THE UNBEES’?ANQING QF ENGLESH
”QR QEbQGY EY Ema/1'“;
“figgéfififiix CHE. kfisfiER

«v

Lhasa ‘09 {its Dag-ma a? 5%. A.
MECKE GAE"? THE -’I\’EVEESETY
Roberta. A1111 Elie-my
£967

1 H5315

   

 

A.‘

LIBRARY

MicHgan State
University

-—

‘ .

 

 

ABSTRACT

THE UNDERSTANDING OF ENGLISH MORPHOLOGY
BY CERTAIN PRESCHOOL CHILDREN

by Roberta Ann Henry

This study replicated selected aspects of Jean
Berko's study of the child's learning of English morphOl—
ogy. From her findings she suggested that "every child
is in contact with a sufficiently varied sample of spoken
English in order for him to be exposed at an early age to
the basic morphological processes." (Berko, 1958, 57)

The purposes of the present study were to investi—
gate the relationship between the understanding of morpho-
logical rules and environment, and the relationship between
the learning of morphology and intelligence.

The two major hypotheses were:

I. Children in the Laboratory Preschool Group will achieve
higher scores on the Berko test for morphological rules
than will children in the Community Play Group.

II. There is a positive correlation between the acquisi—
tion of English morphology, as measured by the Berko test,
and intelligence, as measured by the Peabody test.

The results of these hypotheses yielded a third
hypothesis: There is a difference in the performance of

the two groups on the Berko test when the effect of 1.0.

Roberta Ann Henry

is controlled.

The sample consisted of 30 children from the Mich-
igan State University nursery schools ranging in age from
4 years old to 5 years 2 months old. Half of the children
were from the upper middle class (Laboratory Preschool Group),
and the remainder of the children were representative of
lower class families (Community Play Group). To ascertain
a child's I.Q. score, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
was administered to the child. The child's understanding
of the morphological rules was measured by his responses
to picture cards designed by Berko.

The results supported Hypotheses I and II; however,
Hypothesis III was not supported. The study found that
there was a difference in the mean scores on the Berko test
between the two groups of children. There was also a rela-
tionship between the acquisition of morphology and intelli-
gence. When the effect of 1.0. was controlled, the differ—
ence in the mean scores on the Berko between the groups
was not significant. This may have been due to the fact
that the acquisition of morphology is developmental and
depends on the maturational level of the child. The child-
ren in this study were just beginning the developmental

sequence of understanding the rules of morphology.

Berko, Jean. “The Child's Learning of English Morphology."
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Radcliffe Col-
lege, 1958.

THE UNDERSTANDING OF ENGLISH MORPHOLOGY

BY CERTAIN PRESCHOOL CHILDREN

By

Roberta Ann Henry

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Home Management and Child Development

1967

f ,f

(J: 1ft;
,.
v?!

.fv‘w 1.)

cc .,v
/ '

\J \k__

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author wishes to express her gratitude to Dr.
Martha 3. Dale and Miss Phyllis Lueck for their guidance
and direction in planning and conducting the study.

Special appreciation is due to Dr. Sarah Hervey
and Mr. Tanniru R. Rao for their statistical direction and
generous donation of time and assistance during the course
of the study.

The author also wishes to thank the head teachers
of the Michigan State University nursery schools for their
assistance. Appreciation is expressed to the children who
participated in the study.

It is impossible to adequately express my gratitude
to Dr. Jean Berko Gleason for the consent to replicate her
study and the use of the picture cards which she developed.

And finally to my friends and colleagues who gave
advice and encouragement when it was most necessary, thank

you.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF
Chapter

I.

II.

III.

IV.

TABLE S O O O O O O O O O 0 0

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . .

Objectives. . . . . .
Definitions of terms.
Assumptions . . . . .
Hypotheses. . . . . .

O 0 O O
O O O 0

REVIEW OF LITERATURE. . . .

Major fields of study . .

Components of the language system . .

Studies of morphology . .
PROCEDURES. . . . . . . . .

Sources of subjects . . .
Procedure for selection .

Testing environment and test materials

Procedure for testing . .
Procedure for analysis. .

PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION

Results . . . . . .
Hypothesis I. .
Hypothesis II .
Hypothesis III.

Discussion. . . . .

Summary . . . . . .

O O O O O 0

OF RESULTS.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS .

summary 0 O O O O O O O O

O O O O O 0

Conclusions and implications. . . . .

REFERENCES 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0

APPENDIX A. O O O O O O O O O O O 0

iii

Page
ii
iv

wKOO‘t m when» H

H H
\o

NNNNH
010000“)

k WNNNNN N
O OJWQQOUOW ‘0‘

bk
#0

(Dub
O\l

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
1 Description of Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2 Chi-square RESUltS. o o o o o o o o o o o o o 28
3 Results of Analysis of Co-variance. . . . . . 30

iv

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Many aspects of childhood development have been sub-
jects of study. One of the more important aspects centers
on the acquisition of language by the young child. Language
is of concern for the following reasons: the positive re-
lationship between language development and intelligence;
the establishment of norms measuring development, to be
used as a basis for comparison; recognition of difficulties
in language learning; and location of factors that influ-
ence development both positively and negatively. On the
average, children rapidly acquire a basic understanding
of the spoken language during the preschool years. In the
opinion of McCarthy, if a child's language development is
seriously delayed for any reason he will labor under an
almost insurmountable handicap in his social and academic
relationships. (1946, 477) Because of the severity of in-
sufficient verbal skills researchers have attempted to lo-
cate the causes of delayed language development. The early
records of this learning process were biographical in nature
and centered mainly on precocious or retarded children.

In more recent years the research has become more

standardized and experimental in its approach. Large samples

of children have been studied for purposes of comparison
and the establishment of norms. Research has also turned
from the broad measurements of language such as vocabulary
size, sentence length and sentence complexity, to the more
specific skills of linguistic learning such as phonological,
morphological and syntactic rules. Since little compara-
tive research has been done on these more specific skills,
the purpose of this study was to examine the performance

of two groups of children from different socio-economic
classes on one of these linguistic skills--morphology.

Jean Berko (now Gleason) observed a group of pre-
school children to determine if they possessed rules for
English morphology. From her findings she suggested that
perhaps "factors that influence other aspects of language
development may have no effect on morphological acquisition."
(Berko, 1958a, 58)

Lacking I.Q. scores on her subjects, Berko was able
only to speculate on the relationship between understanding
of morphology and intelligence. Madorah Smith (1926) sug-
gested that one of the best single tests of intelligence
is a vocabulary test, since at every age vocabulary depends
on intelligence. In this study the 1.0. scores were obtained
from the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. This test corree
lates with WISC I.Q. scores in the high .70's and .80's.
(Euros, 1965, 823)

The major intrinsic factor influencing language

development

is intelligence; the major extrinsic factor

is environment. (McCarthy, 1946) It was the intent of this

study to examine the effects of intelligence and environ-

ment on the

Objectives

child's understanding of morphology.

Examination of the interrelationships of intelli-

gence, environment and understanding of morphology was ac-

complished through the following four specific objectives:

1.

Definitions
The
study were:

1.

To measure the subjects' understanding of mor-
phological rules.

To appraise the findings from Objective 1 and
to determine if variations occur between the
two groups.

To obtain intelligence quotient scores by ad-
ministering the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
to each subject.

To compare, within each group, the subjects'
understanding of morphological rules and their

intelligence quotient scores.

9}; terms

definitions of terms as operationalized in this

Community Play Group (C.P.G.) - Children who
would be eligible for Head Start programs and
who were participants in the Michigan State

University play group.

