Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

English and Japanese word associations and syntagmatic-paradigmatic shift of Japanese children learning… Yasutake, Yuko 1985

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1985_A8 Y38.pdf [ 10.62MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0078288.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0078288-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0078288-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0078288-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0078288-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0078288-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0078288-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0078288-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0078288.ris

Full Text

ENGLISH AND JAPANESE WORD ASSOCIATIONS AND SYNTAGMATIC-PARADIGMATIC SHIFT OF JAPANESE CHILDREN LEARNING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE by Yuko Yasutake B.A. Tokyo U n i v e r s i t y of F o r e i g n S t u d i e s , 1978 A T h e s i s Submitted i n P a r t i a l F u l f i l l m e n t of the Requirements f o r the Degree of Master of A r t s i n The F a c u l t y of Graduate S t u d i e s (Department of Language E d u c a t i o n ) We acc e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f i r m i n g t o i h e r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA NOVEMBER 1985 (g) Yuko Y a s u t a k e , 1985 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It i s understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Yukd' Yasutake Department of r , n n g i i n g P Ednr-aHnn The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 D a t e October IQ, 1985 DE-6 f V R n ABSTRACT R e s e a r c h i n word a s s o c i a t i o n s t u d i e s found t h a t c h i l d r e n g i v e p r e d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s ( r e s p o n s e s f r o m d i f f e r e n t form c l a s s e s from s t i m u l i ) . E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n were found t o undergo a s h i f t t o p a r a d i g m a t i c ( r e s p o n s e s from the same form c l a s s e s as s t i m u l i ) b e f o r e age t e n ( r e f e r r e d t o as S-P s h i f t ) w h i c h i s t h e a d u l t norm. On t h e o t h e r hand, Japanese c h i l d r e n do not have S-P s h i f t , and Japanese a d u l t s ' r e s p o n s e s a r e d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c (Moran 1968). L e i c e s t e r ( 1 9 8 1 ) c o l l e c t e d E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s f r o m J a p a n e s e b e g i n n e r and a d v a n c e d l e a r n e r s of E n g l i s h as a second language and found S-P s h i f t l i k e i n c r e a s e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s as E n g l i s h a b i l i t y improves. T h i s s t u d y p u r p o r t s t o r e p l i c a t e L e i c e s t e r ' s s t u d y among c h i l d r e n . I t i s b e c a u s e t h e e x i s t e n c e of t h e S-P s h i f t i n E n g l i s h o f second-language l e a r n e r s whose f i r s t l a n g u a g e does n o t have the s h i f t would mean t h a t second language l e a r n i n g p a r a l l e l s f i r s t language a c q u i s i t i o n . Two main h y p o t h e s i s were t e s t e d : 1. T h a t J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e w i l l g i v e d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r grade l e v e l . 2. T h a t J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a s e c o n d i i l a n g u a g e o f h i g h e r g r a d e l e v e l w i l l g i v e more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s than t h o s e of lower grade l e v e l . Three s u b s i d i a r y hypotheses were t e s t e d : 3. T h a t J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e w i l l g i v e d i f f e r e n t p r o p o r t i o n o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese and E n g l i s h . 4. T h a t J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a s e c o n d language w i l l g i v e d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n o f r e s p o n s e s i n e a c h language. 5. T h a t J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h a s a s e c o n d language w i l l g i v e fewer p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n E n g l i s h t han m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n o f the same grade. T h i r t y s t u d e n t s each o f grades one, t h r e e , and f i v e from two J a p a n e s e s u p p l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l s i n Vancouver and S e a t t l e were used as s u b j e c t s . The s u b j e c t s a t t e n d r e g u l a r E n g l i s h c l a s s e s a t p u b l i c s c h o o l s , and t h e r e f o r e , t h e i r E n g l i s h a b i l i t y was assumed t o p a r a l l e l t h e i r g r a d e l e v e l . 2 7 - i t e m w o r d a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t was a d m i n i s t e r e d i n E n g l i s h and Japanese. The r a t i o of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s was a n a l y z e d a c c o r d i n g t o grade l e v e l . I n a g r e e m e n t w i t h l i t e r a t u r e , no grade d i f f e r e n c e was found among J a p a n e s e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . I n E n g l i s h , however, grade one s u b j e c t s performed most p a r a d i g m a t i c a l l y , and t h e r e b y , no l i n e a r c o rrespondence between E n g l i s h a b i l i t y a n d E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s was f o u n d . A l t h o u g h E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s were c l o s e t o the E n g l i s h norm, and Japanese r e s p o n s e s t o t h e J a p a n e s e norm, a s i g n i f i c a n t number o f Japanese r e s p o n s e s were g i v e n i n E n g l i s h a s s o c i a t i o n by grade f i v e s t u d e n t s . S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y was a l s o found when two s c h o o l s were compared as w e l l as between two l a n g u a g e s . Grade one s t u d e n t s o u t p e r f o r m e d e q u i v a l e n t E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n i n E n g l i s h . I t was s p e c u l a t e d t h a t young c h i l d r e n d e v e l o p L2 v o c a -b u l a r y s y s t e m s i n d e p e n d e n t l y and d i r e c t l y f r o m t h e s t a r t r e s u l t i n g i n h i g h e r r a t e of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , w h e r e a s o l d e r c h i l d r e n i n i t i a l l y c o n s t r u c t a one t o one a s s o c i a t i o n between L I and L 2 , r e s u l t i n g i n t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s and low p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y i n t h e c a s e o f E n g l i s h . S c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e are some o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a f f e c t i n g word a s s o c i a t i o n . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A b s t r a c t i i T a b l e of C o n t e n t s v L i s t of T a b l e s v i CHAPTER 1: I n t r o d u c t i o n 1 CHAPTER 2: L i t e r a t u r e Survey 9 CHAPTER 3: Methodology 98 CHAPTER 4: A n a l y s i s and R e s u l t s 116 CHAPTER 5: D i s c u s s i o n 145 B i b l i o g r a p h y • 168 Appendix 183 L i s t of a l l the res p o n s e s c o l l e c t e d f o r the s t u d y v LIST OF TABLES TABLE I TABLE I I TABLE I I I TABLE IV TABLE V TABLE Va TABLE VI TABLE V I I TABLE V I I I TABLE V i l l a TABLE IX TABLE IXa Page Word l i s t ( s t i m u l i l i s t ) 113-115 Means of each c e l l ( s i x response c a t e g o r i e s w i t h grade 117 A n a l y s i s of V a r i a n c e ( S i x response c a t e g o r i e s w i t h grade) 119-120 A n a l y s i s of V a r i a n c e (Comprehensive r e s p o n s e s w i t h grade) 122-123 Means of each c e l l (Comprehensive p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h g r a d e / l e n g t h of s t u d y ) 126 A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e (Comprehensive p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h g r a d e / l e n g t h o f s t u d y ) 126 M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i o n ( E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h s c h o o l / g r a d e ) 127 M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i o n (Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h s c h o o l / g r a d e ) 127 C e l l Means (Comprehensive p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h s c h o o l / g r a d e ) 129 A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e (Comprehensive p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h s c h o o l / g r a d e ) 129 C e l l Means (Comprehensive p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h s c h o o l / l e n g t h of s t a y ) 131 A n a l y s i s of V a r i a n c e (Comprehensive p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h s c h o o l / l e n g t h of s t a y ) 135 v i LIST OF TABLES ( C o n t i n u e d ) Page TABLE X The e q u i v a l e n c e of Japanese and E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s on E n g l i s h P r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s 135 T a b l e XI Comparison of p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y i n E n g l i s h Response 136 TABLE X I I Comparison of p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s . . . . 137-138 v i i CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION B e i n g m y s e l f a second language l e a r n e r , s t i l l s t r u g g l i n g t o be a p e r f e c t one, I r e g a r d the q u e s t i o n o f how a second language i s l e a r n e d w i t h a s p e c i a l c o n c e r n . U n d e r s t a n d i n g the l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g m echanism, e s p e c i a l l y t h a t o f a s e c o n d language, would not o n l y s a t i s f y our c u r i o s i t y but would h e l p us someday t o reduce the enormous amount o f t i m e , r e s o u r c e s and e n e r g y we a r e c u r r e n t l y e x p e n d i n g i n s e c o n d l a n g u a g e e d u c a t i o n . Second language l e a r n i n g may then become a l e s s cumbersome burden even f o r t h o s e of us who are not g i f t e d i n lan g u a g e s . In r e c e n t y e a r s , one o f the i s s u e s d o m i n a t i n g the second language a q u i s i t i o n l i t e r a t u r e has been t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h second language a c q u i s i t i o n resembles f i r s t language a c q u i s i t i o n . (F o r p u r p o s e s o f t h i s s t u d y , K r a s h e n ' s (1976) d i s t i n c t i o n between a c q u i s i t i o n and l e a r n i n g w i l l be i g n o r e d and the terms used i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y . ) The s t r o n g e s t p o s i t i o n t a k e n on t h i s q u e s t i o n i s , n a t u r a l l y , t h a t f i r s t language and second language a c q u i s i t i o n s a r e i d e n t i c a l , and t h i s p o s i t i o n i s r e f e r r e d t o as the I d e n t i t y H y p o t h e s i s . The I d e n t i t y H y p o t h e s i s m a i n t a i n s t h a t f i r s t language a c q u i s i t i o n and second l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g a r e q u a l i t a t i v e l y s i m i l a r , y e t q u a n t i t a t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t ( M c L a u g h l i n 1978). In o t h e r words, second language l e a r n i n g t a k e s l o n g e r than f i r s t l anguage a c q u i s i t i o n , y e t the p r o c e s s which the second language l e a r n e r has t o go thr o u g h i s e s s e n t i a l l y s i m i l a r t o t h a t o f m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n a c q u i r i n g t h a t l a n g a u g e as t h e f i r s t l anguage. The second language l e a r n e r , j u s t as a young c h i l d s t a r t i n g t o a c q u i r e h i s f i r s t language, s t a r t s a f r e s h w i t h o u t r e l y i n g on the a l r e a d y - a c q u i r e d f i r s t l a n guage. In o r d e r t o t e s t t h i s t h e o r y , we have t o s t u d y s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i s s i m i -l a r i t i e s between f i r s t language a c q u i s i t i o n and second language l e a r n i n g . The b e s t way t o e s t a b l i s h s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i s -s i m i l a r i t i e s i s by co m p a r i s o n . Yet i n com p a r i s o n , we have t o be c a u t i o u s about e s t a b l i s h i n g whom, how and what t o compare i n o r d e r not to miss our o b j e c t i v e s . WHOM TO COMPARE Brown ( 1 9 8 0 ) , c a u t i o n i n g a g a i n s t the c a r e l e s s t r e a t m e n t o f f i r s t / s e c o n d l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n c o m p a r i s o n s , o f f e r s t h e f o l l o w i n g t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s on which t o base f u t u r e s t u d i e s : Type I comparison: f i r s t and second language a c q u i s i t i o n i n c h i l d r e n h o l d i n g age c o n s t a n t ; Type I I comparison: second language a c q u i s i t i o n i n c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s h o l d i n g s e c o n d language c o n s t a n t ; Type I I I comparison: f i r s t language a c q u i s i t i o n i n c h i l d r e n and second language a c q u i s i t i o n i n a d u l t s . S i n c e t h i s d i s c u s s i o n i s about the r e l a t i o n s h i p between f i r s t and second language a c q u i s i t i o n , we might l i m i t our a t t e n t i o n o n l y t o t h e s i m p l e s t and l o g i c a l Type I c o m p a r i s o n s . Yet t h e s e t h r e e are i n a complementary r e l a t i o n s h i p . A t y p e I I c o m p a r i s o n c o u l d show whether second language a c q u i s i t i o n i s q u a l i t a t i v e l y s i m i l a r o r d i s s i m i l a r f o r a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n . I t i s a l s o the one t o t e s t whether c h i l d r e n are indeed s u p e r i o r l e a r n e r s of the second language or n o t . As mentioned above, t h i s i s the c a t e g o r y i n which t h e r e a r e c o n f l i c t i n g r e s u l t s . For example, Snow and Hoehfuagel-Hohle (1978), s t u d y i n g E.F.L. ( E n g l i s h as a f o r e i g n language) l e a r n e r s i n H o l l a n d , found t h a t a d u l t s a c h i e v e much b e t t e r than c h i l d r e n i n v a r i o u s language t e s t s i n t h e s e c o n d l a n g u a g e i n c l u d i n g p r o n u n c i a t i o n . On the o t h e r hand, many o t h e r s t u d i e s found t h a t c h i l d r e n a r e b e t t e r i n a c h i e v i n g n a t i v e - l i k e p r o n o u n c i a t i o n ( A s h e r and G a r c i a 1969, S e l i n k e r , K r a s h e n , and L a d e f o g e d 1975). E v i d e n c e o f a l l t h r e e t y p e s i s r e q u i r e d i f the I d e n t i t y H y p o t h e s i s i s t o be s u p p o r t e d . A Type I c o m p a r i s o n e s t a b l i s h e s a b a s i c t h e s i s about whether and how f i r s t and second language a c q u i s i t i o n b e f o r e p u b e r t y a r e s i m i l a r o r d i s s i m i l a r . I f t h e r e i s i n d e e d a s i m i l a r i t y , a Type I I I c o m p a r i s o n c o u l d show w h e t h e r t h e s i m i l a r i t y h o l d s a f t e r p u b e r t y o r n o t . In a d d i t i o n , a Type I I comparison c o u l d p r o v i d e t h e e v i d e n c e t h a t indeed c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s l e a r n t h e s e c o n d language i n the same manner. Only when t h e s e t h r e e comparisons show e v i d e n c e o f a s i m i l a r i t y , can we c o n f i d e n t l y say t h a t the two p r o c e s s e s are, the same. WHAT TO COMPARE L a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n , f i r s t and second, can be s t u d i e d from a v a r i e t y of p e r s p e c t i v e s . One r e s e a r c h e r might i n v e s t i g a t e t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r language l e v e l - phonology, morphology, o r s y n t a x . More l i k e l y , t h i s s e c o n d r e s e a r c h e r would e l e c t t o s t u d y some s p e c i f i c a s p e c t o f h i s chosen s p e c i a l t y - the a c q u i s i t i o n o r d e r of p a r t i c u l a r morphemes or s y n t a c t i c s t r u c t u r e s such as n e g a t i v e s o r q u e s t i o n s , o r the s i m p l i f i c a t i o n p r o c e s s e s used by c h i l d r e n i n a c q u i r i n g the t a r g e t sound system. Whatever l e v e l of language i s s t u d i e d , the r e s e a r c h e r i s always f a c e d w i t h the q u e s t i o n o f g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y . To what e x t e n t f o r e x a m p l e , c a n we g e n e r a l i z e t h e f i n d i n g s a b o u t c h i l d r e n ' s o r d e r o f a c q u i s i t i o n o f v a r i o u s morphemes t o o t h e r a r e a s o f language a c q u i s i t i o n and to the p r o c e s s i n g e n e r a l ? A c o n c l u s i o n reached w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f one s t r u c t u r e may not be v a l i d f o r the p r o c e s s o f r e q u i r i n g the language as a whole. Y e t we have t o c o l l e c t s m a l l p i