foundations of verb learning: labels promote action category formation shannon m. pruden & kathy...
TRANSCRIPT
Foundations of Verb Learning: Labels Promote Action Category
Formation
Shannon M. Pruden & Kathy Hirsh-Pasek
Temple University
Early Verb Learning: The Research
Verbs are difficult to learn (Gentner, 1982; Gillette, et al., 1999; Imai et al., 2003; Meyer et al., 2003).
Paradox: Verbs appear in children’s earliest vocabularies (Choi, 1998; Choi & Bowerman, 1991; Fenson, et al., 1994; Nelson, 1989; Tardif, 1996).
Why are verbs difficult to learn?
Prerequisites for Learning Verbs
1. The conceptualization of actions and events.
2. The mapping of words to these actions and events.
Gentner & Boroditsky, 2001
1. Pay attention to actions.
2. Form categories of these actions.
3. Map words to these actions.
Golinkoff et al., 2002
Why are Verbs Difficult to Learn?
A mapping problem?
ORLack of conceptual
knowledge?
Most of what has been done on verbs…
Early production of relational terms Choi & Bowerman, 1991
Choi & Gopnik, 1995 Tardif, 1996
Mapping relational terms onto actions and events Choi, et al., 1999
Maguire, et al., 2003 Naigles, 1996
Little research addresses the question of whether infants have the conceptual
knowledge needed to learn verbs.
Prerequisites for Learning Verbs
1. The conceptualization of actions and events.
2. The mapping of words to these actions and events.
Gentner & Boroditsky, 2001
1. Pay attention to actions.
2. Form categories of these actions.
3. Map words to these actions.
Golinkoff et al., 2002
Conceptual Prerequisites in Place?
Some speculate that conceptual prerequisites are in place at an early age.
“relations…are, I suspect, perceived quite early…it is not perceiving relations but packaging and lexicalizing them that is difficult” (Gentner & Boroditsky, 2001, p.326)
“vocabulary acquisition in the real case may reduce mainly to a mapping problem” (Snedeker & Gleitman, 2004, p. 280)
“the young child’s conceptual repertoire may be rich and varied enough from the start…” (Snedeker & Gleitman, 2004, p. 261).
Semantic Components that Relational Terms Encode
Spatial Expressions Containment
Support
Degree of Fit
Motion Verbs Path
Manner
Result
Languages package these components in different ways
Slobin, 2001; Talmy, 1985
Semantic Components that Relational Terms Encode
Spatial Expressions Containment
Support
Degree of Fit
Motion Verbs Path
Manner
Result
Path and Manner in Motion Verbs
Focus on path and manner:(1) Universally codified in languages across world.
Jackendoff, 1983; Langacker, 1987; Talmy, 1985
(2) They are treated differently across languages.Slobin, 2001; Talmy, 1985
English - Manner encoded in verb; path encoded in preposition.
Spanish - Path encoded in verb; manner encoded in adverb (optionally).
(3) Path may be conceptual primitive needed for learning motion verbs.
Mandler, 2004
Early Event Perception
Are infants able to” decompose scenes into constituent parts relevant to linguistic expressions in language?”
(Clark, 2003, p. 168)
Discriminating Path and Manner
14-month-olds discriminate path and manner. Low vocab. infants:more attention to changes in path High vocab. infants: more attention to changes in
manner
7-month-olds discriminate path and mannerPulverman
et al. (2003; 2004)
10-month-olds discriminate path and manner More naturalistic events with humans.
Casasola, Hohenstein, & Naigles (2003)
Categorization of Actions
Can infants form categories of actions?
“words…refer to categories of objects and events, or properties of these things.”
Oakes & Rakison (2003)
Therefore, motion verbs label categories of actions and events rather than single events.
For example, “running”
· “Running” is considered the same
action whether
performed by Carl Lewis or
Grandma.
Finding the Invariant Path and Manner in Motion Events
Can infants abstract the invariant action within a motion event?
