In a longitudinal study we found that 6- and 10-month-old monolingual Turkish infants are already sensitive to backness vowel harmony in stem-suffix sequences. Using a head-turn paradigm, listening times between 2 vowel-harmonic and 2 vowel-disharmonic lists of words for backness and rounding harmony were compared. While only main effects of age and trial were found for rounding harmony, in backness harmony a significant interaction between harmony and age was found: 6-month-olds preferred listening to harmonic words whereas 10-month-olds preferred listening to disharmonic words. This finding is reminiscent of the “familiarity-to-novelty-shift” in cognitive development, indicating that younger infants first extract the regular, harmonic pattern in their ambient language, whereas older infants’ attention is drawn to irregular, disharmonic tokens, due to violation-of-expectation.
Aksu-Koç, A. & Slobin, D.I.1985. The acquisition of Turkish. In Cross-linguistic Study of Language Acquisition, Vol. 1, D. I. Slobin (ed.), 839–878. Hillsdale NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Altan, A.2009. Acquisition of vowel harmony in Turkish. In 35. yıl Yazıları, N. Büyükkantarcıoğlu & E. Yarar (eds), 9–26. Istanbul: Multilingual Yabancı Dil Yayınları.
Bozşahin, C.2012. Combinatory Linguistics. Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
Clements, G.N. & Sezer, E.1982. Vowel and consonant disharmony in Turkish. In The Structure of Phonological Representations, Part II, H. van der Hulst & N. Smith (eds.), 213–255. Dordrecht: Foris.
Ekmekçi, Ö.1979. Acquisition of Turkish: A Longitudinal Study on the Early Language Development of a Turkish Child. PhD dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
Elman, J.L., Bates, E.A., Johnson, M.H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D. & Plunkett, K.1997. Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
Fisher-Thompson, D. & Peterson, J.A.2004. Infant side biases and familiarity-novelty preferences during a serial paired-comparison task. Infancy 5(3): 309–340.
Göz, İ.2003. Yazılı Türkçenin Kelime Sıklığı Sözlüğü (Dictionary of Word Frequency in Written Turkish). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
Hacıoğlu, M.1994. Vowel harmony in Turkish: Problems with generative and auto-segmental approaches. Dilbilim Araştırmaları, 288–305. Ankara: Hitit Yayınevi.
Heck, R.H., Thomas, S.L. & Tabata, L.N.2014. Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling with IBM SPSS, 2nd edn.. [Quantitative Methodology Series]. London: Routledge.
Houston-Price, C. & Nakai, S.2004. Distinguishing novelty and familiarity effects in infant preference procedures. Infant and Child Development 13: 341–348.
Kabak, B., Maniwa, K. & Kazanina, N.2010. Listeners use vowel harmony and word-final stress to spot nonsense words: A study of Turkish and French. Journal of Laboratory Phonology 1: 207–224.
Kabak, B.2011. Turkish vowel harmony. In The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, M. van Oostendorp, C. Ewen, B. Hume & K. Rice (eds), 2831–2954. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Kabak, B. & Weber, S.2013. Markedness, context, and directionality in Turkish harmony: A corpus study on vowel co-occurrence patterns. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi 1: 53–85.
Kemler Nelson, D.G., Jusczyk, P.W., Mandel, D.R., Myers, J., Turk, A. & Gerken, L.1995. The head-turn preference procedure for testing auditory perception. Infant Behavior and Development 18: 111–116.
Ketrez, F.N.2014. Harmonic cues and speech segmentation: A crosslinguistic study on child-directed speech. Journal of Child Language 41(2): 439–461.
Kimper, W.A.2011. Competing Triggers: Transparency and Opacity in Vowel Harmony. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Kuhl, P.K.2000. A new view of language acquisition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 97: 11850–11857.
Kuhl, P.K.2004. Early language acquisition: Cracking the speech code. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 5: 831–843.
Kuhl, P.K.2010. Brain mechanisms in early language acquisition. Neuron 67(5): 713–727.
Lees, R. (1961). The Phonology of Modern Standard Turkish [Indiana University publications: Uralic and Altaic Series 6]. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Publications.
