Incidental Learning of Idioms
Christina Reuterskiöld, Belinda Williams and Diana Sidtis
Department of Communicative Sciences and Disorders
New York University, New York
BACKGROUND
• The meta-semantic hypothesis suggests that
children analyze the components of idioms
and that strong vocabulary skills are a
prerequisite for idiom learning (Nippold (1998).
• Children comprehend high frequency idioms
better than low frequency idioms; exposure
matters (Nippold & Rudzinski, 1993).
• Incidental learning of words in children is a
well-documented phenomenon (Gray,2006; Rice
RESULTS
• More target idioms recognized than target novel
expressions (p=.001)
• More target idioms comprehended than nonexposed idioms (p=.004)
RESULTS
Figure 1
• In comparison with younger girls, older girls:
• Comprehended more target idioms (p=.002)
• No age differences:
• recognition of target idioms.
• recognition of target novel expressions.
• comprehension of non-exposed idioms.
& Woodsmall, 1988; Oetting, Rice, & Swank,1995).
QUESTIONS
Following a one time exposure:
• Do children recognize more idioms than novel
expressions?
• Do children comprehend the meanings of
exposed target idioms better than nonexposed idioms?
• Do older girls recognize and comprehend
more expressions than younger girls?
METHOD
• Subjects: Six girls aged 12-14 (older) and six
girls aged 8-9 (younger). Monolingual.
PROCEDURE
• Conversational exposure during a crafts
activity (4 participants, 1 producing targets)
• 12 low frequency idioms (Nippold, 1998).
• 12 novel expressions, matched in no. of syll.
POST TESTING (reading tasks)
• Recognition: “Did you hear today?” Y/N.
• Target idioms and novels + 12 non-exposed
idioms and 12 non-exposed novels.
• Comprehension: Mary is angry and wants Bob
to leave her house immediately. She might say:
• A. Stay a while B. Pet the toad
• C. Hit the road D. Mind the store
12 exposed target idioms and 12 non-exposed
low frequency idioms included
Corrected for probability of chance level responses (Postman, 1950)
Figure 2
NW
NW
CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION
• Children store the form and meanings of idioms
more successfully than matched novel
expressions.
• Idioms consist of relatively long stereotyped
forms with complex semantic meanings
including affective nuances, and detailed
contextual dependencies.
• Frequency of exposure is not a factor powerful
enough on its own to explain the seemingly
quick acquisition of idioms.
• Future studies should explore the role of theory
of mind and inferencing skills in idiom learning.
REFERENCES
RW
RW
NW
Gray, S. (2006) The Relationship Between PhonologicalMemory, Receptive Vocabulary,and Fast
Mapping in Young Children With Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and
Hearing Research, 49, 955–969
Kempler, D., Van Lancker, D., Marchman, V. & Bates, E. (1999). Idiom comprehension in children
and adults with unilateral brain damage. Developmental Neuropsychology, 15.3, 327-349.
Nippold, M.A. (1998) Later Language Development: The School-Age and Adolescent Years; Pro Ed;
Nippold, M.A. (1998) Later Language Development: The School-Age and Adolescent Years; Pro Ed;
2en edition.
Oetting, J., Rice, M., & Swank, L. (1995). Quick incidental learning (QUIL) of words by school-age
children with and without SLI. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 38, 434-445.
Postman, L. (1950). Choice behavior and the process of recognition. The American Journal of
Psychology, 63, 4, 576-583.
Sahlén, B. & Reuterskiöld-Wagner, C. (1999). Jumping to conclusions: Children with LI need a
theory of mind to comprehend idioms. Journal of Logopedics Phoniatrics and Vocology 24:2, 14015439
Rice, M.L. & Woodsmall, L. (1988). Lessons from television: Children's word learning when viewing,
Child Development, 59, 420-429.
[email protected], [email protected]
ASHA Convention, New Orleans, November 21, 2009