What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Experimental evidence for syntactic structure at 18 months. Lidz, J., Waxman, S., & Freedman, J. Cognition, 89(3):B65-73, 2003. abstract bibtex Generative linguistic theory stands on the hypothesis that grammar cannot be acquired solely on the basis of an analysis of the input, but depends, in addition, on innate structure within the learner to guide the process of acquisition. This hypothesis derives from a logical argument, however, and its consequences have never been examined experimentally with infant learners. Challenges to this hypothesis, claiming that an analysis of the input is indeed sufficient to explain grammatical acquisition, have recently gained attention. We demonstrate with novel experimentation the insufficiency of this countervailing view. Focusing on the syntactic structures required to determine the antecedent for the pronoun one, we demonstrate that the input to children does not contain sufficient information to support unaided learning. Nonetheless, we show that 18-month-old infants do have command of the syntax of one. Because this syntactic knowledge could not have been gleaned exclusively from the input, infants' mastery of this aspect of syntax constitutes evidence for the contribution of innate structure within the learner in acquiring a grammar.
@Article{Lidz2003,
author = {Jeffrey Lidz and Sandra Waxman and Jennifer Freedman},
journal = {Cognition},
title = {What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: {E}xperimental evidence for syntactic structure at 18 months.},
year = {2003},
number = {3},
pages = {B65-73},
volume = {89},
abstract = {Generative linguistic theory stands on the hypothesis that grammar
cannot be acquired solely on the basis of an analysis of the input,
but depends, in addition, on innate structure within the learner
to guide the process of acquisition. This hypothesis derives from
a logical argument, however, and its consequences have never been
examined experimentally with infant learners. Challenges to this
hypothesis, claiming that an analysis of the input is indeed sufficient
to explain grammatical acquisition, have recently gained attention.
We demonstrate with novel experimentation the insufficiency of this
countervailing view. Focusing on the syntactic structures required
to determine the antecedent for the pronoun one, we demonstrate that
the input to children does not contain sufficient information to
support unaided learning. Nonetheless, we show that 18-month-old
infants do have command of the syntax of one. Because this syntactic
knowledge could not have been gleaned exclusively from the input,
infants' mastery of this aspect of syntax constitutes evidence for
the contribution of innate structure within the learner in acquiring
a grammar.},
keywords = {Female, Human, Infant, Knowledge, Language Development, Learning, Linguistics, Male, 12963265},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"bXy33Ek2GteGRmfhY","bibbaseid":"lidz-waxman-freedman-whatinfantsknowaboutsyntaxbutcouldnthavelearnedexperimentalevidenceforsyntacticstructureat18months-2003","author_short":["Lidz, J.","Waxman, S.","Freedman, J."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","author":[{"firstnames":["Jeffrey"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Lidz"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Sandra"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Waxman"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Jennifer"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Freedman"],"suffixes":[]}],"journal":"Cognition","title":"What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Experimental evidence for syntactic structure at 18 months.","year":"2003","number":"3","pages":"B65-73","volume":"89","abstract":"Generative linguistic theory stands on the hypothesis that grammar cannot be acquired solely on the basis of an analysis of the input, but depends, in addition, on innate structure within the learner to guide the process of acquisition. This hypothesis derives from a logical argument, however, and its consequences have never been examined experimentally with infant learners. Challenges to this hypothesis, claiming that an analysis of the input is indeed sufficient to explain grammatical acquisition, have recently gained attention. We demonstrate with novel experimentation the insufficiency of this countervailing view. Focusing on the syntactic structures required to determine the antecedent for the pronoun one, we demonstrate that the input to children does not contain sufficient information to support unaided learning. Nonetheless, we show that 18-month-old infants do have command of the syntax of one. Because this syntactic knowledge could not have been gleaned exclusively from the input, infants' mastery of this aspect of syntax constitutes evidence for the contribution of innate structure within the learner in acquiring a grammar.","keywords":"Female, Human, Infant, Knowledge, Language Development, Learning, Linguistics, Male, 12963265","bibtex":"@Article{Lidz2003,\n author = {Jeffrey Lidz and Sandra Waxman and Jennifer Freedman},\n journal = {Cognition},\n title = {What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: {E}xperimental evidence for syntactic structure at 18 months.},\n year = {2003},\n number = {3},\n pages = {B65-73},\n volume = {89},\n abstract = {Generative linguistic theory stands on the hypothesis that grammar\n\tcannot be acquired solely on the basis of an analysis of the input,\n\tbut depends, in addition, on innate structure within the learner\n\tto guide the process of acquisition. This hypothesis derives from\n\ta logical argument, however, and its consequences have never been\n\texamined experimentally with infant learners. Challenges to this\n\thypothesis, claiming that an analysis of the input is indeed sufficient\n\tto explain grammatical acquisition, have recently gained attention.\n\tWe demonstrate with novel experimentation the insufficiency of this\n\tcountervailing view. Focusing on the syntactic structures required\n\tto determine the antecedent for the pronoun one, we demonstrate that\n\tthe input to children does not contain sufficient information to\n\tsupport unaided learning. Nonetheless, we show that 18-month-old\n\tinfants do have command of the syntax of one. Because this syntactic\n\tknowledge could not have been gleaned exclusively from the input,\n\tinfants' mastery of this aspect of syntax constitutes evidence for\n\tthe contribution of innate structure within the learner in acquiring\n\ta grammar.},\n keywords = {Female, Human, Infant, Knowledge, Language Development, Learning, Linguistics, Male, 12963265},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Lidz, J.","Waxman, S.","Freedman, J."],"key":"Lidz2003","id":"Lidz2003","bibbaseid":"lidz-waxman-freedman-whatinfantsknowaboutsyntaxbutcouldnthavelearnedexperimentalevidenceforsyntacticstructureat18months-2003","role":"author","urls":{},"keyword":["Female","Human","Infant","Knowledge","Language Development","Learning","Linguistics","Male","12963265"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"http://endress.org/publications/ansgar.bib","dataSources":["xPGxHAeh3vZpx4yyE","TXa55dQbNoWnaGmMq"],"keywords":["female","human","infant","knowledge","language development","learning","linguistics","male","12963265"],"search_terms":["infants","know","syntax","couldn","learned","experimental","evidence","syntactic","structure","months","lidz","waxman","freedman"],"title":"What infants know about syntax but couldn't have learned: Experimental evidence for syntactic structure at 18 months.","year":2003}