Phonological rules in young children

1974 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Ingram

ABSTRACTThere are very general phonological processes which appear to operate in one form or another when any child learns a first language. This study attempts to outline and exemplify the most general of these, e.g. the reduction of consonant clusters, the deletion of unstressed syllables. In addition, the study criticizes the point of view that phonological development consists primarily of the child substituting one sound for another. Rather, phonological development reflects very general processes that affect entire classes of sounds. Lastly, the study suggests that identifying general rules can ultimately lead to more insightful information concerning separate strategies that individual children follow.

1994 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
April McMahon ◽  
Paul Foulkes

Abstract. The gestural model of Articulatory Phonology currently being developed by Browman and Goldstein provides a new way of modelling both synchronic and diachronic phonetic processes as well as certain types of synchronic phonological rules. Although Browman and Goldstein place stringent restrictions on the model, ruling out categorical deletion and insertion of gestures, as well as gestural permutation not resulting from magnitude and timing changes, Articulatory Phonology can nonetheless provide enlightening accounts of various types of sound change, including historical developments which have previously been analysed as segmental insertions and deletions. The application of Articulatory Phonology to sound changes is beneficial in that it allows the formulation of a change to include some account of its motivation from the point of view of the speaker (or indeed, though less straightforwardly, the hearer). We aim to extend Browman and Goldstein's preliminary applications of their model to sound change, by demonstrating that changes which have been analysed as entirely separate developments in a traditional segmental phonology can be seen instead as part of an integrated complex of interrelated changes within Articulatory Phonology. Focussing on the development of non-rhotic varieties of English, we show that the sound changes producing present-day linking [r], which are typically given as three independent developments of Pre-[r] Breaking, Pre-Schwa Laxing, and /r/-Deletion, can be shown to be interdependent and analysed in an explanatory way using the gestural model. However, we argue that not all the synchronic phonological processes to which such sound changes give rise can be analysed in gestural terms, given the current restrictions on Articulatory Phonology. For instance, in present-day English varieties which exhibit intrusive as well as linking [r], and which seem to be best characterised by an [r]-Insertion analysis, synchronic addition of gestures must be permitted. Insertion processes of this sort may initially seem incompatible with Articulatory Phonology, but there is clear motivation to retain the gestural framework, given its ability to model many sound changes, casual speech processes and phonological rules using the same mechanisms. Consequently, we propose that, to account for English [r] and similar cases, the current constraints on Articulatory Phonology must be relaxed to a limited extent at some level of the grammar. We suggest that this might be achieved by integrating the gestural approach into a model of Lexical Phonology.


2020 ◽  
pp. 78-90
Author(s):  
Siniša Habijanec ◽  

The paper looks at the phonological development of the Záhorie dialects in the context of historical phonological processes in Slovak and Czech. The Záhorie dialect group is the westernmost dialect of Slovak and many of its traits show a similarity with Czech. Old residual traits are either shared by Czech and West Slovak dialects (*ort, *olt > rot-, lot; *s’ > š; *dl, *tl) or correspond to Czech dialects (*jь- > je-; length for the acute). On the subject of innovations, which are also important in determining genetic affiliation, the Záhorie dialect shows a similarity with the Czech development as well. It was affected by probably the oldest Czech innovation (*dj > z), which was later neutralised by the restructuring of the morphonological system of alternations in assibilation conditions, i.e. the ď > dz change. The Záhorie dialect was also affect-ed by the Proto-Czech depalatalisations, diphthongisations, and in part by the Old Czech umlaut ä > ě, which is, however, the most consistent for  in internal syllables. Some phonological indicators suggest that the *r’ assibilation might have taken place in the Záhorie dialect as well. The most recent change connecting the Záhorie dialect to Czech dialects was the monophthongisation, after which the development of the Záhorie dialect group approaches the Slovak diasystem. The Záhorie dialect there-fore started its development as a dialect of Czech, subsequently gravitating toward the Slovak development, and hence it can with complete justification be considered as a transitional Czech-Slovak dialect.