Miller, J.L. & Eimas, P.D.1983. Studies on the categorization of speech by infants. Cognition 13: 135–165.
Mintz, T. & Walker, R.2006. Infants’ sensitivity to vowel harmony and its role in word segmentation. Paper presented at the LSA, January 7, Albuquerque NM.
Munakata, Y.2000. Challenges to the violation-of-expectation paradıgm: Throwing the conceptual baby out with the perceptual bathwater?Infancy 1(4): 471–477.
Pascalis, O. & de Haan, M.2003. Recognition memory and novelty preference: What model? In Progress in Infancy Research, H. Hayne & J. Fagen (eds.), 95–120. Hillsdale NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Piaget, J.1976. The Grasp of Consciousness: Action and Concept in the Young Child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Pöchtrager, M.2010. Does Turkish diss harmony?Acta Linguistica Hungarica 57(4): 458–473.
Ramscar, M. & Gitcho, N.2007. Developmental change and the nature of learning in children. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11(7): 274–279.
Roder, B.J., Bushnell, E.W. & Sasseville, A.M.2000. Infants’ preferences for familiarity and novelty during the course of visual processing. Infancy 1(4): 491–507.
Rose, S.A., Gottfried, A.W., Melloy-Carminar, P. & Bridger, W.H.1982. Familiarity and novely preferences in infant recognition memory: implications for information processing. Developmental Psychology 18(5): 704–713.
Shinskey, J.L. & Munakata, Y.2010. Something old, something new: A developmental transition from familiarity to novelty preferences with hidden objects. Developmental Science 13: 378–384.
Sirois, S. & Mareschal, D.2004. An interacting systems model of infant habituation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 16(8): 1352–1362.
Snyder, K.A., Blank, M.P. & Marsolek, C.J.2008. What form of memory underlies novelty preferences?Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 15(2): 315–321.
Suomi, K., McQueen, J.M. & Cutler, A.1997. Vowel harmony and speech segmentation in Finnish. Journal of Memory and Language 36: 422–444.
Taylan, E.E.2015. The Phonology and Morphology of Turkish. Istanbul: Boğaziçi University Press.
Trehub, S.E.1976. The discrimination of foreign speech contrasts by infants and adults. Journal of Child Development 47: 466–472.
van Kampen, A., Parmaksız, G., van de Vijver, R. & Höhle, B.2008. Metrical and statistical cues for word segmentation: Vowel harmony and word stress as cues to word boundaries by 6- and 9-month-old Turkish learners. In Language Acquisition and Development, A. Gavarró & M.J. Freitas (eds.), 313–324. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
Werker, J.F. & Tees, R.C.1984. Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development 7: 49–63.
Zimmer, K.E.1967. A note on vowel harmony. International Journal of American Linguistics 33: 166–171.
Zimmer, K.E. & Küntay, A.C.2003. Turkish internal vowel harmony revisited. In Studies in Turkish Linguistics, A.S. Özsoy, D. Akar, M. Nakipoğlu-Demiralp, E. Erguvanlı-Taylan & A. Aksu-Koç (eds.), 27–33. Istanbul: Boğaziçi University Press.
Cited by (6)
Cited by six other publications
Harry van der Hulst & Nancy A. Ritter
2024. The Oxford Handbook of Vowel Harmony,
Özkan, Zeynep G., Berceste Özdemir, Pablo Gómez & Manuel Perea
2024. The distinctive role of vowel harmony in visual word recognition: The case of Turkish. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Güven, Selçuk & Laurence B. Leonard
2023. Verb morphology in Turkish-speaking children with and without DLD: the role of morphophonology. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 37:1 ► pp. 99 ff.
Gervain, Judit
2022. Development of Speech Perception. In Speech Perception [Springer Handbook of Auditory Research, 74], ► pp. 201 ff.
Güven, Selçuk, Naama Friedmann & Claudio Mulatti
2021. Vowel dyslexia in Turkish: A window to the complex structure of the sublexical route. PLOS ONE 16:3 ► pp. e0249016 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 november 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.