The 3 major

I.

Assumptions

Laboratory Preschool Group (L.P.S.) - Children
who were enrolled in the Michigan State Univer-
sity Laboratory Preschool.

concepts dealt with in this study were:
Morphology - The branch of linguistics which
deals with the forms and grammatical inflections
of words as they undergo modification for tense,
number, case, person, etc. (Carroll, 1961, 355)
Intelligence - Intelligence is defined in vari-
ous ways, but for the purposes of this study
intelligence refers to the child's level of
achievement on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary
Test.

Environment - The child's membership in either
the Laboratory Preschool Group or the Community
Play Group. According to Cattell's Metric Scale
for Social Status, (Cattell, 1946, 142) children
in the first group were representative of the
upper middle class, and children in the second

group were members of lower class families.

Four assumptions underlying this study were:

1.

Berko's study of English morphology is valid
and reliable research.
Children between 48 and 60 months operate with

measurable morphological rules. (Berko, 1958a, 56)

3. A valid identification has been made of the
culturally disadvantaged children in the Com-
munity group.

4. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test is a reli—
able and valid instrument which provides valid

intelligence quotient scores.

Hypotheses

The two major hypotheses investigated in relation
to morphology were: A

1. Children in the LPS group will achieve higher
scores on the Berko test for morphological rules
than will children in the Community group.

2. There is a positive correlation between the
acquisition of English morphology, as measured
by the Berko test, and intelligence, as meas-
ured by the Peabody test.

A review of the related literature is found in Chap-
ter Two. The procedures followed in this study are described
in Chapter Three. The analysis and discussion of the data
gathered during this study is summarized in Chapter Four.
Summary and conclusions and implications for further re-
search are discussed in Chapter Five.

This study is a replication of selected aspects

of the Jean Berko research.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The child's acquisition of language has been of
interest for many years to many scholars. Scientific lin-
guists, sociologists, psychologists, educators, and struc-
tural linguists have observed and recorded the child's
learning of language through various means and for differ-
ent reasons. Carroll (1961) attributes the interest in
this particular aspect of a child's development to the
complexity of language and the apparent swiftness of learn-
ing. Another important reason for the concern is that
language development is generally agreed to be positively
correlated with intelligence. (Leopold, 1952, 10) The
interest in studying child language learning stems from

various disciplines.

Major fields 2; study

Scholars in the history of language, such as Jes-
persen (1922), have studied the child's learning of his
mother tongue to aid in obtaining information about the
historical character of language. Carroll reports that
so far there is no positive answer as to whether the grad-
ual changes of languages over generations are to any extent

caused by the variations observed in the child's speech

as compared with that of his parents. (1961, 331)

Sociologists, such as Bernstein, have studied the
language habits of children and have discovered that status
differences are revealed almost from the beginning of speech.
An investigation of the child's language reveals the pur-
pose of language as a means of eliciting and strengthening
ways of feeling and thinking which are functionally related
to the social group. (Bernstein, 1961) Because of the re-
cent interest in eliminating the devastating effects of
cultural deprivation, the linguistic patterns of children
have been studied. These studies have attempted to account
for and remedy differences which contribute to underdevel-
oped verbal skills and substandard speech patterns among
those who are deprived. (Hurst & Jones, 1961, 409)

Skinner and other psychologists see language as
one of many learned behavior patterns. Study of the proc-
ess by which the child learns to speak and understand lan-
guage may hold the key to many fundamental behavioral prob-
1ems. (Carroll, 1961) Piaget studied the content of the
child's language to gain a better understanding of his
thought processes and concept formations. (Piaget, 1965)

Educators, such as Thorndike and Lorge, are con-
cerned with the kind of language that is characteristic
of a particular age range, to help them make comparisons
as well as to gain helpful information for developing school

curriculums. (Thorndike & Lorge, 1944) Other educators

look at a child's language development for a better under—
standing of the child's intelligence, personality and so-
cial adjustment.

Linguists study the child's language for the sake
of language and structure. The child's language provides
clues to structure and facilitates analysis of adult lan-'
guage. (Berko, 1958a, 1) Knowledge gained from observation
of the child's acquisition of language has helped develop
techniques for teaching foreign students.

The literature on the acquisition of language is
now voluminous; a great deal of it was summarized by McCarthy.
Her emphasis was on the ontogenetic development of spoken-
language in normal children. (McCarthy, 1946, 476) Leopold
(1952) has also summarized some of the writings; his bib—
liography is particularly valuable because it covers non-
English material. More recent summaries can be found in
Brown & Berko (1960), Ervin & Miller (1963) and Ervin-Tripp
(1966).

All of the evidence summarized by McCarthy supports
the general prediction that the quality of the child's lan-
guage is dependent on the intelligence of the child. The
most extrinsic factor influencing language development is
the environment in which the child is raised. Regardless
of the child's intelligence, if the models available to
him are not adequate his language development will be sub—

standard. Templin found in one of her studies that upper

socio-economic groups "received higher scores quite con-
sistently at each age level for all language measures."

(Templin, 1958, 333)

Components 2: the language system

Research discussed in the early literature was col-
lected in natural settings, often by parents using non-
standardized techniques. Theories of language learning
cannot ultimately be tested unless an experimental approach
is adopted.

The analyses of language development reported in
the early studies, such as those of McCarthy and M. Smith,
centered largely on the size of vocabulary, sentence length,
sentence complexity, sound discrimination and verbal com-
prehension. More recent studies by Loban and others have
pointed out that these previously-used criteria are largely
inadequate for measuring accurately the essentials of lan-
guage. (Loban, 1963, 9) More descriptive analyses of the'
structure of the language are now being used to understand
language acquisition; this new approach has been used since
the mid '50's.

The structure of the language system is divided
into two fundamental levels. The first is the phonological
or sound system; the second level is grammatical. The A
phonemes are the vowels, consonants, levels of pitch, pauses
and stresses of a particular language. They are the mini-

mal sound units which occur in a particular language and

10

make differences in meaning, for example, the phonemes [s]
and [S] in "sin" and ”shin.” The number of potential sounds
in a language approaches infinity but in languages so far
studied the number of phonemes runs about 25 to 30. (Carroll,
1961, 332)

Jakobson's research concerning the child's acquisi-
tion of phonemes was reported by Velten, ”The hypothesis
is that the development of the sound system [phonology]
can be described in terms of successive contrasts between
features that are maximally different and which permeate
the whole system. Thus the first distinction is between
a vowel and a consonant, since vowels and consonants are
more different than any other part of the system. Next
the child might learn to contrast a stop with a nonstop,
for example /p/ and /m/, or /p/ and /f/. Theoretically,
the child could double his stock of consonants with each
pair of contrasting features.“ (Ervin & Miller, 1963, 112)
A more complete description of the developmental sequence
can be found in Ervin-Tripp.(l966, 68)

One theory of phonological acquisition is that the
original phonetic equipment of the individual is very large
and that learning takes place by a process of adjustment:
it is necessary for the child to eliminate sounds not used
in his language while strengthening or reinforcing the
sounds which are used. Therefore, during the infant's

babbling stage a great number of phonemes are voiced, but

11

as the child's oral cavity and dental arch develop and his
parents reinforce the particular phonemes they recognize,~
the child's phonetic equipment is acquired. (Esper, 1935)

