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

Hate Speech in Online Polylogues: using examples of LGBT issues in Georgian computer-meditated discourse

This research is the first attempt in Georgia to analyse hate speech emerging in Computer-Meditated Communication. Particular attention is paid to the polylogal, asynchronic remarks made by members of the public reacting to online newspaper articles or press releases concerning the LGPT pride event planned for 18 - 23 June 2019, in Tbilisi, Georgia. The methodology is based on combining methods utilized in CDA and Genre Approach to (im)politeness which is in accord with the general approach to CMDA . At the first stage of the analysis, the examples of hate-speech acts were analysed according to the following criteria: identification of linguistic means and strategies employed while expressing impoliteness and specificity of identity construction (self-asserted versus others -asserted, positive versus negative, roles of participants and strategies of conflict generation or management). Next, linguistic peculiarities of hate speech (for instance, linguistic triggers [threats, insults, sarcasm incitements], wordplay, taboo, swear and derogatory words, metaphors, allusions and similes) were identified and analysed. Quantitative methodology was employed while stating the number of proponents and opponents of the event as well as statistical data referring to the number of linguistic and politeness strategies employed while expressing an opinion. This research shows particular tendencies of how impoliteness can be realised and how social identities can be construed using the example of hate discourse concerning LGBT pride in Georgia. However, to fully explore the genre properties of hate discourse in Georgia further research based on examples of hate-discourse strategies applied when discussing ethnic minorities and gender roles, is needed

On the role of pragmatics in child-directed speech for the acquisition of verb morphology

Lituanistikos katedraUžsienio kalbų, lit. ir vert. s. katedraVytauto Didžiojo universiteta

The Acquisition of Quantification across Languages: Some Predictions

International audienc

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