Mechanisms Of Language Acquisition Research Articles

Of Mouses and Mans: A Test of Errorless Versus Error-Based Learning in Children.

For both adults and children, learning from one's mistakes (error-based learning) has been shown to be advantageous over avoiding errors altogether (errorless learning) in pedagogical settings. However, it remains unclear whether this advantage carries over to nonpedagogical settings in children, who mostly learn language in such settings. Using irregular plurals (e.g., "mice") as a test case, we conducted a corpus analysis (N = 227) and two preregistered experiments (N = 56, N = 99), to investigate the potency of error-based learning as a mechanism for language acquisition in 3- and 4-year-old children. The results of the corpus analysis showed that incidental feedback after errors, in the form of caregivers' reformulations of children's errors, was relatively infrequent, had modest informational value, and was rarely used by children to correct their errors immediately. The following two experiments contrasted error-based learning with errorless learning, where the correct utterance was modeled for the child before a potential error was committed. The results showed that error-based learning was not always effective, and when it was, it was certainly not superior to errorless learning. Collectively, these findings question the extension of the benefits of error-based learning from pedagogical to nonpedagogical settings and define constraints under which one mechanism may be more beneficial to learning than the other.

The role of emotion in acquisition of verb meaning

ABSTRACT Children’s earliest acquired words are often learned through sensorimotor experience, but it is less clear how children learn the meaning of concepts whose referents are less associated with sensorimotor experience. The Affective Embodiment Account postulates that children use emotional experience to learn more abstract word meanings. There is mixed evidence for this account; analyses using mega-study datasets suggest that negative or positively valenced abstract words are learned earlier than emotionally neutral abstract words, yet the relationship between sensorimotor experience and valence is inconsistent across different methods of operationalising sensorimotor experience. In the present study, we tested the Affective Embodiment Account specifically in the context of verb acquisition. We tested two semantic dimensions of sensorimotor experience: concreteness and embodiment ratings. Our analyses showed that more positive and negative abstract verbs are acquired at an earlier age than neutral abstract verbs, consistent with the Affective Embodiment Account. When sensorimotor experience is operationalised as embodiment, high embodiment verbs are acquired at an earlier age than low embodiment verbs, and there is further benefit for high embodiment and positively valenced verbs. The findings further clarify the role of Affective Embodiment as a mechanism of language acquisition.

Differentiation as One of the Basic Mechanisms of Language Acquisition

Differentiation as One of the Basic Mechanisms of Language Acquisition

Self-organization and the Process of Dynamic Learner Language Development

Adopting Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST) in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is a testament to the revolutionary and evolutionary advancement in theory and empirical practice in the field. CDST is revolutionary for the fact that it warrants systems thinking of SLA phenomena that breaks the chain of dichotomous conceptualization on vital issues such as the mechanism of language acquisition and learning and the effectiveness of positive and negative evidence. The emergence of CDST, on the other hand, is an evolutionary product nurtured by the painstaking collaborations of SLA scholars for over two decades of scientific inquiry (see, e.g., Han, 2019; Hiver & Al-Hoorie, 2019; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008; Ortega & Han, 2017). To capitalize on CDST as a valid approach to scholarly work, it is necessary to grapple with its fundamental constructs. This forum piece accentuates a critical notion of CDST: self-organization. By first referring to the theoretical aspects of self-organization, this forum piece seeks to demonstrate the relevance of this notion in SLA. This piece will then review three sample studies homing in on learner language development with a CDST lens and a specific focus on self-organization.

Communicative Feedback in language acquisition

Children start to communicate and use language in social interactions from a very young age. This allows them to experiment with their developing linguistic knowledge and receive valuable feedback from their – often more knowledgeable – interlocutors. While research in language acquisition has focused a great deal on children's ability to learn from the linguistic input or social cues, little work, in comparison, has investigated the nature and role of Communicative Feedback, a process that results from children and caregivers trying to coordinate mutual understanding.In this work, we draw on insights from theories of communicative coordination to formalize a mechanism for language acquisition: We argue that children can improve their linguistic knowledge in conversation by leveraging explicit or implicit signals of communication success or failure. This new formalization provides a common framework for several lines of research in child development that have been pursued separately. Further, it points towards several gaps in the literature that, we believe, should be addressed in future research in order to achieve a more complete understanding of language acquisition within and through social interaction.

Evaluating word lists against word frequency, lexical age-of-acquisition and concreteness

This study investigated the efficacy of three criteria, i.e., word frequency, lexical age-of-acquisition (lexical AoA), and concreteness, in evaluating English word lists constructed primarily for the purpose of second-language acquisition. The word lists chosen for evaluation were the New General Service List (New-GSL) and the Academic Vocabulary List (AVL), which are utilized internationally in second-language research, and they were compared against two English word lists that have been widely adopted in China. Statistical analyses revealed that word frequency and lexical AoA were collectively effective in classifying word lists constructed for speakers of different levels of proficiency, e.g., the New-GSL vs the AVL. Furthermore, each of the three criteria appeared to independently qualify the differences between words lists. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating cognitive factors, e.g., lexical AoA and concreteness, into second-language research and theories, which help to specify the characteristics and pinpoint the limitations of word lists in light of the underlying mechanisms of language acquisition and development.

How to learn more about how children learn languages: A commentary on Kidd and García (2022)

Kidd and Garcia demonstrate that the field of language acquisition must consider a more diverse range of languages. This is certainly needed, to gain a deeper understanding of the basic mechanisms of language acquisition; to achieve that, we need more longitudinal studies of several children per language, with (trained) fluent-user transcription and analysis. This could, for example, help to establish the size of the unit from which the child extracts generalizations and builds categories and networks in phonological development.

Rethinking bilingual language assessment: Considering implicit language acquisition mechanisms by means of pupillometry

In this methodological paper, a tool is introduced to the field of bilingual language assessment that has been used widely in other research domains, but has never been applied to the practice of language assessment: The investigation of pupillometric reactions to grammatical violations. The pupillometry approach presented here intends to identify bilingual children at risk for developmental language disorders (DLD) as early as their onset of acquisition of their second language (L2), namely within the first few months of their kindergarten attendance. It focuses the implicit language acquisition mechanisms and the ability to derive linguistic patterns out of a string of input, an ability that is said to be impaired in children with DLD. The approach combines concepts of dynamic and static assessment, and the target structure is an early clinical marker (subject verb agreement, SVA). A SVA-structure is repeatedly presented auditorily within grammatical stimuli in a familiarization phase, followed by a test phase including grammatical and ungrammatical stimuli. During this task, the children's changes in pupil diameters are monitored. It is hypothesized that children whose language processing mechanisms are intact may react to ungrammatical stimuli encountered in their input with surprise – a sign of a violation of their expectations. Therefore, different pupil reactions to grammatical and ungrammatical stimuli after only short exposure are supposed to represent intact language processing mechanisms, whereas similar pupil reactions to grammatical and ungrammatical stimuli are supposed to indicate a risk for DLD. By means of pupillometric observations, an identification of children at risk would be possible at the beginning of L2 acquisition.

The Unifying Theory of Bootstrapping: The Collaboration of Multiple Language Acquisition Mechanisms

Scientists have long been exploring the possibility of Universal Grammar (UG), a linguistic gene that engenders our language acquisition process. What UG may comprise is debated: if semantics is innate, or syntax, or some other linguistic aspects. Moreover, no definitive evidence has surfaced to attest to its existence. Therefore, a first-language acquisition process without the prerequisite of UG is called for. In this paper, we tear apart the incompatibilities among different language acquisition hypotheses and combine them into a theory in which language learning does not require UG. We contend that a unification of the current hypotheses (i.e., pragmatic, prosodic, semantic, and syntactic bootstrapping) is substantial for first-language acquisition, and that scientists should be wary of oversimplifying matters with UG.

Language ERPs reflect learning through prediction error propagation

Event-related potentials (ERPs) provide a window into how the brain is processing language. Here, we propose a theory that argues that ERPs such as the N400 and P600 arise as side effects of an error-based learning mechanism that explains linguistic adaptation and language learning. We instantiated this theory in a connectionist model that can simulate data from three studies on the N400 (amplitude modulation by expectancy, contextual constraint, and sentence position), five studies on the P600 (agreement, tense, word category, subcategorization and garden-path sentences), and a study on the semantic P600 in role reversal anomalies. Since ERPs are learning signals, this account explains adaptation of ERP amplitude to within-experiment frequency manipulations and the way ERP effects are shaped by word predictability in earlier sentences. Moreover, it predicts that ERPs can change over language development. The model provides an account of the sensitivity of ERPs to expectation mismatch, the relative timing of the N400 and P600, the semantic nature of the N400, the syntactic nature of the P600, and the fact that ERPs can change with experience. This approach suggests that comprehension ERPs are related to sentence production and language acquisition mechanisms.

