Pragmatics, Metalanguage, and Addressee-Uptake in Language Acquisition

这个项目着眼于儿童引语中包含的关于单词和词义的元语言方向，以及它们被儿童所接受的情况。元语言的指向可以是显性的，比如为一个范畴提供一个术语(`这是一只松鼠‘)，也可以是隐式的，比如说话者假设受话人可以推断出目标指代(`给我拿汤匙’)。明确和含蓄的指示都可以用来向儿童介绍新的术语，并在儿童提出不适当或不够具体的术语时提供补救。这里的理论问题是1；6到5；0岁的儿童在多大程度上被提供并可以在他们的单词学习中使用这种元语言方向。识别儿童可以获得和使用的语用信息提供了一种替代基于单词习得限制的建议。这些研究既是观察性的，也是实验性的。在观察性研究中，我们将分析实际使用的元语言方向的范围，并检查它们用于引入不同词类成员(例如，名词、动词和介词)以及不同语义关系(例如，包含、部分)的一致性。我们还将研究(从儿童的使用中)吸收的证据，以及它与所使用的元语言方向类型的关系。在实验研究中，我们详细考察了成年人被要求教授不同词类的单词(例如，名词、形容词和动词)时，他们在元语言方向上使用的形式范围。我们还考察了儿童理解显性指导和隐性指导之间的差异的能力，这些指导既用于引入新术语，也用于修正已在考虑的术语。最后，我们考察了当成年人在一个不熟悉的领域教授其他成年人新术语时，是否使用了相同的元语言方向范围。这些研究将使我们能够确定(A)元语言方向从显性到隐性的形式连续体的程度，以及从隐性方向到归纳的连续体；(B)某些词类中的词是否可以被教授，而另一些词类中的词必须被诱导(例如，名词和动词与介词)；(C)成年人是否倾向于特定词类的特定类型的元语言方向(例如，与动词相比，专有名词是否通常以显性方向提供)，以及(D)根据儿童的吸收情况，不同的元语言形式对单词学习的效果如何。

This project looks at the METALANGUAGE DIRECTIONS about words and word meanings contained in child directed speech, and at their UPTAKE by children. Metalanguage directions may be explicit, as in the provision of a term for a category (`That's a squirrel`) or implicit, as when the speaker assumes the addressee can infer the identify the target referent (`Bring me the soup spoon`). Both explicit and implicit directions can be used to introduce children to new terms and to offer repairs when children come up with terms that are inappropriate or not specific enough. The theoretical issue here is the extent to which children aged 1;6 to 5;0 are offered and can make use of such metalanguage directions in their word learning. Identification of the pragmatic information available to and usable by you ng children offers an alternative to proposals based on constraints on word acquisition. The studies are both observational and experimental. In the observational studies, we will analyze the range of metalanguage directions actually used, and examine the consistency with which they serve to introduce members of different word classes (e.g., nouns vs verbs vs prepositions) as well as different semantic relations (e.g., inclusion, part of). We will also look at evidence for uptake (from children's usage) and its relation to the type of metalanguage direction used. In the experimental studies, we examine in detail the range of forms adults make use of in their metalanguage directions when they are asked to teach words from different word classes (e.g., nouns vs adjectives vs verbs). We also look at children's ability to understand differences between explicit and implicit directions used both to introduce new terms and to repair terms already under consideration. Lastly, we look at whether the same range of metalanguage directions is used when adults teach other adults new terms in an unfamiliar domain. These studies will allow us to establish (a) the extent to which there is a continuum of forms for metalanguage directions, from explicit to implicit, and also a continuum from implicit directions to inductions; (b) whether words in some word classes can be taught while others must be induced (e.g., nouns and verbs vs prepositions); (c) whether adults favor particular kinds of metalanguage directions for particular word classes (e.g., whether proper nouns are typically offered in explicit directions, compared to verbs, say, in implicit ones), and (d) how effective different metalanguage forms are for word learning, as measured by child uptake.