Childrens sensitivity to listeners knowledge Evidence from the use of morphosyntactic forms for refe

1
Childrens sensitivity to listeners knowledge
Evidence from the use of morphosyntactic forms
for referent introductions

• Margot Rozendaal Anne Baker - University of
  Amsterdam
• SALC, November 30, 2007, Lund-Sweden

2

• GER He, he, maar vertel e(en)s even van
  die bibliotheek.
• Well, tell me about the library
• CHI Eh zijn allemaal boekjes.
• Uh, are all kinds of books
• GER Ja.
• Yeah
• CHI En vv / van Flipper.
• And about Flipper
• GER Ja.
• Yeah
• CHI lttoen ging toengt / toen ging de
  jongens slapen.
• and then the boys went to sleep

Dutch, Abel 33
3
Reference

• A speaker uses a linguistic expression to refer
  to / identify an entity.
• Combining morphosyntax and pragmatics
• Pragmatics is linked to cognition ? listeners
  perspective / Theory of Mind (ToM)
• ToM influences choice of morphosyntactic forms
  for referent introductions

4
ToM in referent introductions

• Influence of perspective of the listener
• Mutual knowledge (MK) / no mutual knowledge (NMK)
• MK Shared knowledge / world knowledge/ inference
  / uniqueness
• Within MK.Physical presence (exophoric) /
  absence (endophoric)
• EXP here-and-now/ joint attention / directing
  attention / deixis
• Relation to morphosyntactic forms, focus on
• indefinite vs definite determiners
• pronoun vs noun vs proper name

Clark Marshall (1981)
5
Correct forms for introductions

• NMK MK
• Indefinite determiner lt indefinite
  definite/demonstrative determiner
• END EXP
• Noun/proper names lt Noun/proper name Pronoun
• NMK I have drawn a cat at school.
• MK-END The teacher said it looks a bit like a
  tiger!!
• MK-EXP A Whats that?
• B Its another cat I drew at school!

6
Incorrect forms for introductions

• NMK Definite/demonstrative det. (see example
  1st slide)
• END Pronoun
• CHI Où elle est?
• Where is she?
• INV Qui ça. Qu'est ce que tu cherches?
• What. What are you looking for?
• INV Qu'est ce que tu cherches Grégoire ?
• What are you looking for Grégoire?

French, Grégoire 20
7
Referent introduction acquisition (1)

• Children faced with the following tasks
• Acquisition of morphosyntactic forms
• Determiners before or around 20
• Pronouns demonstratives before 20, other forms
  follow around 20 or little later.
• Acquisition of ToM
• New / given to other 12-18 months
• Visible or not visible to other 18 months
• Full ToM from 4-years or later

Tomasello Harberl (2003) Brooks Tomasello
(2002) Ruffman Perner (2005)
8
Referent introduction acquisition (2)

• Combining morphosyntax with ToM..
• MK/NMK Late acquisition of appropriate use of
  indefinites in NMK in narratives from pictures
  (over 60).
• But better performance in spontaneous speech.
• EXP/END incorrect use of pronouns in END by two
  year olds
• But better performance by three year-olds

Kail Hickmann 1992 Roelofs, 1998 Matthews et
al, 2006
9
Questions

• Do young children acquiring Dutch, English or
  French show sensitivity to ToM (perspective of
  the listener) reflected in their use of
  indefinite determiners, definite determiners and
  pronouns?
• What is the influence of the language the
  children hear around them on the acquisition of
  ToM in linguistic reference?
• Do these young children show the same levels of
  sensitivity to ToM in determiner use as compared
  to pronoun use?

10
Influence of input in acquisition

• Input-driven model of language acquisition
• Speed of development is influenced by cue
  strength
• Frequency of form-function association
• Reliability / consistency of form-function
  association

Bates MacWhinney, 1989 Tomasello, 2003
11
Data

• Spontaneous speech Dutch (n3) English (n3),
  French (n4)
• MLU within normal range
• Analysis from 20-33 every three months,
• age points combined to 20-26 and 29-33 here
• Input addressed to child analyzed at 23 and 33

Interrater-reliability pragmatic coding 81
12
Analysis

• Introductions of persons and objects to discourse
  coded for
• Morphosyntactic form
• MK/NMK ? MK determined on basis of
• General / world knowledge (the sun)
• Shared knowledge (the teacher at school)
• Inclusiveness (the wheels of a car)
• Physically present in context
• Physical presence /absence ? Physical presence
  determined on basis of
• Extra-linguistic descriptions in transcript
• Reaction of interlocutor

13
Occurrence of NMK-introductions

• Input less than 1 of all references
• Child data around 3 of all references
• Children hardly receive any evidence on how to
  use determiners for NMK in introducing referents.
• NMK indefinite correct definite/ demonstrative
  incorrect
• MK indefinite/ definite/demonstrative correct

14
MK / NMK English
N1
English input infrequent, no cue English
children growing sensitivity for NMK in use of
(indefinite) determiners Adult level at 33
still errors in using definite for NMK
15
Correct indefinite for NMK

• INV You have a hole in your sock?
• CHI Yeah.
• CHI I fell down and make the hole.
• INV Oh.
• CHI And there was a stick there and broke it
  really hard and it make the hole.

