Two experiments used an elicited speech-production paradigm to explore children's acquisition of noun case-marking inflections. Russian (N = 24, 2;10— 4;6 years) and Serbian children (N = 24, 2;10—4;11) were asked to produce prepositional phrases requiring genitive or dative inflections of masculine and feminine, familiar and novel, simplex (vaza [Ru/Se: vase]) and diminutive (Ru: vazochka, Se: vazica) nouns. Across languages, children produced fewer case-marking errors with familiar compared to novel nouns, and diminutive compared to simplex nouns. The diminutive advantage occurred despite a markedly lower frequency of diminutive usage in Serbian than Russian child-directed speech. This suggests that in acquiring richly inflected languages, children most readily construct low-level generalizations of inflectional changes applying to morpho-phonologically homogeneous clusters of words like diminutives.
Brown, D., Tiberias, C., & Corbett, G.G. (2004). Inflectional syncretism and corpora. Paper presented at the 5th International Workshop on Linguistically Interpreted Corpora (LINC-04) held at the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 29 August, Geneva.
2.
Bryant, G.A. & Barrett, H. (2007). Recognizing intentions in infant-directed speech . Psychological Science, 18(8), 746-751.
3.
Bybee, J. & Hopper, P. (2001). Introduction to frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. In J. Bybee, & P. Hopper (Eds), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (pp. 1-24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
4.
Comrie, B. & Corbett, G. (Eds) (1992). The Slavonic languages. London: Routledge.
5.
Dabrowska, E. (2004). Rules or schemas? Evidence from Polish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(2), 225-271.
6.
Dabrowska, E. (2006). Low-level schemas or productive rules: The role of diminutives in the acquisition of Polish case inflections. Language Sciences, 28, 120-135.
7.
Dissanayake, E. (2004). Motherese is but one part of a ritualized, multimodal, temporally organized, affiliative interaction. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 27(4), 512-513.
8.
Fernald, A. (1992). Human maternal vocalizations to infants as biologically relevant signals: An evolutionary perspective. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides & J. Tooby (Eds), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 391-428). New York: Oxford.
9.
Fernald, A. & McRoberts, G. (1996). Prosodic bootstrapping: Critical analysis of the argument and the evidence. In J. Morgan and C. Demuth (Eds), Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition (pp. 365-388). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Fernald, A., Taeschner, T., Dunne, J., Papousek, M., de Boysson-Bardies, B., & Fukui, I. (1989). A cross-language study of prosodic modifications in mothers' and fathers' speech to preverbal infants. Journal of Child Language, 16, 477-501.
11.
Golinkoff, R.M., & Alioto, A. (1995). Infant-directed speech facilitates lexical learning in adults hearing Chinese: Implications for language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 22, 703-726.
12.
Haman, E. (2003). Early productivity in derivation: A case study of diminutives in the acquisition of Polish. Psychology of Language and Communication, 7, 37-56.
13.
Kempe, V. & Brooks, P.J. (2001/2005). The role of diminutives in Russian gender learning: Can child-directed speech facilitate the acquisition of inflectional morphology?Language Learning, 51, 221-256. [Reprinted (2005): Language Learning, 55, Supplement1, 139-176.]
14.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P.J., & Gillis, S. (2005). Diminutives in child-directed speech supplement metric with distributional word segmentation cues. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 12(1), 145-151.
15.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P.J., & Gillis, S. (2007a). Diminutives provide multiple benefits for language acquisition. In W. Dressler, & I. Savickiene (Eds), The acquisition of diminutives (pp. 319-342). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
16.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P.J., Gillis, S., & Samson, G. (2007b). Diminutives facilitate word segmentation in natural speech: Cross-linguistic evidence. Memory and Cognition, 35, 762-773.
17.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P.J., Mironova, N., Pershukova, A., & Fedorova, O. (2007c). Playing with word endings: Morphological variation in the learning of Russian noun inflections. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25, 55-77.
18.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P.J., Mironova, N., & Fedorova, O. (2003). Diminutivization supports gender acquisition in Russian children. Journal of Child Language, 30, 471-485.
19.
Kempe V., Brooks, P.J., & Pirott, L. (2001). How can child-directed speech facilitate the acquisition of morphology? In M. Almgren, A. Barrena, M. J. Ezeizabarrena , I. Idiazabal, & B. MacWhinney (Eds), Research on child language acquisition: Proceedings of the 8th conference of the International Association for the Study of Child Language (pp. 1237-1247). Medford, MA: Cascadilla Press.
20.
King, B.J. & Shanker, S. (2004). Beyond prosody and infant-directed speech: Affective, social construction of meaning in the origins of language. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 27(4), 515.
21.
Kitamura, C., Tanavishuth, C., Burnham, D., & Luksaneeyanawin, S. (2002). Universality and specificity in infant-directed speech: Pitch modifications as a function of infant age and sex in a tonal and non-tonal language. Infant Behavior and Development, 24, 372-392.
22.
Kostić, Ð. (1965). Sintaktičke funkcije padežnih oblika u srpskohrvatskom jeziku [Syntactic functions and meanings of Serbo-Croatian cases]. Beograd: Institut za eksperimentalnu fonetiku i patologiju govora.
23.
Laalo, K. (1998). Diminutives in Finnish child-directed and child speech. In S. Gillis (Ed.), Studies in the acquisition of number and diminutive marking (pp. 137-148). Antwerp Papers in Linguistics, 95. Antwerp: Universiteit Anwerpen.
24.
Locke, J. (2004). Trickle-up phonetics: A vocal role for the infant . Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 27(4), 516.
25.
Morgan, J. L. & Demuth, K. (Eds) (1996). Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26.
Savickienė, I. (1998). The acquisition of diminutives in Lithuanian. In S. Gillis (Ed.), Studies in the acquisition of number and diminutive marking (pp. 115-135). Antwerp Papers in Linguistics, 95. Antwerp: Universiteit Anwerpen.
27.
Savickienė, I., Kempe, V., & Brooks, P.J. (2009). Acquisition of gender agreement in Lithuanian: Exploring the effect of diminutive usage in an elicited production task. Journal of Child Language, 36.
28.
Ševa, N., Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. (2006). Inducing low-level schema extraction with artificial suffixes. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 26-29 July, Vancouver, Canada, 2135-2140.
29.
Ševa, N., Kempe, V., Brooks, P.J., Mironova, N., Pershukova, A., & Fedorova, O. (2007). Cross-linguistic evidence for the diminutive advantage: Gender agreement in Russian and Serbian children. Journal of Child Language, 34(1), 111-131.
30.
Smoczyńska, M. (1985). The acquisition of Polish. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Vol. 1. The data (pp. 595-686). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of child language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
Wilcox, S. (2004). Language from gesture. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 27(4), 525-526.
