Abstract
Early child phonological acquisition data typically contain exceptional phonetic forms that defy segment-based rules and have long challenged traditional theoretical frameworks. The templatic approach to phonological acquisition claims that whole-word phonotactic patterns emerge as the first primary units of representation, later giving way to segmental knowledge. This approach places importance on the relationships among a child’s forms in addition to those between child forms and their corresponding adult targets. Inscribed within dynamic systems theory, the templatic approach assumes a developing phonological system to be self-organizing and driven by general cognitive processes in response to patterns in the ambient language. This paper analyzes data from a diary study of one monolingual child acquiring American English. Data collected during the first six months of word production were put to templatic analysis, then examined for evidence of schematic structure. Incorporating the chronology of utterances the child produced, analysis revealed varying degrees of abstraction as early patterns integrated with newer patterns. The results reveal schema theory to be an informative supplementary framework for templatic analysis. Schema theory provides a structured way to trace the emergence and interaction of whole-word patterns a child uses to facilitate the production of first words.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Réka Benczes, whose incisive intuition and brilliant ideas prompted this research. I would also like to express my sincere gratitude to the anonymous reviewers, whose comments helped to sharpen the presentation of this research.
References
Albright, Adam & Bruce Hayes. 2003. Rules vs. analogy in English past tenses: A computational/experimental study. Cognition 90(2). 119–161.10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00146-XSearch in Google Scholar
Becker, Michael & Anne-Michelle Tessier. 2011. Trajectories of faithfulness in child-specific phonology. Phonology 28(2). 163–196.10.1017/S0952675711000133Search in Google Scholar
Bernhardt, Barbara Handford & Joseph Paul Stemberger. 1998. Handbook of phonological development: From the perspective of constraint-based nonlinear phonology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2010. Compound construction: Schemas or analogy? A construction morphology perspective. In Sergio Scalise & Irene Vogel (eds.), Cross-disciplinary issues in compounding, 93–108. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/cilt.311.09booSearch in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2001. Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511612886Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam & Morris Halle. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper and Row.Search in Google Scholar
Byun, Tara McAllister, Sharon Inkelas & Yvan Rose. 2016. The A-map model: Articulatory reliability in child-specific phonology. Language 92(1). 141–178.10.1353/lan.2016.0000Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Eve. 1993. The lexicon in acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511554377Search in Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. G. & P. A. de Villiers. 1978. Language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
DePaolis, Rory A., Marilyn M. Vihman & Tamar Keren-Portnoy. 2011. Do production patterns influence the processing of speech in prelinguistic infants? Infant Behavior and Development 34(4). 590–601.10.1016/j.infbeh.2011.06.005Search in Google Scholar
DePaolis, Rory A., Marilyn M. Vihman & Satsuki Nakai. 2013. The influence of babbling patterns on the processing of speech. Infant Behavior and Development 36(4). 642–649.10.1016/j.infbeh.2013.06.007Search in Google Scholar
Dromi, Esther. 1987. Early lexical development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles A. & Carol B. Farwell. 1975. Words and sounds in early language acquisition. Language 51. 419–439.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.007Search in Google Scholar
Gerken, LouAnn. 2008. Language development. San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Gerlach, Sharon Ruth. 2010. The acquisition of consonant feature sequences: Harmony, metathesis and deletion patterns in phonological development. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Gershkoff-Stowe, Lisa & Esther Thelen. 2004. U-shaped changes in behavior: A dynamic systems perspective. Journal of Cognition and Development 5(1). 11–36.10.1207/s15327647jcd0501_2Search in Google Scholar
Gick, Mary L. & Keith J. Holyoak. 1983. Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology 15(1). 1–38.10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6Search in Google Scholar
Hofstadter, Douglas & Emmanuel Sander. 2013. Surfaces and essences. New York: Basic Books.Search in Google Scholar
Ingram, David. 1974. Phonological rules in young children. Journal of Child Language 1(1). 49–64.10.1017/S0305000900000076Search in Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1968 [1941]. Child language, aphasia, and phonological universals. The Hague: Mouton. (Originally published as Kindersprache, Aphasie und allgemeine Lautgesetze. Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell.)10.1515/9783111353562Search in Google Scholar
Kager, René, Joe Pater & Wim Zonneveld (eds.). 2004. Constraints in phonological acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486418Search in Google Scholar
Kehoe, Margaret M. 2015. Lexical-phonological interactions in bilingual children. First Language 35(2). 93–125.10.1177/0142723715574398Search in Google Scholar
Kemmer, Suzanne. 2003. Schemas and lexical blends. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science Series 4. 69–98.10.1075/cilt.243.08kemSearch in Google Scholar
Khattab, Ghada & Jalal Al-Tamimi. 2013. Influence of geminate structure on early Arabic templatic patterns. In Marilyn M. Vihman & Tamar Keren-Portnoy (eds.), The emergence of phonology: Whole-word approaches and cross-linguistic evidence, 317–342. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.018Search in Google Scholar
Kristiansen, Gitte. 2006. Towards a usage-based cognitive phonology: On phonemic description and speech styles as experientially grounded construals. International Journal of English Studies 6(2). 107–140.Search in Google Scholar
Krott, Andrea. 2009. The role of analogy for compound words. In James P. Blevins & Juliette Blevins (eds.), Analogy in grammar: Form and acquisition, 118–136. Oxford: Oxford University.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547548.003.0006Search in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Macken, Marlys A. 1979. Developmental reorganization of phonology: A hierarchy of basic units of acquisition. Lingua 49(1). 11–49.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.008Search in Google Scholar
