The acquisition of past tense in preschool children with specific language impairment and unaffected controls: regular and irregular forms *.
Serratrice, Ludovica ; Joseph, Kate L. ; Conti-Ramsden, Gina 等
Abstract
The main aim of this study was to provide an analysis of the
acquisition of past tense in preschool children with specific language
impairment (SLI) and unaffected controls. Data from three children with
SLI, two boys and one girl, aged 3;1, 3;5, and 4;0 at the beginning of
the study, formed the basis of the investigation. These children were
audiorecorded for an hour in free play sessions with their mothers at
fortnightly intervals for a period of approximately ten months. For
comparison purposes eleven MLU-matched children were selected from the
Manchester corpus (Theakston et al. 2001) available on CHILDES (Mac
Whinney 2000) to form an unaffected control group. The findings of the
present study indicated that, contrary to previously reported
investigations, these younger children's attempts at marking
finiteness in past tense contexts were not significantly better for
irregular than for regular verbs. This held true for both the control
children and the children with SLI. No significant differences were
observed either in the period prior to overregularization or after
overregularization. A positive correlation was, however, found in both
the SLI and the MLU groups between the most frequent past tense forms
used by the children and those used by the eleven mothers of the MLU
control children. The implications of these results for models of past
tense acquisition such as the surface account, the extended optional
infinitive account, and the single-mechanism account are discussed.
Introduction
The acquisition of past tense morphology in children with specific
language impairment (SLI) as compared with typically developing children
has recently been the subject of considerable interest. A body of
findings is beginning to emerge that characterizes the performance of
children with SLI as delayed with respect to language-matched typically
developing children on a number of measures (Leonard et al. 1992; Rice
et al. 1995; Oetting and Horohov 1997; Montgomery and Leonard 1998; Rice
et al. 2000; Hansson and Leonard, this issue). All of the studies
available to date include children with SLI aged five and older and the
methodology is typically cross-sectional involving the elicitation of
target past tense forms. The data gathered using older children are
invaluable for the understanding of how children with SLI develop over
time; however, information is now needed on the earlier stages of past
tense acquisition. Although significant differences have been reported
for older children with SLI when compared to MLU controls, there is no
clear sense of how children with SLI start out in the acquisition
process.
It is important to consider whether younger children with SLI may
be more similar to their MLU controls than their older peers are. By age
five and above it is possible that the gap between children with SLI and
unaffected children has widened to a significant degree, while this may
not necessarily be the case at earlier stages of development; that is,
younger children with SLI may not be very different from MLU controls.
Time is a variable that must be incorporated to a greater extent in the
comparison of children with SLI and typically developing younger
controls. The fact that children with SLI not only start producing
language later than it is typically observed but also develop at a
slower rate must be examined in more detail (Rice et al. 2000).
Moreover, because of the nature of the experimental tasks and of
the spontaneous data available, typically consisting of thirty-minute
samples with an experimenter, there is little information available on
how the input that children with SLI are exposed to on a daily basis may
interact with their acquisition process.
Previous research on the acquisition of past tense in children with
SLI and MLU controls
A number of studies report that children with SLI have considerable
and protracted difficulties in the marking of regular past tense with
respect to both chronological age and MLU controls (Bishop 1994; Eyer
and Leonard 1994; Leonard et al. 1992; Rice et al. 1995, 1998, 2000).
When the context requires an inflected form containing an -ed affix,
children with SLI are more likely than their normal MLU and
chronological age controls to produce an uninflected bare form, such as
walk instead of walk-ed. The difference between children with SLI and
unaffected children is thus a quantitative one; this type of omission
error is also found in typically developing children, but children with
SLI are more likely to produce a proportionally larger number of bare
forms instead of inflected forms when compared to typically developing
children.
A number of recent studies have gone beyond the observation that
children with SLI have difficulties with the production of regular past
tense forms and have investigated the production of finite past tense
forms by comparing children's performance on regular and irregular
verb forms.
Three models of the acquisition of regular and irregular past tense
To date three different models have been proposed to account for
the acquisition of past tense in children with SLI: the surface account
(Leonard et al. 1992), the extended optional infinitive account (Rice et
al. 1995; Rice and Wexler 1996; Rice et al. 2000), and the
single-mechanism account (Oetting and Horohov 1997; Marchman et al.
1999).
Surface account. According to Leonard and colleagues' surface
account (Leonard et al. 1992, 1997; Montgomery and Leonard 1998; Hsieh
et al. 2001), children with SLI have a processing-capacity limitation
that leads to difficulties with morphemes reduced in phonetic content.
Although children with SLI are able to perceive word-final consonants and weak syllables of short duration, when such phonemes play a
morphological role, as is the case of past tense affix -ed, overload due
to their limited capacities may result in incomplete processing of the
morphemes in question (Montgomery and Leonard 1998). This being the
case, children with SLI are thought to need an increased amount of
exposure to this morpheme (and other such phonetically reduced morphemes
such as third person singular -s) before they can perceive them,
categorize them according to their morphosyntactic function, and place
them in the appropriate cell of the corresponding morphological paradigm
(i.e. by learning the appropriate inflection for the morphological
context).
The surface account makes the following predictions for
children's performance on regular and irregular verbs: because
regular past tense forms are associated with endings of reduced
duration, which are considerably difficult to process and categorize for
children with SLI, the expectation is that affected children's
performance will be worse on regular past tense forms than on irregular
past tense forms. In terms of a direct comparison with unaffected MLU
controls, the prediction is that the performance of children with SLI
will be significantly worse than the MLU controls on regular past tense
forms but not on irregular forms.
Although frequency effects are not explicitly incorporated into the
surface account, they are also likely to play a nontrivial role in the
building of morphological paradigms, as is the possibility of
children's learning of word-specific paradigms (Leonard and Eyer
1996). It is reasonable to assume that the high frequency of a given
regular past tense form might override the low phonetic substance of its
ending and thus reduce the length of time it will take for the child to
acquire it. Oetting and Horohov (1997) in fact report a frequency effect
for the suffixation of regular types for both children with SLI and
normal controls and note that sensitivity to frequency is greater in the
former group.
Extended optional infinitive account. The extended optional
infinitive (EOI) account as originally formulated by Rice et al. (1995)
and Rice and Wexler (1996) proposes that, similarly to unaffected
children, children with SLI go through a period in which they do not
know that tense marking is obligatory in main clauses. Unlike typically
developing children, however, the period of optionality is considerably
protracted for children with SLI, which results in the production of a
number of nonfinite uninflected forms in contexts where finite forms are
required (e.g. she walk instead of she walks, I go instead of I went).
An important claim of the EOI account is that regardless of the
surface form, the finiteness principle applies in all main clauses, that
is, marking of finiteness in main clauses is obligatory regardless of
what form actually spells it out. By this rationale, at a time when
children mark tense optionally in main clauses there is no a priori reason to expect that optionality should be different across morphemes
and verb classes. In other words, one would expect that proportion of
optional marking should be constant regardless of whether the tense
marker required is -s for a simple present tense context (e.g. she
needs), or a past tense form in a past tense context (e.g. I played).