Der frühe Fremdsprachenunterricht – je früher desto besser?

The article aims to summarize investigations which shed some light on the mechanisms of early second language acquisition and to draw from them pedagogical implications. Developing an optimal outline for foreign language teaching in early childhood should involve factors which make possible the use of inductive mechanisms of language acquisition by children.

Analysis of the Quality on English Microlectures of Senior High School from Perspectives of Teaching Philosophy, Second Language Acquisition Mechanism and Education Psychology

Concerning the fact that a large amount of teachers have been participated in the microlectures competition, it means the concept of microlectures has been recognized. However, English teachers are devoted to participating in these competitions but fail to put microlectures into practical teaching. Therefore, the focus of this paper is going to answer the following two questions, that is, how to make a good microlecture and how to use it properly. This paper chooses four videos from The Third China’s Microlectures Competition to analysis from three aspects: teaching philosophy, second language acquisition mechanism and education psychology. It is found that English teachers from senior high school generally do not understand the concept of microlectures. Generally speaking, teachers are intended to win the award of the competition but fail to put microlectures in the practical teaching. Teachers are inclined to select big topics, untypical teaching materials. What’s more, the structure of microlectures isn’t complete since some teachers ignore the exercise part. Based on these problems, on the one hand, English teachers should insist on life-long study and apply the latest education technologies into practical teaching. On the other hand, the organization of the whole microlecture should be developed logically. Suggestions are provided with teachers on how to make a make a good microlecture and how to use it properly.

Learning and generalizing non-adjacent dependencies in 18-month-olds: A mechanism for language acquisition?

The ability to track non-adjacent dependencies (the relationship between ai and bi in an aiXbi string) has been hypothesized to support detection of morpho-syntactic dependencies in natural languages (‘The princess is reluctantly kissing the frog’). But tracking such dependencies in natural languages entails being able to generalize dependencies to novel contexts (‘The general is angrily berating his troops’), and also tracking co-occurrence patterns between functional morphemes like is and ing (a class of elements that often lack perceptual salience). We use the Headturn Preference Procedure to investigate (i) whether infants are capable of generalizing dependencies to novel contexts, and (ii) whether they can track dependencies between perceptually non-salient elements in an artificial grammar aXb. Results suggest that 18-month-olds extract abstract knowledge of a_b dependencies between non-salient a and b elements and use this knowledge to subsequently re-familiarize themselves with specific ai_bi combinations. However, they show no evidence of generalizing ai_bi dependencies to novel aiYbi strings.

Content validation: clarity/relevance, reliability and internal consistency of enunciative signs of language acquisition.

To analyze the results of the validation of building enunciative signs of language acquisition for children aged 3 to 12 months. The signs were built based on mechanisms of language acquisition in an enunciative perspective and on clinical experience with language disorders. The signs were submitted to judgment of clarity and relevance by a sample of six experts, doctors in linguistic in with knowledge of psycholinguistics and language clinic. In the validation of reliability, two judges/evaluators helped to implement the instruments in videos of 20% of the total sample of mother-infant dyads using the inter-evaluator method. The method known as internal consistency was applied to the total sample, which consisted of 94 mother-infant dyads to the contents of the Phase 1 (3-6 months) and 61 mother-infant dyads to the contents of Phase 2 (7 to 12 months). The data were collected through the analysis of mother-infant interaction based on filming of dyads and application of the parameters to be validated according to the child's age. Data were organized in a spreadsheet and then converted to computer applications for statistical analysis. The judgments of clarity/relevance indicated no modifications to be made in the instruments. The reliability test showed an almost perfect agreement between judges (0.8 ≤ Kappa ≥ 1.0); only the item 2 of Phase 1 showed substantial agreement (0.6 ≤ Kappa ≥ 0.79). The internal consistency for Phase 1 had alpha = 0.84, and Phase 2, alpha = 0.74. This demonstrates the reliability of the instruments. The results suggest adequacy as to content validity of the instruments created for both age groups, demonstrating the relevance of the content of enunciative signs of language acquisition.

Early positivity signals changes in an abstract linguistic pattern.

The extraction of abstract structures from speech (or from gestures in the case of sign languages) has been claimed to be a fundamental mechanism for language acquisition. In the present study we registered the neural responses that are triggered when a violation of an abstract, token-independent rule is detected. We registered ERPs while presenting participants with trisyllabic CVCVCV nonsense words in an oddball paradigm. Standard stimuli followed an ABB rule (where A and B are different syllables). Importantly, to distinguish neural responses triggered by changes in surface information from responses triggered by changes in the underlying abstract structure, we used two types of deviant stimuli. Phoneme deviants differed from standards only in their phonemes. Rule deviants differed from standards in both their phonemes and their composing rule. We observed a significant positivity as early as 300 ms after the presentation of deviant stimuli that violated the abstract rule (Rule deviants). The amplitude of this neural response was correlated with participants’ performance in a behavioral rule learning test. Differences in electrophysiological responses observed between learners and non-learners suggest that individual differences in an abstract rule learning task might be related to how listeners select relevant sources of information.

The Acquisition of Language: Evidence in Syntax

This paper aims to discuss the two main approaches to language acquisition and present the main ideas behind the nativist and the usage-based account. The concomitant argument between the two sides has been present in linguistics ever since the proposal of innateness was provided by the paradigm of mainstream generative grammar (Chomsky 1965). In order to contribute to the ongoing discussion, we will attempt to outline the main challenges that the both theoretical strands are faced with and provide an overview of syntactic evidence provided by linguists whose work was devoted to understanding the mechanisms of language acquisition. Our goal is to analyze the insights provided by the phenomena such as syntactic bootstrapping, poverty of the stimulus, multiple argument realizations and non-canonical syntactic constructions and argue that integrating these findings into a usage-based framework (Tomasello 2000, 2003 - 2009) or various instances of Construction Grammar (Goldberg 1995 - 1996, Fillmore Kay - Fillmore 1999, van Trijp 2016, Steels 2011, inter alia) provides a more plausible and comprehensive explanation of the processes responsible for language acquisition.

Four ways from universal to particular: how Chomsky’s principles-and-parameters model is not selectionist

Following the development of the selectionist theory of the immune system, there was an attempt to characterise many biological mechanisms as being ‘selectionist’ as juxtaposed with ‘instructionist’. However, this broad definition would group Darwinian evolution, the immune system, embryonic development, and Chomsky’s principles-and-parameters (P&P) language-acquisition mechanism together under the ‘selectionist’ umbrella, even though Chomsky’s mechanism and embryonic development are significantly different from the selectionist mechanisms of biological evolution and the immune system. Surprisingly, there is an abstract way using two dual mathematical logics to make the distinction between genuinely selectionist mechanisms and what are better called ‘generative’ or symmetry-breaking mechanisms. This distinction is outlined in this note.

Words, rules, and mechanisms of language acquisition.

Words, rules, and mechanisms of language acquisition.

Explaining bilingual learning outcomes in terms of exposure and input

I had several goals in writing my keynote “Exposure and input in bilingual development”. The first was to emphasize that there are two components to the study of environmental effects on language learning. The first is the stuff ‘out there’ (exposure) that we want to observe and count and whose effects we want to assess; the second is the internal, mentally represented stuff (myinput) that is logically related to a particular learning problem. Both exposure and input are indissociable from assumptions about what language acquisition mechanisms do and the nature of linguistic cognition. Accordingly, for example, a decision to count ‘words’ in child-directed speech (CDS) or via a parental questionnaire is not an innocent one. Not only can one find radically different views on what a ‘word’ is (Krause, Bosch & Clahsen, 2015), one can find work that questions the need to postulate such a unit at all (see discussion in MacWhinney, 2000). It follows that adopting a clear position, about which abstract mentally represented elements are crucialcuesto learning some phenomenon, is an essential step in deciding what to count in CDS.

Disentangling bilingualism from SLI: Dissociating exposure and input

Exposure and input are often used interchangeably in the study of child bilingualism to describe the learner's interaction with her environment. Carroll (Carroll), in her thought-provoking keynote article, challenges the equation between amount of exposure and amount of input necessary for acquiring a language, and in particular a second language. Carroll, whose diverse research borrows from both generative and psychological models of learning, brings these two perspectives into her exploration of the role of exposure and input in language acquisition, calling for a clearer definition of each. Carroll argues that the input to the language acquisition mechanism is the abstract construct necessary in order to solve the learning problem, and it is not a function of the amount of exposure: very little input is necessary in order to solve a learning problem, e.g., identifying word boundaries, or acquiring a syntactic structure. While scrutinizing the equation often drawn between exposure and input, Carroll further argues that the amount of exposure further misses the quality of this exposure as well as the societal context in which this exposure occurs.