Cited by 297Language Development and DisordersSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationChild and Animal Learning Development

A multiple process solution to the logical problem of language acquisition

Open access
MACWHINNEY, BRIAN·2004·Journal of Child Language

Abstract

Many researchers believe that there is a logical problem at the centre of language acquisition theory. According to this analysis, the input to the learner is too inconsistent and incomplete to determine the acquisition of grammar. Moreover, when corrective feedback is provided, children tend to ignore it. As a result, language learning must rely on additional constraints from universal grammar. To solve this logical problem, theorists have proposed a series of constraints and parameterizations on the form of universal grammar. Plausible alternatives to these constraints include: conservatism, item-based learning, indirect negative evidence, competition, cue construction, and monitoring. Careful analysis of child language corpora has cast doubt on claims regarding the absence of positive exemplars. Using demonstrably available positive data, simple learning procedures can be formulated for each of the syntactic structures that have traditionally motivated invocation of the logical problem. Within the perspective of emergentist theory (MacWhinney, 2001), the operation of a set of mutually supportive processes is viewed as providing multiple buffering for developmental outcomes. However, the fact that some syntactic structures are more difficult to learn than others can be used to highlight areas of intense grammatical competition and processing load.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0305000904006336

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The need to account for effects of both absolute and relative frequency forces us to posit particular types of acquisition model that we may not otherwise have considered, specifically those that build in some form of competition between words with similar meanings and/or surface forms.

    “The need to account for effects of both absolute and relative frequency forces us to posit particular types of acquisition model that we may not otherwise have considered; specifically those that build in some form of competition between words with similar meanings and/or surface forms (MacWhinney, 2004).”

    From The ubiquity of frequency effects in first language acquisition (2015) · cites this paper as MacWhinney, 2004

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MACWHINNEY, B.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
MACWHINNEY, BRIAN
Venue
Journal of Child Language
Published
2004-11
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
883-914
ISSN
  • 0305-0009 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7602
OpenAlex
W2106391276
Cited by
297
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
FWCI
16.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Child Language (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • KiltHub Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • KiltHub Repository
Funders
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC008524)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD023998, R01HD051698)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
universal grammar, grammar learning, corrective feedback, positive evidence, negative evidence, conservatism, child language corpora, syntactic learning, parameterization
MeSH terms
Child Language, Child, Preschool, Feedback, Humans, Infant, Language Development, Logic, Mother-Child Relations, Psycholinguistics, Verbal Learning, Vocabulary

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