Similarly, in the case of tense marking in past tense contexts
children's performance should not be influenced by whether the form
required is regular or irregular.
In earlier EOI accounts of SLI (Rice et al. 1995; Rice and Wexler
1996) only the use of regular past tense was taken into account and no
predictions were made with respect to the use of irregular past tense
forms either for children with SLI or for unaffected controls. In a
recent paper Rice et al. (2000) propose an EOI account of the use of
past tense marking in children with SLI and unaffected controls that
reconciles the observed differences in children's performance on
regular and irregular past tense. The proposal distinguishes two
separate components involved in tense marking: a morphophonological
component, for which the child must learn the correct realization of a
past tense form according to whether the verb root is regular or
irregular, and a morphosyntactic component, which requires the child to
mark finiteness regardless of the morphophonological form selected. For
Rice et al. (2000) the production of overregularizations shows that
children know that a finite form is required in a given context, an
indication that their knowledge is intact from the morphosyntactic point
of view. At the same time the morphophonological knowledge that allows
them to select the correct form is deficient. What children lack is
specific lexical knowledge of which morphophonological form must be
selected; however, they know that finiteness must be realized: failing
the retrieval of an existing form, they resort to a novel
overregularization to fill the lexical gap. (1)
The prediction made by the EOI acount in its strongest form would
have to be that no difference should be observed between regular and
irregular verbs in the marking of finiteness in past tense contexts.
Rice et al. (2000: 1129; emphasis added) state that "[I]f children
do not regard past tense marking as obligatory, they will not try to
mark it on regular or irregular past tense forms." Presumably the
converse is also true, that if children regard past tense as obligatory
they will try to mark it on both regular and irregular past tense forms.
By contrast, a more recent version of the EOI account, which
distinguishes between a morphophonological and a morphosyntactic level
of tense marking, acknowledges a distinction between regular and
irregular verb types. The corollary prediction is that there will be an
advantage for irregular verbs because they are more frequent in terms of
both types and tokens in child-directed speech. It is, however,
important to note that this prediction is based on information outside
the scope of the EOI itself.
Single-mechanism account. Research on the acquisition of regular
and irregular past tense in children with SLI and unaffected controls
has focused to date almost exclusively on the phenomenon of
overregularization (Oetting and Horohov 1997; Marchman et al. 1999; Rice
et al. 2000), and virtually no information is available on
children's acquisition of past tense forms prior to the stage at
which they start to overregularize.
The number of studies investigating the role of frequency and
phonological item-level features in connection with the onset of
overregularization and the acquisition of regular and irregular past
tense in children with SLI is still limited to date, but the findings so
far confirm the importance of such variables in predicting how and when
overregularization is likely to take place. Oetting and Horohov (1997)
and Marchman et al. (1999) both provide evidence to support the
hypothesis that overregularization can be predicted by the vulnerability
of verb types according to their frequency and the phonological
neighborhood to which they belong.
A rich literature exists on the use of regular and irregular past
tense forms in typically developing English-speaking children, and on
the phenomenon of overgeneralization whereby the regular affix -ed is
incorrectly used with an irregular verb type to produce a novel past
tense form, such as breaked instead of broke (Berko 1958; Cazden 1968;
Bybee and Slobin 1982; Marcus et al. 1992; Prasada and Pinker 1993;
Stemberger 1993; Marchman and Bates 1994). Children's
overregularizations have been taken by some researchers as evidence for
the emergence of a symbolic rule. A qualitative shift takes place when
children realize that a productive rule exists to produce past tense
forms; overapplication of the rule leads to erroneous irregular forms
alongside correctly inflected regular forms. By the time the children
have acquired this rule the past tense formation process is then
regulated by a dual mechanism: a symbolic rule to compute regular -ed
affixation, and a rote-learning associative mechanism that allows the
learning and storage of irregular forms (Marcus et al. 1992; Prasada and
Pinker 1993; Pinker and Prince 1988).
An alternative account of children's overregularization errors
has been proposed by researchers working with usage-based models (Bybee
and Slobin 1982; Bybee 1995) and connectionist models (Plunkett and
Marchman 1991, 1993; Marchman 1997) where a single mechanism is thought
to be responsible for the past tense formation process. The emergence of
rule-like behavior is not determined by the acquisition of a symbolic
rule, but by the gradual and incremental exposure to regular verb types.
Plunkett and Marchman (1993) show that overregularizations start
appearing in their network when the proportion and total number of
regular verbs in the training set has reached a critical mass. Marchman
and Bates (1994) report similar findings in a study of the relationship
between verb vocabulary size and overgeneralizations in English-speaking
children. It seems clear that the child must have accumulated an
adequately large number of types before any generalization tendency
becomes sufficiently strong to overrule previously established irregular
past tense forms. Further evidence supporting the single-mechanism model
comes from findings by Oetting and Horohov (1997), where both children
with SLI and unaffected controls show sensitivity to frequency effects,
not only for irregular verbs but also for regular verbs.
A key difference between the dual- and the single-mechanism models
lies in the predictions they make with respect to the extent of the
overgeneralization errors. For the dual-mechanism model the -ed
affixation rule should in principle apply to any verb unless it is
blocked by retrieval of a known irregular form. Presumably successful
retrieval of an irregular form depends to some extent on how entrenched the form is, that is, how strongly the lexical representation has been
established. For the single-mechanism approach two key factors predict
the likelihood of an irregular verb being erroneously suffixed: token
frequency of its past tense forms and the type composition of its
phonological neighborhood. (2) As far as frequency is concerned the
higher the frequency of a past tense form the higher the chances that
the form will be learned. As for phonological neighborhood, the larger
the number of friends and the smaller the number of enemies the less
likely it will be that the form will be overregularized.
The predictions made by the single-mechanism account with respect
to the use of regular and irregular past tense forms are stated as
follows: regular and irregular forms will be learned as a measure of
frequency; the more frequent a form the more quickly it will be learned.
However, because the majority of high-frequency past tense forms tend to
be irregular ones the obvious consequence is that irregular forms should
be learned earlier. As far as the comparison between children with SLI
and unaffected MLU controls is concerned, the expectation is that the
former should not perform significantly differently from the latter if
frequency is the determining variable affecting the acquisition
sequence.
The effect of input on vocabulary and morphosyntactic acquisition
The relevance of frequency effects in the acquisition and use of
lexical items in child language is by no means an uncontroversial
question. However, evidence exists indicating that children's
uptake is significantly affected by statistical regularities in the
input such as type and token frequency. Studies of vocabulary
acquisition investigating whether certain classes of words might be
learned before others have typically reported a bias for noun learning
in languages such as English, Italian, and Hebrew where nouns are highly
frequent and tend to occur in sentence-final position (Dromi 1987;
Goldfield 1993; Caseli et al. 1995). By contrast, similar research
carried out in Korean and Mandarin Chinese has shown that children
acquiring these languages tend to learn verbs at least as early as they
learn nouns (Choi and Gopnik 1995; Tardif 1996). Unlike English and
Italian child-directed speech, in Korean child-directed speech verb
types outnumber noun types, and verbs are typically found in salient
utterance-final position. Cross-linguistic evidence thus shows that,
regardless of the cognitive demands imposed by the task, frequency and
sentence position are good predictors of children's order of
acquisition.
The relationship between frequency and the acquisition of
morphosyntax has also been the subject of investigation in a number of
recent studies. Hsieh et al. (1999) propose that the earlier acquisition
of the morpheme -s as a noun plural marker, as opposed to -s as a third
person singular verb marker, is determined by the frequency with which
plural nouns outweigh third-person-singular verbs, and by the sentence
position in which nouns and verbs occur.
Maternal input effects on verb acquisition have also been
investigated in terms of the finite/nonfinite distinction by Pine et al.
(1998a) and Wijnen et al. (2001). Pine et al. show that the correlation
between the average frequency of the tensed and untensed forms in the
maternal speech of twelve English-speaking mothers and the average age
of acquisition of the forms in the children's speech is highly
significant. Their conclusion is that frequency of occurrence in the
input is a powerful predictor of the order of acquisition of tensed and
untensed forms. Wijnen et al. (2001) provide support for the importance
of the frequency distribution of maternal input in shaping the
acquisition of finite and nonfinite verbs in Dutch.
In sum, although the effect of frequency on children's
acquisition of lexical items and constructions may interact with other
variables such as sentence position, semantic transparency, and
phonological shape, there is sound reason to believe that frequency
itself does play an important role. In fact, in some cases frequency
alone can predict pattern of acquisition (Pine et al. 1998a; Rowland and
Pine 2000).
Evidence for the important role played by input has been used by
lexicalist-constructivist approaches to argue for a limited-scope
account of language acquisition (Tomasello 1992; Lieven et al. 1997;
Pine and Lieven 1997; Pine et al. 1998b). According to this view
children's grammatical acquisition is a gradual phenomenon, which,
at least in the initial stages, tends to be word-specific rather than
category-general, and it is very much modeled on the input the child
receives.
Aims of the study
The focus of the present study is on the early stages of the
acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms in preschool
children with SLI and MLU-matched controls. The aims of the present
study are the following:
1. To provide an account of the appearance and use of regular and
irregular past tense forms in the speech of preschool children with SLI
(3; 1-4; 8) and typically developing controls (1; 10-3;0).
2. To investigate children's use of regular and irregular past
tense forms before and after the point of overregularization.
3. To examine the relationship between the frequency distribution
of past tense forms used by children and the frequency distribution in
the maternal input.
In line with the predictions of the surface account we expect that
both children with SLI and unaffected controls should perform better on
irregular verbs than on regular verbs. In addition we predict that input
frequency will determine children's use of past tense forms, and
therefore frequency could potentially override low phonetic substance
effects in the acquisition of very frequent regular verbs.
As for the effect of overregularization, we consider it to be a
lexically specific, gradual, and protracted phenomenon, and we do not
expect an immediate across-the-board effect with a significant
improvement of regulars alongside high rates of overregularized
irregulars. The view taken here is of children with SLI as conservative
learners who remain in the lexically specific period of language
development for longer than their typically developing peers. Thus,
because of the young age of our children with SLI, we would not rule out
the possibility that their language might be more similar to that of the
MLU controls than has been the case in previous studies of older
children with SLI. This is because both groups of children are likely to
be at a lexically specific stage of development.
Method
Participants
Data in the current study were collected from three children with
SLI, one girl and two boys, over a period of approximately ten months.
The children with SLI ranged in age from 3;1.9 to 4;0.9 at the beginning
of the study, and from 3;10.22 to 4;8.30 at the end of the study. Speech
problems were usually first identified by mothers, who then sought
professional advice. The children were recruited through speech and
language therapists in the northwest of England. All children with SLI
had an IQ above 85, as measured by the Leiter (1979) performance scale.
Children were not included if they presented with behavioral, hearing,
or severe speech problems. Administration of the autistic screening
questionnaire showed that none of the children had autistic tendencies
(Berument et al. 1999). Furthermore children with SLI were included on
the basis of a severe language impairment (receptive score below 16th
centile), as measured by the Reynell developmental language scales
(Edwards et al. 1997). The children were reported by speech therapists
as being at the early stages of multiword speech.
The data for the eleven MLU-matched control children come from the
Manchester corpus, collected by Theakston et al. (2001). The MLU
controls ranged in age from 1;8.22 to 2;4.21 at the beginning of the
study and from 2;5.8 to 3;0.10 at the end of the study. (3) All of the
one-hour recording sessions took place in an informal play situation at
the child's home with child's mother. The investigator was
sometimes present as a participant observer. The children with SLI were
recorded fortnightly and the MLU controls were recorded twice every
three weeks.
Speech corpora
The three children with SLI in this study were audiotaped at
fortnightly intervals for approximately an hour while playing with their
mothers with toys provided by the investigator. All audio recordings
were transcribed orthographically in CHAT format as described in the
CHILDES manual (MacWhinney 2000), and a complete morphological tagging
was automatically created using the MOR and POST programs also available
on CHILDES. The criteria for inclusion of children's utterances in
the corpora were that utterances (a) were fully intelligible; (b) used
spontaneously (i.e. were neither self-repetitions nor imitations); and
(c) were not strings from songs or nursery rhymes. The criteria for the
identification of self-repetitions and imitations were the following:
the utterance was counted as an imitation or a self-repetition if it was
an exact repetition of a multiword utterance in the immediately
preceding line.
For the mother, criteria for inclusion were that the utterances
were (a) fully intelligible; and (b) not strings from songs or nursery
rhymes or text read directly from books. The corpora were searched for
past tense verb forms produced by the children and mothers and
obligatory contexts for past tense forms that contained bare stems for
the children. All no-stem-change irregular verbs for which present and
past tense forms are the same (e.g. hit/hit, cut/cut) were excluded from
the analyses. Obligatory contexts for past tense forms were defined as
utterances containing a bare stem where there was an unambiguous
interpretation from either the mother's recast or the general
dialogue context that the child was talking about events in the past.
It was decided that data for individual mothers should be pooled
together in order to obtain a large database of child-directed speech.
Previous research into whether the input to children with SLI differs
from the input to typically developing children has concentrated on the
pragmatic aspects of the speech corpora. Although mothers of children
with SLI have been shown to use fewer recasts (Conti-Ramsden 1990), a
number of studies have shown similarities between mothers of children
with SLI and mothers of MLU controls, for example in their
responsiveness to topic changes and communicative acts (Messick and
Prelock 1981) and in their use of requests, directives, assertions, and
regulating devices (Conti-Ramsden and Friel-Patti 1983). To our
knowledge studies to date have not separately considered the lexical,
morphological, and syntactic properties of the input to children with
SLI. Due to the lack of previous research into differences between the
input produced by mothers of affected and unaffected children, we
decided to analyze seven hours of speech data for the eleven mothers of
the MLU controls only. This combined mother corpus contained over 60,000
utterances and was considered to be a representative sample of input
language to use for both groups of children.
In order to assess the impact of the onset of overregularization it
was necessary to define stages prior to and following the onset of these
productions. A number of researchers have dealt with the frequency of
overregularizations (c.f. Marcus et al. 1992; Maratsos 2000); however,
to the best of our knowledge the issue of how to define onset of
overregularization has not been dealt with. In most cases the first
appearance of an overregularized form was taken as the onset of the
overregularization phenomenon. In order to avoid counting one-off
instances of overregularizations that could have been overheard and to
ensure that the phenomenon was as robust as possible, a point of
overregularization was defined here as the first of two consecutive
sessions containing at least one overregularized verb.
Results and discussion
Analyses of naturalistic speech data for children with SLI and MLU
controls were carried out in order to describe in detail the
distribution of past tense forms used by the two groups and to find
possible explanations for the patterns observed. The distribution of
past tense forms was defined with respect to two main variables: verb
class (whether verbs were regular or irregular) and finiteness (whether
finite past tense forms were supplied in obligatory contexts). The
effects of the onset of overregularization in child speech and of the
input frequency in maternal speech were investigated as possible
explanatory variables. Summary statistics for the fourteen participants
are provided in Table 1.
Past tense verb forms have been traditionally classified in terms
of whether they belong to the regular or irregular verb class. Table 2
presents information on the children's verb use according to the
regular/irregular dichotomy in terms of verb types and tokens.
Although the children in both groups show a symmetrical distribution in the number of regular and irregular past tense verb
forms overall, over 75% of all high-frequency types and over 85% of
high-frequency tokens are irregular. Thus, although the children may
know and produce approximately the same number of different regular and
irregular types, irregular types feature far more often (i.e. they have
a higher token frequency) in the past tense use of both children with
SLI and MLU-matched controls. That is, around 75% of all past tense
tokens produced by children are irregular.
Having established that irregular past tense forms (in terms of
both types and tokens) are used more frequently than regular past tense
forms, it is important to ascertain whether there is a difference in the
percentage use of regular and irregular finite forms in obligatory
contexts. That is, are irregular forms supplied more often than regular
forms in past tense contexts? In other words, is there a relationship
between word class and finiteness?
The relationship between verb class and finiteness
Table 3 shows the number of regular and irregular verb types used
in finite and nonfinite contexts. The results are shown for types and
not tokens to partial out the effect of cases in which a very small
number of verb types would account for a large number of tokens, as in
the case of one child who has a very high proportion of nonfinite tokens
represented by one single verb type.
In both groups irregular finite forms were supplied either to the
same degree or more often in obligatory contexts than regular finite
forms. However, if the actual frequencies are considered, irregular
finite past tense forms occur most frequently out of the four possible
finite/nonfinite forms. The children's frequent use of irregular
forms is a likely cause of the observed difference between percentage
finiteness for regular and irregular types. This is because irregular
past tense forms are far more frequent than regular past tense forms,
constituting three-quarters of all past tense tokens produced by both
groups of children. These results are inconsistent with the prediction
for regular past tense made by Rice et al. (2000). It was predicted that
children with SLI would be similar to MLU controls on irregular past
tense but that they would perform worse than MLU controls on regular
past tense. As can be seen from Table 3, there is support for the first
prediction, as the two groups perform at similar levels in their use of
irregular past tense. However, the children with SLI in the current
study perform as well as the MLU controls, if not slightly better, on
regular past tense, as shown by the percentage figures.
An analysis of variance was conducted on the data for the MLU
controls shown in Table 3. No main effects were found for verb class
(F(1, 10) = 2.90, p = 0.12) or finiteness (F(1, 10) = 4.40, p = 0.06);
however, there was a significant interaction between verb class and
finiteness in these children's use of past tense forms (F(1, 10) =
7.16, p < 0.05). This result is due to the fact that the average
number of irregular past tense forms used by the children (141) is
almost twice as large as the average number of regular past tense forms
(72), bare stems in regular past tense contexts (74), and bare stems in
irregular past tense contexts (74). That is, the children have a
tendency to use finite irregular verb forms more often than they use
regular finite forms and regular and irregular nonfinite forms. It was
not possible to conduct an analysis of variance on the children with SLI
as there were only three participants; however, visual inspection of the
distributions of past tense use for the three children with SLI show a
similar pattern of past tense marking for irregular verbs. Specifically,
the average number of irregular past tense forms produced by the
children with SLI (69) was larger than the average number of regular
past tense forms (42), as well as the average numbers of unfulfilled
obligatory contexts for regular and irregular past tense forms (25 and
41 respectively).
In sum, irregular finite forms constitute the most frequently used
form in all past tense contexts. This result is consistent with the
finding that the vast majority of the high-frequency types in the past
are irregular.
The effects of overregularization
The production of overregularizations such as comed has been
documented as an important creative process in language acquisition. It
has been suggested that the addition of the regular -ed inflection to
irregular stems represents the emergence of a symbolic rule (Marcus et
al. 1992). Given that irregular finite forms are used more frequently in
absolute terms, and, in the case of the MLU controls in this study, they
are supplied more often in obligatory contexts, it is interesting to
consider whether the onset of overregularizations affects the degree to
which regular finite forms are supplied in obligatory contexts. In other
words, does the onset of overregularization mark a qualitative shift in
children's representation of tense and finiteness?
One child in the SLI group (Nathan) and four children in the MLU
group (Anne, Becky, Carl, and Warren) met the criterion for a point of
overregularization defined as the first of two consecutive sessions
containing at least one overregularized verb. (4)
The data presented in Table 4 were analyzed using hierarchical log
linear models for each of the five children separately. There were no
third-order interactions, suggesting that there were no consistent
relationships between verb class, finiteness, and stage. Significant
interactions were found for two of the five children. For Warren, there
was a borderline interaction between finiteness and stage ([chi square]
= 3.70, p = 0.055), indicating that the child increased his use of
finite forms from stage 1 (before overregularization) to stage 2 (after
overregularization). For Becky there was a significant interaction
between regularity and finiteness ([chi square] = 5.11, p < 0.05),
indicating that the child used more regular finite forms than irregular
finite forms overall.
These results imply that there was no significant improvement in
finiteness marking on regular past tense forms once the children had
begun to overregularize. None of the children showed an increase in
their use of regular past tense forms in obligatory contexts up to five
months after the point of overregularization. It is possible that the
predicted differences between children with SLI and MLU controls become
apparent later on in development when the gap widens between the two
groups, whereas the two groups are not that different during the initial
stages of past tense use.
The lack of improvement in children's production of finite
regular forms is inconsistent with accounts interpreting
overregularizations as the emergence of a symbolic rule applying across
the board, that is, dual-mechanism accounts of past tense learning
(Marcus et al. 1992; Prasada and Pinker 1993). Even invoking a blocking
mechanism whereby overregularization errors are preempted by the
retrieval of a stored irregular form does not solve the problem in the
case of these five children. By this rationale it would be logical to
expect that any irregular verb type without a known past tense form
would be equally likely to be overregularized, as variables such as
frequency and phonological salience play no role in the dual-route
account. However, this is not the case in the present study.
