This study examined whether singular/plural marking in a language helps children learn the meanings of the words 'one,' 'two,' and 'three.' First, CHILDES data in English, Russian (which marks singular/plural), and Japanese (which does not) were compared for frequency, variability, and contexts of number-word use. Then young children in the USA, Russia, and Japan were tested on Counting and Give-N tasks. More English and Russian learners knew the meaning of each number word than Japanese learners, regardless of whether singular/plural cues appeared in the task itself (e.g., "Give two apples" vs. "Give two"). These results suggest that the learning of "one," "two" and "three" is supported by the conceptual framework of grammatical number, rather than that of integers.

The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether participants with intellectual impairments could benefit from the movement associated with animated pictures while they were learning symbol names. Sixteen school students, whose linguistic-developmental age ranged from 38?91 months, participated in the experiment. They were taught 16 static visual symbols and the corresponding action words (naming task) in two sessions conducted one week apart. In the experimental condition, animation was employed to facilitate comprehension, whereas no animation was used in the control condition. Enhancement of learning was shown in the experimental condition, suggesting that the participants benefited from animated symbols. Furthermore, it was found that the lower the linguistic developmental age, the more effective the animated cue was in learning static visual symbols.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the cognition of equal distribution within preschoolers, where children were asked to share out wooden chips. The children were divided into two experimental groups (a quotient and a divisor group), based on the instructions provided. In the trials, each child was given six wooden chips to share out, the instruction for the quotient group was to "divide the chips into twos, while the instruction for the other group was to "divide the chips by three". A total of 128 preschool children, aged from three to six years, participated in the study, with half being assigned to the respective groups. The results indicated that children in the quotient group performed better than those in divisor group at all age levels. These findings suggest that while quotient instructions facilitate equal distributions, it might be di$cult for young children to understand the phrase "divide by X".

No abstract

No abstract