Messaggi: 102
Lingua: English
sudanglo (Mostra il profilo) 28 ottobre 2014 13:00:19
Armchair speculation suggests that imitation is likely to precede generation by analogy - the latter requiring a more mature development of the brain.
A lot of IQ tests require a spot the rule or pattern approach to get the right answer, and as a child develops he/she will get more answers right. An 11 year old child will more readily spot the pattern than a 5 year old child.
Of course, the questions is ultimately an empirical one as to the stages of language acquisition in children. The answer must be on the Net somewhere, I should have thought.
Here we go:
Coming back to the question of forms such as "goed", the issue is actually doubly interesting. Why? Because kids seem actually to acquire some irregular past tense forms and use them pretty early. Then, they often seem to "lose" them, coming out with things like "goed". And then, after a while, they start using the correct form again. What's happening? This is what seems to be the case. At first, the child does memorize a form like "went", by hearing it and associating it with some activity and committing it to her or his lexicon. Then, however, the child's grammar gets to a point where a regular "rule" of past tense formation is solidified. At this point, the child over generalizes and applies the rule to the word "go" to get "goed" and this regular pattern overwhelms the irregular form. Finally, the child realizes that "went" is an exception to the past tense rule and again modifies her or his grammar accordingly by marking "go" as a verb that doesn't undergo the regular process of past tense formation and by reactivating "went" as the past form.
A lot of IQ tests require a spot the rule or pattern approach to get the right answer, and as a child develops he/she will get more answers right. An 11 year old child will more readily spot the pattern than a 5 year old child.
Of course, the questions is ultimately an empirical one as to the stages of language acquisition in children. The answer must be on the Net somewhere, I should have thought.
Here we go:
Coming back to the question of forms such as "goed", the issue is actually doubly interesting. Why? Because kids seem actually to acquire some irregular past tense forms and use them pretty early. Then, they often seem to "lose" them, coming out with things like "goed". And then, after a while, they start using the correct form again. What's happening? This is what seems to be the case. At first, the child does memorize a form like "went", by hearing it and associating it with some activity and committing it to her or his lexicon. Then, however, the child's grammar gets to a point where a regular "rule" of past tense formation is solidified. At this point, the child over generalizes and applies the rule to the word "go" to get "goed" and this regular pattern overwhelms the irregular form. Finally, the child realizes that "went" is an exception to the past tense rule and again modifies her or his grammar accordingly by marking "go" as a verb that doesn't undergo the regular process of past tense formation and by reactivating "went" as the past form.
Nephihaha (Mostra il profilo) 29 ottobre 2014 15:17:16
I think a lot of the irregularities are down to ease of pronunciation and/or laziness. There's a reason the most common verbs are the most irregular, they get used so much that they get run together in speech. It's easier to say "fled" than "flee-ed".
Some of them are also fossilisations of old grammar e.g. the ones with internal vowel changes (ate, sat) and pronunciations as well e.g. bought, caught, where the "gh" would once have been pronounced.
Some of them are also fossilisations of old grammar e.g. the ones with internal vowel changes (ate, sat) and pronunciations as well e.g. bought, caught, where the "gh" would once have been pronounced.