The current status of the motherese hypothesis
Partially conflicting results from correlational studies of maternal speech style and its effects on child language learning motivate a comparative discussion of Newport, Gleitman & Gleitman (1977) and Furrow, Nelson & Benedict (1979), and a reanalysis of the original Newport et al. data. In...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of child language 1984-02, Vol.11 (1), p.43-79 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 79 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 43 |
container_title | Journal of child language |
container_volume | 11 |
creator | Gleitman, Lila R. Newport, Elissa L. Gleitman, Henry |
description | Partially conflicting results from correlational studies of maternal speech style and its effects on child language learning motivate a comparative discussion of Newport, Gleitman & Gleitman (1977) and Furrow, Nelson & Benedict (1979), and a reanalysis of the original Newport et al. data. In the current analysis the data are from two groups of children equated for age, in response to the methodological questions raised by Furrow et al.; but, in line with the original Newport et al. analysis, linguistic differences between these age-equated children are handled by partial correlation. Under this new analysis the original results reported by Newport et al. are reproduced. In addition, however, most effects of the mother on the child's language growth are found to be restricted to a very young age group. Moreover, the new analysis suggests that increased complexity of maternal speech is positively correlated with child language growth in this age range. The findings are discussed in terms of a theoretical analysis of the Motherese Hypothesis; the conditions of both learner and environment in which ‘simplified’ data could aid a learner. Finally, the results of our past work, those of Furrow et al., and those of the present analysis, are discussed as they fit into, and add to, current theorizing about the language acquisition process. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0305000900005584 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85468390</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0305000900005584</cupid><sourcerecordid>85292872</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-a212a2de915cf7c91c9438470e497d71a5855d8365c7fb3483d78423724172253</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkVtLwzAYhoMoOqc_wAuhoHjXmfPhUqZOcSCiXocsTbXarjNpwf17U1eGKKIXST7yPt_LdwDgAMERgkic3kMCGYRQxQMZk3QDDBDlKhUc4k0w6OS003fAbggvn6SS22Cbc6UQIgMwenh2iW29d_MmCY1p2pDUedLE36qOt3fBJc_LRReHIuyBrdyUwe337xA8Xl48jK_S6e3kenw2TS1VokkNRtjgzCnEbC6sQlZRIqmALsqZQIZJxjJJOLMinxEqSSYkxURgigTGjAzBycp34eu31oVGV0WwrizN3NVt0JJRLomC_wCxwlLgv0GoOFayczz6Br7UrZ_HbjUicaBxbopHCq0o6-sQvMv1wheV8UuNoO52o3_sJuYc9s7trHLZOqNfRtSPe90Ea8rcm7ktwhpTDHHGugLTFVaExr2vZeNfNRdEMM0nd_qG3svp-YTrzpb0pZpq5ovsyX3p6NdiPwAnPq-_</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1303091196</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The current status of the motherese hypothesis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Cambridge Journals</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><creator>Gleitman, Lila R. ; Newport, Elissa L. ; Gleitman, Henry</creator><creatorcontrib>Gleitman, Lila R. ; Newport, Elissa L. ; Gleitman, Henry</creatorcontrib><description>Partially conflicting results from correlational studies of maternal speech style and its effects on child language learning motivate a comparative discussion of Newport, Gleitman & Gleitman (1977) and Furrow, Nelson & Benedict (1979), and a reanalysis of the original Newport et al. data. In the current analysis the data are from two groups of children equated for age, in response to the methodological questions raised by Furrow et al.; but, in line with the original Newport et al. analysis, linguistic differences between these age-equated children are handled by partial correlation. Under this new analysis the original results reported by Newport et al. are reproduced. In addition, however, most effects of the mother on the child's language growth are found to be restricted to a very young age group. Moreover, the new analysis suggests that increased complexity of maternal speech is positively correlated with child language growth in this age range. The findings are discussed in terms of a theoretical analysis of the Motherese Hypothesis; the conditions of both learner and environment in which ‘simplified’ data could aid a learner. Finally, the results of our past work, those of Furrow et al., and those of the present analysis, are discussed as they fit into, and add to, current theorizing about the language acquisition process.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0305-0009</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-7602</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0305000900005584</identifier><identifier>PMID: 6699113</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JCLGBJ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Child development ; Child Language ; Communication disorders ; Developmental psychology ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Humans ; Language Development ; Linguistics ; Maternal Behavior ; Mother-Child Relations ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Speech</subject><ispartof>Journal of child language, 1984-02, Vol.11 (1), p.43-79</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984</rights><rights>1984 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-a212a2de915cf7c91c9438470e497d71a5855d8365c7fb3483d78423724172253</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-a212a2de915cf7c91c9438470e497d71a5855d8365c7fb3483d78423724172253</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0305000900005584/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27869,27924,27925,55628</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=9516550$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6699113$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gleitman, Lila R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newport, Elissa L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gleitman, Henry</creatorcontrib><title>The current status of the motherese hypothesis</title><title>Journal of child language</title><addtitle>J. Child Lang</addtitle><description>Partially conflicting results from correlational studies of maternal speech style and its effects on child language learning motivate a comparative discussion of Newport, Gleitman & Gleitman (1977) and Furrow, Nelson & Benedict (1979), and a reanalysis of the original Newport et al. data. In the current analysis the data are from two groups of children equated for age, in response to the methodological questions raised by Furrow et al.; but, in line with the original Newport et al. analysis, linguistic differences between these age-equated children are handled by partial correlation. Under this new analysis the original results reported by Newport et al. are reproduced. In addition, however, most effects of the mother on the child's language growth are found to be restricted to a very young age group. Moreover, the new analysis suggests that increased complexity of maternal speech is positively correlated with child language growth in this age range. The findings are discussed in terms of a theoretical analysis of the Motherese Hypothesis; the conditions of both learner and environment in which ‘simplified’ data could aid a learner. Finally, the results of our past work, those of Furrow et al., and those of the present analysis, are discussed as they fit into, and add to, current theorizing about the language acquisition process.