e c e s b e f o r e we can hope t o make a complete p i c t u r e . The q u e s t i o n of what a s p e c t ( s ) of language t o i n v e s t i g a t e must, t h e r e f o r e , be v e r y c a r e f u l l y c o n s i d e r e d . Once t h a t d e c i s i o n i s made, t h e q u e s t i o n o f how t o approach the comparison must be ad d r e s s e d . HOW TO COMPARE T h e r e a r e two bro a d i s s u e s t o address when c o n s i d e r i n g how t o compare L I and L2 l e a r n e r s on any one a s p e c t o f language. The f i r s t h as t o do w i t h t he r e s e a r c h d e s i g n , but i t i s a t l e a s t p a r t l y dependent upon the second, i . e . , the p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e o f the r e s e a r c h e r . I f , f o r example, the r e s e a r c h e r b e l i e v e s t h a t a d i f f e r e n c e b e t ween t h e two l e a r n e r s i s l i k e l y , he may examine t h e e r r o r s made by the second language l e a r n e r f o r e v i d e n c e o f n a t i v e language t r a n s f e r ( i n t e r f e r e n c e ) . I f , on the o t h e r hand, he b e l i e v e s t h a t the p r o c e s s e s of L I and L2 a c q u i s i t i o n are e s s e n t i a l l y the same, he w i l l l o o k f o r e v i d e n c e f o r e r r o r s i n L2 t h a t p a r a l l e l the de v e l o p m e n t a l e r r o r s made by L I l e a r n e r s . In b o t h i n s t a n c e s , however, the r e s e a r c h e r uses the t e c h n i q u e o f e r r o r a n a l y s i s . S i n c e e r r o r s appear t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g s t r a t e g i e s employed by l e a r n e r s , t h i s t e c h n i q u e has been w i d e l y used. Dulay and B u r t (1974a) examined over 500 e r r o r s made by S p a n i s h s p e a k i n g c h i l d r e n i n E n g l i s h and found t h a t 86% of th o s e e r r o r s r e f l e c t e d d e v e l o p m e n t a l e r r o r s which m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n would make. More i n t e r e s t i n g l y , Dulay and B u r t (1974b) a n a l y z e d e r r o r s made by S p a n i s h , C h i n e s e , Japanese and Norwegian c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language and c o n c l u d e d t h a t because the k i n d s o f m i s t a k e s t h e s e c h i l d r e n made i n E n g l i s h were s t r i k i n g l y s i m i l a r , t h e y employed s i m i l a r s t r a t e g i e s i n l e a r n i n g a second language r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e i r f i r s t l a n guage. Another way t o compare f i r s t and second language a c q u i s i t i o n i s t o f o l l o w t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f one p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t o f language. The Hakuta (1974) and K e s s l e r and I d a r (1977) s t u d i e s a r e examples o f morpheme a c q u i s i t i o n i n a case s t u d y . These r e s e a r c h e r s f e l t t h a t the a c q u i s i t i o n o r d e r o f c e r t a i n g r a m m a t i c a l morphemes was s u i t a b l e f o r s t u d y when (1) the g e n e r a l a c q u i s i t i o n p a t t e r n p e c u l i a r t o m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n has been e s t a b l i s h e d f o r the f i r s t language (2) the f i r s t language o f the s e c o n d language l e a r n e r produces a d i f f e r e n t o r d e r o r has no i n f l u e n c e i n t he a c q u i s i t i o n o r d e r a t a l l . These two c o n d i t i o n s must be met whatever a s p e c t o f language i s compared b e c a u s e u n l e s s a c l e a r d e v e l o p m e n t a l p a t t e r n i n m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n has been e s t a b l i s h e d , one cannot make a com p a r i s o n . A l s o , i f the f i r s t language o f t h e l e a r n e r has a d e v e l o p m e n t a l p a t t e r n s i m i l a r t o the second language, the s o u r c e o f the phenomenon observed commonly among m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n o f e a c h l a n g u a g e w i l l , when i t appears i n second language, p e r p l e x a r e s e a r c h e r who w i l l not know t o which language i t s h o u l d be a t t r i b u t e d . T h e r e f o r e , i n o r d e r t o c l a i m a s i m i l a r i t y o b s e r v e d b etween s e c o n d l a n g u a g e l e a r n e r s and m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n , the f i r s t language of the second language l e a r n e r must be proven t o have no d e v e l o p m e n t a l p a t t e r n s i m i l a r t o the one obser v e d among m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n o f t h a t second language. Wh i l e Hakuta, and K e s s l e r and I d a r a l l used case s t u d i e s , t h e r e a r e a t l e a s t two o t h e r ways o f s t u d y i n g a c q u i s i t i o n o r d e r . One i s a l o n g t i t u d i n a l s t u d y o f more than one s u b j e c t , th e method used i n the o r i g i n a l s t u d y of Morpheme A c q u i s i t i o n Order (Brown 1973). Another i s t h e c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l d e s i g n u s e d by Carrow ( 1 9 7 1 ) . Carrow t e s t e d t h r e e t o t e n year o l d M e x i c a n A m e r i c a n c h i l d r e n on v a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f l a n g u a g e a b i l i t y such as morpheme a c q u i s i t i o n and compared age groups t o get a d e v e l o p m e n t a l p a t t e r n . The sequence o f development o f gr a m m a t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s p a r a l l e l e d t h a t o f m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g c h i l d r e n . A l l t h r e e t y p e s o f d e s i g n can be used w i t h s t u d i e s o t h e r than a c q u i s i t i o n o r d e r s t u d i e s . L e i c e s t e r (1981), f o r example, used a c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l s t u d y i n a word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t t o compare the d e v e l o p m e n t a l t r e n d o f n a t i v e E n g l i s h s p e a k e r s w i t h Japanese a d u l t s l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h , w i t h s u b j e c t s grouped a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r E n g l i s h a b i l i t y . L e i c e s t e r took advantage o f the well-known d e v e l o p m e n t a l change among E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c h i l d r e n c a l l e d the s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t , i . e . t h e de v e l o p m e n t a l p a t t e r n o f m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n from s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g ( d i f f e r e n t form c l a s s ) t o p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g (same form c l a s s ) . He s e t out t o see i f the same s h i f t i s o b s e r v a b l e among Japanese s u b j e c t s a d v a n c i n g i n E n g l i s h competence. Word a s s o c i a t i o n t e c h n i q u e i s v e r y s u i t a b l e f o r t e s t i n g t h e h y p o t h e s i s i n q u e s t i o n p r e c i s e l y because J a p a n e s e s p e a k i n g p e o p l e do n o t make t h e s h i f t i n Japanese word a s s o c i a t i o n , t h e r e b y making i t p o s s i b l e t o i n f e r t h a t the s h i f t marks the s o l i d i f i c a t i o n o f independent development o f E n g l i s h among Japanese s p e a k i n g s u b j e c t s . The s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t was i n d e e d o b s e r v e d . L e i c e s t e r added a new p i e c e t o t h e p u z z l e o f s e c o n d l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n , f o r even though word a s s o c i a t i o n had been u s e d i n t h e s t u d y o f f i r s t l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n f o r some t i m e , i t s use was r e l a t i v e l y new t o the s t u d y o f second language l e a r n i n g . The s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t has s i n c e been w e l l documented ( E n t w i s l e 1966, E r v i n - T r i p p 1961), and a c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between i t s s h i f t and language d e v e l o p -ment has been found (Brown and B e r k o , 1960). S i n c e L e i c e s t e r ' s s t u d y i s of Type I I I (comparing a d u l t l e a r n e r s and m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n ) , i t l e a v e s us the t a s k o f answering t h e b a s i c q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h show a s i m i l a r p a t t e r n o f word a s s o c i a t i o n development as do m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g