Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:16:26.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Appreciating language conventions: thirteen-month-old Chinese infants understand that word generalization is shared practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 April 2019

Siying LIU  and
Renji SUN
Siying LIU
Affiliation:
East China Normal University, China
Renji SUN*
Affiliation:
East China University of Political Science and Law, China
*
*Corresponding author: East China University of Political Science and Law, Number 555, Longyuan Road, Shanghai, China, 201620; E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Language is conventional because word meanings are shared among different people. The present study examined Chinese infants’ understanding of the language convention that different people should generalize words in the same way. Thirteen-month-old Mandarin-speaking Chinese infants repeatedly viewed a speaker providing a novel label for a target object in the presence of a distractor object. Next, the objects changed colour and infants viewed the same speaker and a new speaker providing the label for either the different coloured target or distractor. They were also asked by both speakers to locate the correct referent of the label. Results revealed that infants expected both speakers to generalize the label to objects that belonged to the target category. This is the first evidence demonstrating that Chinese infants perceive word generalization as a form of shared convention.

Keywords

language conventionsword learninggeneralizationinfants
Type
Brief Research Reports
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , July 2019 , pp. 812 - 823
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

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

Buresh, J. S., & Woodward, A. L. (2007). Infants track action goals within and across agents. Cognition, 104(2), 287–314.Google Scholar
Bushnell, I. W., Sai, F., & Mullin, J. T. (1989). Neonatal recognition of the mother's face. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 7(1), 3–15.Google Scholar
Casstevens, R. M. (2007). jHab: Java Habituation Software (Version 1.0.2) [Computer Software]. Chevy Chase, MD. Online <https://woodwardlab.uchicago.edu/resources>..>Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1992). Conventionality and contrast: pragmatic principles with lexical consequences. In A., Lehrer & E. F., Kittay (Eds.), Frames, fields, and contrasts: new essays in semantic and lexical organization (pp. 171–88). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1993). The lexicon in acquisition (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 65). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Colombo, J., & Mitchell, D. W. (2009). Infant visual habituation. Neurobiology of Learning & Memory, 92(2), 225–34.Google Scholar
Diesendruck, G., & Markson, L. (2011). Children's assumption of the conventionality of culture. Child Development Perspectives, 5(3), 189–95.Google Scholar
Field, T. M., Cohen, D., Garcia, R., & Greenberg, R. (1984). Mother–stranger face discrimination by the newborn. Infant Behavior & Development, 7(1), 19–25.Google Scholar
Golinkoff, R. M., Ma, W., Song, L., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2013). Twenty-five years using the intermodal preferential looking paradigm to study language acquisition: What have we learned? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 316–39.Google Scholar
Graham, S. A., & Poulin-Dubois, D. (1999). Infants’ reliance on shape to generalize novel labels to animate and inanimate objects. Journal of Child Language, 26(2), 295–320.Google Scholar
Graham, S. A., Stock, H., & Henderson, A. M. E. (2006). Nineteen-month-olds’ understanding of the conventionality of object labels versus desires. Infancy, 9(3), 341–50.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. M. E., Gerson, S., & Woodward, A. L. (2008). The birth of social intelligence. Zero-to-Three, 28, 13–20.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. M. E., & Graham, S. A. (2005). Two-year-olds’ appreciation of the shared nature of novel object labels. Journal of Cognition and Development, 6(3), 381–402.Google Scholar
Henderson, A. M., & Scott, J. C. (2015). She called that thing a mido, but should you call it a mido too? Linguistic experience influences infants’ expectations of conventionality. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(332), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00332Google Scholar
Henderson, A. M. E., & Woodward, A. L. (2012). Nine-month-old infants generalize object labels, but not object preferences across individuals. Developmental Science, 15(5), 641–52.Google Scholar
Horváth, K., Liu, S., & Plunkett, K. (2016). A daytime nap facilitates generalization of word meanings in young toddlers. Sleep, 39(1), 203–07.Google Scholar
Houston, D. M., & Jusczyk, P. W. (2000). The role of talker-specific information in word segmentation by infants. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26(5), 1570–82.Google Scholar
Houston-Price, C., Plunkett, K., & Harris, P. (2005). ‘Word-learning wizardry’ at 1;6. Journal of Child Language, 32(1), 175–89.Google Scholar
Kelly, D. J., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., Lee, K., Gibson, A., Smith, M., et al. (2005). Three-month-olds, but not newborns, prefer own-race faces. Developmental Science, 8(6), F31–F36.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, H., Graham, S. A., & Curtin, S. (2011). Twelve-month-olds privilege words over other linguistic sounds in an associative learning task. Developmental Science, 14(2), 249–55.Google Scholar
Miller, C. L., Younger, B. A., & Morse, P. A. (1982). The categorization of male and female voices in infancy. Infant Behavior & Development, 5(2), 143–59.Google Scholar
Novack, M. A., Henderson, A. M., & Woodward, A. L. (2013). Twelve-month-old infants generalize novel signed labels, but not preferences across individuals. Journal of Cognition & Development, 15(4), 539–50.Google Scholar
Oakes, L. M. (2010). Using habituation of looking time to assess mental processes in infancy. Journal of Cognition & Development, 11(3), 255–68.Google Scholar
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking individualism and collectivism: evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3–72.Google Scholar
Pascalis, O., de Schonen, S., Morton, J., Deruelle, C., & Fabre-grenet, M. (1995). Mother's face recognition by neonates: a replication and an extension. Infant Behavior & Development, 18(1), 79–85.Google Scholar
Righi, G., Westerlund, A., Congdon, E. L., Troller-Renfree, S., & Nelson, C. A. (2014). Infants’ experience-dependent processing of male and female faces: insights from eye tracking and event-related potentials. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 144–52.Google Scholar
Sabbagh, M. A., & Henderson, A. M. E. (2007). How an appreciation of conventionality shapes early word learning. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2007(115), 25–37.Google Scholar
Schafer, G., & Plunkett, K. (1998). Rapid word learning by fifteen-month-olds under tightly controlled conditions. Child Development, 69(2), 309–20.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2016). The ontogeny of cultural learning. Current Opinion in Psychology, 8, 1–4.Google Scholar
Woodward, A. L., Markman, E. M., & Fitzsimmons, C. M. (1994). Rapid word learning in 13-and 18-month-olds. Developmental Psychology, 30(4), 553–66.Google Scholar
Xu, F., Carey, S., & Quint, N. (2004). The emergence of kind-based object individuation in infancy. Cognitive Psychology, 49(2), 155–90.Google Scholar
Yoon, J. M. D., Johnson, M. H., & Csibra, G. (2008). Communication-induced memory biases in preverbal infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(36), 13690–5.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Liu and Sun supplementary material

Liu and Sun supplementary material 1

Download Liu and Sun supplementary material(File)
File 1.2 MB