Markedness pp 219-239 | Cite as

Markedness, the Organization of Linguistic Information in Speech Production, and Language Acquisition

  • Steven G. Lapointe


In recent work (Lapointe, 1982, 1985) I have been exploring some extensions of Garrett’s (1975) model of normal adult sentence production in an attempt to explain certain aspects of agrammatic aphasia. In the present paper, I would like to consider the role of markedness in those extensions of the normal production system and to explore the relationship among markedness principles, the information manipulated by the speech system, and child language acquisition. The paper will proceed in the following way. First, I will outline the relevant extensions of Garrett’s model, concentrating specifically on the operations of the Syntactic Processor, the most important of which for the present discussion involves accessing information from two types of stores -- one containing fragments of syntactic structures, the other containing function words. These stores are organized according to markedness principles which relate structural fragments and function words to the semantic notions that they typically express. Because it is important for the subsequent discussion, I will describe in some detail the principles underlying this store organization for the particular case of VP fragments, V inflections, and auxiliary (Aux) Vs.


Versus Form Basic Notion Language Acquisition Speech Production Function Word 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anglin, J. (1977) Word, Object, and Conceptual Development, Norton, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Bellugi, U. (1967) The Acquisition of Negation, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, R. (1973) A First Language, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  4. deVilliers, J. and P. deVilliers (1973) “A Cross-sectional Study of the Acquisition of Grammatical Morphemes,” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2, 267–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. deVilliers, J. (1974) “Quantitative Aspects of Agrammatism in Aphasia,” Cortex 10, 36–54.Google Scholar
  6. Garrett, M. (1975) “The Analysis of Sentence Production,” In G. Bower, ed., The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 9, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Jakobson, R. (1968) Child Language, Aphasia, and Phonological Universals, Mouton and Co., The Hague.Google Scholar
  8. Lapointe, S. (1981) “The Representation of Inflectional Morphology within the Lexicon,” in V. Burke and J. Pustejosky, eds., Proceedings of the XIth NELS Meeting, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.Google Scholar
  9. LaPointe, S. 1982. Restrictions on the use of V forms by agrammatic aphasics. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Aphasia, New Paltz, New York.Google Scholar
  10. LaPointe, S. 1985. A theory of verb form use in the speech of agrammatic aphasics. Brain and Language. 24. 100–155.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lapointe, S. (in preparation) “Towards a Theory of Speech Production Mechanisms.”Google Scholar
  12. Williams, E. (1981) “X Features,” in S. Tavakolian, ed., Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven G. Lapointe
    • 1
  1. 1.Wayne State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations