Reanalysing rote-learned phrases: individual differences in the transition to multi-word speech

Abstract

The present study investigates the possibility that the previously documented relationship between referential–expressive and nominal–pronominal styles (Nelson, 1975) may be best explained not so much in terms of ‘object-orientation’ or ‘noun-preference’, as in terms of the direction from which different children break into structure, with some children tending to construct patterns by combining two or more items from their single-word vocabularies and others tending to develop patterns by gaining productive control over ‘slots’ in previously unanalysed phrases. In order to do so it makes use of a methodology for distinguishing between productive and unanalysed multi-word speech proposed in Lieven, Pine & Dresner-Barnes (1992) which is applied to observational and maternal-report data from a longitudinal study of seven children between the ages of 0; 11 and 1; 8. The results suggest not only that variation in children's early word combinations can indeed be explained in terms of different routes to multi-word speech, but also that, far from being atypical, a strategy involving the breaking down of originally unanalysed phrases may be used by all children, though to varying degrees.