Academic Paper |
|
|
|
|
| Title: | Early vocabulary development in Mandarin (Putonghua) and Cantonese |
| Author: | Twila Tardif |
| Institution: | University of Michigan |
| Author: | Paul Fletcher |
| Institution: | University College Cork |
| Author: | Weilan Liang |
| Institution: | Peking University |
| Author: | Niko Kaciroti |
| Institution: | University of Michigan |
| Linguistic Field: | Language Acquisition |
| Subject Language: |
Chinese, Mandarin
|
| Abstract: | Parent report instruments adapted from the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories (CDI) examined vocabulary development in children aged 0 ; 8 to 2 ; 6 for two Chinese languages, Mandarin (n=1694) and Cantonese (n=1625). Parental reports suggested higher overall scores for Mandarin- than for Cantonese-speaking children from approximately 1 ; 4 onward. Factors relevant to the difference were only-child status, monolingual households and caregiver education. In addition to the comparison of vocabulary scores overall, the development of noun classifiers, grammatical function words common to the two languages, was assessed both in terms of the age and the vocabulary size at which these terms are acquired. Whereas age-based developmental trajectories again showed an advantage for Beijing children, Hong Kong children used classifiers when they had smaller vocabularies, reflecting the higher frequencies and greater precision of classifier use in adult Cantonese. The data speak to the importance of using not just age, but also vocabulary size, as a metric by which the acquisition of particular linguistic elements can be examined across languages. |
|
|
|
|
This article appears in Journal of Child Language Vol. 36, Issue 5, which you can read on Cambridge's site or on LINGUIST . |
|
|
|
|
Back
Add a new paper Return to Academic Papers main page Return to Directory of Linguists main page |
|
|
About LINGUIST
|
Contact Us
|
Report Broken Link
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents. |
|
