Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T22:11:55.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An experimental analysis of children's generalization during lexical learning: Comprehension or production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Phil J. Connell  and
Leija V. McReynolds
Phil J. Connell*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Leija V. McReynolds
Affiliation:
University of Kansas Medical Center
*
Phil J. Connell, Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, P.O. Box 413, Milwaukee, WI 53201
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The relationship between comprehension language training and production language training was examined by teaching 12 adults and 12 children a miniature language. The relationship between the two types of training was determined by examining their effects on the generalization of names. The results indicate that production training generalizes more extensively than comprehension training. The advantages and disadvantages of both types of training are discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , November 1981 , pp. 309 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Asher, J., & Garcia, R.The optimal age to learn a foreign language. Modern Language Journal, 1969, 53, 334–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benedict, H.Early lexical development: Comprehension and production. Journal of Child Language, 1979, 6, 183–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, L. Talking, understanding and thinking. In Schiefelbusch, R. & Lloyd, L. (Eds.), Language perspectives-acquisition, retardation and intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Bloom, L.Language development: Form and function in emerging grammars. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., Lightbown, P., & Hood, L.Structure and variation in child language, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1975, 40 (2), Serial No. 160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braine, M.On learning the grammatical order of words. Psychological Review, 1963, 70, 323–348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, R.A First Language. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Chapman, R., & Kohn, L.Comprehension strategies in two and three year olds: Animate agents or probable events? Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1978, 21, 746–761.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, R., & Miller, J.Word order in early two and three word utterances: Does production precede comprehension? Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 1975, 18, 355–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connell, P., Spradlin, J., & McReynolds, L.Strategies for assessing language programs. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1977, 42, 563–567.Google Scholar
deVilliers, P., & deVilliers, J.On this and that, and the other: Non-egocentrism in very young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1974, 18, 438–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
deVilliers, J., & deVilliers, P.Language Acquisition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Dixon, M., & Spradlin, J.Establishing stimulus equivalencies among retarded adolescents. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 1976, 21, 144–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, L.Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. Circle Pines, Minnesota: American Guidance Service, 1959.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S.Is second language learning like the first? TESOL Quarterly, 1974, 8, 11–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esper, E. A technique for the experimental investigation of associative interference in artificial language material. Language Monographs, 1925, 1.Google Scholar
Fourcin, A. Language development in the absence of expressive speech. In Lenneberg, E. H. & Lenneberg, E. (Eds.), Foundations of language development. New York: Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S., Seligman, M., & Gelman, R.Language in the two year old. Cognition, 1976, 4, 189–202.Google Scholar
Guess, D.A functional analysis of receptive language and productive speech: Acquisition of the plural morpheme. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 1969, 2, 55–64.Google Scholar
Guess, D., & Baer, D. Some experimental analysis of linguistic development in institutionalized retarded children. In Lahey, B. (Ed.), The modification of language behavior. Springfield: C.C. Thomas, 1973a.Google Scholar
Guess, D., & Baer, D.An analysis of individual differences in generalization between receptive and productive language in retarded children. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 1973b, 6, 311–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huttenlocher, J. Origins of language comprehension. In Solso, R. (Ed.), Theories of congnitive psychology. New York: Wiley, 1974.Google Scholar
Holdgrafer, G., & McReynolds, L. An experimental analysis of comprehension and production in children's acquisition of morphological rules. Human Communication, 1975, Autumn, 45–61.Google Scholar
Ingram, D.Toward a theory of person deixis. Papers in Linguistics, 1971, 4, 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingram, D. The relationship between comprehension and production. In Schiefelbusch, R. & Lloyd, L. (Eds.), Language perspectives, acquisition, retardation and intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Kinsbourne, M. The ontogeny of cerebral dominance. In D. Aaronson & R. Rieber (Eds.), Developmental Psycholinguistics and Communication Disorders, New York Academy of Science, 1975, 263, 225–235.Google Scholar
Krashen, S.Lateralization, language learning, and the critical period: Some new evidence. Language Learning, 1973, 23, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. The development of cerebral dominance and language learning: more new evidence. In Dato, D. (Ed.), Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E.The Biological foundations of language, New York: Wiley, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, L.Facilitating linguistic skills in children with specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1981, 2, 89–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oyama, S. A sensitive period for the acquisition of a second language. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Harvard University, 1973.Google Scholar
Politzer, R. & Weiss, L.Developmental aspects of auditory discrimination, echo response and recall. The Modern Language Journal. 1969, 53, 75–85.Google Scholar
Rees, N. Pragmatics of language. In Schiefelbusch, R. (Ed.), Bases of language intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Ruder, H., Smith, M., & Hermann, P. Effect of verbal imitation and comprehension on verbal production of lexical items. In L. McReynolds (Ed.), Developing systematic procedures for training children's language. ASHA Monograph Number 18, 1974.Google Scholar
Sailor, W.Reinforcement and generalization of productive plural allomorphs in two retarded children. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 1970, 4, 305–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidman, M.Reading and auditory-visual equivalencies. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research. 1971, 19, 5–13.Google Scholar
Snow, C., & Hoefnagel-Höhle, M.Age differences in the pronunciation of foreign sounds. Language and Speech, 1977, 20, 357–365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spradlin, J., Cotter, V., & Baxley, N.Establishing a conditional discrimination without direct training: A study of transfer with retarded adolescents. American Journal of Mental Deficiency. 1973, 77, 556–566.Google ScholarPubMed
Tanz, C.Cognitive principles underlying children's errors in case-marking. Journal of Child Language. 1974, 1, 271–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wales, R. Deixis. In Fletcher, P. & Garman, M. (Eds.), Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
Weber-Olsen, M., & Ruder, K.Acquisition and generalization of Japanese by English-Speakers. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1980, 1, 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wetherby, B. Miniature languages and the functional analysis of behavior. In Schiefelbusch, R. (Ed.), Bases of language intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Williams, G., & McReynolds, L.The relationship between discrimination and articulation training in children with misarticulations. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 1975, 18, 402–412.Google ScholarPubMed
Winitz, H. A reconsideration of comprehension and production in language training. In Connell, P. (Ed.), Allied health and behavioral sciences monographs. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1978.Google Scholar