Negative evidence in language acquisition

Gary Marcus

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

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 utterances. However, no one has explicitly discussed how children could use noisy feedback, and I show that noisy feedback is unlikely to be necessary for language learning because (a) if noisy feedback exists it is too weak: a child would have to repeat a given sentence verbatim at least 85 times to decide with reasonable certainty that it is ungrammatical; (b) no kind of noisy feedback is provided to all children at all ages for all types of errors; and (c) noisy feedback may be an artifact of defining parental reply categories relative to the child's utterance. For example, because nearly all parental speech is grammatical, exact repetitions (verbatim repetitions of child utterances) necessarily follow more of children's grammatical utterances than their ungrammatical utterances. There is no evidence that noisy feedback is required for language learning, or even that noisy feedback exists. Thus internal mechanisms are necessary to account for the unlearning of ungrammatical utterances.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)53-85
Number of pages33
JournalCognition
Volume46
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 1993

Fingerprint

language acquisition
Language
evidence
Learning
Negative Evidence
Language Acquisition
language
Utterance
Artifacts
learning
artifact
parents
Parents
discourse

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Negative evidence in language acquisition. / Marcus, Gary.

In: Cognition, Vol. 46, No. 1, 1993, p. 53-85.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Marcus, Gary. / Negative evidence in language acquisition. In: Cognition. 1993 ; Vol. 46, No. 1. pp. 53-85.
@article{28fca0c2da854ff3af105b2a32514124,
title = "Negative evidence in language acquisition",
abstract = "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 utterances. However, no one has explicitly discussed how children could use noisy feedback, and I show that noisy feedback is unlikely to be necessary for language learning because (a) if noisy feedback exists it is too weak: a child would have to repeat a given sentence verbatim at least 85 times to decide with reasonable certainty that it is ungrammatical; (b) no kind of noisy feedback is provided to all children at all ages for all types of errors; and (c) noisy feedback may be an artifact of defining parental reply categories relative to the child's utterance. For example, because nearly all parental speech is grammatical, exact repetitions (verbatim repetitions of child utterances) necessarily follow more of children's grammatical utterances than their ungrammatical utterances. There is no evidence that noisy feedback is required for language learning, or even that noisy feedback exists. Thus internal mechanisms are necessary to account for the unlearning of ungrammatical utterances.",
author = "Gary Marcus",
year = "1993",
doi = "10.1016/0010-0277(93)90022-N",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "53--85",
journal = "Cognition",
issn = "0010-0277",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Negative evidence in language acquisition

AU - Marcus, Gary

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - 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 utterances. However, no one has explicitly discussed how children could use noisy feedback, and I show that noisy feedback is unlikely to be necessary for language learning because (a) if noisy feedback exists it is too weak: a child would have to repeat a given sentence verbatim at least 85 times to decide with reasonable certainty that it is ungrammatical; (b) no kind of noisy feedback is provided to all children at all ages for all types of errors; and (c) noisy feedback may be an artifact of defining parental reply categories relative to the child's utterance. For example, because nearly all parental speech is grammatical, exact repetitions (verbatim repetitions of child utterances) necessarily follow more of children's grammatical utterances than their ungrammatical utterances. There is no evidence that noisy feedback is required for language learning, or even that noisy feedback exists. Thus internal mechanisms are necessary to account for the unlearning of ungrammatical utterances.

AB - 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 utterances. However, no one has explicitly discussed how children could use noisy feedback, and I show that noisy feedback is unlikely to be necessary for language learning because (a) if noisy feedback exists it is too weak: a child would have to repeat a given sentence verbatim at least 85 times to decide with reasonable certainty that it is ungrammatical; (b) no kind of noisy feedback is provided to all children at all ages for all types of errors; and (c) noisy feedback may be an artifact of defining parental reply categories relative to the child's utterance. For example, because nearly all parental speech is grammatical, exact repetitions (verbatim repetitions of child utterances) necessarily follow more of children's grammatical utterances than their ungrammatical utterances. There is no evidence that noisy feedback is required for language learning, or even that noisy feedback exists. Thus internal mechanisms are necessary to account for the unlearning of ungrammatical utterances.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027345375&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027345375&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90022-N

DO - 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90022-N

M3 - Article

VL - 46

SP - 53

EP - 85

JO - Cognition

JF - Cognition

SN - 0010-0277

IS - 1

ER -