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Child development</subject><subject>Child Language</subject><subject>Communication disorders</subject><subject>Developmental psychology</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Language Development</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Maternal Behavior</subject><subject>Mother-Child Relations</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Speech</subject><issn>0305-0009</issn><issn>1469-7602</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1984</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkVtLwzAYhoMoOqc_wAuhoHjXmfPhUqZOcSCiXocsTbXarjNpwf17U1eGKKIXST7yPt_LdwDgAMERgkic3kMCGYRQxQMZk3QDDBDlKhUc4k0w6OS003fAbggvn6SS22Cbc6UQIgMwenh2iW29d_MmCY1p2pDUedLE36qOt3fBJc_LRReHIuyBrdyUwe337xA8Xl48jK_S6e3kenw2TS1VokkNRtjgzCnEbC6sQlZRIqmALsqZQIZJxjJJOLMinxEqSSYkxURgigTGjAzBycp34eu31oVGV0WwrizN3NVt0JJRLomC_wCxwlLgv0GoOFayczz6Br7UrZ_HbjUicaBxbopHCq0o6-sQvMv1wheV8UuNoO52o3_sJuYc9s7trHLZOqNfRtSPe90Ea8rcm7ktwhpTDHHGugLTFVaExr2vZeNfNRdEMM0nd_qG3svp-YTrzpb0pZpq5ovsyX3p6NdiPwAnPq-_</recordid><startdate>198402</startdate><enddate>198402</enddate><creator>Gleitman, Lila R.</creator><creator>Newport, Elissa L.</creator><creator>Gleitman, Henry</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>HJHVS</scope><scope>HQAFP</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>198402</creationdate><title>The current status of the motherese hypothesis</title><author>Gleitman, Lila R. ; Newport, Elissa L. ; Gleitman, Henry</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c497t-a212a2de915cf7c91c9438470e497d71a5855d8365c7fb3483d78423724172253</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1984</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Child development</topic><topic>Child Language</topic><topic>Communication disorders</topic><topic>Developmental psychology</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Language Development</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Maternal Behavior</topic><topic>Mother-Child Relations</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Speech</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gleitman, Lila R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newport, Elissa L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gleitman, Henry</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 19</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 23</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Journal of child language</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gleitman, Lila R.</au><au>Newport, Elissa L.</au><au>Gleitman, Henry</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The current status of the motherese hypothesis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of child language</jtitle><addtitle>J. Child Lang</addtitle><date>1984-02</date><risdate>1984</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>43</spage><epage>79</epage><pages>43-79</pages><issn>0305-0009</issn><eissn>1469-7602</eissn><coden>JCLGBJ</coden><abstract>Partially conflicting results from correlational studies of maternal speech style and its effects on child language learning motivate a comparative discussion of Newport, Gleitman & Gleitman (1977) and Furrow, Nelson & Benedict (1979), and a reanalysis of the original Newport et al. data. In the current analysis the data are from two groups of children equated for age, in response to the methodological questions raised by Furrow et al.; but, in line with the original Newport et al. analysis, linguistic differences between these age-equated children are handled by partial correlation. Under this new analysis the original results reported by Newport et al. are reproduced. In addition, however, most effects of the mother on the child's language growth are found to be restricted to a very young age group. Moreover, the new analysis suggests that increased complexity of maternal speech is positively correlated with child language growth in this age range. The findings are discussed in terms of a theoretical analysis of the Motherese Hypothesis; the conditions of both learner and environment in which ‘simplified’ data could aid a learner. Finally, the results of our past work, those of Furrow et al., and those of the present analysis, are discussed as they fit into, and add to, current theorizing about the language acquisition process.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>6699113</pmid><doi>10.1017/S0305000900005584</doi><tpages>37</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0305-0009 |
ispartof | Journal of child language, 1984-02, Vol.11 (1), p.43-79 |
issn | 0305-0009 1469-7602 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85468390 |
source | MEDLINE; Cambridge Journals; Periodicals Index Online |
subjects | Biological and medical sciences Child development Child Language Communication disorders Developmental psychology Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Humans Language Development Linguistics Maternal Behavior Mother-Child Relations Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Speech |
title | The current status of the motherese hypothesis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T18%3A42%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20current%20status%20of%20the%20motherese%20hypothesis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20child%20language&rft.au=Gleitman,%20Lila%20R.&rft.date=1984-02&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=43&rft.epage=79&rft.pages=43-79&rft.issn=0305-0009&rft.eissn=1469-7602&rft.coden=JCLGBJ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0305000900005584&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E85292872%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1303091196&rft_id=info:pmid/6699113&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0305000900005584&rfr_iscdi=true |