first words

[Jay McClelland]

Tardif, Twila wrote:
> And my daughter's was very clearly "I'ee" (Iggy without consonants), the
> name of our cat but it took a while before we figured that out.  Dada
> was next though and referred to BOTH mom and dad and nobody else.
>   
What an enjoyable conversation this is turning out to be! I hope others 
are learning as much as I am from it.

I have recently moved from Carnegie Mellon to Stanford and my Stanford 
address was not recognized by the list, so (now that I've been 
rehabilitated) I am including here the message that I attempted to send 
to the list yesterday. Twila's anecdote seems to support the greater 
power of 'No Coda' relative to 'Onset' discussed in my message, which 
follows here:

Two quick comments: First, the CV syllables used by babies are 
essentially universally preferred and this fact is represented in the 
two parade-case constraints from optimality theory: "Onset" and "No 
Coda". Onset may be weaker than no coda -- this is supported by cases 
like aba from semitic languages (see text below!).

Second comment is that b is the most frequent onset in monomorphemic 
English monosyllables, based on CELEX. b, p, and m are the most frequent 
voiced stop, unvoiced stop, and nasal onsets respectively (that is b > d 
or g, p > t or k, m > n; there is no onset velar nasal). Not clear why 
we have dada and papa but not baba in English (do young children 
contrastively control b and p well? Maybe baba vs papa are in the ear of 
the behearer?), or maybe that is taken for 'baby'? In french we have the 
full set: maman, papa, and be'be' (excuse my weak rendition of the 
accent aigue!).

More speculatively, I think it's been suggested that young children have 
trouble gaining control of liquids and fricatives which may require 
finer control for correct articulation (perhaps this was part of 
Jacobson's speculations?) Liquids are used frequently in onsets by 
adults but not apparently by babies.
-- Jay McClelland

---------------
http://www.path-light.com/IAM11.htm

/ Abba i/s an Aramaic word, found in Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15 and Gal. 4:6. 
In the Gemara (a Rabbinical commentary on the Mishna, the traditional 
teaching of the Jews) it is stated that slaves were forbidden to address 
the head of the family by this title. It approximates to a personal 
name, in contrast to "Father," with which it is always joined in the NT. 
This is probably due to the fact that, abba having practically become a 
proper name, Greek-speaking Jews added the Greek word pater, "father," 
from the language they used. Abba is the word framed by the lips of 
infants, and betokens unreasoning trust; "father" expresses an 
intelligent apprehension of the relationship. The two together express 
the love and intelligent confidence of the child (Vine’s).

-----------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abba

*Abba* (or *Aba*) means "father <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father>" 
in most Semitic languages 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitic_languages>. The Syriac 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syriac> or Chaldee version of the word is 
found three times in the New Testament 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament> (Mark 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark> 14:36; Romans 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Romans> 8:15; Galatians 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galatians> 4:6), and in each case is 
followed by its Greek <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_language> 
equivalent, which is translated "father." It is a term expressing warm 
affection and filial confidence. It has no perfect equivalent in the 
English language. It has passed into European languages as an 
ecclesiastical term, "abbot." See Abba in the New Testament 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_of_Jesus#Abba_.28.CE.91.CE.B2.CE.B2.CE.B1.29>. 
Most modern Israelis <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel> (along with 
other semitic-speaking peoples) call their fathers /*Abba*/ as one would 
use "Dad <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father>" or "Daddy 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daddy>" in English. Unfortunately this 
translation also falls far short of the original meaning.