Many systems, one strategy: Acquiring ordinals in Dutch and English

What it is about

The paper asks whether children learn ordinal numbers (second, third, vierde) by a rule or item by item. Two "Give-N" comprehension tasks are run. Seventy Dutch children (aged 2;08 to 4;11) are tested on synthetic ordinals (vierde), analytic ordinals (auto vier, "car four") and an irregular form (derde "third"); 35 American English children (aged 3;3 to 5;3) do the same test with English forms. The results point to a rule. Children who know the cardinal principle (CP-knowers) find regular ordinals more easily than irregular ones in both languages, and analytic forms are no harder than synthetic ones. English regular ordinals are answered correctly about 60% of the time, while second, third and fifth are below 50%. The authors apply Yang's Tolerance Principle: with five ordinals and three exceptions, the English rule is still productive (the threshold for N = 5 is 3.1). English learners answer less accurately than Dutch learners overall, and the authors attribute this to the greater number of exceptions. Ordinals are learned differently from cardinals, which follow a slower, item-by-item pattern.

Ideas

• I1. Implement the Tolerance Principle as a gate in en/src/morph.rs: for each candidate suffix over N lexical items, count exceptions e and adopt the rule if e is at most N divided by ln N. Output the N, e, threshold and the decision, with BTreeMap order over the candidates.
• I2. Check the gate on the English ordinals: for growing N, count the exceptions to -th among the first N ordinals (first, second, third, fifth, and spelling changes such as ninth, twelfth) and report the smallest N at which the gate adopts -th. Compare that point with the paper's acquisition findings for English.
• I3. Regularity as a feature of the ordinal lookup: mark each ordinal as regular or irregular, and report the accuracy of the ordinal analysis on each class separately. The paper predicts regular > irregular and no difference between analytic and synthetic forms, so that is the expected pattern.
• I4. Negative control: a suffix whose exceptions dominate (the English strong past forms) must be rejected by the gate. If the gate adopts it, the threshold is wrong.

For Mova

The chapters are languages/en/12-pronouns-determiners-numerals.md (cardinals, ordinals and superlatives such as first), languages/en/17-derivation-suffixes.md (productive suffixes such as -th) and languages/en/14-irregular-verbs.md (exceptions to a productive rule). The code is en/src/morph.rs (inflection and derivation rules), with the Tolerance gate as a small addition there, and en/src/dict.rs (the ordinal entries). The measures: the gate's decision and counts on the English ordinal list (run twice to confirm identical output), and the ordinal analysis accuracy by regularity class, compared with the paper's pattern.

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.5334/gjgl.595

@article{meyer2020many,
  title = {{Many systems, one strategy: Acquiring ordinals in Dutch and English}},
  author = {Meyer, Caitlin and Barbiers, Sjef and Weerman, Fred},
  journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics},
  year = {2020},
  doi = {10.5334/gjgl.595},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.595}
}

References

41 references, 1 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Almoammer, Alhanouf, Jessica Sullivan, Chris Donlan, Franc Marušič, Rok Žaucer, Timothy O’Donnell & David Barner. 2013. Grammatical morphology as a source of early number word meanings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110. 18448–18453. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1313652110 ↗
2. Anderson, Stephen Robert. 1969. West Scandinavian vowel systems and the ordering of phonological rules. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD dissertation. find
3. Barbiers, Sjef. 2007. Indefinite numerals one and many and the cause of ordinal suppletion. Lingua 117. 859–880. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2006.03.003 ↗
4. Barner, David, Amanda Libenson, Pierina Cheung & Mayu Takasaki. 2009. Cross-linguistic relations between quantifiers and numerals in language acquisition: Evidence from Japanese. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 103. 421–440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.12.001 Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1). 1–48. DOI: https://doi. org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 Blom, Elma & Siebe de Korte. 2008. De verwerving van het Nederlands: Dummies en Verb Second. [The acquisition of Dutch: Dummies and Verb Second.] Nederlandse Taalkunde 13(2). 133–159. ↗
5. Clark, Eve V. 2014. Acquisition of derivational morphology. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavel Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of derivational morphology, 1–21. Oxford: Oxford University Press. find
6. Colomé, Àngels & Marie-Pascale Noël. 2012. One first? Acquisition of the cardinal and ordinal uses of numbers in preschoolers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 133. 233–247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.03.005 ↗
7. Condry, Kirsten F. & Elizabeth S. Spelke. 2008. The development of language and abstract concepts: The case of natural number. Journal of Experimental Psychology 137. 22–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.137.1.22 ↗
8. Corbett, Greville G. 1978. Universals in the syntax of cardinal numerals. Lingua 46(4). 355–368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(78)90042-6 Davies, Mark. 2008-. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 520 million words, 1990-present. Available online at http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/. ↗
9. De Belder, Marijke. 2007. Silence and the construct state in Dutch date expressions. In Bettelou Los and Marjo van Koppen (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 24. 25–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.24.05de ↗
10. De Belder, Marijke. 2009. On the syntax of titles. Paper presented at The 17th Conference of Student Organization of Linguistics in Europe (ConSOLE XVII), Nova Gorica, January 16–18, 2009. find
11. Dehaene, Stanislas & Jacques Mehler 1992. Cross-linguistic regularities in the frequency of number words. Cognition 43. 1–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92) 90030-L Fischer, Florence E. & Robert D. Beckey. 1990. Beginning kindergartners perception of number. Perceptual and Motor Skills 70. 419–425. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2466/pms. 1990.70.2.419 Geary, David C. & Alex M. Moore. 2016. Cognitive and brain systems underlying early mathematical development. Progress in Brain Research 227. 75–103. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2016.03.008 Gelman, Rochel & Charles Randy Gallistel. 1978. The child’s understanding of number. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Second edition: 1986.) Hamburger, Henry & Stephen Crain. 1984. Acquisition of cognitive compiling. Cognition 17. 85–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(84)90015-5 ↗
12. Huang, Yi Ting, Elizabeth S. Spelke & Jesse Snedeker. 2010. When is four far more than three? Children’s generalization of newly acquired number words. Psychological Science 21. 600–606. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610363552 ↗
13. Hurford, James. 1987. Language and number. The emergence of a cognitive system. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. find
14. Kiparsky, Paul. 1973. Elsewhere in phonology. In Stephen Robert Anderson & Paul Kiparsky (eds.), A festschrift for Morris Halle, 93–106. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. find
15. Le Corre, Mathieu, Gretchen Van de Walle, Elizabeth M. Brannon & Susan Carey. 2006. Re-visiting the competence/performance debate in the acquisition of counting as a representation of the positive integers. Cognitive Psychology 52. 130–169. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.07.002 Le Corre, Mathieu, Peggy Li, Becky H. Huang, Gisela Jia & Susan Carey. 2016. Numerical syntax supports number word learning: Evidence from a comparison of young Mandarin and English learners. Cognitive Psychology 88. 162–186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cogpsych.2016.06.003 Le Corre, Mathieu & Susan Carey. 2007. One, two, three, four, nothing more: An investigation of the conceptual sources of the verbal counting principles. Cognition 105. 395–438. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.005 ↗
16. Lee, Michael & Barbara Sarnecka. 2010a. A model of knower-level behavior in number concept development. Cognitive Science 34(1). 51–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10. 1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01063.x Lee, Michael & Barbara Sarnecka. 2010b. Number-knower levels in young children: insights from Bayesian modeling. Cognition 120(3). 391–402. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cognition.2010.10.003 Lyons, Ian M., Stephen E. Vogel & Daniel Ansari. 2016. On the ordinality of numbers: A review of neural and behavioral studies. Progress in Brain Research 227. 187–221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2016.04.010 ↗
17. Marcus, Gary P., Steven Pinker, Michael Ullman, Michelle Hollander, T. John Rosen & Fei Xu. 1992. Overregularization in language acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 57(4). 1–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1166115 ↗
18. Matthei, Edward. 1982. The acquisition of prenominal modifier sequences. Cognition 11. 301–332. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(82)90018-X ↗
19. Meyer, Caitlin. 2019. Rule and order: acquiring ordinals in Dutch and English. PhD Dissertation, University of Amsterdam. Utrecht: LOT Publications. find
20. Meyer, Caitlin, Sjef Barbiers & Fred Weerman. 2016. Order and ordinality: the acquisition of cardinals and ordinals in Dutch. In Jennifer Scott & Deb Waughtal (eds.), Proceedings of the 40th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 253–266. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. find
21. Meyer, Caitlin, Sjef Barbiers & Fred Weerman. 2018. Ordinals are not as easy as one, two, three: the acquisition of cardinals and ordinals in Dutch. Language Acquisition. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2017.1391266 Meyer, Caitlin, Sjef Barbiers & Fred Weerman. Under review. Rules rule in Dutch L1 ordinal comprehension and production. Ms. University of Amsterdam, Leiden University. ↗
22. Miller, Kevin F., Susan M. Major, Hua Shu & Houcan Zhang. 2000. Ordinal knowledge: Number names and number concepts in Chinese and English. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 54(2). 129–139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087335 ↗
23. Negen, James & Barbara W. Sarnecka 2012. Number-concept acquisition and general vocabulary development. Child Development 83(6). 2019–2027. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01815.x ↗
24. Negen, James, Barbara W. Sarnecka & Michael D. Lee. 2012. An Excel sheet for inferring children’s number-knower levels from give-N data. Behavior Research Methods 44(1). 57–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0134-4 ↗
25. Oostdijk, Nelleke. 2000. Het corpus gesproken Nederlands. [The spoken Dutch corpus.] Nederlandse Taalkunde 5(3). 280-284. find
26. Piantadosi, Steven T., Julian Jara-Ettinger & Edward Gibson. 2014. Children’s learning of number words in an indigenous farming-foraging group. Developmental Science 17(4). 553–563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12078 ↗
27. Pinker, Steven. 1999. Words and rules. New York, NY: Harper Perennial. find
28. R Core Team. 2016. A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/. ↗
29. Rumelhart, David E. & Donald A. Norman. 1978. Accretion, tuning and restructuring: Three modes of learning. In John W. Cotton & Roberta L. Klatzky (eds.), Semantic factors in cognition, 37–53. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. find
30. Sarnecka, Barbara W. 2015. Learning to represent exact numbers. Synthese. 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0854-6 ↗
31. Sarnecka, Barbara W., Valentina G. Kamenskaya, Yuko Yamana, Tamiko Ogura & Yulia Yudovina. 2007. From grammatical number to exact numbers: Early meanings of one, two, and three in English, Russian and Japanese. Cognitive Psychology 55(2). 136–168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.09.001 ↗
32. Siloni, Tal. 1994. Noun phrases and nominalizations. Geneva: University of Geneva PhD dissertation. find
33. Sleeman, Petra & Aafke Hulk. 2013. L1 acquisition of noun ellipsis in French and Dutch: Consequences for linguistic theory. In Sergio Baauw, Frank Drijkoningen, Luisa Meroni & Manuela Pinto (eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory, 249–266. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.5.12sle ↗
34. Syrett, Kristen. 2016. Acquisition of comparatives and degree constructions. In Jeffrey Lidz, William Snyder & Joe Pater (eds.), The Oxford handbook of developmental linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/978019960 1264.013.20 Trabandt, Corinna, Alexander Thiel, Emanuela Sanfelici & Petra Schulz. 2015. On the acquisition of ordinal numbers in German. In Esther Ruigendijk & Cornelia Hamann (eds.), Proceedings of GALA 2013, 521–532. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Scholar Publishing. ↗
35. Wynn, Karen. 1992. Children’s acquisition of the number words and the counting system. Cognitive Psychology 24. 220–251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90008-P ↗
36. Yang, Charles. 2016. The price of linguistic productivity. How children learn to break the rules of language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/ 9780262035323.001.0001 Zuckerman, Shalom. 2001. The acquisition of “optional” movement. PhD Dissertation, University of Groningen. Groningen: Groningen Dissertations in Linguistics (GRODIL). ↗
37. How to cite this article: Meyer, Caitlin, Sjef Barbiers and Fred Weerman. 2020. Many systems, one strategy: Acquiring ordinals in Dutch and English. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 5(1): 100. 1–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ gjgl.595 ↗ our card
38. Submitted: 19 December 2017 find
39. Accepted: 02 January 2020 find
40. Published: 12 October 2020 find
41. Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by Ubiquity Press. OPEN ACCESS ↗