Pruden, et al. (2004)
Infants (7 - 15 months) familiarized to events from the same category. Same path across multiple exemplars of manner
(Path Study)
Same manner across multiple exemplars of path (Manner Study)
Path Study: Familiarization Trials
Four familiarization trials Importantly - no linguistic stimuli accompanied
events
Vary manner across same path Example, “Around”
Bend Around Twist Around Spin Around Toe Touch Around
Path Study: Test Trials
“Flap Around”Novel Manner, Familiar Path
In-category event
“Flap Past”Novel Manner, Novel Path
Out-of-category event
Results
Can infants find the invariant action?
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
Path Manner
Novelty Preference Score (%)
7- to 9-months
10- to 12-months
13- to 15-months
Summary: Finding the Invariant Action 10-month-olds were able to find invariant path
across varying manners.
13-month-olds were able to find invariant manner across varying paths.
Path to manner developmental progression
There is a group of infant in both studies who do not find the invariant action.
· 7- to 9-month-olds
Conceptual prerequisites to learn verbs may be in place early in life
The next step in learning verbs…Adding language to non-verbal scene
What effect might language have on the processing of
these non-linguistic scenes?
Two Possibilities
Adding language increases complexity of the task and may hinder category formation
(Stager & Werker, 1997)
Adding language facilitates category formation
(Balaban & Waxman, 1997; Waxman & Markow, 1995)
To our knowledge, only one study has added language to an event categorization task…
Spatial Categorization and Labels
10- to 18-month-olds: no abstract spatial category of “on” (Casasola & Cohen, 2002)
Can a linguistic label facilitate infants’ spatial categorization of support relations?(Casasola, 2005)
Linguistic label helped infants form an abstract category of “on”
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressorare needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressorare needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressorare needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressorare needed to see this picture.
Loose-fit
support
Tight-fit
support
“ON”
Expanding on Casasola…
1. Exploring categorization of events based on path and manner.
2. Testing pre-verbal infants
The Present Studies
Our Paradigm
Preferential Looking Paradigm: forced-choice split-screen
(Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff, 1996)
Dependent Variable: Looking Time
Novel, easily manipulated and controlled stimuli
Stimuli Across Studies
6 Paths Over Under Past Around Behind In Front
6 Manners Flap Spin Twist Side Bend Bend Forward Toe-Touch
General Method
Introduction
Salience Trials
Four Familiarization Trials
Test Trials
All trials are 12 s
Introduction Trial
· Purpose: To ensure infants look to both sides
Salience Trial
Purpose To show that infants do not have any a priori
preferences for test events.
What they see Two clips simultaneously. Same clips they see at test.
Assumption Infants will not have a preference for either
clip.
Familiarization Trials
Four exemplars of the category are shown.
Trials are separated by attention-getter: Picture of a baby Accompanied by music
QuickTime™ and aRadius SoftDV™ - NTSC decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Test Trials
Test trials Two clips shown simultaneously In-category event (familiar exemplar) Out-of-category event (novel exemplar)
Predictions Infants who can find the invariant action
will show a preference for one of these clips.
Predictions
No salience preference for test clips will be found
Infants will show increased attention during familiarization Labels heighten attention (ala. Baldwin & Markman,
1989 with objects)
Labeling will help infants abstract the invariant path or manner
Study 1: Do Labels Help Infants Abstract the Invariant Path?
24 7- to 9-month-olds
Mono-lingual English-speaking homes.
All infants full-term births.
Equal numbers of males and females.
Participants
Familiarization Trials
Four familiarization trials Same stimuli/design as Pruden et al. (2004)
Vary manner across same path Example, “Under”
During each familiarization trial, they hear novel verb “javing” 4 times.
Spin under Toe touch under Side bend under Flap under
Salience/Test Trials
Starry “Twist Under”
Novel Manner, Familiar PathIn-category event
Starry “Twist Over”
Novel Manner, Novel PathOut-of-category event
8-month-old infant
Results: Salience Preference
Is there a salience preference?
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
Study
Novelty Preference
Score (%)
PathManner
Results: Enhanced Attention
Results: Finding the Invariant Path
DOES A LABEL HELP CHILDREN ABSTRACT THE INVARIANT ACTION?
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
PATH STUDY MANNER STUDY
Novelty Preference Score (%)
LABELNO LABEL
Summary: Path Study
Our Predictions No Salience Preference
Increased attention during familiarization
Label facilitates finding the invariant path
Our Results No Salience Preference
No increase in attention during familiarization
Label facilitates finding the invariant path
Study 2: Do Labels Help Infants Abstract the Invariant Manner?
24 7- to 9-month-olds
Mono-lingual English-speaking homes.
All infants full-term births.
Equal numbers of males and females.
Participants
Familiarization Trials
Four familiarization trials Same stimuli/design as Pruden et al. (2004)
Vary path across same manner Example, “Twist”
During each familiarization trial, they hear novel verb “javing” 4 times.
Twist around Twist in front Twist over Twist Past
Salience/Test Trials
“Twist Under”Familiar Manner, Novel Path
In-category event
“Toe Touch Under”
Novel Manner, Novel PathOut-of-category event
Results: Salience Preference
Is there a salience preference?
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
Study
Novelty Preference
Score (%)
PathManner
Results: Enhanced Attention
DOES A LABEL INCREASE ATTENTION?
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
PATH STUDY MANNER STUDY
Average looking time during familiarization (sec)
LABEL
NO LABEL
Results: Finding the Invariant Manner
DOES A LABEL HELP CHILDREN ABSTRACT THE INVARIANT ACTION?
0.45
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
PATH STUDY MANNER STUDY
Novelty Preference Score (%)
LABELNO LABEL
Summary: Manner Study
Our Predictions No Salience Preference
Increased attention during familiarization
Label facilitates finding the invariant manner
Our Results No Salience Preference
Increased attention during familiarization
Label provides no facilitative effect in finding invariant manner
What does all of this mean?
These studies showInfants can abstract the invariant actions
that are encoded in relational terms, like motion verbs
Labels help infants find invariant actions
Developmental ProgressionPath first, then manner
What are labels doing? Auditory stimulation enhances attention to objects
(Baldwin & Markman, 1989; Roberts & Jacob, 1991)
Labels invite categorization(Balaban & Waxman, 1997; Waxman & Markow, 1995)
Labels highlight similarities and promote comparison
(Gentner & Namy, 1999; Lowenstein & Gentner, 2005)
Is there anything special about a label?Tone studyComplex musical melodies study
Future Studies: Role of Comparison
Comparison helpful in categorization, learning new adjectives and verbs. (Childers, in press; Gentner & Namy, 2000;
Oakes & Ribar, 2004; Waxman & Klibanoff, 2000)
Active comparison of actions - promote abstraction of invariant actions?
Current Studies Sequential familiarization Next Study
Simultaneous familiarization
Future Studies - Trends
Path then manner developmental trend
Would 10- to 12-month-olds use a label to find the invariant manner?
Would we see cross-linguistic differences in our studies?14- to 17-month-old Spanish-speaking infants show
same developmental pattern as English-speaking infants in discrimination task.
What about abstracting the invariant action?
Future Studies: Individual Differences
Individual differences in performance Some children did not
show a novelty preference
Do individual differences predict later language development?
Path Study with Label: 7- to 9-month-olds
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Novelty Preference Score (%)
Acknowledgements…
Thanks to all the parents and children who participated in these studies at the Temple Infant Lab.
Meredith Jones
Natalie Sheridan
Gwen Albertson
Dr. Roberta
Golinkoff
QUESTIONS?
For information contact:
Shannon Pruden [email protected]
Visit my website at: astro.temple.edu/~spruden