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
. 2016 Apr 19:7:470.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00470. eCollection 2016.

An Alternative to Mapping a Word onto a Concept in Language Acquisition: Pragmatic Frames

Affiliations

An Alternative to Mapping a Word onto a Concept in Language Acquisition: Pragmatic Frames

Katharina J Rohlfing et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

The classic mapping metaphor posits that children learn a word by mapping it onto a concept of an object or event. However, we believe that a mapping metaphor cannot account for word learning, because even though children focus attention on objects, they do not necessarily remember the connection between the word and the referent unless it is framed pragmatically, that is, within a task. Our theoretical paper proposes an alternative mechanism for word learning. Our main premise is that word learning occurs as children accomplish a goal in cooperation with a partner. We follow Bruner's (1983) idea and further specify pragmatic frames as the learning units that drive language acquisition and cognitive development. These units consist of a sequence of actions and verbal behaviors that are co-constructed with a partner to achieve a joint goal. We elaborate on this alternative, offer some initial parametrizations of the concept, and embed it in current language learning approaches.

Keywords: developmental robotics; frames; infants’ social learning; language acquisition; learning and memory; pragmatics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Pragmatic frames involve operations on the cognitive level as well as on the pragmatic or communicative level (together, they constitute the “meaning”). On the cognitive level, we distinguish between (1) perceptual functions and (2) functions pertaining to the representational organization of knowledge. Perceptual functions include low-level processing such as segmentation and classification whereas functions pertaining to the representational organization of knowledge include instantiating a new knowledge item, retrieving or correcting an existing knowledge item. The pragmatic level includes knowledge about the interactional requirement and the pragmatic role of the participants, e.g., that a question is followed by an answer. Interactional experience (history of interaction) is the driving force for deep meaning and deep syntax as constituents of an invariant structure.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Akgun B., Cakmak M., Yoo J. W., Thomaz A. L. (2012). “Trajectories and keyframes for kinesthetic teaching: a human-robot interaction perspective,” in Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction, New York, NY: ACM; 391–398.
    1. Akhtar N., Gernsbacher M. A. (2007). Joint attention and vocabulary development: A critical look. Lang. Linguist. Compass 1 195–207. 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00014.x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Akhtar N., Montague L. (1999). Early lexical acquisition: the role of cross-situational learning. First Lang. 19 347–358. 10.1177/014272379901905703 - DOI
    1. Austin J. L. (1962). How to Do Things With Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    1. Axelsson E. L., Churchley K., Horst J. S. (2012). The right thing at the right time: why ostensive naming facilitates word learning. Front. Psychol. 2:88 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00088 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources