1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 語用因素在幼兒指涉詞選擇中之影響：個別、交互、及累積效果
The Role of Pragmatic Factors on Young Children’s Referential Choices: The Individual, Interplay, and Cumulative Effects
作者 王曉婷
Wang, Xiao Ting
貢獻者 黃瓊之
Huang, Chiung Chih
王曉婷
Wang, Xiao Ting
關鍵詞 語用因素
指涉詞選擇
個別效果
交互效果
累積效果
Pragmatic factors
Referential choices
Individual effect
Interplay effect
Cumulative effect
日期 2016
上傳時間 9-Aug-2016 09:50:43 (UTC+8)
摘要 前人文獻指出語用因素 (Pragmatic factors)，例如擁有共同注意力在指涉物上、先前提及指涉物，皆會影響幼兒的指涉詞選擇 (如 Huang, 2013; Hughes & Allen, 2013; Matthew, 2006)。然而，較少文獻將重心放在不同的語用因素是否會有不同的影響。本文以實驗方式探討以下四個研究問題：(1) 個別語用因素之效果是否不同；(2) 語用因素彼此交互之效果是否不同；(3) 累積效果是否存在；(4) 幼兒的指涉詞選擇是否有發展趨勢。共同注意力 (Joint Attention)、先前提及 (Prior Mention)、以及環境中無其它潛在指涉物 (Contextual Disambiguation) 為三個實驗中所操弄的語用因素，用以誘導受測者的指涉詞選擇，如名詞、代名詞、省略。三到四歲幼兒、五到六歲幼兒、以及成人為三個受測族群。
實驗結果發現，個別語用因素之效果顯著不同，可能的原因為言談因素以及環境因素之間的差異所造成 (Hughes & Allen, 2015)。再來，語用因素交互之效果顯著不同，推測的原因為語用因素彼此間聚合和競爭所致 (Hughes & Allen, 2015)。此外，累積之效果顯著地影響幼兒的指涉詞選擇，推斷其效果與門檻理論(Threshold approach; Allen, 2008) 相關。最後，隨著年齡增長，幼兒的指涉詞選擇會逐漸與成人相似，可能的原因為心智理論 (Theory of mind) 的發展成熟度所導致。本論文的研究結果提供了進一步且系統性的證據，說明語用因素在幼兒指涉詞的影響以及幼兒對於語用因素的感知度之發展情形。
Previous studies (e.g., Huang, 2013; Hughes & Allen, 2013; Matthew, 2006) have shown that pragmatic factors, such as both of the participants having the same focus on the target referent when communicating, had effects on children’s referential choices. However, little attention has been paid to the different effects of the pragmatic factors. Using an experimental design, this thesis aimed to (1) examine whether there were differences between the effects of individual pragmatic factors, (2) investigate whether there were differences between the effects of their interplays, (3) provide additional evidence for the cumulative effect of the pragmatic factors on children’s referential choices, and (4) explore children’s developmental trend of their referential choices. Three pragmatic factors—Joint Attention, Prior Mention, and Contextual Disambiguation—were manipulated to elicit the participants’ referential choices, such as noun forms, pronominal forms, and omissions. The participants in the experiment were comprised of three age groups: 3- to 4-year-old children, 5- to 6-year-old children, and adults.

The results revealed that the effects of the individual pragmatic factors were significantly different, which might have been caused by differences between the discourse and contextual factors (Hughes & Allen, 2015). In addition, the effects of the interplays between the pragmatic factors were also significantly different, which might have resulted from the converging and competing effects (Serratrice, 2008). Moreover, there was a significant cumulative effect on the children’s referential choices, which appeared to be related to the threshold approach (Allen, 2008). Furthermore, the children’s sensitivities to the different effects of the pragmatic factors gradually became more adult-like with age, which might have been caused by their development of the theory of mind. The findings of this study provide additional and systematic evidence for the effects of the pragmatic factors on young children’s referential choices and the developmental trend of young children’s sensitivities to the effects of the pragmatic factors.
參考文獻 Allen, S. E. (2000). A discourse-pragmatic explanation for argument representation in child Inuktitut. Linguistics, 38(3), 483-521.
Allen, S. E. (2008). Interacting pragmatic influences on children’s argument realization. Crosslinguistic Perspectives on Argument Structure: Implications for Learnability, 191-210.
Allen, S. E, Skarabela, B., & Hughes, M. (2008). Using corpora to examine discourse effects in syntax. Trends in language acquisition research, Corpora in language acquisition research, 6, 99-138.
Allen, S. E., Hughes, M. E., & Skarabela, B. (2015). The role of cognitive accessibility in children’s referential choice. The Acquisition of Reference, 15, 123.