The grammatical description of language is often
subdivided into morphology and syntax. Morphemes are the
smallest meaningful units in a language, represented by a
sequence of one or more phonemes, as in "Saskatchewan,"
”teach," "-er,” "—ing." (Ervin-Tripp, 1966, 96) In speech,
the plural morpheme appears as /-s/, /-z/, /—ez/, /-en/,
or a vowel change as in "cats," "dogs,“ "bridges,” ”child-
ren," or "men." All of the various forms of the plural
morpheme are called allomorphs. (Ervin & Miller, 1963, 117)

Morphemes are combined to form the most complex
level of grammar-~syntax. Syntax includes phrase structure
and a system of handling the more complicated features of.
clauses and sentences. (Ervin-Tripp, 1966, 97)

The grammar categories (morphology and syntax) often
overlap and are difficult to describe independently. Ac-
cording to Brown and Berko:

Not all languages express the same grammatical

categories, and each language is unique in its
choice of morphological and syntactical meanings
of expression. Often grammatical meanings can be
expressed in two or more ways in the same language;
one of these ways can involve morphology and the
other, syntax; in English, for example, genitive
relations can be shown either by special endings
(morphology), as in the horse's hoof, or by juxta-

position of words and special function words (syn-
tax), as in the hoof of the horse. It is thus im-

possible to describe grammar without considering
both morphology and syntax. (1960, 541)

12

Word order is very important in English, while in-
flexional endings are of more importance in other languages.
In English, "The farmer loves the girl,” and ”The girl loves
the farmer," are two quite different statements. The actor
and the object are indicated only by the position of words.
The opposite is true in Latin; both "Puellam amat agricola"
and "Agricola amat puellam” mean ”The farmer loves the girl."
(Brown & Berko, 1960, 541) Since syntax is more important
in English, it is acquired before morphology. The order
of acquisition is dependent on the structure of the language
learned. English speaking children speak in one or two-
word sentences usually accompanied by gestures to express
complete thoughts by about 12 to 18 months. (Hurlock, 1964,
230) The inflexional endings are not noticed in the child's
speech until about three years of age. '

Research on the acquisition of syntax is relatively
new and most of it has been directed by Roger Brown. He
points out that in the early stages of language development,
most nouns are picturable objects while most verbs are ob?
servable physical actions. It would seem that very early
in the course of language development, children form con-
cepts of the form-classes we call nouns and verbs. (Brown
& Berko, 1960, 552) Suppose a person heard the sentence:
The igglg_sguigs trazed wombly in the harlish 3222. Although
the meanings of the major words are not known, it is pos-

sible to assign them to form classes on the basis of their

13

order in the sentence and the inflections and function words.
The actors are the sguigs; to be more descriptive, they are
igglg.sguigs. The action which they performed was'Egggg

and they did it in a wombly fashion. The actors performed
their act in the harlish 3222. So by putting the words

into classes it is possible to derive some understanding

of the sentence. (Brown & Berko, 1960, 549) Further infor-
mation concerning syntax can be found in Brown & Bellugi
(1964), Brown & Fraser (1964), Brown & Berko (1960), Ervin

& Miller (1963) and Ervin-Tripp (1966).

Studies g£_morphology'

A study by Jean Berko focused on the child's acqui-
sition of morphology. Morphemes are the smallest individual,
meaningful elements in the utterances of a language. Free
morphemes are meaningful forms that can stand alone, such
as "cat” and "dog.“ Bound morphemes are forms that never
stand alone but retain some consistent meaning in the vari-
ous combinations into which they enter, for example, the
possessive "'s” of "cat's" and "dog's." Morphological rules
describe the construction of new words from free to bound
morphemes. (Brown & Berko, 1960, 518) These rules are not
explicitly known to the child or naive adults; they are
implicitly known in that they are followed.

In 1958, Berko developed a set of materials that
could be used to make a complete inventory of the English

inflectional system: the plural and possessive endings of

l4

nouns; the simple past, the third person present indicative,
and the progressive of verbs; the comparative and superla-
tive of adjectives. These materials were used to measure
the child's understanding of English morphology. To test
for this knowledge, nonsense words were used. Berko reas-
oned that a child able to supply the correct endings to
nonsense words had successfully internalized the rules.

For example, if a child responded.wgg§_for the plural form
of 323, it can be assumed that he has internalized the rule
for the plural allomorph. Whereas, if the child were to
supply the correct ending to a common noun such as "dog-
dogs," there is no guarantee that the child hadn't just
memorized the plural form of "dog."

In her study, Berko attempted to answer the follow-
ing questions: Have young children been exposed to enough
language to possess the rules for English morphology? If
children do have the knowledge of morphological rules, how
does this knowledge evolve? Is there a progression from
simple, regular rules to the more irregular and qualified
rules that are adequate fully to describe English? (Berko,
1958b, 150)

To find answers to these questions, Berko presented
her materials in a picture book form to children ranging
in age from four to seven years. She also presented the
27 picture cards to twelve adults whose responses to the

inflexional items were considered correct answers. This

15

made it possible to rate the children's responses. In gen-
eral, she found that adult opinion was unanimous. Where
they differed was with the common but irregular formation,
for example, hgg£_became heaves in the plural for many
speakers and in these cases both responses (hegfg, heaves)
were considered correct.

In a study of preschool children's grammatical er-
rors, M. E. Smith (1933) found that three year olds were
able to generalize in the use of inflected words. Because
of this they often made errors by extending the rules for
the formation of regular forms to other words irregularly
inflected, for example, "bringed." By examining a vocabu-
lary list of elementary school children's 1,000 most fre-
quently used words, Berko found all of the English inflex-
ional morphemes present. With reference to Berko's first
question, then, preschool children have been exposed to
enough language to operate with clearly delimited morpho-
logical rules.

Berko's other major conclusions were: there is
no apparent difference between the sexes concerning the
understanding of morphological rules. Boys and girls in
this age range are equal in their ability to handle the
English morphology represented by these items. (Berko,
1958a, 33) There are differences between the preschoolers
and the first graders, but the improvement was in the direc-

tion of perfecting knowledge already possessed—-the simple

16

plurals and possessives, and the progressive tense. (Berko,
1958a, 33) The children's responses were consistent, regu-
lar and simple; they did not treat new words according to
idiosyncratic patterns. Berko stated, "Where they provided
inflexional endings, their best performance was with those
forms that are the most regular and have the fewest vari-
ants. With the morphemes that have several allomorphs,
they could handle forms calling for the most common of
those allomorphs that appear in a limited distribution
range." (Berko, 1958a, 68) The following is a further
explanation of morphological rules by Berko:

In a great majority of cases the plural form
is made by adding /-ez/ to the singular if it ends
in a voiceless sound other than a sibilant or af-
fricate, or /-z/ if the singular ends in any voiced
sound other than a sibilant or affricate, so that
we have plurals like "batches", ”bags", "backs”.
This summary can be set forth as a general rule
for English. It does not mean that the plural
must be formed in this way, and it does not im-
ply that exceptions like “men” or ”oxen” or "child-
ren" do not exist. But since it is so common, and
since new words coming into the language seem to
be treated according to this formation it is called 7
the regular or productive form of the plural. (1958a,
18)

The productive allomorphs of the plural, the
possessives, and the third person singular of the
verb are phonologically conditioned and identical
with one another. These forms are /-s -z -ez/,
with the following distribution: \/\/\/

/-ez/ after stems that end in /s z s z c j/,
e.g. "glasses", "watches";

/-s/ after stems that end in /p t k f 9/, e.g.
"hops", "hits“;

/-z/ after all other stems, viz. those ending
in /b d g v‘b m n g r 1/, vowels and semivowels,
e.g. "bids“, "goes .

17

The productive allomorphs of the past are /-t
-d -ed/, and they are also phonologically condi-
tioned, with the following distribution:

/-ed/ after stems that end in /t d/, e.g.
"melted"; .

/-t/ after stems that end in /p k E'f 9 §/,
e.g. ”stopped"; ,

/-d/ after stems ending in voiced sounds except
/-d/, e.g. ”climbed", "played”. (1958a, 19)

The progressive -ing-and the adjective -er and
-est do not have variants. It might also be noted
that the possessive.has an additional allomorph
/-¢/; this occurs after an inflexional /-s/ or
/-z/, so that if the form "boy" is made plural,
"boys“, the possessive of that plural form is made
by adding nothing, and indicated in writing only
by the addition of an apostrophe: “boys'”. (1958a,
20)

This review of the literature has attempted to dem-
onstrate that considerable attention has been directed to-
ward the study of the child's acquisition of language.
Most of the early research evaluated language skills on
such measures as size of vocabulary, parts of speech, sen-
tence length and sentence complexity. Comparative studies
of children from different socio—economic groups seem to
agree that children who are socially disadvantaged on such
objective criteria as income and the educational level of
their parents tend to be deficient on many measures of
language skills. (Cazden, 1966, 213)

A few studies have focused more on the elementary
units of the language, such as phonemes, morphemes, and
syntax, but these have not been comparative studies.

The study done by Berko attempted to describe the

acquisition of morphology by children enrolled in the

18

Harvard Preschool in Cambridge and a neighboring elementary
school. From her findings she suggested that "every child
is in contact with a sufficiently varied sample of spoken
English in order for him to be exposed at an early age to
the basic morphological processes. These processes occur
in simple sentences as well as complex ones. Practice with
a limited vocabulary may be as effective as practice with
an extensive vocabulary, and the factors that influence
other aspects of language development may have no effect:E
on morphological acquisition." (Berko, 1958a, 57-58)
Morphology is an area of language acquisition which
has not been systematically studied in the disadvantaged
child. The present study was an attempt in part to repli-
cate Berko's by comparing a sample similar to Berko's with

a group of disadvantaged children.

CHAPTER III
PROCEDURES

Sources 2: subjects

The two groups of subjects selected for this study
were enrolled in the Michigan State University nursery
schools during the winter quarter (January-March), 1967.
The nursery schools serve as a laboratory for the Depart-
ment of Home Management and Child Development in the Col-
lege of Home Economics.

The children who attended the Laboratory Preschool
were representative, in general, of the upper middle class
according to Cattell's Metric Scale for Social Status.
(Cattell, 1946, 142) Participants in the Laboratory Preé
school are chosen for enrollment on the basis of sex, age,
and position on a waiting list.

In the summer of 1965, a Community Play Group was
organized by the nursery school staff. Half of the group
attended the Spartan Nursery School; the remainder attended
the other university preschool. The thirty children en-
rolled in the Play Group were selected by criteria similar
to those used for children in Head Start preschool programs.
According to Cattell's scale, these children were members

of lower class families.

19

20

Procedure fg£,selection

English speaking children who were between 4.0 and
5.2 years at the time the testing program was initiated
and who were emotionally mature enough to leave the class-
room with an examiner qualified as subjects for this study.

All of the Laboratory Preschool children (LPS) who
fulfilled the same requirements were listed by age and sex;
eighteen of these children were then paired with their coun-
terparts in the Community Play Group. If more than one A
LPS child matched in age and sex with a CPG child, the ex-
aminer randomly selected the LPS child to complete the pair.
The teachers were consulted to determine if any of the child-
ren were participants in other research projects or might
be leaving school before the end of the school term. A
total of 20 girls and 10 boys was selected for the study.

For a description of the sample see Table 1.

Testing environment.§ng_tg§2 materials

Twenty-four of the children were tested in the base-
ment of the Laboratory Preschool. The room, 16 1/2' x 34 1/2',
was a bright yellow color. At one end of the room was a
kitchen unit; at the other end there was a counter with
cupboards. The furnishings consisted of 4 desks and 2 small
tables. One table, 19" high, was used for the testing. -
The child and examiner sat on chairs 11" high. The size
and furnishings of the room were distracting to some sub-

jects.

21

 

NH 5 m m.¢m N.mm o.Nm

m N a m.mm m.mm N.Nm

m m v m.¢m m.mm m.Hm

om ON OH

ma OH m

ma OH m

Hmuoe

maouw
amam

hyacseaou

Quouw
Hoonumoum

muoumuonmq

 

Hmuoe mauau mmom

cmuuaanu
Hmsmcaaam

Hmuoa manna msom sauce mauau mama

Hoonum hummusz mnudoz
SH use» odoumm CH mom< cum:

Hmuoa mHun whom
mnam mHQEmm

 

oaaemm mo doauafluumma

H manna

22

The remaining 6 children were tested at the other
University nursery school (Spartan Nursery School) in a-
7' x 12' room furnished as a workshop. The test was admin-
istered on a 1 1/2' x 3 1/2' workbench. Neither room was
soundproof. It was not possible to eliminate all distrac-
tions. I

First, the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT)
was administered according to the procedures outlined in;
the test manual. This test consists of 150 plates with
four illustrations on each plate. The black and white draw-
ings, of equal size, intensity, and appeal, are presented
to the subject who is asked to point to the drawing which
represents the stimulus word. A ceiling level is reached
when the subject misses 6 out of 8 consecutive responses.
Children in the age range from 4.0 to 5.2 years on the
average respond to approximately 40 pictures. A raw score
is determined which can then be converted into either an’
age equivalent (mental age), a standard score equivalent:
(intelligence quotient) or a percentile equivalent. (Dunn,
1959) For the purpose of this study only the intelligent
quotient scores were derived from the raw scores.

The second test administered to each child was de-
signed by Jean Berko to measure a child's understanding
of English morphology. The test comprises a set of twenty-
seven brightly-colored picture cards which are presented

to the subject (Appendix A). A text is read for each

23

picture card and the subject is expected to complete the
statement. Variations of the original nonsense word were
noted phonemically.

Most of the children understood what was being asked
of them; it took between 10 to 15 minutes to administer
the instrument. Some of the subjects in Berko's study,
as well as some in this study, thought they were being
taught new words and repeated the nonsense word after the
examiner. For example, when the examiner said, ”This is
a tass," the child would immediately respond with "Tass."

If a child did not attempt to complete the state-
ment, the examiner re-read the text on the card. After
three readings if the child still did not respond no re-
sponse was recorded and the next card was read. Very few
children failed to complete all of the statements. Their

responses will be discussed in the following chapters.

Procedure £2; testing

All of the tests reported in this study were admin-
istered by the writer.

The examiner spent time in each nursery school
classroom prior to the testing to become more familiar
with the children. During the actual testing the examiner
approached each child in his nursery school room and in-
formed him that it was his turn to play a picture game.
When a child refused to participate he was asked at a later

time; two and sometimes three attempts were made to invite

24

the child to participate. If after the third invitation

the child seemed apprehensive and refused to play the ”game”
he was dropped from the study. The order in which the sub-
jects were selected for administration of the tests depended
upon which subjects were present on the testing day and
which of those subjects were not engaged in thematic or
creative play at a particular time.

After the child had agreed to go with the examiner,
both went to the head teacher and explained where they were
going. This was done partly to help the teacher keep track
of the children, but mainly to let the child know that the
teacher was familiar with the examiner and the testing sit-
uation. The examiner attempted to establish rapport through
conversation from the time she took the child from the class-
room until she was seated with him in the testing room.

The directions for the test were read; a sample item was
presented to insure comprehension of the task; then the
child was given the test. When 6 errors in any 8 presenta-
tions were made on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test,

the examiner turned back to easier items and let the child
"administer the game" to the examiner. All of the children
enjoyed this part of the experience. Some even insisted

on changing seats and keeping a record of the responses

on the score sheet. After completion of the testing pro-
cedure, the child was returned to the classroom. The same

procedure was used for the administration of the second

25

test. Sufficient rapport was established during the first
test so that all of the children approached for the second

test readily agreed to participate.

Procedure for analysis

Hypothesis I was tested by the "t" test for small
samples, equal N's and equal variances. A Chi-square test
of independence was used to examine more closely the find-
ings of Hypothesis I.

Two correlation coefficients were calculated for
the testing of Hypothesis II. The first was Spearman's
rank correlation coefficient; the second was the Pearson
product-moment correlation coefficient.

A third hypothesis, arising from the results of
Hypotheses I and II, was tested by an analysis of co-

variance.

CHAPTER IV
PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The hypotheses that were tested are:

Hypothesis I: Children in the Laboratory Preschool
Group will achieve higher scores on the Berko test for mor-
phological rules than will children in the Community Play
Group.

Hypothesis II: There is a positive correlation
between the acquisition of English morphology, as measured
by the Berko test, and intelligence, as measured by the.
Peabody test.

The results of the tests of Hypotheses I and II
yielded Hypothesis III: There is a difference in the per-
formance of the two groups on the Berko test when the ef-

fect of 1.0. is controlled.

Results

Hypothesis 1. Berko scores were assumed to be
normally distributed; the variances of the two samples
were tested for equality using P and found to be equal.
The "t" test for small samples, equal N's, and equal vari-
ances was used to test Hypothesis 1. The means for the
LPS and CPG groups were 14.3 and 7.7 respectively. The

findings for this one-tail test were t = 3.204, p <:.01.

26

27

The null hypothesis was rejected; the means are different.

A further exploration of Hypothesis I was made us—
ing the Chi-square test of independence. The subjects of
both the groups were categorized as being of high or low
achievement depending on their performance scores on the
Berko test. The Chi-square test with Yates correction for
continuity was used to test whether the observed pattern
of level of achievement was the same for both groups. The
observed pattern for both groups, the chi-square value for
each test, and the level of confidence for each value are
summarized in Table 2. The first Chi-square test was for
the total scores achieved on the Berko. The total scores
were then subdivided into: (1) plural formation of nouns;
(2) past tense of verbs; (3) third person singular of verbs;
(4) progressive form of verbs; and (5) the two possessive
forms of the noun.

Hypothesis II. Two correlations between I.Q. and
Berko scores were calculated. First, the two groups were
combined and ranked on the two tests and the Spearman's‘
rank correlation coefficient was computed. The rank cor-
relation coefficient obtained was .61. Second, the indi-
vidual scores were also correlated using the Pearson product-
moment correlation coefficient; the r obtained was .62.:
These correlations were tested for difference from zero;
both were found to be significantly different from zero’

at the .05 level of confidence.

28

Table 2

Chi-square Results

 

 

Laboratory Community Chi-square Level of
Berko scores Preschool PlayfiGroup »Value. Significance
Total C .
High 11 5 4.954 .05
Low 4 10
Subgroups
Plurals .
High 13 4 11.122 .001_
Low 2 11
Verbs
High 11 2 11.122 .001
Low 4 13
Third Person
Singular
High 11 6 3.527 .10
Low 4 9
Progressive
High 12 10 .850 --
Low 3 5
Possessive
High 9 5 2.275 --
Low 6 10

 

29

The effect of I.Q. on the Berko test was also esti-
mated by means of linear regression. The relationship based
on the sample of 30 children was Y = -7.36 + 0.18X where
Y = Berko score and X = I.Q.

Hypothesis III. Findings in Hypothesis II indi-
cated that an uncontrolled variable, I.Q., may have been
in effect in the analysis of Hypothesis I. Due to the find-
ings of Hypothesis II and due to the fact that the mean:

I.Q. scores of the two groups were substantially different,

a further statistical test was made. An analysis of co;
variance was used to test the difference in mean scores:
between the two groups when the effect of I.Q. is controlled.
Table 3 presents the figures used in this analysis. The

F value of 1.36 was not significant at the .05 level of.
confidence (df = 1,27). There is no significant difference

between the two groups when the effect of I.Q. is controlled.

Discussion

The results of Hypothesis I indicate that the Lab-
oratory Preschool group--children from upper middle class
homes--have a better understanding of English morphology
than the Community Play Group--children from lower class
homes.

At this time it is essential to describe the home"
environment characteristic of lower class families. In
discussing the environment of a lower class home and its

effect on the child's learning ability, Deutsch states that

30

Table 3

Results of Analysis of Co-Variance

 

 

Degrees Adjusted Adjusted
of Sum of Mean
Source of Variation Freedom Sguares Sguares F
Between Group 1 34.7 34.7
Within Group (error) 27 688.90 25.51
Total 28 723.60 1.36

 

31

in large families there is ”little opportunity for indi-

viduation." There is little time and less knowledge that
is shared by adults with children. Books, toys, puzzles,
pencils, and scribbling paper are rarely available to the
child. The scarcity of manipulable objects and the lack

of visual stimuli affect the child's visual perception.

The child has a restricted range of experiences,
"lacks expectations from accumulation of knowledge, from
task orientation and from adult reinforcement." The mean—
ingless background noise contributes to the learning of
inattention. The child does not get practice in auditory
discrimination or feedback from adults correcting his enun-
ciation, pronunciation, and grammar. (Deutsch, 1961)

There is little verbal interaction between the
adults and the children. Communication is largely through
the use of gestures and other non-verbal means. When speech
is used it is what Bernstein refers to aspublic language.
Some of its characteristics are: short, grammatically
simple, often unfinished sentences with a poor syntactical
form; simple and repetitive use of conjunctions; rigid and
limited use of adjectives and adverbs. (Bernstein, 1961,
310)

Most of the child's language is learned by “recep-
tive exposure--by hearing, rather than by the corrective
feedback of his own active speech." (John & Goldstein, 1964,

273) When corrective feedback is available, that which is

32

fed back is often an incorrect model.

In summary, deprivation affects the adult-child
relationship, perceptual and auditory discrimination, abil-
ity to sustain attention, motivation for task completion,
and verbal usage. The implications of Deutsch's statements
affect the present study.

In this study the Community Play Group children
had trouble focussing their attention on the tests. The
experience alone with an adult, the large size of the room,

the distractions in the room, and the test-taking situation

 

‘Izw ..'x_ ' -

seemed to divert the children's attention from the tests.
Some of the children could not recall the nonsense names
of the Berko items. The experimenter had to repeat the
words, sometimes more than once. This may have been due
to either a lack of retention or difficulty in auditory
discrimination or lack of practice in similar tasks.

The adult reinforcement may have motivated the
upper middle class child while the same type of reinforce-
ment may have had little or no effect on the lower class
child.

The quality and quantity of the language models
presented in the lower class homes are not as adequate as
the models found in the upper middle class homes. Yet,
English grammar must have been used correctly to some ex-
tent or the Community Play Group children could not have

responded as well as they did.

33

The results of Hypothesis II indicated a positive
correlation between I.Q. scores and the Berko scores. On
the basis of these results, it is tempting to assume that
since the LPS children had higher scores on the Berko test
and since I.Q. is positively correlated with the Berko
scores, it follows that the LPS children have higher I.Q.‘s.
The mean I.Q. for the LPS was actually higher than that
of the CPG, but one must keep in mind the type of test
used to obtain the I.Q. scores. The PPVT is a picture
vocabulary test in which the examiner asks the child to
point to a particular referent. The raw score obtained
on the vocabulary test is converted to an intelligence quo-
tient. Therefore, since the PPVT is a vocabulary test,
and since the CPG children have deficiencies in language,
the PPVT is not a valid index of intelligence for these
children.

A previously cited study (John & Goldstein, 1964)
found that lower class Negro children had particular dif-
ficulty on the PPVT with action words, words related to
rural living, and words whose referents may be rare in low
class homes. The PPVT is a measure of the child's English
vocabulary and should not be used as a measure of intelli-
gence for lower class children. It is difficult to find
a standardized test that can be used with these children.
Deutsch stated, "As a result of experiential poverty a

child is probably further from his maturational ceiling.

 

34

This would contribute to his poorer performance on stand-
ardized tests of intelligence." (1961, 169)

A lower class child having no experience with pic-
ture books would be in an unfamiliar situation when an
adult asks him to point to particular pictures. The upper
middle class child, being more familiar with picture books,
is more able to cope with the testing situation because r
he knows what is expected of him.

If a child's visual perceptual skills are not as
developed and if he has had little experience attaching

labels to pictures, he may not perceive the object in the

 

picture as representative of a real object or action with
which he is familiar. This being the case, the mode of
presentation of the I.Q. test was also inappropriate for
the lower class children.

A third added disadvantage for the CPG was that
many of the children came from bilingual families. A child
learning two languages simultaneously has a slower acquisi-
tion of both languages. On the average, the children who
came from bilingual environments had fewer English words
in their vocabularies and subsequently had lower I.Q.
scores. They may also have been learning the grammar of
two languages and hence may not have understood English
morphology as well as their peers.

A further explanation as to the meaning of the

scores is necessary. A child's I.Q. score was obtained

35

by comparing his raw score with norms based on children

of the same age. For example, a score of 56 at 4 years
would yield an I.Q. score of 120, while at 5 years the same
raw score would be converted to an I.Q. score of 111. On
the Berko test all 30 children were measured on the same
scale; age was not taken into consideration except that

the two samples for this study were matched on the basis F
of age. This explains discrepancies such as the following: A

Subject A I.Q. = 125, Berko = 5;
Subject B I.Q. = 105, Berko = 18.

The first child was only 4 years old; the second child was

 

5 years and 2 months old. An explanation of this finding
is that age is a variable which must be considered in rat-
ing a child's level of morphological understanding.
Examination of Hypothesis III demonstrated that
there was not a significant difference in the mean Berko
scores between the two groups when the effect of I.Q. was
controlled. This finding further emphasizes the positive
relationship between morphological acquisition and intel—
ligence. The two variables are so closely linked that when
the effect of I.Q. is held constant across the two socio-
economic groups, the difference between the mean Berko scores
disappears.
Around 4 years of age the child is just beginning
to comprehend the inflexional endings of words. A verbally
enriched environment does not seem to accelerate the child's

learning of morphology nor does a verbally deficient

36

environment (as described above) decelerate the learning,

if the child has been exposed to inflexional endings. The
CPG children had been attending the university nursery school
6 months prior to the time they took the Berko test. Their
exposure to good English models and the corrective feedback
given by the teachers and other children may have influenced
the children's language acquisition and, more specifically,
morphology.

A content analysis of the responses revealed results
similar to those in Berko's study. The plural allomorph
most often used by the children was /-z/, followed by /-s/,
and finally /-ez/. Although these children have in their
vocabularies real words which form their plural in /-ez/,
they were not able to generalize to form new words in /—ez/.
Berko stated the children's rule for plural formation as,
”to add /-s/ or /-z/, unless the word ends in /s 2 Y E‘E 37.
To words ending in these sounds add nothing to make the
p1ura1--and when asked to form a plural, repeat the stem
as if it were already in the plural." (Berko, 1958a, 59)
Some of the children who were unable to form the /-ez/
plural allomorph were able to supply /-ez/ as the inflex-
ional ending on the third person singular of the verb.

A similar situation arose with the past tense allo—
morph of the verb. Although the children had forms like
“melted" in their vocabularies, they were unable to gener-

alize the /-ed/ form to new words ending in /t d/. Berko

37

found that the children treated these forms as if they were
already in the past. She suggested that the children's
“real morphological rules for the formation of the past
tense is to add /~d/, and under certain conditions it will
automatically become /—t/." (Berko, 1958a, 63) The child-
ren did not use irregular patterns to form the past tense,
for example, "ring" became "ringed." : i
The best performance on the verb inflexions was h
with the progressive form. There is only one allomorph

for the progressive and that is "-ing." The children either

 

responded with the correct form or not at all. Children

[1‘

in this age group are more involved with the present and
might be more familiar with the progressive form of the
verb than the past tense.

Formation of the two possessives is accomplished
in writing by adding either "'5“ or "s'" to the singular
form; in speech, by adding a morphological zero. There-
fore, if a child supplied the correct plural allomorph for
either the singular or plural possessive he was credited
with a correct response. Some children responded with real
words instead of the nonsense words for the possessive?
forms, for example, instead of "EEELE hat," they responded
with "man's hat," "cartoon's hat" or "boy's hat." In such
cases partial credit was given.

Although not considered in the total score, the

adjectival inflexion was tested. The test item attempted

38

to elicit comparative and superlative endings for the ad-
jective quirky. Instead of using the inflexional endings
many children responded with homonyms (such as "turkey,"
murkey) or synonyms (such as "spotty," "Beagle," "Collie”).
If a child did not supply the comparative form of the ad-
jective, the experimenter supplied that form when asking
for the superlative form. The majority of the children
repeated the “-ier" form after the experimenter. Two
children attempted the superlative with "more quirkier“

and "guirkier than the last." Only one child supplied the

 

correct response—-quirkiest. These responses were congru-

 

ent with those discussed by Berko.

Summary

The results of the first statistical test supported
Hypothesis I; children in the LPS Group achieved higher
scores on the Berko test than children in the CPG. There
was a cause and effect relationship between environmental
experiences and test-taking abilities.

Two correlation coefficients were obtained and
supported Hypothesis II; there is a positive correlation
between I.Q. scores and Berko scores. Implications of this
result were discussed as they pertained to the inadequacy
of the PPVT to evaluate the intelligence of the lower class
children.

The difference in the performance of the two groups

on the Berko test when the effect of I.Q. is controlled

’5‘... .7

 

{l 17"" a. _ '-
ll
1' A

39

was not found to be significant. This finding further
emphasized the complex interrelationship of language ac-
quisition and intelligence.

These findings suggest that morphological acquisi-
tion is another aspect of language development which is
extrinsically influenced by environment and intrinsically

influenced by intelligence. 9

 

FFI'T \

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Summary

For the past several years, the child's acquisition

a!.Vfl’
._ i‘

of spoken language has been the basis for a considerable
amount of writing and research. In the early studies the
size of a child's vocabulary, the parts of speech used,

and the length and complexity of his sentences were uti—

 

17.

lized to evaluate his language skills. The findings from
studies which compare children from various socio-economic
classes seem to indicate that children from the lower class
homes tend to be deficient in many of the measured language
skills.

In the more recent studies on language development,
the methods of measuring language have been more preciSe.
The acquisition of language structure has been studied by
investigating the elementary units of the language--the
phonemes, morphemes and syntax. However, research which
more accurately measures the essentials of language has
not been comparative in nature.

The purpose of this study was to measure certain
preschool children's understanding of English morphology.

A study conducted by Jean Berko in 1958 found that child-

ren as young as four years of age begin to operate within

40

41

clearly defined morphological rules. She suggested that
"every child is in contact with a sufficiently varied sam-
ple of spoken English in order for him to be exposed at

an early age to the basic morphological processes." (Berko,
1958a, 57)

The specific problem involved in the present study
was to compare children from upper middle class homes to
children from lower class families on their understanding
of the morphological rules. A second aspect of English

morphology investigated was the relationship of language

 

acquisition to intelligence. 5
The sample consisted of two groups of children
ranging in age from 4 years old to 5 years 2 months old.
One group, from the Laboratory Preschool on the Michigan
State University campus, was comprised of 15 children from
upper middle class homes. The 15 children in the Community
Play Group, also from the university nursery schools, were
representatives of lower class homes.
Each child was tested on two separate occasions;
on the first occasion the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
was administered in order to obtain an intelligence quotient
score; and the second test, designed by Jean Berko, was
used to measure the child's understanding of English mor-
phology. The latter test consisted of 27 brightly-colored
pictures representative of nonsense words. Berko hypoth-

esized that if a child were able to supply the correct

42

endings to nonsense words, he would have successfully in-
ternalized the morphological rules. On the other hand,

a child able to supply the plural allomorph to a common
noun may have just memorized the plural form of the word
and not have internalized the rule. The Berko test meas-
ured the complete system of English inflexions: the plural
and possessive endings of nouns; the simple past, the third ET
person present indicative and the progressive of verbs; L
the comparative and superlative of adjectives.

The two major hypotheses tested in this study were:

 

I. Children in the Laboratory Preschool Group (LPS) will E
achieve higher scores on the Berko test for morphological
rules than will children in the Community Play Group (CPG);
II. There is a positive correlation between the acquisi-
tion of English morphology, as measured by the Berko test,
and intelligence, as measured by the Peabody test. A third
hypothesis, arising from the findings of Hypotheses I and
II, was examined: III. There is a difference in the per-
formance of the two groups on the Berko test when the ef-
fect of I.Q. is controlled.

The findings of the first statistical test (t=3.204,
p <1.01) supported Hypothesis I. Children in the Laboratory
Preschool did achieve higher scores on the Berko test than
did children in the Community Play Group. Implications
of this result were discussed as they pertained to a cause

and effect relationship between environmental experiences

43

and test-taking abilities.

A rank correlation coefficient of .61, and a product—
moment correlation coefficient of .62 supported Hypothesis
II. There is a positive correlation between the understand-
ing of English morphology and intelligence. The probable
reasons for this finding are again due to environmental
differences; the children from lower class families have rt
not had as much experience with attaching labels to pictures
as have upper middle class children. Because of this, the f

lower class children would not perform as well on a picture

 

w——.z

vocabulary test as would the upper middle class children.
This is a possible explanation for the lower mean I.Q.
score achieved by the CPG children.

Due to the fact that the test used to measure I.Q.
was not an appropriate measure for evaluating the intelli-
gence of lower class children, the data were further sta-
tistically tested. An analysis of co-variance was used
to test the difference between the two groups after con-
trolling the effect of I.Q. The F obtained in this statis-
tical test was not significant at the .05 level. The most
probable explanations for this finding seem to be: (1)
intelligence and language are so complexly interrelated
that if intelligence (as measured by an I.Q. test) is held
constant the proficiency of verbal skills is minimized;
(2) the CPG children had been in nursery school 6 months

prior to the time they were given the Berko test, so even

44

if they had not been exposed to the inflexional endings

in their homes, their exposure to them in nursery school
might have had a positive influence on their Berko scores;
and (3) acquisition of morphological rules is developmental
and children in this age range are just beginning to under—
stand morphology. Therefore, a child raised in a verbally-
sophisticated environment is unlikely, at this age, to have

a comprehensive understanding of morphology. It has been
pointed out in this study that age is an important variable
which must be considered when measuring a child's understand-

ing of morphology.

Conclusions Egg_implications

Implications from the findings in this study sug-
gest that further comparative investigation is needed in
the area of grammar acquisition. Morphological understand-
ing should be measured in children older than the ones in
this study. Since these children were in the developmental
sequence of learning the rules of morphology, the disorep—
ancy between the groups' means was not significant when
the effect of I.Q. was controlled. Whether or not the
discrepancy would appear at an older age is left to spec-
ulation. The 12 adults in Berko's study, whose responses
to the inflexional items were considered correct answers,
were all college graduates. Whether or not adults of the
lower class have mastered the morphology rules has not been

investigated. The findings from such an investigation might

 

45

have implications for early childhood education. If the
adults do understand the morphological rules, perhaps every
child is exposed to enough correctly spoken English to ac-
quire a basic understanding of English morphology. U

Intelligence is a very important factor involved
in the acquisition of this aspect of language. It is such
an inseparable variable that when the effect of I.Q. is
held constant, the language difference between the two
socio-economic groups disappears. Considering this fact,
the only way to do a study of language acquisition compar-
ing children of differing class groups would be to match
the groups on I.Q. as well as age. In this way, the dif-
ference in language would be due to environmental factors,
not intelligence quotient.

A more accurate correlation between the understand-
ing of morphology and intelligence could be obtained if
environmental factors were held constant. A large sample
of children from approximately the same socio-economic
class could be evaluated on both a standardized intelli-
gence test and the Berko test. The results of such a cor-
relation would be due more to intelligence than to environ-
ment.

Another approach to the relationship between mor-
phology and intelligence was suggested by Berko. After
a group of children have been evaluated by a standardized

intelligence test, the Berko cards could be used as practice

46

with half the children until they have acquired all the
morphological items. A retest of the group on the I.Q.
measure could then be used to see if specific instructions
in morphology at the preschool level results in higher per-
formance on the standardized I.Q. test. (Berko, 1967)

Until researchers have a more complete understand-
ing of the developmental sequence of the acquisition of
language in the early years, one may assume that intelli-
gence, environment, and age are all greatly influential

in the acquisition of morpholdgy.

REFERENCES

Berko, Jean. "The Child's Learning of English Morphology."
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Radcliffe Col-
lege, 1958 (a).

Berko, Jean. "The Child's Learning of English Morphology."
Word, 1958, 14, 150-177 (b). Also cited in S.
Saporta (Ed.), Psycholinguistics. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1961. Pp. 359-375.

Berko, Jean. Personal communication. January, 1967.

Bernstein, B. "Aspects of Language and Learning in the
Genesis of Social Process." Journal 2f_Child Psy-
chology and Psychiatry, 1961, 6, 313-325.

Brown, R., & Bellugi, Ursula. "The Acquisition of Language."
Monograph 2f the Society for Research in Child 2g:
velopment, 1964, 29, No. 1.

Brown, R., & Berko, Jean. "Psycholinguistics Research
Methods." In P. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook 9£_Research
Methods in_Child Develgpment. New York: John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., 1960. Pp. 517-557.

Brown, R., & Fraser, C. "The Acquisition of Syntax."
Monograph g: the Society for Research in Child 2g:
velgpment, 1964, 29, 43-79°

Buros, 0. Sixth Mental Measurement Yearbook. Highland
Park, New Jersey: The Gryphon Press, 1965.

Carroll, J. "Language Development in Children." In S.
Saporta (Ed.), Psycholinguistics. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1961. Pp. 331-345.

