1 / 35

A Psycholinguistic Perspective on Child Phonology

Laboratoire de Sciences Cognitives et Psycholinguistique, EHESS-CNRS, Paris www.lscp.net/persons/peperkamp. A Psycholinguistic Perspective on Child Phonology. Sharon Peperkamp Emmanuel Dupoux. Second International Conference on Contrast in Phonology. Toronto, May 3-5, 2002. Child phonology.

mavis
Télécharger la présentation

A Psycholinguistic Perspective on Child Phonology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Laboratoire de Sciences Cognitives et Psycholinguistique, EHESS-CNRS, Paris www.lscp.net/persons/peperkamp A Psycholinguistic Perspective on Child Phonology Sharon Peperkamp Emmanuel Dupoux Second International Conference on Contrast in Phonology. Toronto, May 3-5, 2002

  2. Child phonology Jakobsonian view of phonological acquisition: Children’s productions • reflect their internal grammar • evolve from universally unmarked structures towards the marked structures present in their language

  3. Outline of talk • Discuss problems with child phonology • Propose a model of phonological processing, featuring: • a distinction between perception and production • a distinction between phonology and phonetics • Show how in this model: • acquisition can take place • data of child phonology can be accounted for

  4. I. Child phonology

  5. Problem #1: Initial state • Children’s earliest productions unmarked structures: - consonant: [p] - vowel: [a] - syllable structure: CV • Infants’ perceptual capacities between 0 and 2 months marked structures - [pa] vs. [ba] (Eimas et al. 1971) - [a] vs. [i] (Trehub 1973) - V vs. CV vs. VC ?  Are initial representations really unmarked?

  6. Problem #2: Preverbal acquisition • 6 months vowels(Kuhl et al. 1992; Polka & Werker 1994) • 9 months phonotactics (Friederici & Wessels 1993; Jusczyk et al. 1993, 1994) • 10-12 months consonants(Werker & Tees 1984) Experimental perception data:  Is grammatical knowledge really reflected in production?

  7. Two time paths in acquisition Perception universal: marked adult-like 0 12 months 4 years universal: unmarked adult-like Production

  8. Two time paths in acquisition Perception universal: marked adult-like 0 12 months 4 years universal: unmarked adult-like Production  Do children acquire one or two grammars?

  9. Problem #3: Speed of acquisition Acquisition of syllable structure (Fikkert 1994) Elke ageonsetsrhymes 1;6.4 stops, nasals fricatives 1;6.25 glides stops 1;7.22 nasals 1;9.24 fricatives 1;11.28 liquids 2;0.11 stop+glide 2;3.27 stop+liquid 2;4.15 [s]+stop  Why does acquisition take so long?

  10. Problem #4: Inter-individual variability Production of 3-syllable tokens by twins (Savinainen-Makkonen 2000) 1;5 1;6 1;7 Annika 0% 100% 100% Antti 0% 27% 37%  Why do children follow different time paths?

  11. Problem #5: Gradual changes Consonant harmony by Trevor (Pater & Werle 2001)  Why is learning gradual?

  12. Problem #6: Intra-individual variability • type variability frequent words resist correction (Storkel & Gierut 2001) consonant harmony in French child language Hélène, 4;8.7: très [k] ‘very’ - trou [tu] ‘hole’  Why is there a frequency effect? • token variability non-frequent words show free variation consonant harmony in English child language Trevor, 2:1.5: truck [trk] ~ [krk]  Why is there type-specific variability?

  13. II. A theory of phonological acquisition

  14. Phonological processing PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal /ti/ /ti/ phonological decoding phonological encoding [thi] [thi] phonetic encoding phonetic decoding |thi| |thi|

  15. Initial state PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding: phonological encoding:  phonetic encoding:  phonetic decoding: identity

  16. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding Step 2 phonetic encoding phonetic decoding Step 3 Step 1

  17. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding phonetic encoding phonetic decoding Step 1

  18. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding bottom-up algorithms - segments (Kuhl et al. 1997; Maye, Werker & Gerken in press) - syllablestructure(Peperkamp 2001) phonetic encoding phonetic decoding

  19. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding phonetic encoding phonetic decoding 0-12 months

  20. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding Step 2 phonetic encoding phonetic decoding 0-12 months

  21. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal bottom-up algorithms - allophonic rules(Peperkamp & Dupoux 2002) -neutralizing rules(Peperkamp & Dupoux 2002) -stress (Dupoux & Peperkamp 2002) phonological decoding phonological encoding phonetic encoding phonetic decoding 0-12 months

  22. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding 12 months - ?? phonetic encoding phonetic decoding 0-12 months

  23. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding 12 months - ?? phonetic encoding phonetic decoding Step 3 0-12 months

  24. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding 12 months - ?? trial and error algorithms (Boersma 1999) phonetic encoding phonetic decoding 0-12 months

  25. PerceptionProduction underlying form underlying form Phonology surface form surface form Phonetics universal phonetic motor plan representation acoustic signal acoustic signal phonological decoding phonological encoding 12 months - ?? phonetic encoding phonetic decoding 1-4 years 0-12 months

  26. Dual route for phonetic encoding surface form retrieval from storage assembling rules motor plan (Levelt 1989)

  27. Stage 1 Creation of simplifying assembling rules surface form  [t, k]  |k| motor plan ‘very’: [t]  |k| assembled ‘hole’: [tu]  |ku| assembled

  28. Stage 2 Storage of patterns surface form [t, k]  |k| [t]  |k| motor plan ‘very’: [t]  |k| assembled ‘hole’: [tu]  |ku| assembled

  29. Stage 2 Storage of patterns surface form [t, k]  |k| [t]  |k| motor plan ‘very’: [t]  |k| retrieved from storage ‘hole’: [tu]  |ku| assembled

  30. Stage 3 Correction of assembling rules surface form [t, k]  |t, k| [t]  |k| motor plan ‘very’: [t]  |k| retrieved from storage ‘hole’: [tu]  |ku| assembled

  31. Stage 3 Correction of assembling rules surface form [t, k]  |t, k| [t]  |k| motor plan ‘very’: [t]  |k| retrieved from storage ‘hole’: [tu]  |tu|assembled

  32. Stage 4 Correction of stored patterns surface form [t, k]  |t, k| [t]  |t| motor plan ‘very’: [t]  |k| retrieved from storage ‘hole’: [tu]  |tu| assembled

  33. Stage 4 Correction of stored patterns surface form [t, k]  |t, k| [t]  |t| motor plan ‘very’: [t]  |t|retrieved from storage ‘hole’: [tu]  |tu| assembled

  34. Summary: phonetic encoding and children’s productions Why does acquisition take so long? articulation is a complex motor skill Why do children follow different time paths? the phonetic encoder is acquired by means of trial and error algorithms, which predict variation among individuals Why is learning gradual? motor skills are learned with ups and downs Why is there a frequency effect? during the acquisition of the phonetic encoder, the correction of stored patterns is more difficult for more frequent patterns Why is there type-specific variability? there is competition both between and within the two routes, the outcome of which depends on both linguistic (e.g. utterance length) and extra-linguistic factors (e.g. fatigue)

  35. Conclusion • Models of phonological acquisition should take both perception and production data into account. • Phenomena of ‘child phonology’ reflect the developing phonetic encoder. • The phonetic encoder is partly non-linguistic; it should, therefore, be modeled within a psycholinguistic framework.

More Related