English, Peter 33
16
MK / NMK French
N1
French children sensitivity to MK/NMK developing
as in English
17
MK / NMK Dutch
n.s.!
N2
Dutch children slower development of determiner
use in general no sensitivity yet for MK/NMK in
use of determiners at 29-33
18
Summary MK/NMK

• Dutch children
• no difference in determiner use over MK/NMK at
  29-33
• Sensitivity not yet apparent
• English and French children
• Sensitivity developing at 29-33
• ButFrench children produce more determiners in
  general and therefore make more mistakes

19
Occurrence of EXP/END

• Input 3 of all references
• Child data 6 of all references
• Children do not receive many evidence on how to
  use introduce referents outside the here-and-now
  to discourse
• EXP noun / proper name / pronouns correct
• END noun / proper name correct pronoun
  incorrect

20
EXP / END English
Input infrequent (3), but form-function
association consistent (no pronoun) Children
from 20-26 distinction between exp vs. end in
use of forms. Adult level restriction on use of
pronouns in intro outside here-and-now from
20-26
21
EXP/END French and Dutch

• No difference in acquisition of category pronouns
  as a whole between languages.
• Results for use in EXP/END are similar to the
  English results
• Hardly any pronouns for endophoric introductions
  in input.
• From 20-26, the children are at adult level
  hardly use pronouns in endophoric introductions
  in both languages.

22
Discussion (1)

• Childrens sensitivity to ToM (listeners
  perspective) in referent introductions
• Indefinite vs. definite determiner (MK/NMK)
• Infrequent in input (no cue)
• Developing until after 33
• Pronouns vs. nouns vs. proper names (EXP/END)
• Infrequent in input, but consistent
• Appears to be present by 20

23
Discussion (2)

• Relationship to cues in input
• MK/NMK Infrequent, no evidence ? acquired
  late
• EXP/END Infrequent but consistent ? appears
  to be acquired earlier..
• It may be the case that children use pronouns in
  deictic situations only
• Evidence child uses pronoun only when she can
  see the referent herself
• For example use of pronouns in the data if there
  is (apparently) no joint attention

24
Incorrect pronoun-no joint attention

• CHI Ah , valt.
• Oh, falling
• CHI Dit.
• This
• GER Wat valt?
• Whats falling?
• GER Oh , die kleine.
• Oh, the little one
• Cp. Results Matthews et al 2006, Küntay Özyürek
  2006

Dutch, Abel, 26
25
Conclusions

• Sensitivity to ToM ( listeners perspective) in
  language use needs some time to develop even in
  spontaneous speech.
• This sensitivity is acquired on a form-by form
  basis
• There are different paths for determiners and
  pronouns
• In the use of pronouns, deixis seems to be the
  basis for differential use.
• Earlier acquisition of the form might lead to
  earlier sensitivity (Dutch cp, to English and
  French)
• But.. also phase in which earlier acquisition of
  determiners leads to more errors
• Input is clearly important in the acquisition of
  sensitivity for MK/NMK and EXP/END
• cue frequency and cue consistency

26
More information

• Contact m.i.rozendaal_at_uva.nl
• http//home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.i.rozendaal/

27
Literature (1)

• Brooks, R. Meltzoff, A.N. (2002). The
  importance of eyes How infants interpret adult
  looking behavior. Developmental Psychology 38,
  958-66.
• Küntay, A.C. Özyürek, A. (2006). Learning to
  use demonstratives in conversation what do
  language specific strategies from Turkish reveal?
  Journal of Child Language 33, 303-320.
• Kail, M. Hickmann, M. (1992). French childrens
  ability to introduce referents in narratives as a
  function of mutual knowledge. First Language 12,
  73-94.
• MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project Tools
  for Analyzing Talk. Hillsdale, N.J.,Lawrence
  Erlbaum.

28
Literature (2)

• MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project Tools
  for Analyzing Talk. Hillsdale, N.J.,Lawrence
  Erlbaum.
• Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston, A.
  Tomasello, M. (2006). The effect of perceptual
  availability and prior discourse on young
  children's use of referring expressions. Applied
  Psycholinguistics 27, 403-22
• Roelofs, M. (1998). Hoe bedoel je? De verwerving
  van pragmatische vaardigheden. Ph.D.
  Dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Utrecht
  LOT.
• Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language a
  usage-based theory of language acquisition.
  Cambridge, M.A. Harvard University Press.
• Tomasello, M. Haberl, K. (2003). Understanding
  attention 12- and 18-month-olds know what is new
  for other persons. Developmental-Psychology. 39,
  906-12.

29
EXP / END French
30
EXP / END Dutch