Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-t27h7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-20T05:13:57.052Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learning conversational dependency: Children’s response using un in Japanese

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2022

Tomoko TATSUMI  and
Giovanni SALA
Tomoko TATSUMI*
Affiliation:
Kobe University, Kobe, Japan
Giovanni SALA
Affiliation:
National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Obu, Japan
*
*Corresponding author. Tomoko Tatsumi, 1-2-1 Tsurukabuto, Nada-ku, Kobe, Hyogo, JAPAN. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates how Japanese-speaking children learn interactional dependencies in conversations that determine the use of un, a token typically used as a positive response for yes-no questions, backchannel, and acknowledgement. We hypothesise that children learn to produce un appropriately by recognising different types of cues occurring in the immediately preceding turns. We built a set of generalised linear models on the longitudinal conversation data from seven children aged 1 to 5 years and their caregivers. Our models revealed that children not only increased their un production, but also learned to attend relevant cues in the preceding turns to understand when to respond by producing un. Children increasingly produced un when their interlocutors asked a yes-no question or signalled the continuation of their own speech. These results illustrate how children learn the probabilistic dependency between adjacent turns, and become able to participate in conversational interactions.

Keywords

child languageadjacencyconversationstatistical modellingJapanesecorpus
Type
Article
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 50 , Issue 5: Special Issue on Syntactic Bootstrapping , September 2023 , pp. 1226 - 1244
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Ambridge, B., Kidd, E., Rowland, C. F., & Theakston, A. L. (2015). The ubiquity of frequency effects in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 42(2), 239–273. doi:10.1017/S030500091400049XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Angles, J., Nagatomi, A., & Nakayama, M. (2000). Japanese responses hai, ee, and un: yes, no, and beyond. Language & Communication, 20(1), 55–86. doi:10.1016/S0271-5309(99)00018-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bucciarelli, M., Colle, L., & Bara, B. G. (2003). How children comprehend speech acts and communicative gestures. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(2), 207–241. doi:10.1017/S0305000915000689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casillas, M., Bobb, S. C., & Clark, E. V. (2016). Turn-taking, timing, and planning in early language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 43(6), 1310–1337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, F. (2017). The LuCiD language researcher’s toolkit [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.lucid.ac.uk/resources/for-researchers/toolkit/ Accessed January 29, 2020.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. M. (1987). 11. The acquisition of communicative style in Japanese. In Schieffelin, B. B., & Ochs, E. (eds.). Language socialization across cultures, 213–150. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clancy, P. M., Thompson, S. A., Suzuki, R., & Tao, H. (1996). The conversational use of reactive tokens in English, Japanese, and Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(3), 355–387. doi:10.1016/0378-2166(95)00036-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M. & Teasley, S. D. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, H. M. (1990). The sentence-final particle ne as a tool for cooperation in Japanese conversation. Japanese/Korean Linguistics, 1, 29–44.Google Scholar
Cosgrove, J. M., & Patterson, C. J. (1977). Plans and the development of listener skills. Developmental Psychology, 13(6), 557–564. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.13.6.557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143–188. doi:10.1017/S0272263102002024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, L. J., & Johnston, J. R. (1988). Acquisition of back channel listener responses to adequate messages. Discourse Processes, 11(3), 319–335. doi:10.1080/01638538809544706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iwasaki, S. (1997). The Northridge earthquake conversations: The floor structure and the “loop” sequence in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(6), 661–693. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00070-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kawamori, M., Kawabata, T., & Shimazu, A. (1998). Discourse markers in spontaneous dialogue. A corpus based study of Japanese and English. In Stede, M., Wanner, L., & Hovy, E. (Eds.), Proceedings of coling/ACL workshop on discourse relations and discourse markers (pp. 93–99).Google Scholar
