Cross-linguistic patterns in the acquisition of quantifiers.

Learners of most languages are faced with the task of acquiring words to talk about number and quantity. Much is known about the order of acquisition of number words as well as the cognitive and perceptual systems and cultural practices that shape it. Substantially less is known about the acquisition of quantifiers. Here, we consider the extent to which systems and practices that support number word acquisition can be applied to quantifier acquisition and conclude that the two domains are largely distinct in this respect. Consequently, we hypothesize that the acquisition of quantifiers is constrained by a set of factors related to each quantifier's specific meaning. We investigate competence with the expressions for "all," "none," "some," "some…not," and "most" in 31 languages, representing 11 language types, by testing 768 5-y-old children and 536 adults. We found a cross-linguistically similar order of acquisition of quantifiers, explicable in terms of four factors relating to their meaning and use. In addition, exploratory analyses reveal that language- and learner-specific factors, such as negative concord and gender, are significant predictors of variation.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from the National Academy of Sciences via http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.160134111

Numerical cognition in monolingual and Chinese-English bilingual adults

This thesis contains three studies. The first study examined the relationship between bilingualism/biscriptalism and working memory performance. Forty-two English monolingual and forty -five Chinese-English bili ngual adults participated in the research . Participants performed verbal shortterm, verbal working memory, visuospatial short-term, and visuo-spatial working memory tasks in their native language. Bilinguals also performed these tasks in their second language (L1). Results showed bilingual disadvantage in L1 verbal working memory. but bilingual advantage in visuo-spatial working memory regardless of language used. A robust relationship was found between L2 proficiency and verbal short-term and working memory in L2. LI proficiency predicted verbal and visuo-spatial short-term memory performance in less LI dominant bilinguals. The second study assessed the involvement of working memory in numerical cognition. Participants performcd numerical magnitude and physical size judgement tasks under no suppression, visuo-spatial suppression, or verbal suppression, with horizontal or vertical presentation, in neutral, congruent or incongruent conditions. The third study assessed the role of working memory in simple multiplication and subtraction. Participants performed multiplication and subtraction tasks under no suppression, visuo-spatial suppression, or verbal suppression, with horizontal or veltical presentation, in congruent or incongruent conditions. Results from both second and third studies revealed tbat bilinguals generally performed faster than monolinguals in the tasks. Also in both studies. further analysis showed accuracy to be a better determinant of performance difference between bilinguals and monolinguals. Performance differed between the language groups within the suppression and congruency levels in the multiplication task. Correlational analyses showed a relationship between bilinguals L2 verbal working memory performance in numerical magnitude. physical size, and multiplication processing. In addition, bilinguals' LI verbal working memory and L2 vi suo-spatial working memory were involved in physical size and multiplication processing. Results were discussed as to the underlying mechanism shared between working memory and accuracy processes in the numerical and arithmetical tasks.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Cross-linguistic patterns in the acquisition of quantifiers

Learners of most languages are faced with the task of acquiring words to talk about number and quantity. Much is known about the order of acquisition of number words as well as the cognitive and perceptual systems and cultural practices that shape it. Substantially less is known about the acquisition of quantifiers. Here, we consider the extent to which systems and practices that support number word acquisition can be applied to quantifier acquisition and conclude that the two domains are largely distinct in this respect. Consequently, we hypothesize that the acquisition of quantifiers is constrained by a set of factors related to each quantifier's specific meaning. We investigate competence with the expressions for "all," "none," "some," "some. not," and "most" in 31 languages, representing 11 language types, by testing 768 5-y-old children and 536 adults. We found a cross-linguistically similar order of acquisition of quantifiers, explicable in terms of four factors relating to their meaning and use. In addition, exploratory analyses reveal that language-and learner-specific factors, such as negative concord and gender, are significant predictors of variationLituanistikos katedraVytauto Didžiojo universiteta

Research data supporting "Cross-linguistic patterns in the acquisition of quantifiers"

Response_Data.csv: Participant responses ('correct' or 'incorrect') to sentences with quantifiers ('all', 'none', 'some', 'some...not', 'most') in 31 languages presented in the context of different visual displays. Item_Coding.csv: How sentences with quantifiers ('all', 'none', 'some', 'some...not', 'most') were coded.European Cooperation in Science and Technology - COST [COST Action A33

Research data supporting "Cross-linguistic patterns in the acquisition of quantifiers"

Response_Data.csv: Participant responses ('correct' or 'incorrect') to sentences with quantifiers ('all', 'none', 'some', 'some...not', 'most') in 31 languages presented in the context of different visual displays. Item_Coding.csv: How sentences with quantifiers ('all', 'none', 'some', 'some...not', 'most') were coded