The effect of argument omission on monolingual and bilingual children: Evidence from the acquisition of Japanese case-marking (original) (raw)

This study investigates how monolingual and bilingual children recognize speech which uses argument omission. Specifically, this study focuses on object case-markings in Japanese transitive sentences where argument omission occurs at a high percentage. In study 1, the effectiveness of argument-omitted sentences and full-argument sentences on monolingual children's learning (ages four to seven) of artificial case-markings via short exposure was compared. Meanwhile, the ability of bilingual children (ages four to nine) to learn artificial case-marking through exposure to argument-omitted and full-argument sentences was investigated in study 2. In study 1, the monolinguals first watched and imitated four single action scenarios while listening to sentences with two non-lexical syllables, po (artificial subject marker) and bi (artificial object marker). Half of the participants learned full-argument sentences, and the rest learned argument-omitted sentences. In another test, participants completed forced-choice discrimination of scenarios after hearing sentences with either po or bi. Contrary to study 1, bilinguals in study 2 were only subjected to argument-omitted sentences. A mixed effect model for children's responses (correct or incorrect answer) showed that in study 1, children who learned case-markings through argument-omitted sentences comprehended OSV sentences well. However, children who learned case-markings through full-argument sentences did not do well in sentence comprehension. Results indicated that argument-dropped exposure, not full-argument exposure, was useful for monolinguals in learning object case-markings. For study 2, children who learned case-markings through argument-omitted sentences also comprehended OSV sentences well as compared to chance level. Results showed that both monolinguals and bilinguals probably pay attention to case-markings when they process argument-dropped sentences since this is the only way to understand a sentence. This study suggests that simpler sentences may work better for learning purposes, specifically for languages with high percentages of argument omission.