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. Routlege, Londres. Linguistics, COLING, 96, 113-118.
Bock, J. K., & Warren, R. K. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21(1), 47-67.
Campbell, A. L., Brooks, P., & Tomasello, M. (2000). Factors affecting young children`s use of pronouns as referring expressions. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43(6), 1337-1349.
Cho, S. (2004). Argument Ellipsis on Korean-Speaking Children’s Early Speech. Harvard University: Doctoral Dissertation.
Clark, H. H., & Schaefer, E. F. (1987). Collaborating on contributions to conversations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2(1), 19-41.
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1-39.
Demir, Ö. E., So, W. C., Özyürek, A., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2012). Turkish-and English-speaking children display sensitivity to perceptual context in the referring expressions they produce in speech and gesture. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(6), 844-867.
Graf, E., and Davies, C. (2014). The production and comprehension of referring expressions. Pragmatic Development in First Language Acquisition, 10, 161.
Graf, E., Theakston, A., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2015). Subject and object omission in children`s early transitive constructions: A discourse-pragmatic approach. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(03), 701-727.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech acts, pp. 41-58.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69(2), 274-307.
Huang, C. C. (2011). Referential choice in Mandarin child language: A discourse-pragmatic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(7), 2057-2080.
Huang, S. F. (2013). Chinese Grammar at Work (Vol. 1). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hughes, M., & Allen, S. (2006). A discourse-pragmatic analysis of subject omission in child English. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 1, pp. 293-304).
Hughes, M. E., & Allen, S. E. (2013). The effect of individual discourse-pragmatic features on referential choice in child English. Journal of Pragmatics,56, 15-30.
Hughes, M. E., & Allen, S. E. (2015). The incremental effect of discourse-pragmatic sensitivity on referential choice in the acquisition of a first language. Lingua, 155, 43-61.
Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2006). The effect of perceptual availability and prior discourse on young children`s use of referring expressions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(3), 403-422.
O`Neill, D. K. (2005). Why Language Matters for Theory of Mind. Oxford University.
Pardis, J., & Navarro, S. (2003). Subject realization and crosslinguistic interference in the bilingual acquisition of spanish and english: What is the role of the input? Journal of Child Language, 30(2), 371-93.
Salomo, D., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2013). Children`s ability to answer different types of questions. Journal of Child Language, 40(2), 469-491.
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., & Paoli, S. (2004). Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax–pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English–Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(3), 183-205.
Serratrice, L. (2008). The role of discourse and perceptual cues in the choice of referential expressions in English preschoolers, school-age children, and adults. Language Learning and Development, 4(4), 309-332.
Serratrice, L. (2013). The role of number of referents and animacy in children`s use of pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics, 56, 31-42.
Skarabela, B., & Allen, S. E. (2002). The role of joint attention in argument realization in child Inuktitut. In Proceedings of the Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 26, pp. 620-30).
Skarabela, B. (2007). Signs of early social cognition in children`s syntax: The case of joint attention in argument realization in child Inuktitut. Lingua, 117(11), 1837-1857.
Skarabela, B., Allen, S. E., & Scott-Phillips, T. C. (2013). Joint attention helps explain why children omit new referents. Journal of Pragmatics, 56, 5-14.
Wittek, A., & Tomasello, M. (2005). Young children`s sensitivity to listener knowledge and perceptual context in choosing referring expressions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26(4), 541-558.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
語言學研究所
102555003
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1025550032
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 黃瓊之zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Huang, Chiung Chihen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 王曉婷zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Wang, Xiao Tingen_US
dc.creator (作者) 王曉婷zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Wang, Xiao Tingen_US
dc.date (日期) 2016en_US
dc.date.accessioned 9-Aug-2016 09:50:43 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 9-Aug-2016 09:50:43 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 9-Aug-2016 09:50:43 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G1025550032en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/99740-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 語言學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 102555003zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 前人文獻指出語用因素 (Pragmatic factors)，例如擁有共同注意力在指涉物上、先前提及指涉物，皆會影響幼兒的指涉詞選擇 (如 Huang, 2013; Hughes & Allen, 2013; Matthew, 2006)。然而，較少文獻將重心放在不同的語用因素是否會有不同的影響。本文以實驗方式探討以下四個研究問題：(1) 個別語用因素之效果是否不同；(2) 語用因素彼此交互之效果是否不同；(3) 累積效果是否存在；(4) 幼兒的指涉詞選擇是否有發展趨勢。共同注意力 (Joint Attention)、先前提及 (Prior Mention)、以及環境中無其它潛在指涉物 (Contextual Disambiguation) 為三個實驗中所操弄的語用因素，用以誘導受測者的指涉詞選擇，如名詞、代名詞、省略。三到四歲幼兒、五到六歲幼兒、以及成人為三個受測族群。
實驗結果發現，個別語用因素之效果顯著不同，可能的原因為言談因素以及環境因素之間的差異所造成 (Hughes & Allen, 2015)。再來，語用因素交互之效果顯著不同，推測的原因為語用因素彼此間聚合和競爭所致 (Hughes & Allen, 2015)。此外，累積之效果顯著地影響幼兒的指涉詞選擇，推斷其效果與門檻理論(Threshold approach; Allen, 2008) 相關。最後，隨著年齡增長，幼兒的指涉詞選擇會逐漸與成人相似，可能的原因為心智理論 (Theory of mind) 的發展成熟度所導致。本論文的研究結果提供了進一步且系統性的證據，說明語用因素在幼兒指涉詞的影響以及幼兒對於語用因素的感知度之發展情形。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Previous studies (e.g., Huang, 2013; Hughes & Allen, 2013; Matthew, 2006) have shown that pragmatic factors, such as both of the participants having the same focus on the target referent when communicating, had effects on children’s referential choices. However, little attention has been paid to the different effects of the pragmatic factors. Using an experimental design, this thesis aimed to (1) examine whether there were differences between the effects of individual pragmatic factors, (2) investigate whether there were differences between the effects of their interplays, (3) provide additional evidence for the cumulative effect of the pragmatic factors on children’s referential choices, and (4) explore children’s developmental trend of their referential choices. Three pragmatic factors—Joint Attention, Prior Mention, and Contextual Disambiguation—were manipulated to elicit the participants’ referential choices, such as noun forms, pronominal forms, and omissions. The participants in the experiment were comprised of three age groups: 3- to 4-year-old children, 5- to 6-year-old children, and adults.

The results revealed that the effects of the individual pragmatic factors were significantly different, which might have been caused by differences between the discourse and contextual factors (Hughes & Allen, 2015). In addition, the effects of the interplays between the pragmatic factors were also significantly different, which might have resulted from the converging and competing effects (Serratrice, 2008). Moreover, there was a significant cumulative effect on the children’s referential choices, which appeared to be related to the threshold approach (Allen, 2008). Furthermore, the children’s sensitivities to the different effects of the pragmatic factors gradually became more adult-like with age, which might have been caused by their development of the theory of mind. The findings of this study provide additional and systematic evidence for the effects of the pragmatic factors on young children’s referential choices and the developmental trend of young children’s sensitivities to the effects of the pragmatic factors.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents Acknowledgement iv
Chinses Abstract vii
English Abstract viii
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 General background 1
1.2 Research gap and the present study 6
1.3 Organization of the thesis 9
Chapter 2 Literature Review 11
2.1 Information flow of referential choices 11
2.2 Spontaneous speech studies on children’s referential choices 15
2.2.1 Examination of an individual factor or a set of individual factors 18
2.2.2 Threshold approach and incremental contribution 21
2.3 Experimental studies on children’s referential production 25
2.3.1 Examination of discourse factors 26
2.3.2 Examination of contextual factors 32
2.3.3 The interplays between discourse factors and contextual factors 35
2.4 Summary 38
Chapter 3 Method 42
3.1 Participants 42
3.2 Materials and design 43
3.3 Procedure 50
3.4 Analytical Framework 59
Chapter 4 Results 62
4.1 The tokens produced by each age group 62
4.2 The effects of the individual pragmatic factors 64
4.2.1 Three- to four-year-old children 64
4.2.2 Five- to six-year-old children 67
4.2.3 Adults 71
4.2.4 Comparisons among the three age groups 75
4.3 The effects of the interplays between the pragmatic factors 78
4.3.1 Three- to four-year-old children 78
4.3.2 Five- to six-year-old children 82
4.3.3 Adults 86
4.3.4 Comparisons among the three age groups 90
4.4 Cumulative effect of the pragmatic factors 92
4.4.1 Three- to four-year-old children 92
4.4.2 Five- to six-year-old children 94
4.4.3 Adults 97
4.4.4 Comparison among the three age groups 100
Chapter 5 Discussion 105
5.1 Different effects of the individual pragmatic factors 105
5.2 Different effects of the interplays between the pragmatic factors 112
5.3 Cumulative effect of the pragmatic factors 119
5.4 Developmental trend of the children’s sensitivities to the different effects of the pragmatic factors 123
Chapter 6 Conclusion 127
6.1 Summary 127
6.2 Limitations and suggestions for the further research 130
Appendix A 133
References 135		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 3897369 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1025550032en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 語用因素zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 指涉詞選擇zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 個別效果zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 交互效果zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 累積效果zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Pragmatic factorsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Referential choicesen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Individual effecten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Interplay effecten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Cumulative effecten_US
dc.title (題名) 語用因素在幼兒指涉詞選擇中之影響：個別、交互、及累積效果zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The Role of Pragmatic Factors on Young Children’s Referential Choices: The Individual, Interplay, and Cumulative Effectsen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Allen, S. E. (2000). A discourse-pragmatic explanation for argument representation in child Inuktitut. Linguistics, 38(3), 483-521.
