Word learning challenges explain nonadult possibility language comprehension in preschoolers.

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL
Ailís Cournane, Anouk Dieuleveut, Chiara Repetti-Ludlow, Valentine Hacquard
{"title":"Word learning challenges explain nonadult possibility language comprehension in preschoolers.","authors":"Ailís Cournane, Anouk Dieuleveut, Chiara Repetti-Ludlow, Valentine Hacquard","doi":"10.1037/dev0002061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article presents two experiments testing English children's understanding of the \"force\" of modals, asking whether they understand that can expresses possibility and have_to expresses necessity. Prior studies show that children tend to over-accept necessity modals in possibility situations and argue this behavior stems from conceptual difficulties reasoning about open possibilities. However, these studies typically test modal force using epistemic modality (knowledge-based), which is less input-frequent than nonepistemic modalities (actual-world priorities or goals) and involves speaker perspective-taking. Our results with more familiar teleological (goal-oriented) modality show that preschoolers have an adult-like understanding of possibility can, but they seem to treat necessity have_to as a possibility modal, in affirmative (Experiment 1) and arguably in negative sentences (Experiment 2). We take these systematic errors to call into question conceptual accounts. We argue that younger preschoolers' difficulties with modal force are due to word-learning challenges: They treat necessity modals as possibility modals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48464,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0002061","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article presents two experiments testing English children's understanding of the "force" of modals, asking whether they understand that can expresses possibility and have_to expresses necessity. Prior studies show that children tend to over-accept necessity modals in possibility situations and argue this behavior stems from conceptual difficulties reasoning about open possibilities. However, these studies typically test modal force using epistemic modality (knowledge-based), which is less input-frequent than nonepistemic modalities (actual-world priorities or goals) and involves speaker perspective-taking. Our results with more familiar teleological (goal-oriented) modality show that preschoolers have an adult-like understanding of possibility can, but they seem to treat necessity have_to as a possibility modal, in affirmative (Experiment 1) and arguably in negative sentences (Experiment 2). We take these systematic errors to call into question conceptual accounts. We argue that younger preschoolers' difficulties with modal force are due to word-learning challenges: They treat necessity modals as possibility modals. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

单词学习挑战解释了学龄前儿童非成人可能性语言理解。
本文通过两个测试英语儿童对情态动词“力”的理解的实验,考察他们是否理解can表示可能性,而have_to表示必要性。先前的研究表明,儿童倾向于在可能性情境中过度接受必要性情态,并认为这种行为源于对开放可能性的概念推理困难。然而,这些研究通常使用认知模态(以知识为基础)来测试模态力,这比非认知模态(现实世界的优先事项或目标)的输入频率要低,并且涉及说话人的视角。我们的研究结果表明,在更熟悉的目的论(目标导向)情态中,学龄前儿童对可能性的理解与成人相似,但他们似乎在肯定句(实验1)和否定句(实验2)中将必要性视为可能性情态。我们用这些系统错误来质疑概念性的解释。我们认为年幼的学龄前儿童在情态力量方面的困难是由于单词学习的挑战:他们将必要性情态视为可能性情态。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Developmental Psychology
Developmental Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.50%
发文量
329
期刊介绍: Developmental Psychology ® publishes articles that significantly advance knowledge and theory about development across the life span. The journal focuses on seminal empirical contributions. The journal occasionally publishes exceptionally strong scholarly reviews and theoretical or methodological articles. Studies of any aspect of psychological development are appropriate, as are studies of the biological, social, and cultural factors that affect development. The journal welcomes not only laboratory-based experimental studies but studies employing other rigorous methodologies, such as ethnographies, field research, and secondary analyses of large data sets. We especially seek submissions in new areas of inquiry and submissions that will address contradictory findings or controversies in the field as well as the generalizability of extant findings in new populations. Although most articles in this journal address human development, studies of other species are appropriate if they have important implications for human development. Submissions can consist of single manuscripts, proposed sections, or short reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信