MLU for languages with complex morphology

[Yonata Levy]

Since MLU is a heuristic measure, seems to me  the solution to this problem
cannot be universal. Rather, it is necessary to establish a method of
counting which will be verified against theoretically-motivated
developmental trajectories to achieve comparative standards. In our studies
of Hebrew speaking children (Hebrew being a root-based, rich morphological
language) we are using a method of counting MLU that takes into
consideration the structure of Hebrew along with the need to guard against
an inflated MLU. Our way of calculating MLU could perhaps inform other
root-based languages such as Arabic but probably not languages with a
different typology.
Yonata.


On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 2:47 PM, marilyn vihman
<marilyn.vihman at york.ac.uk>wrote:

> I think one of the key problems with calculating MLU in morphemes -
> although it seems the right way to compare across languages, in principle -
> is the productivity problem: How do we know which morphemes the child
> really has any kind of mastery over? Is it sensible or appropriate to count
> all morphemes as if the child were using them productively, without any
> test to see if that is true or not? This may give an artificially high
> count to languages with synthetic morphology, lots of morphemes packed into
> a single affix...or is a morpheme only counted based on form? Even then, if
> the presence or absence of a single consonant means having one morpheme or
> two...less of an issue for English, say, than for many other Indo-European
> languages...then we probably need much more careful transcription of the
> phonetics of the child's speech than is usually thought necessary in
> morphosyntactic studies...
>
> -marilyn
>
>
> On 20 maj 2013, at 13.40, Isa Barriere wrote:
>
> I meant to add:
>
> In contrast with a mophologically impoverished/poor language, the number
> of morphemes will tend to be positively correlated with the number of
> words, which is why it is not as crucial to calculate MLU in morphemes.
>
> Good morning,
> Isn't there a negative correlation between morphological complexity of a
> given language and the average number of words that an utterance contains
> in the same language?
>
> If we take the examples in Inuktitut (given Shanley Allen's book based on
> her dissertation- Allen 1989 or 1990, in the appendix), looking at the
> utterances taking into account the # of words, many of them would only 1
> word.  However this does not capture the complexity of the meaning and the
> structure- that MLU does.
>
> So for different stages of devlpt and in the adult language the number of
> word per utterance may be limited and pretty stable and the progression is
> therefore best assessed taking into account number of morphemes (less
> stable across ages and stages).
>
> Isabelle Barriere, PhD
>
>
> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Isa Barriere <barriere.isa at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Good morning,
>> Isn't there a negative correlation between morphological complexity of a
>> given language and the average number of words that an utterance contains
>> in the same language?
>>
>> If we take the examples in Inuktitut (given Shanley Allen's book based on
>> her dissertation- Allen 1989 or 1990, in the appendix), looking at the
>> utterances taking into account the # of words, many of them would only 1
>> word.  However this does not capture the complexity of the meaning and the
>> structure- that MLU does.
>>
>> So for different stages of devlpt and in the adult language the number of
>> word per utterance may be limited and pretty stable and the progression is
>> therefore best assessed taking into account number of morphemes (less
>> stable across ages and stages).
>>
>> Isabelle Barriere, PhD
>>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Info-CHILDES" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to info-childes+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to info-childes at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/info-childes/CANNGd2b6ELzcqj3umutoAa1GBL1RyqzMBs4s75cxuBGgc12NBw%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-US
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Info-CHILDES" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to info-childes+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to info-childes at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/info-childes/E552879A-092E-41ED-BFCB-515BF8782633%40york.ac.uk?hl=en-US
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>



-- 
*Prof. Yonata Levy*
*Psychology Department *
*and Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical School*
*Mount Scopus*
*Jerusalem 91905, ISRAEL*
**
*tel:972-2-5883408 (o)*
*     972-547905997 (c)*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Info-CHILDES" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to info-childes+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to info-childes at googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/info-childes/attachments/20130520/2cc7ee8b/attachment.htm>