Class Notes (835,872)
Canada (509,458)
Psychology (1,975)
PSY 302 (207)
Lecture

Overheads.doc

5 Pages
138 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSY 302
Professor
Candace Grant
Semester
Winter

Description
Language Development Theoretical perspectives  Behaviourism  Skinner; Chomsky announced him  Nativism  Interactionist View  genetic and environment interact Behaviourism  Skinner  Children learn language by learning (i.e., through imitation combined with parental reinforcement)—children will say things that they have never heard before, wasn’t learned Nativism  Chomsky and the L.A.D. (Language Acquisition Device—language module—part of your brain that guides acquisition of language particularly grammar)  “Language learning is not really something the child does; it is something that happens to the child place in an appropriate environment, much as the child’s body grows and matures in a predetermined way when provided with appropriate nutrition and environmental stimulation” (Chomsky, 1987) –need input from the environment—related to critical period; biological window which you need to be exposed to in order to learn it Interactionist View  combination of the first two  focus on interactions between biological endowment and environmental input Evidence for a critical period Johnson & Newport (1989)  Knowledge of English grammar among Asian immigrants to U.S.  IVs: Age of arrival, number of years in U.S.  Number of years mattered little, age of arrival mattered a lot  Arrive by age 7, native-like grammar  Came to US between 3+36 years of age  Lived in US between 3+26 years  Separated these two things—and found that number of years mattered little  Age at which you arrive matters a lot, younger the age the better the grammar  Arrive by age 7 grammar was just like any other native American  Arrived in late teens to adulthood is the worst  Period of early sensitivity, more likely to use grammar like a native speaker  Not a step function (critical period)—its really more evidence for a sensitive period with greater sensitivity for one time than other  Also true with accents –ppl who acquire language particularly after puberty people have trouble losing their accents  Cognitive ability is specific to language Word Segmentation  “the test next week might be very hard or very easy”  In English there is stress—one cue to word segmentation standard rule is to stress the first syllable (exceptions though guitar, etc)  Statistical regularities brain might be sensitive to things that may occur—mechanism that is sensitive “pretty baby”—pretty obvious because a baby is more likely to hear “baby” from ba|by than Bay|Watch Saffran et al. (1996)  Are infants sensitive to statistical regularities in speech?—pabiku/golatu/daropi/tibudo within words also followed by the same, but between words it was always followed by 33% of the others  Test trials done—could be words or not words—presented in random order—draw infants attention to the centre and then see a flashing light keep hearing the word as long as they look there then a light is flashed at the other side and a word or a non-word is presented as long as the baby looks  It’s a preference paradigm—look to see what they prefer either words or non-words  Baby preferred familiarized words and not mixed syllables—heard them sometimes but not nearly as much as the familiarized words  2 minute familiarization  Experiment 1 Words vs. Non-Words ex. ladati preferred the non-words  Experiment 2 Part Words vs. Words babies looked longer to see the word that was not familiarized already  Demonstrated a novelty preference—combinations heard sometimes but not as frequently  Mechanism that things go together—sensitive to statistical regularities to fix the word segmention problem  Cues with statistical regularities in infants learned rapidly—only 2 mins of exposure, but still knew what went together—human cognitive mechanism—which might help you learn language and help solve word segmentation  Sensitive to regularities not to language acquisition device  8-month-olds: familiarization followed by listening preference  Looked longer to hear “non-words” than “words”  Only cues were statistical regularities Acquisition of grammar Marcus et al. (1999)  Same procedure as Saffran; 7-month-olds  Hadn’t heard any familiarized words  Words were all CV—consonant vowel  Each sentence had 3 words  Very simple structure  Familiarization (ABA or ABB) followed by preference (ABA or ABB)  Grammar used very loosely either ABA or ABB  Grammar exposed to one for 2 mins  Test trials hears something and looks towards speaker, either grammatical or un- grammatical  Have never heard the sounds before, just the structure of the grammar (ABA)  Preferred novel ‘grammars’ –more interesting  Also ABB vs. AAB, same results –always preferred novel stimuli Infant-Directed Speech  Sentences are short, simple, repetitive  Clear enunciation, slower, higher pitched voice  Linger spaces between utterances  Vowels are hyper-articulated—stress difference between vowels Fernald et al. (1989)  Recorded ID speech to infants among German, Japanese, French, Italian, British- English, and U.S-English moms and dads  Modifications in ID speech were consistent across genders/cultures  May not be universal but people tend to do this 
More Less

Related notes for PSY 302

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit