Whorfian potential in child language

Open access

Abstract

As toddlers begin the language acquisition process, event memory and the capacity for dead-reckoning are developing in the cognitive domain, providing the potential to think about the relative location of events in time and objects in space. While the language they happen to be learning varies in structure, every language has a way of coding the location of events / objects in time / space. We can think of the toddler as a code breaker who arrives at the acquisition problem with a set of language information processing abilities. Depending how temporal and / or spatial location is coded in the language, it will make the toddler’s code-breaking problem more or less difficult, providing the potential to facilitate acquisition. Benjamin Whorf argued that the structure of a child’s language influences the course of conceptual development within the realms of temporal and spatial thinking. If the structure of a particular language matches the toddler’s processing capacities in either the temporal or spatial domain, then the resulting precocious acquisition in that domain provides the potential to influence conceptual development. This paper investigates such a potential in child language, i.e., a developmental Whorfian hypothesis.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Allen S. E. M. (1997). Aspects of argument structure acquisition in Inuktitut. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Atance C. M. (2008). From the past into the future: The developmental origins and trajectory of episodic future thinking. In E. Dere A. Easton L. Nadel & J. P. Huston (Eds.) Handbook of episodic memory (pp. 99-114). Netherlands: Elsevier.

  • Atance C. M. & O’Neill D. K. (2005). The emergence of episodic future thinking in humans. Learning and Motivation 36 126-144.

  • Bauer P. J. (2007). Remembering the times of our lives: Memory in infancy and beyond. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Berman R. & Slobin D. I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Bowerman M. (1981). Notes for the Nijmegen workshop. MPI Nijmegen Netherlands.

  • Bowerman M. (1985). What shapes children’s grammars? In D. I. Slobin (Ed.) The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition (Vol. 2 pp. 1257-1320). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Brown P. (2001). Learning to talk about motion UP and DOWN in Tzeltal: Is there a language-specific bias for verb learning? In M. Bowerman & S. C. Levinson (Eds.) Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 512-543). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Choi S. (1991). Early acquisition of epistemic meanings of Korean: A study of sentence-ending suffixes in the spontaneous speech of three children. First Language 11 93-120.

  • Choi S. (2006). Influence of language-specific input on spatial cognition: Categories of containment. First Language 77 207-232.

  • Choi S. & Bowerman M. (1991). Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexication patterns. Cognition 41 83-121.

  • Choi S. McDonough L. Bowerman M. & Mandler J. M. (1999). Early sensitivity to language-specific spatial categories in English and Korean. Cognitive Development 14 241-268.

  • Clark H. H. (1973). Space time semantics and the child. In T. E. Moore (Ed). Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 27-63). New York NY: Academic Press.

  • De León L. (2001). Finding the richest path: Language and cognition in the acquisition of verticality in Tzotzil (Mayan). In M. Bowerman & S. C. Levinson (Eds.) Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 544-565). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Fivush R. (1995). Language narrative and autobiography. Consciousness and Cognition 4 100-103.

  • Fivush R. Haden C. & Adam S. (1995). Structure and coherence of the preschoolers’ personal narratives over time: Implications for childhood amnesia. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 60 32-56.

  • Gee J. & Savasir I. (1985). On the use of will and gonna: Toward a description of activity-types for child language. Discourse Processes 8 143-175.

  • Haun D. B. M. Rapold C. J. Call J. Janzen G. & Levinson S. C. (2006). Cognitive cladistics and culture override in hominid spatial cognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 103(46) 17568-17573.

  • Johnston J. R. & Slobin D. I. (1979). The development of locative expressions in English Italian Serbo-Croatian and Turkish. Journal of Child Language 6 529-545.

  • Kuczaj S. A. (1976). ‘-ing’ ‘-s’ & ‘-ed’: A study of the acquisition of certain verb inflections. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota Department of Psychology.

  • Levinson S. C. (1996). Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: Crosslinguistic evidence. In P. Bloom M. A. Peterson L. Nadel & M. F. Garrett (Eds.) Language and space (pp. 109-170). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

  • Levinson S. C. (2003). Space in language and cognition: Exploration in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Li P. Abarbanell L. Gleitman L. & Papafragou A. (2011). Spatial reasoning in Tenejapan Mayans. Cognition 120(1) 33-53.

  • Lucy J. A. (1992). Language diversity and thought: A reformulation of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Lucy J. A. & Gaskins S. (2001). Grammatical categories and the development of classification preferences: A comparative approach. In M. Bowerman & S. C. Levinson (Eds.) Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 257-283). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Meltzoff A. M. (1988). Infant imitation after a 1-week delay: Long-term memory for novel acts and multiple stimuli. Developmental Psychology 24 470-476.

  • Meltzoff A. M. (2005). Imitation and other minds: The “Like Me” hypothesis. In S. Hurley & N. Chater (Eds.) Perspective on imitation: From neuroscience to social science (Vol. 2 pp. 55-77). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

  • Newcombe N. S. (2017). Cognitive development in comparative perspective: Exploring the role of language acquisition in spatial quantitative and memory development. In J. Call (Ed.). APA handbook of comparative psychology (Vol. 1 pp. 403-425). Washington DC: APA Books.

  • Newcombe N. S. & Huttenlocher J. (2003). Making space: The development of spatial representation and reasoning. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

  • Newcombe N. S. Huttenlocher J. Drummey A. B. & Wiley J. (1998). The development of spatial location: Place learning and dead reckoning in the second and third years. Cognitive Development 13 185-200.

  • Newcombe N. & Uttal D. (2006). Whorf versus Socrates round 10. Trends in Cognitive Science 10 394-396.

  • Ozturk O. & Papafragou A. (2016). The acquisition of evidentiality and source monitoring. Language Learning and Development 12(2) 199-230.

  • Papafragou A. Li P. Choi Y. & Han C. (2007). Evidentiality in language and cognition. Cognition 103 253-299.

  • Papafragou A. Hulbert J. & Trueswell J. (2008). Does language guide event perception? Evidence from eye movements. Cognition 108 155-184.

  • Pawlak A. Oehlrich J. & Weist R. M. (2006). Reference time in child English and Polish. First Language 78 281 298.

  • Peterson C. & Rideout R. (1998). Memory for medical emergencies experienced by 1- and 2-year-olds. Developmental Psychology 14 1059-1072.

  • Piaget J. (1952). The origin of intelligence in children. New York NY: Norton. Rovee-Collier C. K. (1997). Dissociations in infant memory: Rethinking the development of implicit and explicit memory. Psychological Review 104 467-498.

  • Rovee-Collier C. K. (1999). The development of infant memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science 8 80-85.

  • Sachs J. (1983). Talking about the there and then: The emergence of displaced reference in parent-child discourse. In K. E. Nelson (Ed.) Children's language (Vol. 4 pp. 1-28). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Shirai Y. & Andersen R. W. (1995). The acquisition of tense-aspect morphology: A prototype account. Language 71 743-762.

  • Simcock G. & Hayne H. (2003). Age-related changes in verbal and nonverbal memory during early childhood. Developmental Psychology 39(5) 805-814.

  • Slobin D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (Eds.) Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70-96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Slobin D. I. & Aksu A. (1982). Tense aspect and modality in the use of the Turkish evidential. In P. J. Hopper (Ed.) Tense-aspect: Between semantics and pragmatics (pp. 185-200). Amsterdam/Philadelphia Benjamins.

  • Spelke E. S. (2000). Core knowledge. American Psychologist 55 1233-1243.

  • Stephany U. (1986). Modality. In P. Fletcher & M. Garman (Eds.) Language acquisition (pp. 375-400). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Swift M. D. (2004). Time in child Inuktitut: A developmental study of an Eskimo-Aleut language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

  • Tillman K. A. Marghetis T. Barner D. & Srinivasan M. (2017). Today is tomorrow’s yesterday: Children’s acquisition of deictic time words. Cognitive psychology 92 87-100.

  • Tulving E. (1985). How many memory systems are there? American Psychologist 40 385-398.

  • Ünal E. & Papafragou A. (2016). Interactions between language and mental representations. Language Learning 66(3) 554-580.

  • Van Valin R. D. (2005). The syntax-semantics-pragmatics interface: An introduction to Role and Reference Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Weist R.M. (1991). Spatial and temporal location in child language. First Language 11 253-267.

  • Weist R.M. (2002). The first language acquisition of tense and aspect. In R. Salaberry & Y. Shirai (Eds.) The L2 acquisition of tense-aspect morphology (pp. 21-78). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Weist R. M. (2009). One-to-one mapping of temporal and spatial relations. In J. Guo E. Lieven S. Ervin-Tripp N. Budwig S. Őzçalişkan & K. Nakamura (Eds.) Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 69-79). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Weist R. M. (2014). Future temporal reference in child language. In P. De Brabanter M. Kissine & S. Sharifzadeh (Eds.) Future times: Future tenses (pp. 87-113). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Weist R. M. Atanassova M. Wysocka H. & Pawlak A. (1999). Spatial and temporal systems in child language and thought: A cross-linguistic study. First Language. 19 267-312.

  • Weist R. M. & Buczowska E. (1987). The emergence of temporal adverbs in child Polish. First Language 7 217-229.

  • Weist R. M. Lyytinen P. Wysocka J. & Atanassova M. (1997). The interaction of language and thought in children’s language acquisition: A cross-linguistic study. Journal of Child Language. 24 81-121.

  • Weist R. M. Pawlak A. & Carapella J. (2004). Syntactic-semantic interface in the acquisition of verb morphology. Journal of Child Language 31 31-60.

  • Weist R. M. Pawlak A. & Hoffman K. (2009). Finiteness systems and lexical aspect in child Polish and English. Linguistics 47 1321-1350.

  • Weist R. M. & Zevenbergen A. (2008). Autobiographical memory and past time reference. Language Learning and Development 4 291-308.

  • Whorf B. L. (1956). Language thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (J. B. Carroll Ed.). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.29

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.118
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.410

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 290 163 13
PDF Downloads 214 121 7