What Is "High"? The Development of Reference Points for "High" and "Low"

Abstract

Young children have been characterized as interpreting relative adjectives as if they were nominal or categorical terms. The categorical interpretation of relative terms, however, may be quite complex. Indeed, the mature understanding of relative terms would seem to include a complex system of reference points for the terms' categorical usages. In 5 experiments we examined the complexity of 3-5-year-old children's and adults' categorical interpretations. We specifically examined how reference points for the categorical interpretation of high and low are defined. The definition of reference points relative to the object judged, the vertical position of the observer, and the extent of vertical variation were assessed. 3 major developmental trends were observed: a trend from the application of the terms to only extreme values to their application to broader categories; a trend from nominal-like categories to ones defined flexibly relative to context (e.g., nature of object judged, and extent of vertical variation); and a trend from reference points functioning as focal points to their operating as directional category boundaries. In brief, the results suggest that the categorical usage of relative terms involves a rich and intricate knowledge system and that it takes children considerable time to acquire and organize the relevant pieces of knowledge.

Meaning matters in children’s plural productions

“…With regard to this issue, a key question for empirical study is whether it is specifically the link between the plural and "two" (and perhaps three) that is dampened or whether the plural is perhaps graded with respect to number for young children and thus generally stronger for larger than smaller numbers. The latter effect would be consistent with evidence on children's acquisition of dimensional terms such as "big" and "little" which are often first understood as applied to extreme values (e.g., Sera & Smith, 1987;Smith, Cooney, & McCord, 1986).…”

“…With regard to this issue, a key question for empirical study is whether it is specifically the link between the plural and "two" (and perhaps three) that is dampened or whether the plural is perhaps graded with respect to number for young children and thus generally stronger for larger than smaller numbers. The latter effect would be consistent with evidence on children's acquisition of dimensional terms such as "big" and "little" which are often first understood as applied to extreme values (e.g., Sera & Smith, 1987;Smith, Cooney, & McCord, 1986).As a first demonstration of an effect of number and similarity on children's early plural productions, we acknowledge there are many unanswered questions about the phenomenon itself, its meaning for children's understanding of the English plural, and its implications for the development of quantification. But the investigation of these new effects should provide a new and informative window on the development of the plural and the role of meaning in that development.…”

Once again on norms and comparison classes

“…First, comprehension of relative adjectives was primarily investigated by psychologists and (less frequently) linguists studying language acquisition (e.g. Barner and Snedeker 2008;Bartlett 1976;Gelman 1988, 1994;Eilers et al 1974;Nelson and Benedict 1974;Sera and Smith 1987;Smith et al 1986Smith et al , 1988Syrett 2007;Syrett et al 2006Syrett et al , 2010. Most of these studies used adult subjects as a control group.…”

“…Given this recent evidence, it is important to establish whether prototypicality effects influence the assignment of norms in the process of adjective interpretation. Smith et al (1986) embarked upon this path by comparing adults' and children's judgments of what is considered to be high or low for a bird (typically located high up in the sky) and a bunny (typically located low on the ground). Their results suggest that adults and older children (5-year-olds) shift reference points depending on a comparison class involved.…”

“…Materials, design and procedure. Experiment 1 involved a Scalar Judgment Task (Smith et al 1986(Smith et al , 1988Syrett et al 2006;Syrett 2007). The subjects saw pictures of seven same-kind objects on a computer screen and heard a question of the type Welke X vind je groot/klein?…”