Cattell, R. "The Concept of Social Status." In P. Harri-
man (Ed.), 20th Centurngsychology. New York:
The Philosophical Library, 1946. Pp. 128-145.

Cazden, C. B. "Subcultural Differences in Child Language:
An Inter Disciplinary Review." .Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 1966, 12, 185-2190

Deutsch, M. "The Disadvantaged Child in the Learning Proc-
ess." In A. H. Passow (Ed.), Education in Depressed
Areas. New York: Teachers College Press, 1965.

Pp. 163-179.
47

48

Dunn, L. Manual for the Peabody Picture Vocabulary TLst.
Minneapolis: American Guidance Service, Inc., 1959.

Ervin, Susan, & Miller, W. ”Language Development." In
H. Stevenson (Ed. ), Child Psychology. - 62nd Yearbook
Lf the National Society for the Stud y Lf Education.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963. Pp.
108- 143.

Ervin-Tripp, Susan. "Language Development. In Hoffman
& Hoffman (Ed. ), Review Lf Child Development Re- .
search. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966.
Pp. 55-105 0

'Esper, E. "Language." In C. Murchinson (Ed.), Handbook
g£_Socia1 Psychology. Worcester: Clark University
Press, 1935. Pp. 417-460.

Hurlock, Elizabeth. Child Development. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1964.

Hurst, C., & Jones, W. "Psychosocial Concomitants of Sub-
standardHSpeech.* The.Jonrna1 g; Negro Education,

Jesperson, O. Langgage: Its Nature, Development and Ori-'
gin. New York: Holt, 1922.

John, Vera, & Goldstein, L. “The Social Context of Lan-
guage Acquisition." Merrill-Palmer‘anrterly,

Leopold, W. Bibliography 2; Child Langgage. Evanston,
Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1952.

Loban, W. The Langgage Lf Elementary School Children.
Champaign: National Council of Teachers of Eng-
lish Research Report, No. 1,1964.

McCarthy, Dorthea. "Language Development in Children.“
In L. Carmichael (Ed. ), Manual Lf Child Ps cholo
New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,194. Pp. 482-
630.

Piaget, J. The Langgage aLd Thought Lf the Child. New
York: The World Publishing Company, 1965.

Smith, Madorah. "An Investigation of the Development of
the Sentence and the Extent of Vocabularies tn
Young Children."' University of Iowa Study_ a
Child Welfare, 1926, 3, 5.

 

 

49

Smith, Madorah. "Grammatical Errors in the Speech of Pre-
school Children." Child Development, 1933, 4, 201-
213. , . -.

Templin, Mildred. "Relation of Speech and.Language Develop-
ment to Intelligence.and.Socio-Economic Status."
Volta Review, 1958, 60, 331-334»

Thorndike, E., & Lorge, I. The Teacher's Wordbook g£_30,000
Words. New York: Teachers College Press, 1944.

APPENDIX A

Description of the Berko Cards

The following is Berko's description of the 27
brightly-colored picture cards. She has included a state-
ment of what is being tested, a description of the card,
and the text which is read. Pronunciation is indicated
by regular English orthography; a phonemic transcription
is included for first occurrences of nonsense words.

1. Plural. One bird-like animal, then two. "This
is a wug /wAg/. Now there is another one. There are two
of them. There are two ."

2. Plural. One bird, then two. "This is a gutch
/gnE/. Now there is another one. There are two of them.
There are two ."

3. Past tense. Man with a steaming pitcher on
his head. "This is a man who knows how to spow /spow/.
He is spowing. He did the same thing yesterday. What
did he do yesterday? Yesterday he ."

4. Plural. One animal, then two. ”This is a
kazh /k ae‘éh Now there is another one. There are two
of them. There are two .'

5. Past tense. Man swinging an object. ”This
is a man who knows how to rick /rik/. He is ricking. He
did the same thing yesterday. What did he do yesterday?
Yesterday he .”

6. Diminutive and compounded or derived word.
One animal, then a miniscule animal. "This is a wug.
This is a very tiny wug. What would you call a very tiny
wug? This wug lives in a house. What would you call a
house that a wug lives in?"

7. Plural. One animal, then two. "This is a

tor /t3r/. Now there is another one. There are two of
them. There are two ."

SO

51

8. Derived adjective. Dog covered with irregular
green spots. "This is a dog with quirks /kworks/ on him.
He is all covered with quirks. What kind of a dog is he?
He is a dog." ,

9. Plural. One flower, then two. "This is a lun
/lAn/. Now there is another one-w There are two of them.
There are two .“ g

10. Plural. One animal, then two. P”This is a niz
/niz/. Now there is another one. There are two of them.
There are two ." .

11. Past tense. Man doing calisthenics. "This
is a man who knows how to mot /mat/. He is motting. He
did the same thing yesterday. What did he do yesterday?
Yesterday he ."

12. Plural. One bird, then two. "This is a cra
/kra/. Now there is another one. There are two of them.
There are two ." A

13. Plural. One animal, then two. "This is a tass
/taas/. Now there is another one- There are two of them.
There are two .“

14. Past tense. Han dangling an object on a string.
"This is a man who knows how to bod /bad/. He is bedding.
He did the same thing yesterday. What did he do yesterday?
Yesterday he ."

15. Third person singular. Man shaking an object.
"This is a man who knows how to naz /naz/. He is nazzing.
He does it every day. Every day he ."

16. Plural. One insect, then two. ”This is a
heaf /hiyf/. Now there is another one. There are two
of them. There are two .'

l7. Plural. One glass, then two. This is a glass.
Now there is another one. There are two of them. There
are two ."

18. Past tense. Man exercising. “This is a man
who knows how to gling /9113/. He is glinging. He did
the same thing yesterday. hat did he do yesterday? Yes—
terday he .

19. Third person singular. Man holding an object.
”This is a man who knows how to loodge /1uwd¥/. He is
loading. He does it every day. Every day he .”

52

20. Past tense. Man standing on the ceiling.
"This is a man who knows how to bing /bin/. He is bing-
ing. He did the same thing yesterdays What did he do
yesterday? Yesterday he ."

21. Singular and plural possessive. One animal
wearing a hat, then two wearing hats.. ”This is.a niz who
owns a hat. Whose hat is it? It is the . hat. Now
there are two nizzes. They both.own hats. Whose hats
are they? They are the hats-” .

22. Past tense. A bell. "This is a bell that
can ring. It is ringing. It did the same thing yesterday.
What did it do yesterday? Yesterday it .“

23. Singular and plural possessive. One animal
wearing a hat, then two. ”This is a wug who owns a hat.
Whose hat is it? It is the hat. Now there are two
wugs. They both own hats. Whose hats are.they? They are
the hats.”

24. Comparative and superlative of the adjective.
A dog with a few spots, one with several, and one with a
great number. "This dog has quirks on him. This dog has
more quirks on him. And this dog has even more quirks on
him. This dog is quirky. This dog is . And this
dog is the .'

25. Progressive and derived agentive or compound.
Man balancing a ball on his nose. "This is a man who knows
how to zib /zib/. What is he doing? He is . What
would you call a man whose job is to zib?"

26. Past tense. An ice cube, then a puddle of
water. “This is an ice cube. Ice melts. It is melting.
Now it is all gone. What happened to it? It ."

27. Singular and plural possessive. One animal
wearing a hat, then two. "This is a bik /bik/ who owns
a hat. Whose hat is it? It is the hat. Now there
are two biks. They both own hats. Whose hats are they?
They are the hats.”

(Berko, 1958a, 25-29)

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

1mm; IIIIIII“

IIII

3 1293

III