First, in nine cases the verb types that are overregularized do
have a corresponding past tense form; in this case blocking may not have
worked if the known form is not sufficiently entrenched. Second, a large
proportion of irregular verb types for which no corresponding past tense
form is known by the child are used in the bare stem form rather than
being overregularized. Across the five children there is a total of 36
bare forms, of which 17 do not have a corresponding past tense form.
This lack of across-the-board overregularization also has
implications for Rice et al.'s (2000) finiteness measure on
irregulars including both correct forms and overregularizations. In Rice
et al.'s most recent version of the EOI model, a distinction
between a morphophonological component and a morphosyntactic component
allows a new measure of finiteness that includes any attempt to mark
past tense, regardless of whether the child produces a correct form or
an overregularized one. Both types of form mark finiteness and as such
testify to children's morphosyntactic knowledge of the requirement
to mark tense, although their morphophonological knowledge is still
incomplete and retrieval of a correct form is not always possible. If
the stage at which children start to overregularize coincides with the
insight that tense must be obligatorily marked, one would expect this
new piece of knowledge to be applied to any verb. However, this is not
the case: as shown by proponents of the single-mechanism account
(Plunkett and Marchman 1993; Marchman 1997), overregularization is a
selective process governed by frequency and phonological-neighborhood
effects. Rather than a qualitative shift in children's knowledge of
the obligatoriness of finiteness, overregularization is better defined
as a phonologically constrained mechanism that becomes operational when
correct irregular past tense forms are not particularly well entrenched.
The effects of input frequency
Given that the corpora of child speech data consisted of
mother-child interaction, it was possible to investigate the influence
of maternal input frequency of past tense forms on the forms used by the
children. In order to obtain a representative picture of the lexical
statistics of English child-directed speech, frequencies of past tense
forms for the eleven mothers of the MLU controls were pooled to form a
mother group. Recall that only data for the mothers of the controls were
used due to the lack of information regarding similarities and
differences between the language of mothers of children with SLI and
mothers of typically developing children. Type and token frequencies of
the regular and irregular past tense forms used by the eleven mothers of
the control group children in a seven-hour sample are presented in Table
5. Although the mothers use a slightly greater mean number of regular
past tense types than irregular past tense types, the mean number of
irregular past tense tokens is considerably larger than regular past
tense tokens. Whereas there was some variation in the frequency with
which mothers used regular and irregular types, ten out of the eleven
mothers used over twice as many irregular tokens as regular tokens.
Thus, irregular past tense forms featured far more frequently than
regular past tense forms in the speech of mothers as well as of both
groups of children.
The data for children in each group were pooled to form an SLI
group and an MLU group, and the data for the children in each group were
correlated with data for the mother group. In order to avoid spurious relationships resulting from a large number of past tense forms used
rarely by both mothers and children, only high-frequency forms in the
child-group data were included. These forms are the high-frequency forms
that occur at least five times in the SLI-group and MLU-group data. Past
tense forms were not divided into regular and irregular classes--the
high-frequency lists contained both classes of forms. The lists of
absolute frequencies and their corresponding ranks are shown in Table 6.
As can be seen from Table 6, the frequency distribution of past
tense verb forms was highly skewed, which made it necessary to perform a
log transformation on the data. The relationships between verb forms
used by the SLI group and mother group and the MLU group and mother
group were examined.
A Pearson's product--moment pairwise correlation between the
log percentage frequencies for the SLI group and mother group use of the
thirteen most frequent past tense forms in the SLI-group data was r =
0.86 (df = 12, p < 0.001) (see Figure 1). The correlation between the
log percentage frequencies for the MLU-group and the mother-group use of
the seventeen most frequent past tense forms in the MLU group yielded a
result of r = 0.69 (df = 16, p < 0.01) (see Figure 2).
[FIGURES 1-2 OMITTED]
In addition, the [R.sup.2] values for these correlations indicate
how much variance in the children's past tense use is accounted for
by the distribution of past tense forms in the mother-group input. In
the case of the SLI group, the distribution of past tense forms in the
maternal input accounts for 74.0% of the variance in the distribution of
past tense forms in the children's speech, and for the MLU group,
the corresponding figure is 47.6%. Therefore, for both groups, the
lexical statistics of maternal input can account for between
approximately one-half and three-quarters of the variance seen in child
productions of past tense forms.
These results are consistent with a limited-scope account of
language learning (Tomasello 1992; Lieven et al. 1997; Tomasello and
Brooks 1999; Pine et al. 1998b). According to this view, children are
conservative learners who derive much of their knowledge from the input
to which they are exposed. As shown by a number of other studies
investigating the interaction between children's verb use and
maternal input (Naigles and Hoff-Ginsberg 1998; Pine et al. 1998a; Hsieh
et al. 1999; Rowland and Pine 2000; Wijnen et al. 2001), input frequency
is a powerful predictor of which forms will be used by the children. In
addition, by inspecting the verbs included in the list of most frequent
forms used by children with SLI and the MLU controls, it is apparent
that phonological effects are also a factor, given that over 80% of verb
types in both groups is represented by irregulars.
Further indirect support for the surface account and the
single-mechanism account is also provided by these findings. First, for
both the children with SLI and the unaffected controls, irregular past
tense forms account for over 80% of the most frequently used types. As
predicted by Leonard and colleagues, vowel-change irregular past tense
forms are more salient for both groups of children and as such are
acquired earlier. Second, although to a much lesser extent, regular past
tense forms are also found among the most frequently used past tense
forms, thus showing that phonetically reduced forms can be learned
relatively early provided they are sufficiently frequent in the input.
Although this is not a prediction that is explicitly made by the
single-mechanism account, it is a logical consequence of the role played
by frequency in the model: the more frequent the verb form, the quicker
it will be learned. Although high-frequency verbs in child-directed
speech tend to be irregular, a number of regular verbs are also used
with considerable frequency by mothers when speaking to their young
children; exposure is such that difficulties in the perception of the
unstressed -ed suffix can be overridden.
Although there are few differences in the results for the children
with SLI and the MLU controls in this study, it is necessary to account
for the differences found in previous work with older groups of children
(Leonard et al. 1997; Montgomery and Leonard 1998; Rice et al. 2000).
The limited-scope account can explain why the two groups of children in
the current study performed at similar levels while older children with
SLI perform significantly worse than MLU controls. In the current study,
both groups of children are at the early stages of multiword speech,
when there is a substantial degree of lexical specificity in verb use
(Pine et al. 1998b). This is highlighted by the correlations found
between the mother and child distributions of past tense forms. However,
over time, typically developing children become less dependent on the
input, so that their knowledge becomes less lexically specific and more
category-general. It is suggested that children with SLI are
particularly conservative learners who take longer to create
category-general knowledge from the lexical statistics of the input
language (Conti-Ramsden and Jones 1997). Thus at later stages when MLU
controls have developed an "add -ed" pattern based on a
prolonged period of exposure to regular past tense forms, the children
with SLI have yet to form such a pattern and are only able to use
correctly those forms that are most frequent in the input.
