Cover not available
Part of
Exploring the Turkish Linguistic Landscape: Essays in honor of Eser Erguvanlı-Taylan
Edited by Mine Güven, Didar Akar, Balkız Öztürk and Meltem Kelepir
[Studies in Language Companion Series 175] 2016
► pp. 183–200

Different paces (but not different paths) in language acquisition

ORCID logo | Istanbul Bilgi University
This study examines the acquisition of irregular morpho-phonological alternations (word final k-Ø, p-b, t-d, and ç-c alternations) by two different populations of Turkish speaking children, twins vs. singletons around age 3;0. The results, based on an elicited production test, suggest that relatively more regular and more frequent alternations (k-Ø alternation) are acquired earlier and children, like adults, are sensitive to word length in their alternations. Twins follow the same pattern but with a slower pace. Twins’ delay is attributed to their exposure to each other’s erroraneous speech, which is not a regular experience that one can observe in a singleton home.
Keywords: irregular alternation, language acquisition, twins vs. singletons
Published online: 14 June 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.175.11ket
References (81)
References
Aksu-Koç, Ayhan, Küntay, Aylin C., Acarlar, Funda, Maviş, İlknur, Sofu, Hatice, Topbaş, Seyhun & Turan, Figen. 2009. Türkçe’de erken sözcük ve dilbilgisi gelişimi ölçme ve değerlendirme çalışması Türkçe İletişim Envanterleri: TİGE-I ve TİGE-II. Report submitted to TÜBİTAK (Proje No: 107K058).Google Scholar
Anlar, Banu & Yalaz, Kalbiye. 1993. Denver II Gelişimsel Tarama Testi: Türk Çocuklarına Uyarlaması ve Standardizasyonu. Gelişimsel Tıp Araştırmaları Grubu. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi.Google Scholar
Becker, Michael, Ketrez, F. Nihan & Nevins, Andrew. 2012. The surfeit of the stimulus: Analytical biases filter lexical statistics in Turkish laryngial alternations, Language 87(1): 84-125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bishop, Dorothy V.M. & Bishop, S.J. 1998. “Twin Language” A risk factor for language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 41: 150-160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breslau, Naomi, Chilcoat, Howard D., DelDotto, Jerel & Andreski, Patricia. 1996. Low birth weight and neurocognitive status at six years of age. Biological Psychiatry 40: 389–397. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breslau, Naomi, Chilcoat, Howard D., Johnson, Eric O., Andreski, Patricia & Lucia, Victoria C. 2000. Neurologic soft signs and low birthweight: Their association and neuropsychiatric implications. Biological Psychiatry 47: 71–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Briscoe, Josie, Gathercole, Susan E. & Marlow, Neil. 1998. Short-term memory and language outcomes after extreme prematurity at birth. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research 41: 654–666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 1995. Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10: 425-455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Phonology and Language Use [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 94]. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conway, Dorice, Lytton, Hugh & Pysh, Fred. 1980. Twin-singleton language differences. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science 12(3): 264-271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomksy, Noam & Halle, Morris. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Dale, Philip S., Dionne, Ginette, Eley, Thalia C. & Plomin, Robert. 2000. Lexical and grammatical development: A behavioural genetic perspective. Journal of Child Language 27(3): 619-642. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, Edith A. 1937. The development of linguistic skill in twins, singletons, and sibs, and only children from 5-10. University of Minnesota Institute of Child Welfare, Monograph 14.
Dodd, Barbara & McEvoy, Sandra. 1994. Twin language or phonological disorder? Journal of Child Language 21: 273-189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekmekçi, F. Özden. 1979. Acquisition of Turkish: A Longitudinal Study on the Early Language Development of a Turkish Child. PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
Erguvanlı-Taylan, Eser. 2015. The Phonology and Morphology of Turkish. Istanbul: Boğaziçi University Press.Google Scholar
. 2011. Is there evidence for a voicing rule in Turkish? In Puzzles of Language: Essays in Honor of Karl Zimmer, Eser Erguvanlı-Taylan & Bengisu Rona (eds), 71-93. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Ganger, Jennifer. 2003. Twins and language development: An overview. <[URL]>
Gathercole, Mueller Virginia C. 2007. Miami and North Wales, so far and yet so near: A constructivist account of morphosyntactic development in bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 10(3): 224-247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guarini, Annalisa, Sansavini, Allesandra, Fabbri, Christina, Savini, Silvia, Alessandroni, Rosina, Faldella, Giacomo & Karmiloff-Smith, Annette. 2010. Long-term effects of preterm birth on language and literacy at eight years. Journal of Child Language 37(4): 865-885. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guyer, Bernard, Freedman, Mary Anne, Strobino, Donna M. & Sondik, Edward J. 1999. Annual summary for vital statistics. Pediatrics 104. 1229–1246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris & Mohanan, Karuvannur P. 1985. Segmental phonology of Modern English. Linguistic Inquiry 16: 57–116.Google Scholar
