Development of forms and functions of negation in the early stages of language acquisition: a study in Tamil

Abstract

The development of forms and functions of negation in parent–child interactions in the early stages of language acquisition is discussed with illustrative examples from field data relating to two Tamil-speaking children and their parents. An attempt is made to provide a scheme for analysing the negatives in children's speech, maintaining the three basic functions of Bloom (1970) unaltered. Subcategories of these functions are introduced, taking into consideration the interactional situations as they are perceived by the parents and children. Children, it is observed, acquire the forms and functions of negation in a clear developmental sequence. They acquire and use the free forms naanaa (veeṇḍaam) ‘No, I don't want’ first, followed by negatives involving bound forms. Certain forms like maaṭṭeen ‘I won't’, muḍiyaadi' I can't’ and even veeṇḍaam are used in isolation (as free forms) first. Only later are they used with verb infinitives. The development of functions of negation follows the sequence: rejection, non-existence, prohibition and denial. Thus the children of this study show preference for rejection over non-existence as observed by earlier scholars.

Negation and Polarity: Experimental Perspectives

“…Previous studies on children's negative spoken productions have shown that no (and its equivalent in other languages) is the most consistently used word throughout the single word utterance period (Pea 1980: 170) and that the first negative functions children express are rejection, refusal and protest (Spitz 1957;Bloom 1970;Clark 1978;Vaidyanathan 1991;Dodane and Massini-Cagliari 2010;Beaupoil 2013). These studies described how children begin using spoken productions for negation around 1;07 1 (Tomasello 2003: 228-229).…”

Preschool boys and girls usenodifferently

“…The reason for coding denials and rejections together rather than separately as has been done traditionally (see, for example, Bloom 1970;Vaidyanathan, 1991) is due to the nature of the situation from which the recordings were made in the present study. The reason for coding denials and rejections together rather than separately as has been done traditionally (see, for example, Bloom 1970;Vaidyanathan, 1991) is due to the nature of the situation from which the recordings were made in the present study.…”

“…According to a review of the literature conducted by Wenar (1982), there is a marked increase in the incidence of wo use among children aged 1; 6 to 3-year-olds, followed by a gradual decline in the number of no usage during the next 2 years. Vaidyanathan (1991) examined the development of forms and functions of negation in two girls aged o;9 to 2;9. shaking of the head), appears earlier (Wenar, 1982;Garvey, 1984;Bloom, 1991).…”

“…While the verbal form of negation does not emerge until children are aged around i;6, there is evidence that a nonverbal form of intentional negation (i.e. Vaidyanathan (1991) found that while the girls appeared to understand the concept of negation early on in their development, they nonetheless still used the incorrect form of negation at age 2; 9. Vaidyanathan (1991) examined the development of forms and functions of negation in two girls aged o;9 to 2;9.…”

“…shaking of the head), appears earlier (Wenar, 1982;Garvey, 1984;Bloom, 1991). Vaidyanathan (1991) examined the development of forms and functions of negation in two girls aged o;9 to 2;9. These girls' native language, Tamil, is a language in which there are two distinct forms of negation.…”