Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T00:20:05.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Overextensions in comprehension and production revisited: preferential-looking in a study of dog, cat, and cow*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Letitia G. Naigles  and
Susan A. Gelman
Letitia G. Naigles*
Affiliation:
Yale University
Susan A. Gelman
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
*
Department of Psychology, Yale University, Box 208205 Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520–8205, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigated overextensions in comprehension and production using a new method (the preferential-looking paradigm) in which children (N = 99, mean age (younger) = 1;9, mean age (older) = 2;3) were asked to find the referent that matched the label they were given. Both Real Referent (in which there was a match) and Anomalous (in which there was no match) trials were included, as well as nonverbal control trials. During the Real Referent trials, all children significantly preferred the matching puppet. During the Anomalous trials, children showed no preference with two of the labels (dog and cat); however, they did show a preference when ‘cow’ was requested but not available. There were no differences based on prior overextension performance in production. It is concluded that overextensions in production are not diagnostic of children's underlying semantic representations, and that anomalous trials in comprehension provide useful information concerning young children's lexical entries.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , February 1995 , pp. 19 - 46
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

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

[*]

This research was supported by NIH FIRST Award HD26595 to the first author and NSF Faculty Award for Women Scientists and Engineers BNS-9100348 to the second author. We are grateful to Athina Pappas, Edward Kako, Chris Hawkins, Alex Bilsky, Sara Krieger, Vaijanthi Sarma, Hannah Silverstein, Karen Lin, Melissa Highter, Kristina Hanson and all the volunteers at the Yale Infant Language Lab for their invaluable assistance with data collection and analysis. We thank Eve Clark, Marilyn Shatz, Twila Tardif and our two reviewers for their insights and commentary, and the parents and children for their participation in these studies.

References

REFERENCES

Anglin, J. (1977). Word, object, and conceptual development. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Banigan, R. & Mervis, C. B. (1988). Role of adult input in young children's category evolution. II. An experimental study. Journal of Child Language 15, 493–504.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Behrend, D. (1988). Overextensions in early language comprehension: evidence from a signal detection approach. Journal of Child Language 15, 63–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, L. (1973). One word at a time. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1978). The acquisition of word meaning: an investigation into some current conflicts. In Waterson, N. & Snow, C. (eds), The development of communication. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Chapman, K., Leonard, L. & Mervis, C. B. (1986). The effect of feedback on young children's inappropriate word usage. Journal of Child Language 13, 101–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, K. & Mervis, C. B. (1989). Patterns of object-name extension in production. Journal of Child Language 16, 561–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheney, D. & Seyfarth, R. (1990). How monkeys see the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, E. (1973). What's in a word? On the child's acquisition of semantics in his first language. In Moore, T. (ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Clark, E. (1983). Meanings and concepts. In Flavell, J. & Markman, E. (eds), Handbook of child psychology. Vol. 3. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clark, E. & Hecht, B. (1983). Comprehension, production, and language acquisition. Annual Review of Psychology 34, 325–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dromi, E. (1987). Early lexical development. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Fernald, A., McRoberts, G. & Herrera, C. (1993). Effects of prosody and word position on lexical comprehension in infants. Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Fremgen, A. & Fay, D. (1980). Overextensions in production and comprehension: a methodological clarification. Journal of Child Language 7, 205–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Golinkoff, R., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Cauley, K. & Gordon, L. (1987). The eyes have it: lexical and syntactic comprehension in a new paradigm. Journal of Child Language 14, 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsh-Pasek, K. & Golinkoff, R. (1991). Language comprehension: a new look at some old themes. In Krasnegor, N., Rumbaugh, D., Studdert-Kennedy, M. & Schiefelbusch, R. (eds), Biological and behavioral aspects of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hoek, D., Ingram, D. & Gibson, D. (1986). Some possible causes of children's early word Overextensions. Journal of Child Language 13, 477–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huttenlocher, J. (1974). The origins of language comprehension. In Solso, R. (ed.), Theories in cognitive psychology. Potomac, MD: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ingram, D. (1989). First language acquisition. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Kay, D. & Anglin, J. (1982). Overextensions and underextensions in the child's expressive and receptive speech. Journal of Child Language 9, 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuczaj, S. A. (1982). Young children's Overextensions of object words in comprehension and/or production: support for a prototype theory of early object word meaning. First Language 3, 93–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mervis, C. B. (1987). Child-basic object categories and early lexical development. In Neisser, U. (ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: ecological and intellectual factors in categorization. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Mervis, C. B. & Canada, K. (1983). On the existence of competence errors in early comprehension: a reply to Fremgen & Fay and Chapman & Thomson. Journal of Child Language 10, 431–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mervis, C. B. & Mervis, C. A. (1988). Role of adult input in young children's category evolution. I. An observational study. Journal of Child Language 15, 257–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naigles, L. (1990). Children use syntax to learn verb meanings. Journal of Child Language 17, 357–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naigles, L. & Kako, E. (1993). First contact: biases in verb learning with and without syntactic information. Child Development 64, 1665–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naigles, L., Eisenberg, A. & Kako, E. (1992). Acquiring a language-specific lexicon: motion verbs in English and Spanish. Paper presented at the Conference of the International Pragmatics Association, Antwerp, Belgium.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1974). Concept, word, and sentence: interrelations in acquisition and development. Psychological Review 81, 267–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K., Rescorla, L., Gruendel, J. M. & Benedict, H. (1978). Early lexicons: what do they mean? Child Development 49, 960–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rescorla, L. (1980). Overextension in early language development. Journal of Child Language 7, 321–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rescorla, L., Hadicke-Wiley, M. & Escarce, E. (1993). Epidemiological investigation of expressive language delay at age two. First Language 13, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reznick, J. S. (1990). Visual preference as a test of infant word comprehension. Applied Psycholinguistics 11, 145–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, D., Campos, J., Shucard, D., Ramsay, S. & Shucard, J. (1981). Semantic comprehension in infancy: a signal detection analysis. Child Development 52, 798–803.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, J. & Chapman, R. (1977). Who is ‘Daddy’ revisited: the status of two-year-olds' over-extended words in use and comprehension. Journal of Child Language 4, 359–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar