Response to MacNeilage and Davis and to Oller

D. H. Whalen, Sara Giulivi, Louis M. Goldstein, Hosung Nam, Andrea G. Levitt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The article by MacNeilage and Davis in this issue, entitled "In Defense of the 'Frames, then Content' (FC) Perspective on Speech Acquisition: A Response to Two Critiques" appears to assume that the only alternative to segment-level control is oscillation specifically of the jaw; however, other articulators could be oscillated by infants as well. This allows the preferred CV combinations to emerge without positing a level of segmental control in babbling. Their response does not address our modeling work, which, rather similarly to Davis's own modeling (Serkhane, Schwartz, Boë, Davis, & Matyear, 2007), shows little support for the Frame-then-Content (F/C) account. Our results show substantial support for the Articulatory Phonology (AP) one. A closer look at feeding in infants shows substantial control of the tongue and lips, casting further doubt on the foundation of the F/C account.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)243-249
Number of pages7
JournalLanguage Learning and Development
Volume7
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2011 Jul 1
Externally publishedYes

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Education
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Whalen, D. H., Giulivi, S., Goldstein, L. M., Nam, H., & Levitt, A. G. (2011). Response to MacNeilage and Davis and to Oller. Language Learning and Development, 7(3), 243-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2011.578547