Maja Savić

Ratings of age of acquisition of 299 words across 25 languages: Is there a cross-linguistic order of words?

We present a new set of subjective age-of-acquisition (AoA) ratings for 299 words (158 nouns, 141 verbs) in 25 languages from five language families (Afro-Asiatic: Semitic languages; Altaic: one Turkic language: Indo-European: Baltic, Celtic, Germanic, Hellenic, Slavic, and Romance languages; Niger-Congo: one Bantu language; Uralic: Finnic and Ugric languages). Adult native speakers reported the age at which they had learned each word. We present a comparison of the AoA ratings across all languages by contrasting them in pairs. This comparison shows a consistency in the orders of ratings across the 25 languages. The data were then analyzed (1) to ascertain how the demographic characteristics of the participants influenced AoA estimations and (2) to assess differences caused by the exact form of the target question (when did you learn vs. when do children learn this word); (3) to compare the ratings obtained in our study to those of previous studies; and (4) to assess the validity of our study by comparison with quasi-objective AoA norms derived from the MacArthur–Bates Communicative Development Inventories (MB-CDI). All 299 words were judged as being acquired early (mostly before the age of 6 years). AoA ratings were associated with the raters’ social or language status, but not with the raters’ age or education. Parents reported words as being learned earlier, and bilinguals reported learning them later. Estimations of the age at which children learn the words revealed significantly lower ratings of AoA. Finally, comparisons with previous AoA and MB-CDI norms support the validity of the present estimations. Our AoA ratings are available for research or other purposes.

Cross-linguistic patterns in the acquisition of quantifiers.

Significance Although much research has been devoted to the acquisition of number words, relatively little is known about the acquisition of other expressions of quantity. We propose that the order of acquisition of quantifiers is related to features inherent to the meaning of each term. Four specific dimensions of the meaning and use of quantifiers are found to capture robust similarities in the order of acquisition of quantifiers in similar ways across 31 languages, representing 11 language types. Learners of most languages are faced with the task of acquiring words to talk about number and quantity. Much is known about the order of acquisition of number words as well as the cognitive and perceptual systems and cultural practices that shape it. Substantially less is known about the acquisition of quantifiers. Here, we consider the extent to which systems and practices that support number word acquisition can be applied to quantifier acquisition and conclude that the two domains are largely distinct in this respect. Consequently, we hypothesize that the acquisition of quantifiers is constrained by a set of factors related to each quantifier’s specific meaning. We investigate competence with the expressions for “all,” “none,” “some,” “some…not,” and “most” in 31 languages, representing 11 language types, by testing 768 5-y-old children and 536 adults. We found a cross-linguistically similar order of acquisition of quantifiers, explicable in terms of four factors relating to their meaning and use. In addition, exploratory analyses reveal that language- and learner-specific factors, such as negative concord and gender, are significant predictors of variation.

How do 5-year-olds understand questions? Differences in languages across Europe

The comprehension of constituent questions is an important topic for language acquisition research and for applications in the diagnosis of language impairment. This article presents the results of a study investigating the comprehension of different types of questions by 5-year-old, typically developing children across 19 European countries, 18 different languages, and 7 language (sub-)families. The study investigated the effects of two factors on question formation: (a) whether the question contains a simple interrogative word like ‘who’ or a complex one like ‘which princess’, and (b) whether the question word was related to the sentential subject or object position of the verb. The findings show that there is considerable variation among languages, but the two factors mentioned consistently affect children’s performance. The cross-linguistic variation shows that three linguistic factors facilitate children’s understanding of questions: having overt case morphology, having a single lexical item for both ‘who’ and ‘which’, and the use of synthetic verbal forms.

Assessment of grammar comprehension: Adaptation of TROG for Serbian language

In this study we present our adaptation and preliminary standardization of Test for Reception of Grammar TROG (Bishop, 1989) for Serbian language. TROG is a receptive test of grammatical structures, constructed primarily for an assessment of grammatical development and detection of children with Specific Language Impairment (SLI). Due to the lack of standardized tests for language development in our clinical community, TROG is selected for adaptation as a test which includes two components relevant for discrimination of children with language difficulties: a) measure of receptive abilities and b) distinguishing knowledge of grammar from semantic aspect of comprehension. Preliminary standardization was done on a sample of 335 participants between 4 and 7 years of age, divided into 8 age subsamples. Since dynamic of language change at early ages is faster, age samples covered range of 3 months at the ages 4;0-4;2, 4;3-4;5, 4;6-4;8, 4;9-4;11, and range of 6 months at the ages 5;0-5;5, 5;6-5;11, 6;00-6;05, 6;06-6;11. Analyses have revealed that the first version of Serbian TROG is discriminative for the differences between age samples, but discrimination is smaller then it was expected. The test discriminates three age-samples (4;0-4;8, 4;9-5;5, and 5;6-6;11). It is easier for the children older then 5 years, which causes statistical significance of discrimination to tilt within a narrow margin around 0,05. Reliability of the whole instrument is estimated very high - between 0,86 and 0,91, depending on the method of estimation. However, reliability estimated for particular blocks (grammatical structure) revealed that internal consistency of blocks is not homogeneous. This finding prevents reliable estimation of competence for particular structures, and makes difficult to define which contrast is understood by a child and which is not. Furthermore, internal inconsistency of blocks may also be additional source of low discrimination of test for children older then 5. Further improvement of test, balancing of items and inclusion of additional grammatical structures in order to get a wider range of age discrimination is required. This will be done in future research.