c h i l d r e n . With t h i s Type I comparison c o m p l e t e , we c o u l d then do a Type I I comparison u s i n g L e i c e s t e r ' s d a t a , t h u s c o m p l e t i n g t h e comparison of word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k s i n a l l t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s . T h i s would p r o v i d e b e t t e r e v i d e n c e c o n c e r n i n g the argument of s i m i l a r i t y and d i s s i m i l a r i t y , however l i m i t e d the e v i d e n c e may be. The purpose o f t h i s s t u d y d e s c r i b e d here was t o conduct a Type I comparison o f E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n and Japanese c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language. CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE SURVEY WORD ASSOCIATION Word a s s o c i a t i o n i s an e s t a b l i s h e d and v e r y a c t i v e f i e l d i n p s y c h o l o g y as i s demonstrated by i t s independent e n t r y i n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A b s t r a c t s , and by the number o f s t u d i e s l i s t e d under i t , e s p e c i a l l y from the 1950s t o 1980s. The p o p u l a r i t y o f word a s s o c i a t i o n l i e s l a r g e l y i n the f a c t t h a t i t i s a game anybody can p l a y ( C l a r k , 1970). In i t s b a s i c form, word a s s o c i s t i o n needs o n l y s u b j e c t s , a word l i s t , and an e x p e r i m e n t e r . The s t a n d a r d i n s t r u c t i o n o f "Say t h e f i r s t word t h a t comes t o your mind a f t e r h e a r i n g each word I say" w i l l get the raw d a t a r e q u i r e d . A l t h o u g h i t r e q u i r e s a tremendous amount o f work t o c l a s s i f y and a n a l y z e the d a t a , i t i s s t i l l a manageable t a s k because t h e d a t a c o n s i s t o f f a m i l i a r n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e . For the same r e a s o n , however, i t i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o m a i n t a i n p e r f e c t o b j e c t i v i t y i n c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . A more i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e o f word a s s o c i a t i o n i s i t s a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o ex p e r i m e n t s w i t h v a r i o u s p u r p o s e s . I t has been u t i l i z e d t o measure t h e a b n o r m a l i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l s i n c l i n i c a l s t u d i e s , t o t e s t l e a r n i n g t h e o r i e s , t o f i n d concept o r g a n i z a t i o n , and even to f i n d d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l p a t t e r n s . The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y i s t o e x p l o i t t h i s v e r s a t i l i t y o f word a s s o c i a t i o n i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h b i l i n g u a l i s m and second language l e a r n i n g . T h i s a d a p t a b i l i t y must come from a w i d e l y a c c e p t e d assumption t h a t t h e word a s s o c i a t i o n mechanism r e f l e c t s b r o a d e r and more u n i v e r s a l mental a c t i v i t i e s . I f t h i s assumption i s t r u e , i t must have proven i t s r e l i a b i l i t y as the measurement o f v a r i o u s v a r i a b l e s o f human p s y c h o l o g y . Indeed, Cramer i n her book on word a s s o c i a t i o n (1968) c o n c i s e l y s t a t e s t h i s p o i n t : ... a s s o c i a t i v e c o n n e c t i o n s among words are i m p o r t a n t and m e a n i n g f u l f a c t o r s i n d e t e r m i n i n g these [ c o g n i t i v e ] p r o c e s s e s . I n f a c t , s u c h a s s o c i a t i o n s have been shown e m p i r i c a l l y t o be p o w e r f u l p r e d i c t o r s o f such b e h a v i o u r as o r g a n i z a t i o n i n f r e e r e c a l l , f a c i l i t a t i o n o f t r a n s f e r , and ease o f concept a t t a i n m e n t . (1968, P-2) More i m p o r t a n t l y , she makes the f o l l o w i n g s t r o n g c o n t e n t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t he importance of Word A s s o c i a t i o n : T h i n k i n g i s a t l e a s t p a r t l y a s s o c i a t i o n i s t i c , and ... t h e d i s c o v e r y o f the c o r r e l a t e s , d e t e r m i n a n t s , and c o n s t r a i n t s o f a s s o c i a t i o n w i l l a i d us i n under-s t a n d i n g t h i n k i n g . (1968, p.6) THE HISTORY OF WORD ASSOCIATION STUDIES The f i r s t e x p e r i m e n t s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n had t o w a i t u n t i l t h e v e r y l a t e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , y e t the concept o f a s s o c i a t i o n i t s e l f has a l o n g h i s t o r y g o i n g back t o a n c i e n t Greek p h i l o -s o p h e r s . A r i s t o t l e noted a s s o c i a t i o n as "a t r a i n o f t h o u g h t s " and e s t a b l i s h e d t he l o n g - h e l d t h e o r y o f the P r i m a r y Laws o f A s s o c i a t i o n , namely, c o n t i g u i t y and s i m i l a r i t y . He even noted o t h e r f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g a s s o c i a t i o n s , such as e m o t i o n a l i t y and l a t e n c y , which Thomas Brown l a t e r c a l l e d the S e c o n d a r y Laws of A s s o c i a t i o n ( E s p e r 1973). E s p e r (1973) d e s c r i b e s the h i s t o r y o f a s s o c i a t i o n s from A r i s t o t l e t o the p r e s e n t , as the swing between two extremes o f a t h e o r e t i c a l c o n t i n u u m , between e m p i r i c i s m and i n n a t i c i s m . In today's p s y c h o l o g y and l i n g u i s t i c s t h i s c o r r e s p o n d s t o b e h a v i o r i s m and c o g n i t i v i s m . T h i s o p p o s i t i o n can be t r a c e d t h r o u g h p h i l o s o p h e r s o f the 16th t h rough 19th c e n t u r i e s - n a t i v i s m w i t h D e s c a r t e s and S p i n o z a , e m p i r i c i s m among B r i t i s h A s s o c i a -t i o n i s t s such as David Hume and Thomas Hobbes. A c c o r d i n g t o Rappoport (1974), the n a t i v i s t s saw a s s o c i a -t i o n as secondary i n human i n t e l l i g e n c e . A s s o c i a t i o n s "do not p r o v i d e i n s i g h t s n e c e s s a r y t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g " and a r e "a s o u r c e of e r r o r s t h a t d i s t u r b s c o r r e c t t h i n k i n g " . In s h o r t , r e a s o n i n g i s not r e d u c i b l e t o a s s o c i a t i o n s . On the o t h e r hand, B r i t i s h A s s o c i a t i o n i s t s , as t h e i r name i m p l i e s , saw a s s o c i a t i o n s as c e n t r a l t o t h i n k i n g . David Hume opened a new p a t h by c o n t e n d i n g " A s s o c i a t i v e o p e r a t i o n [ i s ] the b a s i s o f judgement o f r e l a t i o n s between f a c t s by c o n t i g u i t y and s i m i l a r i t y " ( 1 9 7 4 , p . 4 ) , though he h i m s e l f e x c l u d e d l o g i c a l and m a t h e m a t i c a l j u d g e m e n t . Thomas Hobbes f u r t h e r advanced a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y by s a y i n g : "That t r u t h i s found i n s e n s a t i o n , was based on t h e mechanism of a s s o c i a t i o n " (1974, p . 5 ) . In summary, t h e i r p o s i t i o n was t h a t a s e n s a t i o n p e r c e i v e d i n a c e r t a i n s i t u a t i o n c a n be r e t r i e v e d i n a s i m i l a r e x p e r i e n c e i n the absence o f the s e n s a -t i o n . The c o l l e c t i o n of t h e s e a s s o c i a t i o n s form th e bases of i n t e l l i g e n c e ( E s p e r 1974, Robinson 1932). I t must be remembered t h a t t h e s e p h i l o s o p h e r s took a s s o c i a -t i o n f o r p u r e l y a s u b j e c t i v e phenomenon and s t u d i e d i t o n l y by i n t r o s p e c t i o n o f t h e i r own e x p e r i e n c e s ( C o f e r and M u s g r a v e , 1963). I t was a p h i l o s o p h i c a l q u e s t i o n and d i s c u s s e d o n l y as an " e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l " m a t t e r . In t h e l a t e 19th c e n t u r y , however, D a r w i n i s m and German f u n c t i o n a l i s m c o m b i n e d w i t h B r i t i s h a s s o c i a t i o n i s m , and e x p e r i m e n t a l p s y c h o l o g y was b o r n ( E s p e r 1 9 7 3 ) . In t h i s new s c i e n c e , the a c t u a l e x p e r i m e n t s of word a s s o c i a t i o n were begun. As a p r o d u c t o f a s s o c i a t i o n i s m , i t was most n a t u r a l t o see many s c i e n t i s t s pursue word a s s o c i a t i o n e x p e r i m e n t s l o o k i n g f o r s c i e n t i f i c e x p l a n a t i o n s and p r o o f of i t s v a l i d i t y . There were, of c o u r s e , s e v e r a l p r e l i m i n a r y s t u d i e s w h i c h s u p p o r t e d t h e b l o s s o m i n g word a s s o c i a t i o n e x p e r i m e n t s as mentioned e a r l i e r . Thomas Brown e s t a b l i s h e d the Secondary Laws of A s s o c i a t i o n , thus c l e a r i n g the way f o r many s t u d i e s on the r e l a t i o n s h i p between word a s s o c i a t i o n and t h e v a r i a b l e s i n f l u e n c i n g i t . A f t e r f i n d i n g t h e c o n n e c t i o n between muscular movement and mental a c t i v i t i e s , D a v id H a t l e y posed a n e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l h y p o t h e s i s on mnemic and a s s o c i a t i v e p r o c e s s e s . Thomas B a i n found t h a t p l e a s a n t s e n s a t i o n s were r e t a i n e d and u n p l e a s a n t s e n s a t i o n d i s c a r d e d , thus f o u n d i n g the b a s i s o f S t i m u lus-Response (S-R) t h e o r y . 