The link between lexical and grammatical acquisition has been
recognized by a number of researchers (Marchman and Bates 1994; Jones
and Conti-Ramsden 1997; Conti Ramsden and Jones 1997; Bates and Goodman
1999). This tie is particularly relevant in the case of past tense
acquisition on the assumption that exposure to a sufficiently large number of verb types is necessary before the child can form any sort of
generalization. If children with SLI are overall poorer vocabulary
learners, this implies that they will not be particularly good at
learning low-frequency words, that is, in this case, regular past tense
forms, which are also phonetically reduced. This being the case, it will
take children with SLI a considerable amount of time before they are
exposed to a sufficiently large number of regular verb types and a
pattern is detected. In other words, they will reach the "critical
mass" point considerably later than children who have better
vocabulary-learning skills. The reverse is also true; superior
vocabulary learners are more likely to notice low-frequency items. With
respect to past tense acquisition this would give superior vocabulary
learners a rather larger group of regular verb types that would serve as
a basis for pattern generalization relatively early. Maratsos (2000)
reports such a case for Abe, a very gifted vocabulary learner who
acquired both obligatory regular and irregular past tensing very early
(2;9) and who also had a very high overgeneralization error rate.
Concluding remarks
It is important to note that this study differs from previous work
on the development of the past tense in two main ways. First, unlike
previous research that draws evidence from probe-test data, the current
work is based on a rich longitudinal database of spontaneous
mother-child interaction. Second, both the children with SLI and the MLU
control group were at the early stages of multiword speech (MLU
1.6-3.8), which represents an earlier stage of development than has
previously been considered. It is therefore necessary to view the
results obtained in light of these methodological differences.
The current findings shed light both on the distribution of past
tense use in young children with SLI and MLU controls and on some of the
proposed explanations for patterns observed. The distribution of regular
and irregular past tense forms used by the children in both the SLI and
MLU groups was found to be symmetrical in terms of verb types overall,
but asymmetrical in terms of high-frequency verb types, with irregular
past tense forms being used more often than regular ones. For the MLU
controls, there was a significant interaction between finiteness and
verb class, with irregular verb types significantly more likely to be
used in a tensed form in obligatory past tense contexts.
These results only partially confirm the predictions made by the
surface account with respect to the asymmetry between regular and
irregular types. Only the MLU controls, but not the children with SLI,
showed a significant difference between the percentage of correct
regular past tense forms and irregular past tense forms in obligatory
contexts, with irregulars being supplied in a tensed form more often
than regulars. For the children with SLI no advantage for irregular
verbs in obligatory contexts was found. This unexpected result could be
accounted for by the relatively poor lexical learning skills that
characterize this group of children. Note also that an advantage for
irregular verbs has often been reported in the literature for children
with SLI who are considerably older than the children included here. It
is possible that the older children included in other studies will have
reached a sufficiently large critical mass for a number of irregular
past tense forms to show an advantage over the phonetically reduced
regular past tense forms, which take even longer to be acquired.
For one child with SLI and four MLU controls who had an
identifiable point of overregularization, there was no increase in the
use of regular past tense forms in obligatory contexts in the stage
following this point. This could suggest that overregularizations do not
constitute evidence of an across-the-board rule. Nevertheless it is
possible that a longer period of time after the onset of
overregularizations may be needed in order to assess the impact of
overregularization more fully.
The absence of improvement in the proportion of regular past tense
forms in obligatory contexts and the selective overregularization of a
limited number of irregular verb types are inconsistent with claims made
by proponents of the EOI model with respect to finiteness marking. If
overregularization marks a qualitative shift in the child's mental
representation of finiteness and obligatoriness of tense marking, the
expectation would be that any regular verb would be appropriately
tense-marked, and at least any irregular verb without a sufficiently
entrenched correct past tense form would be a candidate for
overregularization. This is, however, not the case either for Nathan or
for any of the other unaffected children. Our results point to an
interpretation of overregularization as a lexical phenomenon driven by
analogy and schema formation, in line with predictions made by the
single-mechanism account and usage-based models.
Finally, the positive correlations between frequencies of past
tense form use in the mother group and both the SLI and MLU groups
testify to the importance of frequency as a predictor of order of
acquisition and are consistent with a limited-scope account of
grammatical development. The fact that the verb forms used most
frequently by both children with SLI and typically developing children
correspond to those used by a group of mothers suggests that children
could be drawing upon distributional information from the input during
early past tense acquisition. Thus, both groups of children seem to be
similarly influenced by frequency effects in their use of past tense
forms. Furthermore, the MLU controls show an advantage in the use of
irregular forms in obligatory contexts, unlike the children with SLI.
The role played by vocabulary-learning skills is thus even more obvious
in the group of affected children. For them not only does it take longer
to form a regular schema for regular verb types, typically lower in
frequency than irregulars, but even learning the irregular forms seems
to be taking a considerable amount of time. We take this as further
evidence for the close relationship between lexical and grammatical
development, and for the conservative learning strategies of children
with SLI.
University of Manchester
Appendix. Overregularizations for the five children who met the
criteria for point of overregularization
Child (group) Overregularization No.
of
tokens
Nathan (SLI) felled 4
comed 3
catched 1
swimmed 1
Anne (MLU) bited 1
borned 1
hiddened 1
lied (instead of lay) 1
runned 1
thoughted 1
Becky (MLU) stealed 4
broked 2
comed 2
brokened 1
sawed 1
Carl (MLU) broked 8
comed 8
runned 3
catched 1
doned 1
falled 1
goned 1
Warren (MLU) comed 11
stucked 4
blowed 1
breaked 1
broked 1
Table 1. Summary statistics
Group
Child Age range MLU No. of No. of Mean no. of
name range sessions past past tense
analyzed tense contexts
contexts per session
SLI
Bonnie 4;0.09-4;8.30 2.2-3.4 14 113 8.1
Harry 3;5.0-4;5.2 1.7-3.3 24 115 4.8
Nathan 3;1.9-3;10.22 1.6-3.6 22 163 7.4
MLU controls
Anne 1;10.07-2;7.01 1.5-2.8 7 64 9.1
Aran 2;0.2-2;8.12 1.7-3.4 7 77 11.0
Becky 2;2.15-2;10.25 1.7-3.1 7 49 7.0
Carl 1;8.22-2;58 1.9-3.1 7 57 8.1
Dominic 2;1.11-2;9.26 1.6-2.7 7 98 14.0
Gail 1;11.27-2;8.6 1.6-3.0 7 94 13.4
Joel 1;11.22-2;9.13 1.5-2.8 7 102 14.6
John 1;11.15-2;7.24 1.8-2.8 7 21 3.0
Liz 2;0.07-2;8.14 1.6-3.5 7 56 8.0
Nicole 2;4.21-3;0.10 1.6-3.0 7 19 2.7
Warren 1;10.6-2;6.23 1.9-3.8 7 46 6.6
Table 2. Regular and irregular past tense in terms of total number
of verb types, number of high-frequency types, and percentage of
irregular tokens for the children with and without SLI
Group Past tense forms
No. of No. of % irregular
regular irregular tokens of all
types types past tense
forms
SLI 29 32 77.4
MLU controls 45 33 74.8
Group High-frequency past tense form (a)
No. of No. of % irregular
high high tokens of all
frequency frequency past tense
regular irregular forms
types types
SLI 2 11 92.9
MLU controls 5 18 86.9
(a.) High-frequency past tense verb types were those that appeared
with five or more tokens in the pooled speech data for the SLI and
MLU groups.
Table 3. The number of past tense verb types in terms of verb class
and finiteness used by the children in the SLI and MLU groups
+ finite - finite % finiteness
SLI (N = 3)
regular 42 25 63
irregular 69 41 63
MLU controls (N = 11)
regular 72 74 49
irregular 141 74 66
Table 4. The number of past tense types used before and after the point
overregularization for one child with SLI and four MLU controls
Child (group) Regular and irregular %
Before/after past tense verb types occurring finiteness
overregularization in finite and nonfinite form
+ finite - finite
Nathan (SLI)
before
regular 14 8 64
irregular 21 5 81
after
regular 10 2 83
irregular 13 2 87
Anne (MLU)
before
regular 5 1 83
irregular 9 2 82
after
regular 7 7 50
irregular 13 5 72
Becky (MLUU)
before
regular 7 0 100
irregular 9 7 56
after
regular 11 1 92
irregular 18 4 82
Carl (MLU)
before
regular 3 4 43
irregular 1 2 33
after
regular 21 9 70
irregular 8 6 57
Warren (MLU)
before
regular 2 7 22
irregular 3 5 38
after
regular 11 9 55
irregular 7 4 64
Table 5. Type and token frequencies for the eleven individual mothers'
use of regular and irregular past tense
Mother of Past tense types Past tense tokens
MLU control regular irregular all regular irregular all
child
Anne 37 32 69 87 181 268
Aran 105 51 156 254 425 679
Becky 32 25 57 57 165 222
Carl 33 34 67 80 220 300
Dominic 48 40 88 92 270 362
Gail 55 38 93 124 298 422
Joel 51 40 91 93 179 272
John 38 31 69 69 170 239
Liz 28 28 56 53 104 157
Nicole 47 25 72 70 169 239
Warren 34 42 76 52 154 206
Group mean 46.2 35.1 81.3 93.7 212.3 306.0
Table 6. Token frequency and ranks for past tense forms used by the SLI
and MLU groups and their corresponding frequencies and ranks in the
mother group data
High- Frequency Frequency High- Frequency Frequency
frequency in SLI in mother frequency in MLU in mother
past tense group group past tense group group
forms for (rank) (rank) forms for (rank) (rank)
SLI groups MLU
control
group
got 27 (1) 252 (1) had 45 (1) 229 (2)
lost 25 (2) 45 (5) got 44 (2) 252 (1)
had 23 (3) 229 (2) said 31 (3) 163 (3)
did 21 (4) 128 (4) went 27 (4) 159 (4)
said 16 (5) 163 (3) lost 22 (5) 45 (9)
broke 10 (6.5) (a) 21 (10) bumped 19 (6) 9 (16)
found 10 (6.5) 43 (6) found 18 (7) 43 (10)
finished 7 (8.5) 23 (9) did 16 (8) 128 (5)
bought 7 (8.5) 38 (7) fell 15 (9) 35 (12)
fell 6 (10.5) 35 (8) happened 14 (10) 88 (6)
forgot 6 (10.5) 8 (12) bought 13 (11) 38 (11)
crashed 5 (12.5) 10 (11) saw 10 (12) 53 (8)
won 5 (12.5) 7 (13) came 9 (13) 68 (7)
broke 8 (15) 21 (14)
crashed 8 (15) 10 (15)
forgot 8 (15) 8 (17)
gave 5 (17) 30 (13)
(a.) Tied ranks are given as mean averages.
Notes
* This research was supported by the Economic and Social Research
Council, ESRC grant to Gina Conti-Ramsden (grant number R00023 7767). We
would like to thank Rachel F. Hick for help with data collection and
Brian Faragher for help with statistical analyses. In addition, our
special thanks go to the three children with SLI and their families who
participated in the study. Correspondence address: Professor Gina
Conti-Ramsden, Human Communication and Deafness, School of Education,
University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 3PL, UK.
E-mail: gina.conti-ramsden@man.ac.uk.
(1.) It must be noted that the average age of the children with SLI
at the start of the Rice et al. (2000) study is 4;8 and the average age
of the language-age controls is 3;0 (3N group). The evidence reported
indicates that for a protracted period of time both the SLI group and
the 3N group resort to overregularization with some consistency.
However, because of the age range selected, no information is available
on children's marking of finiteness in past tense contexts prior to
the onset of overregularization.
(2.) Phonological neighborhood is defined with respect to the
phonological features that are relevant for the clustering of past tense
forms, i.e. stem-final vowel--consonant sequence. Neighborhoods are
composed of "friends" and "enemies." For example the
verb throw (past tense form threw) has a number of friends that have
similar sounding past tense forms (blow/blew, grow/grew, flow/flew) but
it also has a number of enemies, who despite having the same stem-final
vowel in the root have a regular past tense form (mow/ mowed,
show/showed, snow/snowed). If the number of enemies is higher than the
number of friends the vulnerability to overregularization increases
considerably.
(3.) MLU was calculated in words throughout.
(4.) See Appendix 1 for a list of overregularizations.
References
Bates, Elizabeth and Goodman, Judith (1999). On the emergence of
grammar from the lexicon. In The Emergence of Language, Brian MacWhinney (ed.), 1-79. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Berko, Jean (1958). The child's learning of English
morphology. Word 14, 150-177.
Berument, Sibel Kazak; Rutter, Michael; Lord, Catherine; Pickles,
Andrew; and Bailey, Anthony (1999). Autistic screening questionnaire:
diagnostic validity. British Journal of Psychiatry 175, 444-451.
Bishop, Dorothy (1994). Grammatical errors in specific language
impairment: competence or performance limitations? Applied
Psycholinguistics 15, 507-550.
Brown, Roger (1973). A First Language: The Early Stages. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Bybee, Joan (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language
and Cognitive Processes 10, 425-455.
--; and Slobin, Dan (1982). Rules and schemas in the development
and use of the English past tense. Language 58, 265-289.
Caselli, Maria Christina; Bates, Elizabeth; Casadio, Paola; Fenson,
Judi; Fenson, Larry; Sanderl, Lisa; and Weir, Judy (1995). A
cross-linguistic study of early lexical development. Cognitive
Development 10, 159-199.
Cazden, Courtney (1968). The acquisition of noun and verb
inflections. Child Development 39, 433-448.
Choi, Sonja; and Gopnik, Alison (1995). Early acquisition of verbs
in Korean: a cross-linguistic study. Journal of Child Language 22,
497-530.