Hay, David A. & O’Brien, Pauline J. 1983. The La Trobe study: A genetic approach to the structure and development of cognition in twin children. Child Development, 54, 317–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hediger, Mary L., Overpeck, Mary D., Ruan, W. June & Troendle, James F. 2002. Birthweight and gestational age effects on motor and social development. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 16: 33–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmgren, Per A. & Hogberg, Ulf. 2001. The very preterm infant- a population-based study. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 80: 525–531. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Charlotte L., Johnson, A. & Hope, P.L. 2001. Educational and behavioural problems in babies of 32 –35 weeks gestation. Archives of Disease in Childhood - Fetal Neonatal Edition 88(1): F23-F28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon. 2011. Another look at velar deletion in Turkish. In Puzzles of Language: Essays in Honor of Karl Zimmer, Eser Erguvanlı-Taylan & Bengisu Rona (eds), 37-53. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon, Küntay, Aylin, Lowe, J., Orgun, C. Orhan & Sprouse, Rex. 2000. Turkish Electronic Living Lexicon (TELL). <[URL]>Google Scholar
Inkelas, Sharon & Orgun, C. Orhan. 1995. Level ordering and economy in the lexical phonology of Turkish. Language 71: 763-793. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jennische, Margareta & Sedin, Gunnar. 1999. Speech and language skills in children who required neonatal intensive care. II. Linguistic skills at 6 1/2 years of age. Acta Paediatrica 88: 371–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaisse, Ellen. 1986. Locating Turkish Devoicing. In WCCFL 5: The Proceedings of the Fifth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Mary Dalrymple, Jeffrey Goldberg, Kristin Hanson, Michael Inman, Christoper Piñon & Stephen Wechsler (eds), 119-128. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Kallestinova, Elena. 2004. Voice and aspiration of stops in Turkish. In Folia Linguistica 38: Special Issue on Voice, Grzegorz Dogil (ed.), 117–143. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ketrez, F. Nihan. 2011. A case study on the acquisition of Turkish by identical twins: 4 boys, 2 languages and 2 stories of language delay. Social Science Seminar Talk, Koç University, İstanbul. December 26.
. 2015. Acquisition of Turkish alongside a secret twin language. In Ankara Papers: Turkish and Turkic Linguistics [Turcologia 103], Deniz Zeyrek, D., Çiğdem Sağın-Şimşek, Ufuk Ataş & Jochen Rehbein (eds), 247-256. Wiesbaden: Harrowitz.Google Scholar
. 2012. Okul öncesi dil gelişimi ve ikizlerin özel durumu. In Türkçe’nin Eğitimi Öğretimi Üzerine Çalışmalar, Engin Yılmaz, Mehmet Gedizli, Erdal Özcan & Yonca Koçmar (Eds), 120-127. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.Google Scholar
. 2014a. Acquisition of an agglutinating language by twins vs. singletons. International Association of the Study of Child Language conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, July.
. 2014b. Word size in the acquisition of Turkish: Twins vs. Singletons. Paper presented at the 17th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, University of Rouen, Rouen, France. September.
Ketrez, F. Nihan, Kamiloğlu, Funda, Özkul, Aslı & Yıldız, Esra. 2015. Early vocabulary size: Twins vs. Singletons. In Ankara Papers: Turkish and Turkic linguistics [Turcologia 103], Deniz Zeyrek, D., Çiğdem Sağın-Şimşek, Ufuk Ataş & Jochen Rehbein (eds), 257-265. Wiesbaden: Harrowitz.Google Scholar
Koch, Helen L. 1966. Twins and Twin Relations. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kopkallı, Handan. 1993. A Phonetic and Phonological Analysis of Final Devoicing in Turkish. PhD dissertation, University of Michigan.
Lees, Robert. 1961. The Phonology of Modern Standard Turkish [Uralic and Altaic Series 6]. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Publications.Google Scholar
Luoma, Laila, Herrgard, Eila A., Martikainen, Anneli & Ahonen, Timo. 1998. Speech and language development of children born at < or = 32 weeks’ gestation: A5-year prospective follow-up study. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 40 380–387. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Low, James A., Hanley-Derry, Mark H., Burke, Sharon O., Peters, Ray D., Pater, Elizabeth A., Killen, Helen L. & Derrick, E. Jane. 1992. Association of intrauterine fetal growth retardation and learning deficits at 9 to 11 years of age. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 167: 1499–1505. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lytton, Hugh, Conway, Dorice & Suave, Reginald. 1977. The impact of twinship on parent–child interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35: 97–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 2000. The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk, 2 vols, 3rd edn. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Marcus, Gary F., Pinker, Steven, Ullman, Michael, Hollander, Michelle, Rosen, T. John & Xu, Fei. 1992. Overgeneralization in Language Acquisition. Monographs for the Society for Research in Child Development 57(4). Serial no 228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McClelland, James L. & Patterson, Karalyn. 2002. Rules or connections in pasttense inflections: What does the evidence rule out? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6(11): 465–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mittler, Peter. 1969. Genetic aspects of psycholinguistic abilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 10: 165–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1970. Biological and social aspects of language development in twins. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 12: 741–757. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1976. Language development in young twins: Biological, genetic, and social aspects. Acta Geneticae Medicae Gemellologiae 25: 359–365.Google Scholar
Mogford, Kay. 1993. Language development in twins. In Language Development in Exceptional Circumstances, Dorothy Bishop & Kay Mogford (eds), 80-95. New York NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Nakipoğlu, Mine & Üntak, Aslı. 2006. What does the acquisition of stems that undergo phonological alternation reveal about rule application? Paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics , Uppsala, Sweden.
