Query Details
| Query Subject: |
Lang Acq: Comprehension versus Production
|
|
| Author: | Zahra Rastegar Haghighi Shirazi | |
| Submitter Email: | click here to access email | |
| Linguistic LingField(s): |
Language Acquisition
|
|
| Subject Language(s): |
Persian, Iranian
|
|
| Query: |
Dear LINGUIST subscribers,
I have conducted research on the asymmetry between comprehension and production of verb inflection in children aged 4 to 6 years old in Persian. The children took part in two different tasks: production and comprehension. In the first phase of the experiment on production, each child was presented with 8 pictures which elicited verb inflections. One week later, the same children were asked to listen to an orally presented utterance describing a picture and point to the relevant picture. For each sentence, a pair of similar simple colored drawings was presented which differed only in terms of the number of the agents depicted. It is worth noting that 2 different sets of pictures were employed in production and comprehension tasks. The following are some examples of the sentences in the test: Non pro-drop: 1. dokhtær be ayne negah mikone The girl at the mirror looks PRESENT-3SG 'The girl looks at the mirror.' 2. una be gola ab midæn They the flowers water. PRESENT-3PL 'They water the flowers.' Pro-drop: 3. hendoone mikhore Water melon eats. PRESENT-3SG 'He eats watermelon Both prodrop and non prodrop singular and plural sentences were used. I found an interesting result. There was an asymmetry between comprehension and production of inflection in children. In other words, they could produce it but had problems with comprehension. I think that the complex morphological inflections in Persian including -ha, the allomorphs like -an,-gan, -yan, -van, -at, -jat, and -yat, together with the Arabic origin inflections (-in, -at, a-) all have created a quite complex situation for the child to deal with and they, therefore, contribute to the difficulty in the interpretation of verb inflections. However, in production children just use an inflection (-a) as an umbrella term to cover all these inflections which is quite acceptable in informal language. But I need more persuasive reasons concerning this asymmetry because many other researchers including Johnson, de Villiers, and Seymour (2005) too conducted similar studies and found similar results concerning the asymmetry between comprehension and production. Johnson, V. E., J. De Villiers, H. N. Seymour. (2005). Agreement without understanding? The case of third person singular /s/. First Language, 25 (3): 317-330 I want to know whether there is a global justification for this asymmetry or it is related to the characteristics of Persian Language. Why can children produce verb inflection in Persian, but they are not successful in comprehension? I really need useful suggestions. How can I justify my results? Perhaps a very experienced linguist (Persian or non Persian) can help me solve the puzzle of why Persian children produce verb inflections but they have difficulty in comprehension? Respectfully yours, Zahra |
|
| LL Issue: | 22.2674 | |
| Date posted: | 27-Jun-2011 | |
|
Back |
||
|
|
||
|
Sums 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. |
|