13 R i e g e l (1970) d e c r i b e s the b i r t h of b e h a v i o r i s m , one of t h e 2 0 t h c e n t u r y ' s d o m i n a t i n g f o r c e ( b o t h i n p s y c h o l o g y and l i n g u i s t i c s ) , as the g e n e r a l t r e n d i n s c i e n c e toward the end o f the 19th c e n t u r y . B e h a v i o r i s m employed a model which had been s u c c e s s f u l i n c h e m i s t r y and p h y s i c s , t h a t i t i s the " s m a l l e s t i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e s and t h e i r random movement which produces a c c i d e n t a l c o n n e c t i o n s " (1970, p.358). The i m p l i c a t i o n s a r e o b v i o u s ; i n d i v i d u a l s e n s a t i o n s o r words as p a r t i c l e s e s t a b l i s h a s s o c i a t i o n s by a c c i d e n t a l c o n n e c t i o n s such as c o n t i g u i t y and c o n c u r r e n c e . Indeed, Wundtian p s y c h o l o g i s t s devoted themselves t o i s o l a t i n g and d e s c r i b i n g t h r e e s e t s o f t h i s model (namely, s e n s a t i o n s , images and f e e l i n g s ) t h e r e b y p e r f o r m i n g a l a r g e r number of word a s s o c i a t i o n s t u d i e s . They u n f o r t u n a t e l y stopped s h o r t o f i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h ose, " a c c i d e n t a l c o n n e c t i o n s , " and t h e r e f o r e , we had t o w a i t f o r Watson and h i s c o l l e a g u e s t o d e v e l o p a f u l l b e h a v i o r i s t i c t h e o r y out o f t h i s m i n i - u n i v e r s e . I n t e r e s t i n g l y , Deese, opposed t o a b e h a v i o r i s t i c v i e w, s t i l l echoes t h i s c h e m i s t r y model by h i s use o f words such as " e l e -ments", " m o l e c u l e s " and " c h e m i s t r y " (Deese 1965), s u g g e s t i n g the s e r i o u s impact t h a t t h i s c h e m i s t r y model made on p s y c h o l o g y and l i n g u i s t i c s . In the f i r s t h a l f o f t h i s c e n t u r y , c l i n i c a l p s y c h o l o g i s t s b e s i d e s the Wundtians were a c t i v e i n w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n e x p e r i -ments. F r e u d , Jung and o t h e r s u t i l i z e d f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n i n p s y c h o a n a l y s i s i n o r d e r t o t a p t h e u n c o n s c i o u s , a t a s k d i f f i c u l t t o a c h i e v e by o t h e r methods. B l e u l e r r a t i o n a l i s e d the use o f word a s s o c i a t i o n : . . . i n the a c t i v i t y o f a s s o c i a t i o n t h e r e i s m i r r o r e d the w h ole p s y c h i c a l e s s e n c e o f t h e p a s t and t h e p r e s e n t , w i t h a l l t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e s and d e s i r e s . I t th u s becomes an index o f a l l the p s y c h i c a l p r o c e s s e s which we have but t o d e c i p h e r i n o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d the complete man. (1918, p.5) A s i m i l a r v i e w , though i n the f i e l d of s e m a n t i c s , was r e c e n t l y e x p r e s s e d by S z a l a y and Deese: A s s o c i a t i o n s make m e a n i n g f u l s t a t e m e n t s , ... t h e i r s i m p l i c i t y and immediacy makes them, however, much c l o s e r t o t h e s t a b l e , s i g n i f i c a n t a s p e c t s o f the s u b j e c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e w o r l d t h a n an e q u i v a l e n t s e t o f f u l l y a r t i c u l a t e d s e n t e n c e s about the s t i m u l i . (1978, p.21) In the 1950's, word a s s o c i a t i o n and v e r b a l l e a r n i n g came i n t o c l o s e i n t e r a c t i o n , m a i n l y due t o the r i s e o f b e h a v i o r i s m ( E s t e r 1973). Word a s s o c i a t i o n f i t b e a u t i f u l l y i n t o the t h e o r y o f S-R h a b i t , i t s e l f t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f an a s s o c i a t i o n between a p a r t i c u l a r s t i m u l u s and a r e s p o n s e . In the b e h a v i o r -i s t i c l i n g u i s t i c s p i o n e e r e d by S k i n n e r , word a s s o c i a t i o n was even p l a c e d a t the base of language i t s e l f . Palermo c o n c i s e l y s t a t e d t h a t , s e n t e n t i a l s e q u e n c i n g i n v o l v e d the c h a i n i n g paradigm and t h a t g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s a re g r a d u a l l y d i f f e r e n -t i a t e d t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s o f m e d i a t i o n o f t h e s t i m u l u s and r e s p o n s e s e q u i v a l e n c e t y p e . (1970, p.405) In o t h e r w o r d s , when two words o c c u r i n the same sequence, t h e s e words are a s s o c i a t e d by the m e d i a t i o n o f the c o n t i g u i t y and form " e q u i v a l e n c e " (same c l a s s ) , and s u b s t i t u t i n g e a c h o t h e r i n a d i f f e r e n t sequence produces a new s e n t e n c e . Thus i t i s t h r o u g h a s s o c i a t i o n s t h a t l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g and t h e g e n e r a t i v e a s p e c t of language are e x p l a i n e d . I n t h e 1 9 6 0 ' s , h o w e v e r , t h e o t h e r end o f t h e s c a l e , g e n e r a t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s and c o g n i t i v e p s y c h o l o g y , s t a r t e d t o g a i n wide s u p p o r t . T h e i r p r e d e c e s s o r s , G e s t a l t p s y c h o l o g i s t s , emphasized the r o l e o f i n s i g h t s i n l e a r n i n g and proposed the G e s t a l t Laws of p e r c e p t i o n , t h e r e b y i n s i s t i n g t h a t the framework f o r c o g n i t i o n i s p r e s e n t a t b i r t h . T h i s G e s t a l t t r a d i t i o n m a i n t a i n e d t h a t l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o u r c a n n o t be a d e q u a t e l y d e s c r i b e d i n terms of a s s o c i a t i v e c h a i n s (Houston 1972). The r i s e o f t h i s view made a s i g n i f i c a n t impact on word a s s o c i a t i o n . The l o n g - h e l d c l a s s i c P r i m a r y Laws o f A s s o c i a t i o n c e n t r a l to i t s b e h a v i o r i s t i c view were a t t a c k e d i n v a r i o u s s t u d i e s , and t h e s e a r c h f o r o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t i e s s t a r t e d . I n f l u e n c e d by P i a g e t ' s s t u d i e s o f c o g n i t i v e development, t h e c o g n i t i v i s t s examined the q u e s t i o n o f whether a s s o c i a t i o n s were not s i m p l y a c c u mulated, but were r a t h e r a c t i v e l y i n f l u e n c e d by c o g n i t i v e development. The c o g n i t i v i s t s attemped t o e x p l a i n Word A s s o c i a -t i o n by combining P i a g e t ' s t h e o r i e s w i t h t h e i r d i s c o v e r i e s about the S-P dichotomy (Esper 1973). The t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l grammar of Chomsky gave r i s e t o the Semantic F e a t u r e T h e o r i e s . These were e v e n t u a l l y a p p l i e d t o word a s s o c i a t i o n i n o r d e r t o e x p l a i n the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of words, t h u s c r e a t i n g a new a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y . Now a s s o c i a t i o n was seen as t h e end p r o d u c t of t h e u n d e r l y i n g l i n g u i s t i c p r o c e s s , whereas a c c o r d i n g t o the b e h a v i o r i s t i c v i e w , i t was a s s o c i a t i o n w hich u n d e r l a y the l i n g u i s t i c p r o d u c t s . T h i s change o f a t t i t u d e toward word a s s o c i a t i o n was b e s t e x p r e s s e d by C l a r k : language ... s h o u l d not