Volume 8, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2211-7245
  • E-ISSN: 2211-7253



A common assumption is that children learn a language implicitly and without conscious awareness of form and grammar, but this assumption has virtually never been tested experimentally. We propose a novel experimental method to examine if children’s ability to acquire linguistic regularities relates to awareness of these regularities. Traditional methods investigating awareness often rely on learners’ abilities to verbalize their awareness. For young children, such methods are not adequate because they often cannot reflect explicitly on their acquired knowledge, although they might be aware of it in a way they cannot verbalize. To test this, we adapted a method that is used to investigate awareness in animals, because it does not rely on verbalization for demonstrating awareness. Pilot results with 26 adults and 48 kindergartners show some important procedural prerequisites are met. In future research, this procedure could be used to investigate the development of meta-linguistic awareness in children.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license.

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Aissen, J.
    (2003) Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21(3), 435–483. 10.1023/A:1024109008573
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024109008573 [Google Scholar]
  2. Allport, A.
    (1988) What concept of consciousness?InA. J. Marcel, & E. Bisiach (Eds.), Consciousness in contemporary science (pp.159–182). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Andringa, S. & Curcic, M.
    (2015) How explicit knowledge affects online L2 processing. Evidence from differential object marking acquisition. Studies in Language Acquisition, 37(2), 237–268. 10.1017/S0272263115000017
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000017 [Google Scholar]
  4. Andringa, S., & Rebuschat, P.
    (2015) New directions in the study of implicit and explicit learning. An introduction. Studies in Language Acquisition, 37(2), 185–196. 10.1017/S027226311500008X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500008X [Google Scholar]
  5. Aslin, R. N., Saffran, J. R., & Newport, E. L.
    (1998) Computation of conditional probability statistics by 8-month-old infants. Psychological science, 9(4), 321–324. 10.1111/1467‑9280.00063
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00063 [Google Scholar]
  6. Baguley, T.
    (2012) Serious stats. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑0‑230‑36355‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-36355-7 [Google Scholar]
  7. Barac, R., & Bialystok, E.
    (2012) Bilingual effects on cognitive and linguistic development: Role of language, cultural background and education. Child Development83(2), 413–422. 10.1111/j.1467‑8624.2011.01707.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01707.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
    (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. doi:  10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  9. Batterink, L. J., Reber, P. J., Neville, H. J., & Paller, K. A.
    (2015) Implicit and explicit contributions to statistical learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 83, 62–78. 10.1016/j.jml.2015.04.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.04.004 [Google Scholar]
  10. Berko, J.
    (1958) The child’s learning of English morphology. WORD, 14(2–3), 150–177. 10.1080/00437956.1958.11659661
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1958.11659661 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bertels, J., Boursain, E., Destrebecqz, A., & Gaillard, V.
    (2015) Visual statistical learning in children and young adults: How implicit?Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–11. 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01541
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01541 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bialystok, E.
    (1986) Factors in the growth of linguistic awareness. Child Development, 57(2), 498–510. 10.2307/1130604
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1130604 [Google Scholar]
  13. Bosch, L. & Sebastián-Gallés, N.
    (2003) Simultaneous bilingualism and the perception of a language-specific vowel contrast in the first year of life. Language and Speech, 46 (2/3), 217–243. 10.1177/00238309030460020801
    https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309030460020801 [Google Scholar]
  14. Chomsky, N.
    (1986) Knowledge of language. Its nature, origin and use. New York: NY: Praeger.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Cleeremans, A.
    (2008) Consciousness: The radical plasticity thesis. InR. Banerjee, & B. K. Chakrabarti (Eds.), Progress in brain research (Volume168, pp.19–33). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. De Graaff, R.
    (1997) The Experanto experiment. Effects of explicit instruction on Second Language Acquisition. SSLA, 19(2), 249–276.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. DeKeyser, R.
    (2003) Implicit and Explicit learning. InC. Doughty, & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.312–348). Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756492.ch11
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch11 [Google Scholar]
  18. Dennett, D.
    (1991) Het bewustzijn verklaard. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Atlas Contact.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. De Waal, F.
    (2016) Are we smart enough to know how smart animals are?New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Eigsti, I.-M., Zayas, V., Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., Ayduk, O., Dadlani, M. B., Davidson, M. C., Lawrence Aber, J., & Casey, M. C.
    (2006) Predicting cognitive control from preschool to late adolescence and young adulthood. Psychological Science, 17(6), 478–484. 10.1111/j.1467‑9280.2006.01732.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01732.x [Google Scholar]
  21. Ellis, N. C.
    (2003) Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. InC. Doughty, & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.63–103). Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756492.ch4
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch4 [Google Scholar]
  22. Endress, A. D., & Bonatti, L. L.
    (2007) Rapid learning of syllable classes from a perceptually continuous speech stream. Cognition, 105(2), 247–299. 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.09.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.09.010 [Google Scholar]
  23. Erickson, L. C., & Thiessen, E. D.
    (2015) Statistical learning of language: Theory, validity and predictions of a statistical learning account of language acquisition. Developmental Review. doi:  10.1016/j.dr.2015.05.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2015.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  24. Evans, J. L., Saffran, J. R., & Robe-Torres, K.
    (2009) Statistical learning in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 52(2), 1044–1092. 10.1044/1092‑4388(2009/07‑0189)
    https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2009/07-0189) [Google Scholar]
  25. Frederick, S.
    (2005) Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. 10.1257/089533005775196732
    https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hampton, R. R.
    (2001) Rhesus monkeys know when they remember. PNAS, 98(9), 5359–5362. 10.1073/pnas.071600998
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.071600998 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2009) Focusing the uncertainty about nonhuman metacognition. Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews, 4, 56–57. 10.3819/ccbr.2009.40006
    https://doi.org/10.3819/ccbr.2009.40006 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hsu, H. J., Tomblin, J. B., & Christiansen, M. H.
    (2014) Impaired statistical learning of non-adjacent dependencies in adolescents with specific language impairment. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(175), 1–10.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hulstijn, J.
    (2015) Explaining phenomena of first and second language acquisition with the constructs of implicit and explicit learning. The virtues and pitfalls of a two-system view. InP. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp.25–46). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.48.02hul
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.02hul [Google Scholar]
  30. James, W.
    (1890) The principles of psychology. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Krashen, S. D.
    (1981) Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Lichtman, K.
    (2016) Age and learning environment: Are children implicit second language learners?Journal of Child Language, 43(3), 707–730. 10.1017/S0305000915000598
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000915000598 [Google Scholar]
  33. Lum, J. A. G., Conti-Ramsden, G., Page, D., & Ullman, M. T.
    (2012) Working, declarative and procedural memory in specific language impairment. Cortex, 48(9), 1138–1154. 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2011.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Rodriguez, M. L.
    (1989) Delay of gratification in children. Science, 244(4907), 933–938. 10.1126/science.2658056
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.2658056 [Google Scholar]
  35. Misyak, J. B. & Christiansen, M. H.
    (2012) Statistical learning and language: An individual differences study. Language Learning, 62(1), 302–331. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00626.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00626.x [Google Scholar]
  36. Misyak, J. B., Christiansen, M. H., & Tomblin, J. B.
    (2010) On-line individual differences in statistical learning predict language processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 1(31), 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Packard, M. R.
    (2009) Anxiety, cognition and habit: A multiple memory systems perspective. Brain Research, 1293(1), 121–128. 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.03.029
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2009.03.029 [Google Scholar]
  38. Passer, M.
    (2016) The typology and diachrony of nominal classification. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Psychology Software Tools, Inc.
    Psychology Software Tools, Inc. (2016) E-Prime 3.0. Retrieved fromwww.pstnet.com
  40. Radford, A.
    (2004) Minimalist Syntax: Exploring the structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511811319
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811319 [Google Scholar]
  41. R Core Team
    R Core Team (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved fromhttps://www.R-project.org/
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Rebuschat, P.
    (2015) Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge in second language research. Language Learning, 63(3), 595–626. 10.1111/lang.12010
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12010 [Google Scholar]
  43. Saffran, J. R., Johnson, E. K., & Aslin, R. N.
    (1996) Word-segmentation: The role of distributional cues. Journal of Memory and Language, 35(4), 606–621. 10.1006/jmla.1996.0032
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.0032 [Google Scholar]
  44. Schmidt, R. W.
    (1990) The role of consciousness in Second Language Learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. 10.1093/applin/11.2.129
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129 [Google Scholar]
  45. Timmermans, B. & Cleeremans, A.
    (2015) How can we measure awareness? An overview of current methods. InM. Overgaard (Ed.), Behavioural methods in consciousness research (pp.21–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688890.003.0003
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199688890.003.0003 [Google Scholar]
  46. Tomasello, M.
    (2000) First steps toward a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics, 11(1/2), 61–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Ullman, M.
    (2001) A neurocognitive perspective on language: The declarative/procedural model. Neuroscience, 2(10), 717–726.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. (2004) Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92(1–2), 231–270. 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2016) The declarative/procedural model: A neurobiological model of language learning, knowledge and use. InG. Hickok, & S. A. Small (Eds.), The neurobiology of language (pp.953–968). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  50. Ullman, M., & Pierpont, E.
    (2005) Specific language impairment is not specific to language: The procedural deficit hypothesis. Cortex, 41(3), 399–433. 10.1016/S0010‑9452(08)70276‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70276-4 [Google Scholar]
  51. Vouloumanos, A.
    (2018) Voulez-vous jouer avec moi? Twelve-months-olds understand that foreign languages can communicate. Cognition, 174(4), 87–92. 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.01.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.01.002 [Google Scholar]
  52. West, G., Vadillo, M. A., Shanks, D. R., & Hulme, C.
    (2017) The procedural learning deficit hypothesis of language learning disorders: We see some problems. Developmental Science. doi:  10.1111/desc.12552
    https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12552 [Google Scholar]
  53. Wijnen, F.
    (2013) Acquisition of linguistic categories: Cross domain convergences. InJ. Bolhuis, & M. Everaert (Eds.), Birdsong, speech, and language (pp.157–177). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error