Conti-Ramsden, Gina (1990). Maternal recasts and other contingent
replies to language-impaired children. Journal of Speech and Hearing
Disorders 55, 262-274.
--; and Friel-Patti, Sandy (1983). Mothers' discourse
adjustments to language-impaired and non-language-impaired children.
Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 48, 360-367.
--; and Jones, Melanie (1997). Verb use in specific language
impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 40, 1298-1313.
Dromi, Esther (1987). Early Lexical Development. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, Susan; Fletcher, Paul; Garman, Michael; Hughes, Arthur;
Letts, Carolyn; and Sinka, Indra (1997). The Reynell Developmental
Language Scales III: The University of Reading Edition. Windsor:
NFER-NELSON.
Eyer, Julia; and Leonard, Laurence (1994). Learning past tense
morphology with specific language impairment: a case study. Child
Language, Teaching and Therapy 10, 127-138.
Goldfield, Beverly (1993). Noun bias in maternal speech to
one-year-olds. Journal of Child Language 20, 85-99.
Hsieh, Li; Leonard, Laurence; and Swanson, Lori (1999). Some
differences between English plural noun inflections and third singular
verb inflections in the input: the contribution of frequency, sentence
position and duration. Journal of Child Languag 26, 531-543.
Jones, Melanie; and Conti-Ramsden, Gina (1997). A comparison of
verb use in children with SLI and their younger siblings. First Language
17, 165-193.
Leiter (1979). Leiter International Performance Scale. Chicago:
Stoelting.
Leonard, Laurence; Bortolini, U.; Caselli, Maria Christina;
McGregor, K.; and Sabbadini, L. (1992). Morphological deficits in
children with specific language impairment: the status of features in
the underlying grammar. Language Acquisition 2, 151-179.
--; and Eyer, Julia (1996). Surface properties of grammatical
morphology and morphological deficits in children with specific language
impairment. In Signal to Syntax, J. Morgan and K. Demuth (eds.),
233-247. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
--; Eyer, Julia; Bedore, Lisa; and Grela, Bernard (1997). Three
accounts of the grammatical morpheme difficulties of English-speaking
children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language
and Hearing Research 40, 741-753.
McGregor, K.; and Allen, G. (1992). Grammatical morphology and
speech perception in children with specific language impairment. Journal
of Speech and Hearing Research 35, 1076-1085.
Lieven, Elena; Pine, Julian; and Baldwin, Gillian (1997).
Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of
Child Language 24, 187-219.
MacWhinney, Brian (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analysing
Talk. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Maratsos, Michael (2000). More overregularizations after all: new
data and discussion on Marcus, Pinker, Ullman, Hollander, Rosen and Xu.
Journal of Child Language 27, 183-212.
Marchman, Virginia (1997). Children's productivity in the
English past tense: the role of frequency, phonology and neighborhood
structure. Cognitive Science 21, 283-304.
--; and Bates, Elizabeth (1994). Continuity in lexical and
morphological development: a test of the critical mass hypothesis.
Journal of Child Language 21, 331-366.
--; Wulfeck, Beverly; and Ellis Weismer, Susan (1999). Morphogical
productivity in children with normal language and SLI: a study of the
English past tense. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 42,
206-219.
Marcus, Gary; Pinker, Steven; Ullman, Michael; Hollander, Michelle;
Rosen, T.; and Xu, Fei (1992). Overregularization in Language
Acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development
57(4), serial no. 228.
Messick, C.; and Prelock, P. (1981). Successful communication:
mothers of language-impaired children versus mothers of language-normal
children. Paper presented at the Convention for the American
Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Los Angeles.
Montgomery, James; and Leonard, Laurence (1998). Real-time
inflectional processing by children with specific language impairment:
effects of phonetic substance. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing
Research, 41, 1432-1443.
Naigles, Letitia; and Hoff-Ginsberg, Erika (1998). Why are some
verbs learned before other verbs? Effects of input frequency and
structure on children's early verb use. Journal of Child Language
25, 95-120.
Oetting, Janna; and Horohov, Janice (1997). Past tense marking by
children with and without specific language impairment. Journal of
Speech, Language and Hearing Research 40, 62-74.
Pine, Julian; and Lieven, Elena (1997). Slot-and-frame patterns and
the development of the determiner category. Applied Psycholinguistics
18, 123-138.
--; Lieven, Elena; and Rowland, Caroline (1998a). Tense optionality
and children's use of English verb morphology: testing the optional
infinitive hypothesis. Paper presented at the Child Language Seminar,
Sheffield.
--; Lieven, Elena; and Rowland, Caroline (1998b). Comparing
different models of the development of the English verb category.
Linguistics 36, 807-830.
Pinker, Steven; and Prince, Alan (1988). On language and
connectionism: analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of
language acquisition. Cognition 28, 59-108.
Plunkett, Kim; and Marchman, Virginia (1991). U-shaped learning and
frequency effects in a multi-layered perceptron: implications for child
language acquisition. Cognition 38, 43-102.
--; and Marchman, Virginia (1993). From rote learning to system
building: acquiring verb morphology in children and connectionist nets.
Cognition 48, 21-69.
Prasada, Sandeep; and Pinker, Steven (1993). Generalizations of
regular and irregular morphological patterns. Language and Cognitive
Processes 8, 1-56.
Rice, Mabel; and Wexler, Kenneth (1996). Towards tense as a
clinical marker of specific language impairment in English-speaking
children. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 39,
1239-1257.
--; Wexler, Kenneth; and Cleave, Patricia (1995). Specific language
impairment as a period of extended optional infinitive. Journal of
Speech and Hearing Research 38, 850-863.
--; Wexler, Kenneth; and Hershberger, Scott (1998). Tense over
time: the longitudinal course of tense acquisition in children with
specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing
Research 41, 1412-1431.
--; Wexler, Kenneth; Marquis, Janet; and Hershberger, Scott (2000).
Acquisition of irregular past tense by children with specific lnguage
impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 43,
1126-1145.
Rowland, Caroline; and Pine, Julian (2000). Subject-auxiliary
inversion errors and wh-question acquisition: "what children do
know?" Journal of Child Language 27, 157-181.
Stemberger, Joseph (1993). Vowel dominance in overregularizations.
Journal of Child Language 20, 503-521.
Tardif, Twila (1996). Nouns are not always learned before verbs:
evidence from Mandarin speakers' early vocabularies. Developmental
Psychology 32, 492-504.
Theakston, Anna; Lieven, Elena; Pine, Julian; and Rowland, Caroline
(2001). The role of performance limitations in the acquisition of
verb-argument structure. Journal of Child Language 28, 127-152.
Tomasello, Michael (1992). First Verbs: A Case of Early Grammatical
Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
--; and Brooks, Patricia (1999). Early syntactic development: a
construction grammar approach. In The Development of Language, M.
Barrett (ed.). Sussex: Psychology Press.
Wijnen, Frank; Kempen, Masja; and Gillis, Steven (2001). Root
infinitives in Dutch early child language: an effect of input? Journal
of Child Language 28, 629-660.
Received 20 March 2001
Revised version received 19 November 2001