PubMed · 7309821
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
S Kulikowski. 1981. Possible worlds semantics for early syntax.. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900003470
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The apparent very close similarity between the learning of the past tense by Adam and the Plunkett and Marchman model is exaggerated by several misleading comparisons--including arbitrary, unexplained changes in how graphs were plotted. The model's development differs from Adam's in three important ways: Children show a U-shaped sequence of development which does not depend on abrupt changes in input; U-shaped development in the simulation occurs only after an abrupt change in training regimen. Children overregularize vowel-change verbs more than no-change verbs; the simulation overregularizes vowel-change verbs less often than no-change verbs. Children, including Adam, overregularize more than they irregularize; the simulation overregularized less than it irregularized. Interestingly, the RM model--widely criticized as being inadequate--does somewhat better, correctly overregularizing vowel-change verbs more often than no-change verbs, and overregularizing more often than it irregularizes. Although Plunkett and Marchman's (1993) state of the art model incorporated hidden layers and back-propagation, used a more realistic phonological coding scheme, and explored a broader range of parameters than Rumelhart and McClelland's model, their results are farther from psychological reality. It is unknown whether any connectionist model can mimic a child's performance without resorting to unrealistic exogenous changes in the training or input, but it is clear that adding a hidden-layer and back-propagation does not ensure a solution.
Recent research has located extraordinary weakness in specifically language-impaired (SLI) children's development other than grammatical morphemes. A problem with pronoun case marking was reported to be more prevalent in SLI children than in normally developing children matched by mean length of utterance. However, results from the present study do not support that finding. Spontaneous utterances from 3 conversational contexts were generated by 3 groups of normal and SLI children and were analyzed for accuracy of pronoun usage. Third person singular pronouns were judged according to case, gender, number, person and cohesion based on their linguistic and nonlinguistic contexts. Results indicated that SLI children exhibited more total errors than their chronological peers, but not more than their language level peers. An analysis of error types indicated a similar pattern in pronoun case marking.
The purpose of this investigation was to determine the validity of the Clinical Linguistic Auditory Milestone Scale (CLAMS) as a screening test to help physicians detect delays in language development. Language delays in children are often not diagnosed until about 3 years of age because (1) parents may not be aware of what constitutes normal language development, (2) diagnosis of a language problem is difficult for physicians to make because they see the child for brief periods of time, (3) there is a wide range of what constitutes normal language so professionals are reluctant to classify a child as delayed without thorough testing. The hypothesis for this investigation was that children who have language delays can be identified quickly and easily through the administration of the CLAMS. Subjects included 99 children between the ages of 1 and 3 years. The procedure had 3 parts: (1) parents completed a form consisting of questions such as parent occupation, number of children in the family, birth history, etc., (2) the CLAMS, a parent report that can be given while the child is seen by the physician, was administered, (3) the Sequenced Inventory of Communication Development (SICD), was administered to assess receptive and expressive language. The purpose for administering the SICD was to obtain a more in-depth picture of the child's ability to comprehend and use language, thereby providing data to determine the validity of the CLAMS as a screening device. Results indicated that the CLAMS is a valid instrument for identifying language delayed children.