Allen, S. E. (2008). Interacting pragmatic influences on children’s argument realization. Crosslinguistic Perspectives on Argument Structure: Implications for Learnability, 191-210.
Allen, S. E, Skarabela, B., & Hughes, M. (2008). Using corpora to examine discourse effects in syntax. Trends in language acquisition research, Corpora in language acquisition research, 6, 99-138.
Allen, S. E., Hughes, M. E., & Skarabela, B. (2015). The role of cognitive accessibility in children’s referential choice. The Acquisition of Reference, 15, 123.
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. Routlege, Londres. Linguistics, COLING, 96, 113-118.
Bock, J. K., & Warren, R. K. (1985). Conceptual accessibility and syntactic structure in sentence formulation. Cognition, 21(1), 47-67.
Campbell, A. L., Brooks, P., & Tomasello, M. (2000). Factors affecting young children`s use of pronouns as referring expressions. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43(6), 1337-1349.
Cho, S. (2004). Argument Ellipsis on Korean-Speaking Children’s Early Speech. Harvard University: Doctoral Dissertation.
Clark, H. H., & Schaefer, E. F. (1987). Collaborating on contributions to conversations. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2(1), 19-41.
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1-39.
Demir, Ö. E., So, W. C., Özyürek, A., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2012). Turkish-and English-speaking children display sensitivity to perceptual context in the referring expressions they produce in speech and gesture. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(6), 844-867.
Graf, E., and Davies, C. (2014). The production and comprehension of referring expressions. Pragmatic Development in First Language Acquisition, 10, 161.
Graf, E., Theakston, A., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2015). Subject and object omission in children`s early transitive constructions: A discourse-pragmatic approach. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(03), 701-727.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech acts, pp. 41-58.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69(2), 274-307.
Huang, C. C. (2011). Referential choice in Mandarin child language: A discourse-pragmatic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(7), 2057-2080.
Huang, S. F. (2013). Chinese Grammar at Work (Vol. 1). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hughes, M., & Allen, S. (2006). A discourse-pragmatic analysis of subject omission in child English. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 1, pp. 293-304).
Hughes, M. E., & Allen, S. E. (2013). The effect of individual discourse-pragmatic features on referential choice in child English. Journal of Pragmatics,56, 15-30.
Hughes, M. E., & Allen, S. E. (2015). The incremental effect of discourse-pragmatic sensitivity on referential choice in the acquisition of a first language. Lingua, 155, 43-61.
Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2006). The effect of perceptual availability and prior discourse on young children`s use of referring expressions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(3), 403-422.
O`Neill, D. K. (2005). Why Language Matters for Theory of Mind. Oxford University.
Pardis, J., & Navarro, S. (2003). Subject realization and crosslinguistic interference in the bilingual acquisition of spanish and english: What is the role of the input? Journal of Child Language, 30(2), 371-93.
Salomo, D., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2013). Children`s ability to answer different types of questions. Journal of Child Language, 40(2), 469-491.
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., & Paoli, S. (2004). Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax–pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English–Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(3), 183-205.
Serratrice, L. (2008). The role of discourse and perceptual cues in the choice of referential expressions in English preschoolers, school-age children, and adults. Language Learning and Development, 4(4), 309-332.
Serratrice, L. (2013). The role of number of referents and animacy in children`s use of pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics, 56, 31-42.
Skarabela, B., & Allen, S. E. (2002). The role of joint attention in argument realization in child Inuktitut. In Proceedings of the Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 26, pp. 620-30).
Skarabela, B. (2007). Signs of early social cognition in children`s syntax: The case of joint attention in argument realization in child Inuktitut. Lingua, 117(11), 1837-1857.
Skarabela, B., Allen, S. E., & Scott-Phillips, T. C. (2013). Joint attention helps explain why children omit new referents. Journal of Pragmatics, 56, 5-14.
Wittek, A., & Tomasello, M. (2005). Young children`s sensitivity to listener knowledge and perceptual context in choosing referring expressions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26(4), 541-558.		zh_TW