Elsevier

Cognition

Volume 53, Issue 2, November 1994, Pages 155-180
Cognition

Does sentential prosody help infants organize and remember speech information?

https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)90069-8Get rights and content

Abstract

Theories that propose a mapping between prosodic and syntactic structures require that prosodic units in fluent speech be perceptually salient for infants. Although previous studies have demonstrated that infants are sensitive to prosodic markers of syntactic units, they do not show that prosodic information really has an impact on how infants encode the speech they hear. Two experiments were conducted to examine whether infants as young as 2 months old might actually use the prosody afforded by sentences to organize and remember spoken information. The results suggest that infants better remember the phonetic properties of (1) words that are prosodically linked together within a single clause as opposed to individual items in a list (Experiment 1); and (2) words that are prosodically linked within a single clausal unit as opposed to spanning two contiguous fragments (Experiment 2). Taken together, the evidence from both experiments suggests that the prosodic organization of speech into clausal units enhances infants' memory for spoken information. These findings are discussed with regard to their implications for theories of language acquisition.

References (39)

  • G. Suci

    The validity of pause as an index of units in language

    Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior

    (1967)
  • R.N. Aslin et al.

    Auditory development and speech perception in infancy

  • N. Bernstein-Ratner

    Cues which mark clause-boundaries in mother-child speech

    Journal of Phonetics

    (1985)
  • A.J. DeCasper et al.

    Of human bonding: newborns prefer their mother's voices

    Science

    (1980)
  • W. Epstein

    The influence of syntactical structure on learning

    American Journal of Psychology

    (1961)
  • C.L. Fisher

    Prosodic cues to phrase structure in infant-directed speech

    Papers and Reports on Child Language Development

    (1991)
  • L. Gleitman

    The structural sources of verb meanings

    Language Acquisition

    (1990)
  • L. Gleitman et al.

    The state of the state of the art

  • P.W. Jusczyk

    Perception of cues to clausal units in native and non-native languages

    Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development Kansas City, MO

    (1989, April)
  • Cited by (88)

    • “The tiger is hitting! the duck too!” 3-year-olds can use prosodic information to constrain their interpretation of ellipsis

      2021, Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      Several studies propose that the suprasegmental cues of speech (e.g., pitch, duration, energy, etc.) constitute a very important set of cues for the beginning of lexical and syntactic acquisition, as they indicate, among other things, prosodic phrase boundaries (Christophe, Dautriche, de Carvalho, & Brusini, 2016; Christophe, Millotte, Bernal, & Lidz, 2008; de Carvalho, Dautriche, Millotte, & Christophe, 2018; Hawthorne & Gerken, 2014; Hawthorne, Mazuka, & Gerken, 2015; Massicotte-Laforge & Shi, 2015, 2020; Morgan & Demuth, 1996). Young children have been shown to know a great deal about their native language's prosodic structure, and to use this knowledge for many different aspects of sentence parsing: for sentence disambiguation (e.g., Dautriche et al., 2014; de Carvalho, Dautriche, & Christophe, 2016; de Carvalho, Dautriche, Lin, & Christophe, 2017; de Carvalho, Lidz, Tieu, Bleam, & Christophe, 2016; Snedeker & Yuan, 2008; Zhou, Su, Crain, Gao, & Zhan, 2011), for word and sentence segmentation (e.g., Bailey & Plunkett, 1998; Gervain & Werker, 2013; Graf Estes & Bowen, 2013; Hirsh-Pasek et al., 1987; Johnson, 2008; Johnson & Seidl, 2008; Jusczyk et al., 1992; Mandel, Jusczyk, & Kemler Nelson, 1994; Ramachers, Brouwer, & Fikkert, 2017; Shukla, White, & Aslin, 2011; Soderstrom, Seidl, Kemler Nelson, & Jusczyk, 2003); to decide whether a utterance is declarative or interrogative (e.g., Zhou, Crain, & Zhan, 2012); and for grammatical categorization of novel words (e.g., de Carvalho, Babineau, Trueswell, Waxman, & Christophe, 2019; Hawthorne & Gerken, 2014; Massicotte-Laforge & Shi, 2015). Although there is no one-to-one correspondence between prosodic and syntactic boundaries, prosodic phrasing aligns with syntactic phrasing (Nespor & Vogel, 1986), such that whenever a prosodic phrase boundary occurs, it signals a syntactic phrase boundary (while the reverse is not true).

    • The acoustic salience of prosody trumps infants' acquired knowledge of language-specific prosodic patterns

      2015, Journal of Memory and Language
      Citation Excerpt :

      This suggests that infants listening to an unfamiliar language may have trouble detecting violations of the typical correspondence between pauses, final lengthening, and pitch resets at clause boundaries. Similarly, English-acquiring infants who are listening to their native language are better at remembering a string of words that forms a prosodic constituent than the same string of words spoken with list prosody or straddling a prosodic boundary (Mandel, Jusczyk, & Kemler Nelson, 1994; Mandel, Kemler Nelson, & Jusczyk, 1996; Nazzi et al., 2000; Seidl, 2007; Soderstrom et al., 2003, 2005). Johnson and Seidl (2008), Seidl, (2007) found that both English- and Dutch-acquiring 6-month-olds recognized a familiarized prosodically-signaled clause at test when listening to their native language, but they also mention an unpublished experiment1 in which neither English-acquiring infants listening to Dutch nor Dutch-acquiring infants listening to English were able to recognize a non-native clause at test.

    • Biological Preconditions for Language Development

      2015, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition
    • Exploring the relationship between intonation and the lexicon: Evidence for lexicalised storage of intonation

      2015, Speech Communication
      Citation Excerpt :

      Besides these two studies which come from an exemplar-theoretic angle, there is other work that indicates storage of sentential intonation. These studies are firstly situated in the domain of psycholinguistics, where several experiments demonstrate that the familiarity or frequency of prosodic parameters influence speech processing, perception and production (Braun et al., 2006; Braun and Johnson, 2011; Braun et al., 2011; Mandel et al., 1994; Van Lancker and Canter, 1981; Van Lancker et al., 1981). A second research area which provides evidence for lexicalised storage of intonation is the area of machine learning, where various studies showed that word identity helps in predicting pitch accent location (Brenier et al., 2006; Nenkova et al., 2007; Pan and Hirschberg, 2000; Pan and McKeown, 1999), and where instance-based learning of prosody outperforms other types of learning (Marsi et al., 2003).

    • The missing link in the embodiment of syntax: Prosody

      2014, Brain and Language
      Citation Excerpt :

      For example, Johnson and Jusczyk (2001) show that 8-month old infants use stress patterns as a cue for segmenting the speech stream into words. Mandel, Jusczyk, and Nelson (1994) show that 2-months-old not only prefer to listen to coherent prosodic phrases, but their memory for words presented in such prosody is better than for words presented in a list intonation. Finally, there is evidence to suggest that 9-month-olds prefer passages where the prosodic break corresponds to the major syntactic break compared to passages where prosodic and syntactic breaks mismatch (e.g., Jusczyk et al., 1992).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text