Negative evidence in language acquisition

@article{Marcus1993NegativeEI,
  title={Negative evidence in language acquisition},
  author={Gary F. Marcus},
  journal={Cognition},
  year={1993},
  volume={46},
  pages={53-85}
}
  • G. Marcus
  • Published 1993
  • Medicine, Psychology
  • Cognition
Whether children require "negative evidence" (i.e., information about which strings of words are not grammatical sentences) to eliminate their ungrammatical utterances is a central question in language acquisition because, lacking negative evidence, a child would require internal mechanisms to unlearn grammatical errors. Several recent studies argue that parents provide noisy feedback, that is, certain discourse patterns that differ in frequency depending on the grammaticality of children's… Expand

Figures, Tables, and Topics from this paper

Negative Evidence on Negative Evidence.
In the course of development, children may at times adopt grammars that appear to be overgeneral with respect to the language they are acquiring. For example, children learning English may alternateExpand
Language Learning From Positive Evidence, Reconsidered: A Simplicity-Based Approach
TLDR
This study reviews recent formal results showing that the learner has sufficient data to learn successfully from positive evidence, if it favors the simplest encoding of the linguistic input. Expand
An ANN model of anaphora: implications for nativism
It is widely believed that acquisition of language involves the formation of successive hypotheses about the adult grammar, and the testing and modification of them with reference to the data. If aExpand
Negative evidence and negative feedback: immediate effects on the grammaticality of child speech
Until recently, a long-standing assumption in the field of child language acquisition research was that parents do not correct the grammatical errors of their children. While consensus now existsExpand
Language acquisition in the absence of explicit negative evidence: how important is starting small?
It is commonly assumed that innate linguistic constraints are necessary to learn a natural language, based on the apparent lack of explicit negative evidence provided to children and on Gold's proofExpand
The Contrast Theory of negative input.
  • M. Saxton
  • Psychology, Medicine
  • Journal of child language
  • 1997
TLDR
Within the Contrast Theory of negative input, an alternative definition of negative evidence is offered, based on the idea that the unique discourse structure created in the juxtaposition of child error and adult correct form can reveal to the child the contrast, or conflict, between the two forms, and hence provide a basis for rejecting the erroneous form. Expand
Differential Use of Implicit Negative Evidence in Generative and Discriminative Language Learning
TLDR
It is shown that these two learning approaches differ in their use of implicit negative evidence – the absence of a sentence – when learning verb alternations, and that human learners can produce results consistent with the predictions of both approaches, depending on how the learning problem is presented. Expand
Negative Evidence on Negative Evidence
Previous work has shown that recasts may be contingent responses to children's early ungrammatically. On this basis, it has been claimed that recasts provide negative evidence, thereby offsetting theExpand
Sampling Assumptions Affect Use of Indirect Negative Evidence in Language Learning
TLDR
It is demonstrated in a series of artificial language learning experiments that adults can produce behavior consistent with both sets of sampling assumptions, depending on how the learning problem is presented, and suggests that people use information about the way in which linguistic input is sampled to guide their learning. Expand
How Do Children Restrict Their Linguistic Generalizations? An (Un-)Grammaticality Judgment Study
TLDR
Independent ratings of the extent to which verbs instantiate the semantic properties characteristic of a hypothesized semantic cryptotype for un- prefixation were a significant positive predictor of acceptability, for all age groups. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 50 REFERENCES
Limits on negative information in language input.
TLDR
Examining parental responses to inflectional over-regularizations and wh-question auxiliary-verb omission errors in the sets of transcripts from Adam, Eve and Sarah found that negative feedback may occasionally be available, but the contention that language input generally incorporates negative information appears to be unfounded. Expand
The issue of negative evidence: Adult responses to children's language errors.
This study was designed to assess one of the major assumptions of current language learning theories: Adults ignore children's speech errors. We observed both parents (n = 16) and nonparent adults (nExpand
Structure dependence in grammar formation
Action NP's 26 24 2 Expletive NP's 41 36 5 Controls 41 38 3 TABLE 7. Frequency of correct and incorrect responses by sentence type. Returning to the results of the pretest, the first observation isExpand
Positive evidence for negative evidence
The topic of 'negative evidence', i.e., of linguistic corrections, is focused upon. Its denial in the recent literature is briefly documented and various dimensions of this denial are specified.Expand
The child's trigger experience: Degree-0 learnability
According to a “selective” (as opposed to “instructive”) model of human language capacity, people come to know more than they experience. The discrepancy between experience and eventual capacity (theExpand
Overregularization in language acquisition.
TLDR
The traditional account in which memory operates before rules cannot be replaced by a connectionist alternative in which a single network displays rotelike or rulelike behavior in response to changes in input statistics, and a simple explanation is proposed. Expand
Feedback to first language learners: the role of repetitions and clarification questions.
TLDR
Research was expanded by broadening the definition of ‘negative feedback’ and by describing individual styles of mother–child dialogues to investigate whether mothers of four 2-year-old children responded differentially to their children's well-formed or ill-formed utterances with explicit and implicit feedback. Expand
Brown & Hanlon revisited: mothers' sensitivity to ungrammatical forms.
TLDR
Focusing on repetitions, it is found that mothers are more inclined to repeat ungrammatical than grammatical sentences generated by 2- year-old subjects, indicating that the language learning environment does present subtle cues that distinguish between well-formed and ill-formed sentences. Expand
No negative evidence revisited: Beyond learnability or who has to prove what to whom.
Gordon (1990), in his commentary on Bohannon and Stanowicz (1988), argued that (a) the originalGold (1967) learnability proof bears little relevance for innateness of language, (b) the BohannonandExpand
Learnability and Feedback
Bohannon and Stanowicz (1988) have claimed that contrary to popular belief, children do receive negative evidence about the ungrammaticality of their utterances in the form of recasts, expansions,Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...