Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 292

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sensitivity to discontinuous dependencies in language learners: evidence for limitations in processing space

Open access
Santelmann, Lynn M, Jusczyk, Peter W·1998·Cognition

Abstract

Five experiments using the Headturn Preference Procedure examined 15- and 18-month-old children's sensitivity to morphosyntactic dependencies in English. In each experiment, the children were exposed to two types of passages. Passages in the experimental condition contained a well-formed English dependency between the auxiliary verb is and a main verb with the ending -ing. Passages in the control condition contained an ungrammatical combination of the modal auxiliary can and a main verb with the ending -ing. In the experiments, the distance between the dependent morphemes was systematically varied by inserting an adverbial of a specified length between the auxiliary and main verbs. The results indicated that 18-month-olds are sensitive to the basic relationship between is and -ing, but that 15-month-olds are not. The 18-month-olds, but not the 15-month-olds, listened significantly longer to the passages with the well-formed English dependency. In addition, the 18-month-olds showed this preference for the well-formed dependency only over a limited domain of 1-3 syllables. Over domains of 4-5 syllables, they showed no significant preference for the experimental over the control passages. These findings indicate that 18-month-olds can track relationships between functor morphemes. Additionally, these findings are consistent with the hypothesis that 18-month-olds are working with a limited processing window, and that they are only picking up relevant dependencies that fall within this window.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00060-2

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 43 references

Cited by

See all 292

Metadata

Authors
Santelmann, L. M., & Jusczyk, P. W.
Venue
Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-12
Volume
69
Issue
2
Pages
105-134
ISSN
0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2000781199
Cited by
292
References
43
FWCI
4.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sensitivity to discontinuous dependencies in language learners: evidence for limitations in processing space. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00060-2
The paper
Santelmann, L. M., & Jusczyk, P. W. (1998). Sensitivity to discontinuous dependencies in language learners: evidence for limitations in processing space. Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00060-2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.