2008 ◽  
Vol 155 ◽  
pp. 23-52
Author(s):  
Elma Nap-Kolhoff ◽  
Peter Broeder

Abstract This study compares pronominal possessive constructions in Dutch first language (L1) acquisition, second language (L2) acquisition by young children, and untutored L2 acquisition by adults. The L2 learners all have Turkish as L1. In longitudinal spontaneous speech data for four L1 learners, seven child L2 learners, and two adult learners, remarkable differences and similarities between the three learner groups were found. In some respects, the child L2 learners develop in a way that is similar to child L1 learners, for instance in the kind of overgeneralisations that they make. However, the child L2 learners also behave like adult L2 learners; i.e., in the pace of the acquisition process, the frequency and persistence of non-target constructions, and the difficulty in acquiring reduced pronouns. The similarities between the child and adult L2 learners are remarkable, because the child L2 learners were only two years old when they started learning Dutch. L2 acquisition before the age of three is often considered to be similar to L1 acquisition. The findings might be attributable to the relatively small amount of Dutch language input the L2 children received.


1978 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 4-15
Author(s):  
Sou Mee Tse ◽  
David Ingram

2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARILYN VIHMAN ◽  
TAMAR KEREN-PORTNOY

Carol Stoel-Gammon has made a real contribution in bringing together two fields that are not generally jointly addressed. Like Stoel-Gammon, we have long focused on individual differences in phonological development (e.g. Vihman, Ferguson & Elbert, 1986; Vihman, Boysson-Bardies, Durand & Sundberg, 1994; Keren-Portnoy, Majorano & Vihman, 2008). And like her, we have been closely concerned with the relationship between lexical and phonological learning. Accordingly, we will focus our discussion on two areas covered by Stoel-Gammon (this issue) on which our current work may shed some additional light.


1998 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Lowrie

This article reports a case study involving a talented Year 1 (aged 6) child who was challenged to “take another person's point of view” when responding to a series of questions based on a well-known folk tale. It is argued that the use of effective questioning techniques allowed the child to develop a variety of metacognitive processes.


1984 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry Piper

This paper reports the results of a study investigating the acquisition of the sound system by fifteen ESL five-year-olds. Segmental consonant errors drawn from speech data collected over ten months were categorized according to eight phonological processes in three categories, assimilation. substitution, and syllable structure changes. Eighty-six percent of the errors corresponded to those identified by Ingram (1979) and others as universal in first language acquisition. The author advises caution in the interpretation of this result, however, since there were certain differences in the particular errors made by the ESL learners within each category as well as processes considered universal among first language learners which were not found among the ESL learners.


2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
SHELLEY L. VELLEMAN

Although not the focus of her article, phonological development in young children with speech sound disorders of various types is highly germane to Stoel-Gammon's discussion (this issue) for at least two primary reasons. Most obvious is that typical processes and milestones of phonological development are the standards and benchmarks against which we measure disorder and delay. Factors that impact children without disorders may suggest underlying causes or co-occurring symptoms of speech sound deficits, prognostic indicators of improvement, appropriate remediation strategies or some combination of these. Equally important is the fact that studying children with disorders can help us to verify and, in some cases, even unpack relationships among factors that are so closely interwoven in children who develop their phonologies at the typically very rapid rate that their individual influences cannot be discerned. Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS) is a particularly interesting case in point because, while it is universally accepted to be a motor speech disorder, symptoms include deficits in speech perception and often in literacy-related skills as well.


2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
TANIA S. ZAMUNER

Within the subfields of linguistics, traditional approaches tend to examine different phenomena in isolation. As Stoel-Gammon (this issue) correctly states, there is little interaction between the subfields. However, for a more comprehensive understanding of language acquisition in general and, more specifically, lexical and phonological development, we must consider relations between multiple subfields. That is, by examining the interactions between these subfields, a greater understanding of lexical and phonological development can emerge. For instance, the interaction between phonology, syntax and semantics is demonstrated in recent work looking at how phonological patterns can provide a basis for inferring a word's lexical category (such as nouns and verbs) (Christiansen, Onnis & Hockema, 2009; Lany & Saffran, 2010).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document