Majorano, Marinella, Marilyn M. Vihman & Rory A. DePaolis. 2014. The relationship between infant production experience and their processing of speech. Language Learning and Development 10(2). 179–204.10.1080/15475441.2013.829740Search in Google Scholar
Menn, Lise. 1971. Phonotactic rules in beginning speech: A study in the development of English discourse. Lingua 26. 225–251.10.1016/0024-3841(71)90011-8Search in Google Scholar
Menn, Lise. 1992. Building our own models: Developmental phonology comes of age. In Charles A. Ferguson, Lise Menn & Carol Stoel-Gammon (eds.), Phonological development: Models, research, implications, 3–15. Timonium, MD: York Press.Search in Google Scholar
Mompeán-González, José A. 2004. Category overlap and neutralization: The importance of speakers’ classifications in phonology. Cognitive Linguistics 15(4). 429–469.10.1515/cogl.2004.15.4.429Search in Google Scholar
Oliveira-Guimarães, Daniela. 2013. Beyond early words: Word template development in Brazilian Portuguese. In Marilyn M. Vihman & Tamar Keren-Portnoy (eds.), The emergence of phonology: Whole-word approaches and cross-linguistic evidence, 317–342. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.014Search in Google Scholar
Pater, Joe & Adam Werle. 2001. Typology and variation in child consonant harmony. In Caroline Féry, Antony Dubach Green & Ruben van de Vijver (eds.), Proceedings of the Holland institute of linguistics–phonology, Vol. 5, 119–139. Potsdam: University of Potsdam.Search in Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven & Alan Prince. 1994. Regular and irregular morphology and the psychological status of rules of grammar. In Susan D. Lima, Roberta L. Corrigan & Gregory K. Iverson (eds.), The reality of linguistic rules, 321–351. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.26.21pinSearch in Google Scholar
Priestly, T. M. S. 1977. One idiosyncratic strategy in the acquisition of phonology. Journal of Child Language 4(1). 45–65.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.011Search in Google Scholar
Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky. 2002–2008. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University Community Repository. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.7282/T34M92MV (accessed 28 July 2016).Search in Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor, Caroline Mervis, Wayne Gray, David Johnson & Penny Boyes-Braem. 1976. Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8. 382–439.10.1037/e666602011-017Search in Google Scholar
Savinainen-Makkonen, Tuula. 2007. Geminate template: A model for first Finnish words. First Language 27(4). 347–359.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.017Search in Google Scholar
Smith, Neil. 1973. The acquisition of phonology: A case study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Szreder, Marta. 2013. The acquisition of consonant clusters in Polish: A case study. In Marilyn M. Vihman & Tamar Keren-Portnoy (eds.), The emergence of phonology: Whole-word approaches and cross-linguistic evidence, 343–361. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.016Search in Google Scholar
Taylor, John R. 1990. Schemas, prototypes, and models: In search of the unity of the sign. In Savas L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Meanings and prototypes: Studies in linguistic categorization, 521–534. London & New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Taylor, John R. 2002. Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Thelen, Esther & Linda B. Smith. 1994. A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/2524.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 1995. Language is not an instinct. Cognitive Development 10. 131–156.10.1016/0885-2014(95)90021-7Search in Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 2000. First steps toward a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics 11(1/2). 61–82.10.1515/cogl.2001.012Search in Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 2005. Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.10.2307/j.ctv26070v8Search in Google Scholar
Tomasello, Michael. 2006. Acquiring linguistic constructions. In Deanna Kuhn & Robert S. Siegler (eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Cognition, perception, and language, Vol. 2, 255–298. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0206Search in Google Scholar
Välimaa-Blum, Riitta. 2005. Cognitive phonology in construction grammar: Analytic tools for students of English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110920598Search in Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. 1978. Consonant harmony: Its scope and function in child language. Universals of Human Language 2. 281–334.Search in Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. 1993. Variable paths to early word production. Journal of Phonetics 21(1–2). 61–82.10.1016/S0095-4470(19)31321-XSearch in Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. 1996. Phonological development: The origins of language in the child. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. 2016. Prosodic structures and templates in bilingual phonological development. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 19(1). 69–88.10.1017/S1366728914000790Search in Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. & William Croft. 2007. Phonological development: Toward a “radical” templatic phonology. Linguistics 45(4). 683–725.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.004Search in Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. & Shelley L. Velleman. 2000. The construction of a first phonology. Phonetica 57(2–4). 255–266.10.1159/000028478Search in Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. & Virve Anneli Vihman. 2011. From first words to segments. Experience, Variation and Generalization: Learning a First Language 7. 109–133.10.1075/tilar.7.07vihSearch in Google Scholar
Vihman, Marilyn M. & Sophi Wauquier. In press. Templates in child language. In M. Hickmann, E. Veneziano & H. Jisa (eds.), Sources of variation in first language acquisition: Languages, contexts, and learners. (Trends in Language Acquisition Research). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar
Waterson, Natalie. 1971. Child phonology: A prosodic view. Journal of Linguistics 7. 179–211.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.006Search in Google Scholar
Wauquier, Sophie & Naomi Yamaguchi. 2013. Templates in French. In Marilyn M. Vihman & Tamar Keren-Portnoy (eds.), The emergence of phonology: Whole-word approaches and cross-linguistic evidence, 317–342. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511980503.015Search in Google Scholar
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
