In word learning, the mapping problem refers to the question of how infants attach the forms of language to the things that they experience in the world. There are infinite objects, concepts, and actions in the world that words could be mapped onto. Many theories have been proposed to account for the way in which the language learner successfully maps words onto the correct objects, concepts, and actions. While
domain-specific accounts of word learning argue for innate constraints that limit infants' hypotheses about word meanings,
domain-general perspectives argue that word learning can be accounted for by general cognitive processes, such as learning and memory, which are not specific to language. Yet other theorists have proposed social
pragmatic accounts, which stress the role of caregivers in guiding infants through the word learning process. According to some research, however, children are active participants in their own word learning, although caregivers may still play an important role in this process. Recently, an
emergentist coalition model has also been proposed to suggest that word learning cannot be fully attributed to a single factor. Instead, a variety of cues, including salient and social cues, may be utilized by infants at different points in their vocabulary development.
Theories of constraints Theories of
word-learning constraints argue for biases or default assumptions that guide the infant through the word learning process. Constraints are outside of the infant's control and are believed to help the infant limit their hypotheses about the meaning of words that they encounter daily. Constraints can be considered domain-specific (unique to language). Critics argue that theories of constraints focus on how children learn nouns, but ignore other aspects of their word learning. Although constraints are useful in explaining how children limit possible meanings when learning novel words, the same constraints would eventually need to be overridden because they are not utilized in adult language. For instance, adult speakers often use several terms, each term meaning something slightly different, when referring to one entity, such as a family pet. This practice would violate the
mutual exclusivity constraint. Below, the most prominent constraints in the literature are detailed: •
Reference is the notion that a word symbolizes or stands in for an object, action, or event. Words consistently stand for their
referents, even if referents are not physically present in context. •
Mutual Exclusivity is the assumption that each object in the world can only be referred to by a single label. •
Shape has been considered to be one of the most critical properties for identifying members of an object category. Infants assume that objects that have the same shape also share a name. Shape plays an important role in both appropriate and inappropriate extensions. •
The Whole Object Assumption is the belief that labels refer to whole objects instead of parts or properties of those objects. Children are believed to hold this assumption because they typically label whole objects first, and parts of properties of objects later in development. •
The Taxonomic Assumption reflects the belief that speakers use words to refer to categories that are internally consistent. Labels to pick out coherent categories of objects, rather than those objects and the things that are related to them. For example, children assume that the word "dog" refers to the category of "dogs", not to "dogs with bones", or "dogs chasing cats".
Domain-general views Domain-general views of vocabulary development argue that children do not need principles or constraints in order to successfully develop word-world mappings. Instead, word learning can be accounted for through general learning mechanisms such as
salience, association, and frequency. Children are thought to notice the objects, actions, or events that are most
salient in context, and then to associate them with the words that are most frequently used in their presence. Additionally, research on word learning suggests that
fast mapping, the rapid learning that children display after a single exposure to new information, is not specific to word learning. Children can also successfully fast map when exposed to a novel fact, remembering both words and facts after a time delay. Domain-general views have been criticized for not fully explaining how children manage to avoid mapping errors when there are numerous possible referents to which objects, actions, or events might point. For instance, if biases are not present from birth, why do infants assume that labels refer to whole objects, instead of salient parts of these objects? However, domain-general perspectives do not dismiss the notion of biases. Rather, they suggest biases develop through learning strategies instead of existing as built-in constraints. For instance, the whole object bias could be explained as a strategy that humans use to reason about the world; perhaps we are prone to thinking about our environment in terms of whole objects, and this strategy is not specific to the language domain. Additionally, children may be exposed to cues associated with categorization by shape early in the word learning process, which would draw their attention to shape when presented with novel objects and labels. Ordinary learning could, then, lead to a shape bias.
Social pragmatic theories Social
pragmatic theories, also in contrast to the constraints view, focus on the
social context in which the infant is embedded. According to this approach, environmental input removes the ambiguity of the word learning situation. Cues such as the caregiver's gaze, body language, gesture, and smile help infants to understand the meanings of words. Social pragmatic theories stress the role of the caregiver in talking about objects, actions, or events that the infant is already focused-in upon.
Joint attention is an important mechanism through which children learn to map words-to-world, and vice versa. Adults commonly make an attempt to establish joint attention with a child before they convey something to the child. Joint attention is often accompanied by physical co-presence, since children are often focused on what is in their immediate environment. As well, conversational co-presence is likely to occur; the caregiver and child typically talk together about whatever is taking place at their locus of joint attention. Social pragmatic perspectives often present children as covariation detectors, who simply associate the words that they hear with whatever they are attending to in the world at the same time. The co-variation detection model of joint attention seems problematic when we consider that many caregiver utterances do not refer to things that occupy the immediate attentional focus of infants. For instance, caregivers among the
Kaluli, a group of indigenous peoples living in New Guinea, rarely provide labels in the context of their
referents. While the covariation detection model emphasizes the caregiver's role in the
meaning-making process, some theorists argue that infants also play an important role in their own word learning, actively avoiding mapping errors. When infants are in situations where their own attentional focus differs from that of a speaker, they seek out information about the speaker's focus, and then use that information to establish correct word-
referent mappings. Joint attention can be created through infant agency, in an attempt to gather information about a speaker's intent. From early on, children also assume that language is designed for communication. Infants treat communication as a cooperative process. Specifically, infants observe the principles of
conventionality and
contrast. According to conventionality, infants believe that for a particular meaning that they wish to convey, there is a term that everyone in the community would expect to be used. According to contrast, infants act according to the notion that differences in form mark differences in meaning. Children's attention to conventionality and contrast is demonstrated in their language use, even before the age of 2 years; they direct their early words towards adult targets, repair mispronunciations quickly if possible, ask for words to relate to the world around them, and maintain contrast in their own word use.
Emergentist coalition model The
emergentist coalition model suggests that children make use of multiple cues to successfully attach a novel label to a novel object. The word learning situation may offer an infant combinations of social, perceptual, cognitive, and linguistic cues. While a range of cues are available from the start of word learning, it may be the case that not all cues are utilized by the infant when they begin the word learning process. While younger children may only be able to detect a limited number of cues, older, more experienced word learners may be able to make use of a range of cues. For instance, young children seem to focus primarily on perceptual salience, but older children attend to the gaze of caregivers and use the focus of caregivers to direct their word mapping. Therefore, this model argues that principles or cues may be present from the onset of word learning, but the use of a wide range of cues develops over time. Supporters of the emergentist coalition model argue that, as a hybrid, this model moves towards a more holistic explanation of word learning that is not captured by models with a singular focus. For instance, constraints theories typically argue that constraints/principles are available to children from the onset of word learning, but do not explain how children develop into expert speakers who are not limited by constraints. Additionally, some argue that domain-general perspectives do not fully address the question of how children sort through numerous potential referents in order to correctly sort out meaning. Lastly, social pragmatic theories claim that social encounters guide word learning. Although these theories describe how children become more advanced word learners, they seem to tell us little about children's capacities at the start of word learning. According to its proponents, the emergentist coalition model incorporates constraints/principles, but argues for the development and change in these principles over time, while simultaneously taking into consideration social aspects of word learning alongside other cues, such as salience. ==Pragmatic development==