Nicoladis, Elena, Palmer, Andrea & Marentette, Paula. 2007. The role of type and token frequency in using past tense morphemes correctly. Developmental Science 10(2): 237–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Özçakar, Z. Birsin, Sahin, Figen, Beyazova, Ufuk & Soysal, Sebnem. 2003. Physical and mental development of Turkish twins. Pediatrics International 45: 712–718. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paradis, Johanne, Nicoladis, Elena, Crago, Martha & Genesee, Fred. 2010. Bilingual children’s acquisition of the past tense: A Usage-Based Approach. Journal of Child Language 38(3): 554 -578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petrova, Olga, Plapp, Rosemary, Ringen, Catherine & Szentgyörgyi, Szilárd. 2006. Voice and aspiration: Evidence from Russian, Hungarian, German, Swedish, and Turkish. Linguistic Review 23: 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, Steven. 1991. Rules of language. Science 253: 530-535 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, Steven & Ullman, Michael T. 2002. The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6(11): 456–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pöchtrager, Markus A. 2013. k-Ø and what phonology can do. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi 1: 87-109.Google Scholar
Reznick, J. Steven. 1997. Intelligence, language, nature and nurture in young twins. In Intelligence, Heredity and Environment, Robert J. Sternberg & Elena L. Grigorenko (eds), 483–504. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Rooney, Rosanna, Hay, David & Levy, Florence. 2003. Small for gestational age as a predictor of behavioral and learning problems in twins. Twin Research 6: 46–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rumelhart, David E. & McClelland, James L. 1986. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rutter, Michael & Redshaw, Jane. 1991. Growing up as a twin: Twin-singleton differences in Psychological development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines 32: 885–895. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rutter, Michael, Thorpe, Karen, Greenwood, Rosemary, Northstone, Kate & Golding, Jean. 2003. Twins as a natural experiment to study the causes of mild language delay: I: design; twin–singleton differences in language, and obstetric risks. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 44: 326–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sezer, Engin. 1981. The k/Ø alternation in Turkish. In Harvard Studies in Phonology, George N. Clements (ed.) 354-382. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
Slobin, Dan I. 1985. The Cross-linguistic Study of Language Acquisition, Vol.1. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Stafford, Laura. 1987. Maternal input to twin and singleton children: Implications for language acquisition. Human Communication Research 13: 429–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, Marguerite B., Roach, Mary A., Leavitt, Lewis A., Miller, John F. & Chapman, Robin S. 1988. Early receptive and productive language skills in pre-term and full-term 8-month-old infants. Journal of Psycholinguist Research 17(2): 169–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, H. Gerry, Klein, Nancy K. & Hack, Maureen. 2000. School-age consequences of birth weight less than 750 g: A review and update. Developmental Neuropsychology 17: 289-321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, H. Gerry, Klein, Nancy K, Minich, Nori M. & Hack, Maureen. 2000a. Middle-school-age outcomes in children with very low birth weight. Child Development 71: 1495–1511. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, H. Gerry, Klein, Nancy K., Minich, Nori M. & Hack, Maureen. 2000b. Verbal memory deficits in children with less than 750 g birth weight. Child Neuropsychology 6: 49–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thorpe, Karen, Greenwood, Rosemary, Eivers, Areana & Rutter, Michael. 2001. Prevalence and development course of “secret language.” International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders 36: 43-62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thorpe, Karen, Rutter, Michael & Greenwood, Rosemary. 2003. Twins as a natural experiment to study the Causes of mild language delay, II: Family interaction risk factors. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines 44: 342–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, Michael, Mannle, Sara & Kruger, Ann C. 1986. Linguistic environment of 1- to 2-year-old twins. Developmental Psychology 22: 169–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Topbaş, Seyhun & Kopkallı-Yavuz, Handan. 1997. The onset of a linguistic system: Is there evidence from the acquisition of final devoicing in Turkish? In Proceedings of GALA ’97 Conference on Language Acquisition, A. Caroline Heycock & Richard Skillcock (eds), 284-289. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Walther, Frans J. 1988. Growth and development of term disproportionate small-for-gestational age infants at the age of 7 years. Early Human Development 18: 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xu, Fei. & Pinker, Steven. 1995. Weird past tense forms. Journal of Child Language 22: 531–556. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, Charles D. 2002. Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 2004. Universal grammar, statistics or both? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8(10): 451-456. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. For and againts frequencies. Journal of Child Language 42(2): 287-293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zimmer, Karl & Abbott, Barbara. 1978. The k/Ø alternation in Turkish: Some experimental evidence for its productivity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 7: 35-46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Ketrez, F. Nihan
2017. Chapter 7. Sibling influence on morphological development?. In Social Environment and Cognition in Language Development [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 21], ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.