Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Apr;55(2):596-608.
doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0113). Epub 2011 Dec 29.

Lexical and phonological effects in early word production

Affiliations

Lexical and phonological effects in early word production

Anna V Sosa et al. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2012 Apr.

Abstract

Purpose: This study examines the influence of word frequency, phonological neighborhood density (PND), age of acquisition (AoA), and phonotactic probability on production variability and accuracy of known words by toddlers with no history of speech, hearing, or language disorders.

Method: Fifteen toddlers between 2;0 (years;months) and 2;5 produced monosyllabic target words varying in word frequency, PND, AoA, and phonotactic probability. Phonetic transcription was used to determine (a) whole-word variability and (b) proportion of whole-word proximity (PWP; Ingram, 2002) of each target word produced.

Results: Results show a significant effect of PND on PWP and variability (words from dense neighborhoods had higher PWP and lower variability than those from sparse neighborhoods), a significant effect of word frequency on variability (high-frequency words were less variable) but not proximity, and a significant effect of AoA on proximity (earlier acquired words had lower PWP) but not variability.

Conclusions: Results provide new information regarding the role that lexical and phonological factors play in the speech of young children; specifically, several factors are identified that influence variability of production. Additionally, by examining lexical and phonological factors simultaneously, the current study isolates differential effects of the individual factors. Implications for our understanding of emerging phonological representations are discussed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Mean variability and proximity for each participant. N = 15.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean variability (# of forms per 5 productions of target word) for each target word type against phonological neighborhood density (top panel) and word frequency (bottom panel). N = 32.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Anderson J. Phonological neighborhood and word frequency effects in the stuttered disfluencies of children who stutter. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. 2007;50:229–247. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anderson J. Age of acquisition and repetition priming effects on picture naming of children who do and do not stutter. Journal of Fluency Disorders. 2008;33:135–155. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aslin RN, Saffran JR, Newport EL. Computation of conditional probability statistics by 8-month-old infants. Psychological Science. 1998;9:321–324.
    1. Barry C, Johnston RA, Wood RF. Effects of age of acquisition, age, and repetition priming on object naming. Visual Cognition. 2006;13:911–927.
    1. Beckman ME, Edwards J. Lexical frequency effects on young children’s imitative productions. In: Broe MB, Pierrehumbert JB, editors. Papers in Laboratory Phonology: Vol. V. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2000. pp. 208–218.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources