in the nascent grammar with sufficient sophistication to ensure generalizability across languages and development.

Although the role of the striatum in language processing is still largely unclear, a number of recent proposals have outlined its specific contribution. Different studies report evidence converging to a picture where the striatum may be involved in those aspects of rule-application requiring non-automatized behaviour. This is the main characteristic of the earliest phases of language acquisition that require the online detection of distant dependencies and the creation of syntactic categories by means of rule learning. Learning of sequences and categorization processes in non-language domains has been known to require striatal recruitment. Thus, we hypothesized that the striatum should play a prominent role in the extraction of rules in learning a language. We studied 13 pre-symptomatic gene-carriers and 22 early stage patients of Huntington's disease (pre-HD), both characterized by a progressive degeneration of the striatum and 21 late stage patients Huntington's disease (18 stage II, two stage III and one stage IV) where cortical degeneration accompanies striatal degeneration. When presented with a simplified artificial language where words and rules could be extracted, early stage Huntington's disease patients (stage I) were impaired in the learning test, demonstrating a greater impairment in rule than word learning compared to the 20 age- and education-matched controls. Huntington's disease patients at later stages were impaired both on word and rule learning. While spared in their overall performance, gene-carriers having learned a set of abstract artificial language rules were then impaired in the transfer of those rules to similar artificial language structures. The correlation analyses among several neuropsychological tests assessing executive function showed that rule learning correlated with tests requiring working memory and attentional control, while word learning correlated with a test involving episodic memory. These learning impairments significantly correlated with the bicaudate ratio. The overall results support striatal involvement in rule extraction from speech and suggest that language acquisition requires several aspects of memory and executive functions for word and rule learning.

The role of reference in cross-situational word learning

Word learning involves massive ambiguity, since in a particular encounter with a novel word, there are an unlimited number of potential referents. One proposal for how learners surmount the problem of ambiguity is that learners use cross-situational statistics to constrain the ambiguity: When a word and its referent co-occur across multiple situations, learners will associate the word with the correct referent. Yu & Smith (2007) propose that these co-occurrence statistics are sufficient for word-to-referent mapping. Alternative accounts hold that co-occurrence statistics alone are insufficient to support learning, and that learners are further guided by knowledge that words are referential (e.g., Waxman & Gelman, 2009). However, no behavioral word learning studies we are aware of explicitly manipulate subjects’ prior assumptions about the role of the words in the experiments in order to test the influence of these assumptions. In this study, we directly test whether, when faced with referential ambiguity, co-occurrence statistics are sufficient for word-to-referent mappings in adult word-learners. Across a series of cross-situational learning experiments, we varied the degree to which there was support for the notion that the words were referential. At the same time, the statistical information about the words’ meanings was held constant. When we overrode support for the notion that words were referential, subjects failed to learn the word-to-referent mappings, but otherwise they succeeded. Thus, cross-situational statistics were useful only when learners had the goal of discovering mappings between words and referents. We discuss the implications of these results for theories of word learning in children’s language acquisition.

Embodied attention and word learning by toddlers

Using variability to guide dimensional weighting: associative mechanisms in early word learning.