Kita, S., & Ide, S. (2007). Nodding, aizuchi, and final particles in Japanese conversation: How conversation reflects the ideology of communication and social relationships. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(7), 1242–1254. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2007.02.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kushida, S. (2009). Kikite ni yoru katari no shinkou sokushin – keizoku shiji, keizoku saisoku, keizoku shikou- [Recipient’s Methods for Facilitating Progress of Telling: Sustaining, Prompting and Promoting Continuation]. Cognitive studies: Bulletin of the Japanese Cognitive Science Society, 16(1), 12–23. doi:10.11225/jcss.16.12Google Scholar
Lammertink, I., Casillas, M., Benders, T., Post, B., & Fikkert, P. (2015). Dutch and English toddlers’ use of linguistic cues in predicting upcoming turn transitions. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(495), 495. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00495CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk. Transcription format and programs (Vol. 1). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Miyata, S. (2004a). Japanese – Miyata – Aki Corpus. TalkBank.Google Scholar
Miyata, S. (2004b). Japanese – Miyata – Ryo Corpus. TalkBank.Google Scholar
Miyata, S. (2004c). Japanese – Miyata – Tai Corpus. TalkBank.Google Scholar
Miyata, S., & Nisisawa, H. Y. (2007). The acquisition of Japanese backchanneling behavior: Observing the emergence of aizuchi in a Japanese boy. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(7), 1255–1274. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2007.02.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miyata, S., & Nisisawa, H. Y. (2009). Japanese – MiiPro – Asato Corpus. TalkBank.Google Scholar
Miyata, S., & Nisisawa, H. Y. (2010). Japanese – MiiPro – Tomito Corpus. TalkBank.Google Scholar
Montes, R. G. (1999). The development of discourse markers in Spanish: Interjections. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(10), 1289–1319. doi:10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00106-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nishizaka, A. (2008). Hatsugen junban nai ni oite bunsan suru bun: sougo koui no shouten to shite no hannou kikai ba [A Sentence Dispersed Within a Turn-at-Talk: Response-Opportunity Places as an Interactional Focus]. Japanese Journal of Sociolinguistic Sciences, 10(2), 83–95.Google Scholar
Nisisawa, H. Y., & Miyata, S. (2009). Japanese – MiiPro – Nanami Corpus. TalkBank.Google Scholar
Nisisawa, H. Y., & Miyata, S. (2010). Japanese – MiiPro – ArikaM Corpus. TalkBank.Google Scholar
Rakoczy, H., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Done wrong or said wrong? Young children understand the normative directions of fit of different speech acts. Cognition, 113(2), 205–212. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.07.013CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Rigby, R. A., & Stasinopoulos, D. M. (2005). Generalized additive models for location, scale and shape. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 54(3), 507–554.Google Scholar
Sadanobu, T. (2002). ‘Un’ to ‘so’ ni imi wa aru ka [Do ‘un’ and ‘so’ have meanings?]. In Sadanobu, T. (Ed.), ‘Un’ to ‘so’ no gengogaku [Linguistics of ‘un’ and ‘so’] (pp. 75–112). Hitujisyobo.Google Scholar
Saffran, J. R., & Kirkham, N. Z. (2018). Infant statistical learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 69, 181–203. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011805CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. In Tannen, D. (Ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk (pp. 71–93). Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8(4), 289–327. doi:10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephens, G., & Matthews, D. (2014). The communicative infant. In Matthews, D. (Ed.), Pragmatic development in first langauge acquisition (pp. 13–36). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T., Sidnell, J., & Bergen, C. (2018). Children’s responses to questions in peer interaction: A window into the ontogenesis of interactional competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 124, 14–30. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.11.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, L. (2010). Is formality relevant? Japanese tokens hai, ee and un. Pragmatics, 20(2), 191–211. doi:10.1075/prag.20.2.04tanGoogle Scholar
Togashi, J. (2002). ‘Un’ to ‘hai’ no kankei o megutte [Regarding the relationship between ‘Un’ and ‘hai’]. In Sadanobu, T. (Ed.), ‘Un’ to ‘so’ no gengogaku [Linguistics of ‘un’ and ‘so’] (pp. 127–157). Hitujisyobo.Google Scholar
White, S. (1989). Backchannels across cultures: A study of Americans and Japanese. Language in Society, 18(1), 59–76. doi:10.1017/S0047404500013270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yngve, V. H. (1970). On getting a word in edgewise. In Chicago linguistics society, 6th Meeting (pp. 567–578).Google Scholar