Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T20:02:03.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of linguistic experience on the flexible use of mutual exclusivity in word learning*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2014

MARINA KALASHNIKOVA ,
KAREN MATTOCK  and
PADRAIC MONAGHAN
MARINA KALASHNIKOVA*
Affiliation:
The MARCS Institute, University of Western Sydney & Centre for Research in Human Development and Learning, Department of Psychology, Lancaster University
KAREN MATTOCK
Affiliation:
School of Social Sciences & Psychology, and The MARCS Institute, University of Western Sydney
PADRAIC MONAGHAN
Affiliation:
Centre for Research in Human Development and Learning, Department of Psychology, Lancaster University
*
Address for correspondence: Marina Kalashnikova, The MARCS Institute, University of Western Sydney, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, 2751, Sydney, NSW, Australia[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mutual Exclusivity (ME) is a prominent constraint in language acquisition, which guides children to establish one-to-one mappings between words and referents. But how does unfolding experience of multiple-to-one word-meaning mappings in bilingual children's environment affect their understanding of when to use ME and when to accept lexical overlap? Three-to-five-year-old monolingual and simultaneous bilingual children completed two pragmatically distinct tasks, where successful word learning relied on either the default use of ME or the ability to accept overlapping labels. All children could flexibly use ME by following the social-pragmatic directions available in each task. However, linguistic experience shaped the development of ME use, whereby older monolinguals showed a greater reliance on the one-to-one mapping assumption, but older bilinguals showed a greater ability to accept lexical overlap. We suggest that flexible use of ME is thus shaped by pragmatic information present in each communicative interaction and children's individual linguistic experience.

Keywords

mutual exclusivitylexical overlapword learningbilingualismlanguage acquisition
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 18 , Issue 4 , October 2015 , pp. 626 - 638
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable feedback on the earlier versions of this manuscript. We are also grateful to the children, parents, and schools who participated in this research.

References

Au, T. K. F., & Glusman, M. (1990). The principle of mutual exclusivity in word learning: To honor or not to honor? Child Development, 67, 1474–1490.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Barac, R., Blaye, A., & Poulin-Dubois, D. (2010). Word mapping and executive functioning in young monolingual and bilingual children. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11, 485–508.Google Scholar
Byers-Heinlein, K., Fennell, C. T., & Werker, J. F. (2013). The development of associative word learning in monolingual and bilingual infants. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 198–205.Google Scholar
Byers-Heinlein, K., & Werker, J. F. (2009). Monolingual, bilingual, trilingual: Infants’ language experience influences the development of a word-learning heuristic. Developmental Science, 12, 815–823.Google Scholar
Byers-Heinlein, K., & Werker, J. F. (2013). Lexicon structure and the disambiguation of novel words: Evidence from bilingual infants. Cognition, 128, 407–416.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V., & Grossman, J. B. (1998). Pragmatic directions and children's word learning. Journal of Child Language, 25, 1–18.Google Scholar
Davidson, D., Jergovic, D., Imami, Z., & Theodos, V. (1997). Monolingual and bilingual children's use of the mutual exclusivity constraint. Journal of Child Language, 24, 3–24.Google Scholar
Davidson, D., & Tell, D. (2005). Monolingual and bilingual children's use of mutual exclusivity in the naming of whole objects. Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 25–45.Google Scholar
Deák, G. O., & Maratsos, M. (1998). On having complex representations of things: Preschoolers use multiple words for objects and people. Developmental Psychology, 34, 224–240.Google Scholar
Diesendruck, G. (2005). The principles of conventionality and contrast in word learning: An empirical examination. Developmental Psychology, 41, 451–463.Google Scholar
Diesendruck, G., & Markson, L. (2001). Children's avoidance of lexical overlap: A pragmatic account. Developmental Psychology, 37, 630–641.Google Scholar
Dunn, L. M., Dunn, D. M., Sewell, J., Styles, B., Brzyska, B., Shamsan, Y., & Burge, B. (2009). British Picture Vocabulary Scale: Third edition. London: GL Assessment Limited.Google Scholar
Frank, I., & Poulin-Dubois, D. (2002). Young monolingual and bilingual children's responses to violation of the mutual exclusivity principle. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 6, 125–146.Google Scholar
Grassmann, S., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Young children follow pointing over words in interpreting acts of reference. Developmental Science, 13, 252–263.Google Scholar
Halberda, J. (2003). The development of a word-learning strategy. Cognition, 87, B23–B34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halberda, J. (2006). Is this a dax which I see before me? Use of the logical argument disjunctive syllogism supports word-learning in children and adults. Cognitive Psychology, 53, 310–344.Google Scholar
Hall, G. (1996). Preschooler's default assumptions about word meaning: Proper names designate unique individuals. Developmental Psychology, 32, 177–186.Google Scholar
Haryu, E. (1998). Effects of knowledge about cross-language equivalents on children's use of mutual exclusivity in interpreting novel labels. Japanese Psychological Research, 40, 82–91.Google Scholar
Houston-Price, C., Caloghiris, Z., & Raviglione, E. (2010). Language experience shapes the development of the mutual exclusivity bias. Infancy, 15, 125–150.Google Scholar
Jaswal, V. K. (2010). Explaining the disambiguation effect: Don't exclude mutual exclusivity. Journal of Child Language, 37, 95–113.Google Scholar
Kalashnikova, M., Mattock, K., & Monaghan, P. (2014). Disambiguation of novel labels and referential facts: A developmental perspective. First Language, 34, 125–135.Google Scholar
Liittschwager, J. C., & Markman, E. M. (1994). Sixteen- and 24-month olds’ use of mutual exclusivity as a default assumption in second-label learning. Developmental Psychology, 30, 955–968.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M. (1990). Constraints children place on word meanings. Cognitive Science, 14, 57–77.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M., & Wachtel, G. F. (1988). Children's use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meanings of words. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 121–157.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M., Wasow, J. L., & Hansen, M. B. (2003). Use of the mutual exclusivity assumption by young word learners. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 241–275.Google Scholar
Mather, E., & Plunkett, K. (2010). Mutual exclusivity and phonological novelty constrain word learning at 16 months. Journal of Child Language, 38, 933–950.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (1989). Early differentiation of languages in bilingual children. In Hyltenstam, K. & Obler, L. (eds.), Bilingualism across the life span: Aspects of acquisition, maturity and loss, pp. 13–40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Merriman, W. E. (1986). Some reasons for the occurrence and eventual correction of children's naming errors. Child Development, 57, 942–952.Google Scholar
Merriman, W. E. (1991). The mutual exclusivity bias in children's word learning: A reply to Woodward and Markman. Developmental Review, 11, 164–191.Google Scholar
Merriman, W. E., & Bowman, L. L. (1989). The mutual exclusivity bias in children's word learning (Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 54).Google Scholar
Merriman, W. E., & Kutlesic, V. (1993). Bilingual and monolingual children's use of two lexical acquisition heuristics. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 229–249.Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B., Golinkoff, R. M., & Bertrand, J. (1994). Two-year-olds readily learn multiple labels for the same basic-level category. Child Development, 65, 1163–1177.Google Scholar
Oliver, B., Dale, P. S., Saudino, K. J., Petrill, S. A., Pike, A., & Plomin, R. (2002). The validity of a parent-based assessment of cognitive abilities of three-year-olds. Early Child Development and Care, 172, 337–348.Google Scholar
Pearson, B., Fernandez, S., & Oller, D. K. (1993). Lexical development in bilingual infants and toddlers: Comparison to monolingual norms. Language Learning, 43, 93–120.Google Scholar
Pearson, B., Fernandez, S., & Oller, D. K. (1995). Cross-language synonyms in the lexicons of bilingual infants: One language or two? Journal of Child Language, 22, 345–368.Google Scholar
Piccin, T. B., & Blewitt, P. (2007). Resource conservation as a basis for the mutual exclusivity effect in children's word learning. First Language, 27, 5–28.Google Scholar
Savage, S. L., & Au, K. F. T. (1996). What word learners do when input contradicts the mutual exclusivity assumption. Child Development, 67, 3120–3134.Google Scholar
Saylor, M. M., Sabbagh, M. A., & Baldwin, D. A. (2002). Children use whole–part juxtaposition as a pragmatic cue to word meaning. Developmental Psychology, 38, 993–1003.Google Scholar
Woodward, A. L., & Markman, E. M. (1991). Constraints on learning as default assumptions: Comments on Merriman and Bowman's “The Mutual Exclusivity Bias in Children's Word Learning”. Developmental Review, 11, 137–163.Google Scholar