be thought of as a consequence of b u i l t - u p a s s o c i a t i o n s ; r a t h e r , word a s s o c i a t i o n s s h o u l d be thought of as a consequence of l i n g u i s t i c competence. (1970, p.272) R e g a r d l e s s o f w h i c h d i r e c t i o n word a s s o c i a t i o n s t u d i e s go, the c l o s e i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between l a n g u a g e and word a s s o c i a t i o n c a n n e v e r be d e n i e d , no m a t t e r which i m p l i c i t p r o c e s s i s i n v o l v e d . T h i s i s because b o t h t h e i n p u t and o u t p u t o f word a s s o c i a t i o n s a r e l a n g u a g e and i n d e e d t h e o b v i o u s r e a s o n i s t h a t "our a b i l i t y t o produce a s s o c i a t i o n s i s presumably d e r i v e d from our a b i l i t y t o u n d e r s t a n d and produce language" ( C l a r k 1970, p272). EARLY STUDIES The c r e d i t f o r t he f i r s t word a s s o c i a t i o n experiment goes t o G a l t o n ( 1879). He t e s t e d 75 words w i t h h i m s e l f as a s u b j e c t and r e p e a t e d t h e experiment f o u r t i m e s . R e a l i z i n g t h a t t h e same r e s p o n s e s o c c u r r e d r e p e a t e d l y , he n o t e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f e a r l y l i f e e x p e r i e n c e , and d i s t i n g u i s h e d t h r e e t y p e s o f re s p o n s e s ; v i s u a l image, h i s t o r i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n ( a c t i n g o u t ) , and pure v e r b a l . F o l l o w i n g G a l t o n , many German p s y c h o l o g i s t s , m a i n l y t h e Wundtians, p i o n e e r e d word a s s o c i a t i o n e x p e r i m e n t s o f the 19th c e n t u r y . T r a n t c h b o l d s (1882) d i s c o v e r e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between response time and a s s o c i a t i o n t y p e s o r s t i m u l u s t y p e s . They found t h a t s t i m u l i w i t h many r e s p o n s e p o s s i b i l i t i e s , a m biguous s t i m u l i and r a r e s t i m u l i had l o n g r e a c t i o n t i m e s . S t i m u l i which were f r e q u e n t ( e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r r e s p o n s e ) , i n f r e q u e n t y e t u n a m b i g u o u s , o r w h i c h p r o d u c e d i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c s t r o n g a s s o c i a t i o n s , had s h o r t r e a c t i o n t i m e s . T h e i r s t u d y o f r e a c t i o n time and s t i m u l u s response v a r i a b l e s was l a t e r f o l l o w e d by W a l l e n h o r s t (1965) and o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s (Cramer 1968, p . 6 3 ) . C a t t e l l (1887) d i d the f i r s t c o n t r o l l e d a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t by s p e c i f y i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between s t i m u l u s and r e s p o n s e . He a l s o found t h a t r e a c t i o n time g e t s s h o r t e r when more c o n t r o l i s imposed. So f a r , t h e s e e x p e r i m e n t s had been done w i t h a v e r y s m a l l number o f s u b j e c t s . The f i r s t experiment w i t h a l a r g e group o f s u b j e c t s was done by C a t t e l l and Byant (1889). They t e s t e d 465 s u b j e c t s and c o n s t r u c t e d the f i r s t f r e q u e n c y t a b l e s , showing t h a t the same r e s p o n s e s were e m i t t e d by many s u b j e c t s . T h i s was l a t e r d e v e l o p e d i n t o the c o n c e p t s o f response commonality and p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s . Thumb and Marbe (1901) used a v a r i e t y o f s t i m u l i i n s t e a d of the common nouns. They t e s t e d a l i s t of 60 words of d i f f e r e n t 18 g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s on e i g h t s u b j e c t s and p r o p o s e d Marbe's Law, the main components o f which a r e : (1) r e s p o n s e s a r e f r o m t h e same g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s as the s t i m u l i , (2) a s s o c i a t i o n s tend to be r e c i p r o c a l , (3) the more common an a s s o c i a t i o n i s , the s h o r t e r the r e a c t i o n time i s . The f i r s t p r o p o s i t i o n o f Marbe's Law was t e s t e d by Schmidt (1902) w i t h e i g h t t e n - y e a r - o l d b o y s and u s i n g 48 v e r b s i n v a r i o u s c o n j u g a t i o n s . Indeed, f i v e s u b j e c t s out o f e i g h t gave p r e d o m i n a n t l y the same c o n j u g a t i o n s as r e s p o n s e s . W r e s h r u r ( 1 9 0 7 ) u s e d f i f t e e n educated a d u l t s , f i v e uneducated a d u l t s and two c h i l d r e n , and a l s o found t h a t most r e s p o n s e s a re from the same g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s . In a d d i t i o n , he d i s c o v e r e d what we now c a l l l a t e n c y and p r i m i n g e f f e c t s , as w e l l as the tendency f o r a r e s p o n s e t o a f a m i l i a r s t i m u l u s t o be a u t o m a t i c and common among s u b j e c t s , and s t i l l of the same g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s as the s t i m u l u s . He even noted what we now c a l l a s s o c i a t i o n s t r e n g t h - t h a t c e r t a i n words r e c u r as a response t o d i f f e r e n t s t i m u l i . Wreshrur was the f i r s t p e r s o n t o i n t r o d u c e s u b j e c t v a r i a b l e s f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n , and more i m p o r t a n t l y , was the f i r s t person t o c h a l l e n g e e x p l i c i t l y the n o t i o n o f e m p i r i c a l c o n t i g u i t y and s i m i l a r i t y . He i n s t e a d s u g g e s t e d " p s y c h i c a l r e w o r k i n g " as the a s s o c i a t i o n p r o c e s s , u r g i n g s c i e n t i s t s t o s t u d y the memory p r o c e s s and the l e x i c o n o f a s s o c i a t e d words as the p s y c h o l o g y of l anguage. Thus he r e p r e s e n t s the f i r s t swing back t o the n a t i v i s t p o s i t i o n , a l t h o u g h the f u l l swing was 50 y e a r s away. R e a c t i o n time was s t u d i e d by Mayer and O r t h ( 1 9 0 1 ) , who t e s t e d f o u r s u b j e c t s and o b t a i n e d t h e i r i n t r o s p e c t i v e r e p o r t s . He found t h a t when t h e r e i s an i n t e r v e n i n g c o n s c i o u s p r o c e s s , r e a c t i o n time g e t s l o n g e r , t h e r e b y s u g g e s t i n g t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of spontaneous and mediated a s s o c i a t i o n s . The same d i s t i n c t i o n was c a l l e d "immediate" and "mediated" by A s c h a f f e n b u r g (1895). T r a n t s c h o l d , on the o t h e r hand, suggested a c o m p l e t e l y d i f f e r e n t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n : " o u t e r " ( l o g i c a l ) and " i n n e r " ( s e m a n t i c ) r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Dauber (1911) found an i n v e r s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between the number of d i f f e r e n t r e s p o n s e s t o a s t i m u l u s and the f r e q u e n c y o f a p a r t i c u l a r r e s p o n s e , thus c l e a r l y e s t a b l i s h i n g the c o n c e p t s of p r i m a r y response and response f r e q u e n c y . He a l s o noted t h a t c l a n g a s s o c i a t i o n s ( a s s o c i a t i o n s c o n n e c t e d by sounds w i t h l i t t l e s e mantic r e l a t i o n ) seldom o c c u r , y e t tend t o appear more f r e q u e n t l y w i t h nonsense s y l l a b l e s . A l l t h e s e s t u d i e s were c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y concerned w i t h s t i m u l u s and r e s p o n s e v a r i a b l e s , w i t h r e a c t i o n time as the o n l y o t h e r v a r i a b l e , i n s h a r p c o n t r a s t w i t h the v a r i e t y o f s t u d i e s a v a i l a b l e t o d a y . Other v a r i a b l e s , such as s u b j e c t v a r i a b l e s were not c o n s i d e r e d . The r e s u l t s , by today's s t a n d a r d s , were s k e t c h y , w i t h o n l y a h a n d f u l of s u b j e c t s and l i t t l e c o n t r o l on the t e s t i n g environment. T h i s i s p a r t l y because t h e s e s c i e n t i s t s were p i o n e e r s w i t h o u t any g u i d e l i n e s t o f o l l o w , b u t m a i n l y because they were i n t e r e s t e d i n the phenomenon of word a s s o c i a t i o n i t s e l f . They wanted t o know the mechanism between s t i m u l u s and r e s p o n s e , ( t h e apparent components o f word a s s o c i a t i o n ) , t h e r e b y s p e c u l a t i n g on the p r o c e s s b e h i n d i t . However s k e t c h y s t a t i s t i c a l l y o r m e t h o d o l o g i c a l l y they may have been, t h e i r f i n d i n g s and s p e c u l a t i o n s d i d l a y t h e g r o u n d work on w h i c h c l i n i c a l s t u d i e s c o u l d grow. These s t u d i e s c o n c e n t r a t e d on the d i f f e r e n c e s between normal and p a t h o l o g i c a l p o p u l a t i o n s and used word a s s o c i a t i o n as a t o o l t o measure s u b j e c t v a r i a b l e s . From the s t a r t o f e x p e r i m e n t s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f i t s a p p l i c a t i o n t o c l i n i c a l purposes had been s u g g e s t e d . In f a c t , b o th G a l ton and C a t t e l l a r e examples o f s u c h a d v o c a t e s (E s p e r 1973). In o r d e r t o use i t i n c l i n i c s and l a b o r a t o r i e s , however, t h e t y p i c a l word a s s o c i a t i o n o f a normal p o p u l a t i o n had to be known. Responding t o the need f o r such a norm w i t h which the p a t h o l o g i c a l p o p u l a t i o n c o u l d be compared, Kent and R o s a n o f f (1910) t e s t e d a t o t a l of 1000 p e o p l e on 100 words. They gave p s y c h o l o g i s t s and o t h e r r e -s e a r c h e r s the c l a s s i c word a s s o c i a t i o n d a t a t o which they have come back a g a i n and a g a i n , even up t o the p r e s e n t day. The importance o f the Kent and Rosanoff Study as a b r i d g e between the e a r l y s t u d i e s a l r e a d y r e v i e w e d and r e c e n t ones t o be r e v i e w e d was t h a t the Kent and R o s a n o t t s t u d y : 1. suggested s t a t i s t i c a l method i n word a s s o c i a t i o n , 2. s u g g e s t e d t h e c o m p a r i s o n of word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s of d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s , and 3. suggested t h a t r e s p o n s e s c o l l e c t i v e l y f o l l o w s t a t i s t i c a l a s s u mptions (such as n o r m a t i v e c u r v e ) . The second f a c t o r makes the Kent and R o s a n o f f s t u d y so remark-a b l e . Of c o u r s e , the attempt t o compare d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s had e x i s t e d b e f o r e . Watt ( 1 9 0 4 ) t e s t e d f i v e c h i l d r e n and t h r e e a d u l t s and found t h a t commonality i s much g r e a t e r among a d u l t s than i n c h i l d r e n . But l i k e the s t u d i e s a l r e a d y r e v i e w e d , t h i s one l a c k e d a s u f f i c i e n t number o f s u b j e c t s . I n t h i s sense o n l y , Kent and R o s a n o f f made a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n . A l t h o u g h t h e i r norm was s p e c i f i c a l l y d eveloped f o r the comparison o f n o r m a l and p a t h o l o g i c a l p o p u l a t i o n s and t h e subsequent s e a r c h f o r t h e d i f f e r i n g v a r i a b l e s , i t has been f u r t h e r u t i l i z e d f o r d e v e l o p m e n t a l s t u d i e s i n which age d i f f e r e n c e i s compared; s o c i o - c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s i n which sex, s o c i o - e c o n o m i c s t a t u s , e d u c a t i o n and c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e a r e measured; l i n g u i s t i c c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s i n which t h e word a s s o c i a t i o n o f d i f f e r e n t l i n g u i s t i c p o p u l a t i o n s i s compared. As p r e v i o u s l y mentioned, t h i s s t u d y f a l l s r i g h t i n t o the expanded r e a l m of a p p l i c a t i o n o f word a s s o c i a t i o n f i r s t s t i m u l a t e d by the p u b l i c a t i o n o f the Kent and R o s a n o f f norm. In t h i s s t u d y , by comparing the word a s s o c i a t i o n s of young second language s p e a k e r s t o t h o s e o f young m o n o l i n g u a l s p e a k e r s , t h e s i m i l a r i t y o r d i s s i m i l a r i t y b etween f i r s t and s e c o n d language l e a r n i n g w i l l be s t u d i e d . The d a t a o f m o n o l i n g u a l s p e a k e r s w i l l come f r o m t h e f i n d i n g s o f p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s , l a r g e l y n o r m a t i v e s t u d i e s of young c h i l d r e n . The most i m p o r t a n t f i n d i n g i n t h e s t u d i e s o f E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g c h i l d r e n ( t h e p o p u l a t i o n w i t h which our s u b j e c t s w i l l be compared,) i s the o c c u r r e n c e o f t h e S-P s h i f t around age e i g h t t o t e n , which w i l l be d i s c u s s e d below. S - P S H I F T Of t h e t h r e e Laws f o r m u l a t e d by M arbe, t h e one which a t t r a c t e d t h e i n t e r e s t o f e a r l y r e s e a r c h e r s was t h a t most re s p o n s e s b e l o n g t o the same gr a m m a t i c a l c l a s s as the s t i m u l u s As s e e n , many s t u d i e s seemed t o s u p p o r t i t . D e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a r e s p o n s e comes f r o m t h e same f o r m c l a s s as the s t i m u l u s has g a i n e d s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t , e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e s e v e r a l s t u d i e s e s t a b l i s h e d the tendency o f c h i l d r e n t o respond from d i f f e r e n t form c l a s s e s and t h e n t o u n d e r g o a s h i f t t o w a r d t h e a d u l t r e s p o n s e p a t t e r n o f r e s p o n d i n g i n t h e same form c l a s s (Brown and Berko 1960, E r v i n 1961, E n t w i s l e 1963, Palermo 1964). Today, t h i s i s r e d e f i n e d as the dichotomy of s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , t h e l a t t e r r e f e r r i n g t o t h o s e r e s p o n s e s of the same gr a m m a t i c a l c l a s s as the s t i m u l u s , and the former t h o s e of the d i f f e r e n t form c l a s s e s . T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n , f i r s t s u g g e s ted by Saussure and f u r t h e r developed by Jacobson ( L u r i a 1981) goes f u r t h e r t h a n e a r l y r e s e a r c h e r s ' s i m p l e d i s t i n c t i o n r e l y i n g s o l e y on g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s . T h i s i s 23 w e l l i l l u s t r a t e d by the s t a n d a r d d e f i n i t i o n of t h e t e r m s by J e n k i n s : Word a s s o c i a t i o n s may be i n t e r p r e t e d as a r e s u l t o f r e l a t i v e d i s t r i b u t i o n of the s t i m u l i and r e s p o n s e s . The s i m i l a r i t y between any two words can be c o n c e i v e d l i n g u i s t i c a l l y as the degree of s i m i l a r i t y i n d i s -t r i b u t i o n . However, i t seems a p p a r e n t t h a t t h i s s i m i l a r i t y may be p r o f i t a b l y d i v i d e d i n t o two c l a s s e s , p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c . Two words a r e c o n s i d e r e d p a r a d i g m a t i c a l l y s i m i l a r t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t they a r e s u b s t i t u t a b l e i n the i d e n t i c a l frame . . . and syntagmatic t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t hey f o l l o w one a n o t h e r i n u t t e r -ances. (1954, p.115) That t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s w i d e l y a c c e p t e d , i s a t t e s t e d t o by the f a c t t h a t i t i s quoted by v a r i o u s r e s e a r c h e r s ( E s p e r 1973, Deese 1965, L e i c e s t e r 1981) . T h i s d e f i n i t i o n c l e a r l y demonstrates the two a s p e c t s i n h e r e n t i n word a s s o c i a t i o n , namely, a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y and l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y . C o n t i g u i t y , t h e c l a s s i c a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y , i s d i r e c t l y i m p l i e d by the d e f i n i t i o n of s y n t a g m a t i c i t y , a c o n c u r r e n c e i n speech. T h e r e f o r e , the dominance of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i s i t s e l f t h e c a s e a g a i n s t c o n t i g u i t y , u n l e s s one r e l i e s on m e d i a t i o n , as E r v i n ( 1 9 6 1 ) d i d . The e x i s t e n c e of the S-P s h i f t poses y e t a n o t h e r c h a l l e n g e t o a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r i s t s , f o r i t s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e may be a h i e r a r c h y o f p r i o r i t y o f d i f f e r e n t a s s o c i a t i o n p r o c e s s e s , p o s s i b i l y t i e d i n w i t h age v a r i a b l e s , t h u s c a l l i n g f o r the New Laws of A s s o c i a t i o n (Deese 1965) which e x p l a i n the S-P dichotomy as w e l l as i t s s h i f t . The o t h e r a s p e c t o f s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c dichotomy i s e x p r e s s e d by L u r i a ( 1 9 8 1 ) . He contends t h a t s y n t a g m a t i c l i n k a g e i s a more n a t u r a l form o f speech t h a n t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c s y s t e m o f o p p o s i t i o n and h i e r a r c h i c a l u n i t y o f language. (1981, p.119) and f u r t h e r , The p a r a d i g m a t i c [ a s s o c i a t i v e r e s p o n s e s ] are q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . They a r e more a r t i f i c i a l . S y n t agmatic r e s p o n s e s i n v o l v e not o n l y a d i f f e r e n t p s y c h o l o g y b u t a l s o b e l o n g t o a d i f f e r e n t form of speech a c t i v i t y . (1981, p.120) Indeed, i t has been p o i n t e d out t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s go hand-in-hand w i t h m a t u r i t y i n g r a m m a t i c a l competence (Brown and Berko 1960) and semantic knowledge ( M c N e i l l 1963). P a r a -d i g m a t i c i t y seems t o i m p l y a h i g h e r l e v e l of l i n g u i s t i c competence than s y n t a g m a t i c i t y which e x p l a i n s why the S-P s h i f t o c c u r s . The s i t u a t i o n i s n o t , however, so s i m p l e , as t h i s i s not the case i n o t h e r l a n g u a g e s , such as Japanese or C h i n e s e (Moran and Murakawa 1968, Moran and Huang 1974), though i t g e n e r a l l y a p p l i e s t o most European languages. In Japanese and C h i n e s e , s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g seems t o be dominant i n a d u l t speech as w e l l as c h i l d r e n ' s , t h u s s u g g e s t i n g t h a t more i n t e r l i n g u a l s t u d i e s a r e needed i n o r d e r t o examine the l i n g u i s t i c m a t u r i t y h y p o t h e s i s more c a r e f u l l y . A p a r t from the S-P s h i f t , however, t h e r e does seem t o be the same u n i v e r s a l t e n d e n c i e s i n young c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s . The appearances o f c l a n g r e s p o n s e s , response f a i l u r e , low commonality and s y n t a g m a t i c response a r e r e p o r t e d (Woodlow and L o w e l l 1918, E n t w i s l e 1966, L u r i a 1981, Moran 1966). Moran even s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e i s a u n i v e r s a l a s s o c i a t i v e ' s e t ' w o r k i n g when c h i l d r e n are v e r y young, w i t h r e s p o n s e s c l a s s i f i e d a c c o r d i n g t o " i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s " based on s u b c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f a s s o c i a t i o n l i n k s r a t h e r than S-P dichotomy, and t h a t as t h e y get o l d e r , c h i l d r e n ' s r e s p o n s e s become i n c r e a s i n g l y l i k e t h o s e of a d u l t s i n t h e i r language community. I t i s a d u l t s ' norms t h a t d i f f e r from each o t h e r , and they seem t o d i f f e r i n s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g , c a u s i n g the S-P s h i f t i n some languages but not i n o t h e r s . T h i s background h e l p s t o c l a r i f y the i n t e n t o f t h i s s t u d y . Japanese i s a language i n which the S-P s h i f t does not o c c u r , and E n g l i s h i s a language i n which the S-P s h i f t i s p r o m i n e n t . I t i s i d e a l t h e n , t o use t h e s e two languages t o t e s t whether s e c o n d l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g r e p l i c a t e s the l e a r n i n g of n a t i v e s p e a k e r s . The Study of Children's Associative Behaviour The s t u d y o f c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n s t a r t e d as a d i r e c t r e s u l t o f the K e n t / R o s a n o f f norms i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , and i t i s w e l l known t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n d i f f e r s f r o m t h a t o f a d u l t s i n c o n t a i n i n g c l a n g r e s p o n s e s and l e s s com-m o n a l i t y (Palermo 1963). The importance of mental age r a t h e r than c h r o n o l o g i c a l age i n a s s o c i a t i o n was d i s c o v e r e d by comparing r e t a r d e d and normal c h i l d r e n (Eastman and Rosanoff 1912, O t i s 1915). R o s a n o f f and R o s a n o f f (1913) p u b l i s h e d e x t e n s i v e d a t a on 300 normal c h i l d r e n , 25 a t each age from f o u r t h rough 15. They f o u n d t h a t t h e s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n r a p i d l y d i s a p p e a r e d and by the age o f 11 became v e r y c l o s e t o a d u l t s ' . T h i s age t r e n d was a l s o f o u n d when t h e c h i l d r e n were grouped i n t o t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s o f i n t e l l i g e n c e ' d u l l ' , ' b r i g h t ' and 'average.' The f i r s t and p o s s i b l y the most i m p o r t a n t o f the c h i l d s t u d i e s was r e p o r t e d i n 1916 by Woodrow and L o w e l l . They t e s t e d 1,000 f o u r t h and f i f t h grade c h i l d r e n on 100 words, 90 of which were taken from the K e n t / R o s a n o f f norm. The r e s u l t s of the s t u d y suggested many d i f f e r e n c e s between the word a s s o c i a -t i o n s o f a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n . Except i n a few c a s e s , p o p u l a r r e s p o n s e s d i f f e r e d and the f r e q u e n c y o f r e s p o n s e s t o a l l the s t i m u l i d i f f e r e d . Compared t o a d u l t s , c h i l d r e n tended t o g i v e f e w e r c o n t r a s t , s u p e r o r d i n a t e , c o o r d i n a t e , p a r t - w h o l e , noun-a b s t r a c t a t t r i b u t e s ; fewer p a r t i c i p l e s and c a u s e - e f f e c t r e s p o n s e s ; and t o g i v e more v e r b s , v e r b - o b j e c t , n o u n - a d j e c t i v e , a d j e c t i v e -noun, pronouns. R e i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e s e i n terms of form c l a s s , c h i l d r e n gave fewer p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , and more s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . The f i r s t s t u d y t o i n s p i r e the r e c e n t surge o f i n t e r e s t i n c h i l d r e n ' s a s s o c i a t i o n was Brown and Berko (1960). They used a l i s t o f s i x words each from s i x g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s i n f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n . They a l s o a d m i n i s t e r e d a usage t e s t which used a p r onounceable nonsense s y l l a b l e i n s e n t e n c e frames which i m p l i e d i t s p a r t of s peech, one o f the s i x g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s employed i n t h e i r word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t s . S u b j e c t s were t o c r e a t e t h e i r own s e n t e n c e s a f t e r t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s e frames embedded w i t h nonsense s y l l a b l e s . Brown and Berko found a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between the c o r r e c t use o f nonsense s y l l a b l e s and age, and more i n t e r e s t i n g l y , a s t r o n g c o r r e l a t i o n among homogeneous (same f o r m c l a s s ) r e s p o n d i n g , age, and the c o r r e c t use o f nonsense s y l l a b l e s . Thus p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g ( c a l l e d homogeneous by Brown and B e r k o ) was f o u n d t o be c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e l i n g u i s t i c s k i l l s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c o r r e c t u n d e r s t a n d i n g and the use o f p a r t s o f speech. These r e s e a r c h e r s c o n s i d e r e d t h a t i n c r e a s e d e x p e r i e n c e i n p a r t s o f s p e e c h d e t e r m i n e s t h e " s y n t a c t i c a l o p e r a t i o n " of usage and word a s s o c i a t i o n . E r v i n (1961) t e s t e d k i n d e r g a r t e n and grade one, t h r e e and s i x c h i l d r e n on 46 words w i t h a word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k and a 35 i t e m c l o s e d a l t e r n a t e t e s t . B a s i n g her work on a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r i e s , she assumed t h a t the d e c r e a s e i n s y n t a g a m t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s due t o the i n c r e a s e d v a r i e t y o f c o n t e x t s , which produce more competing a s s o c i a t i o n s by c o n t i g u i t y , t h e r e b y r e d u c i n g t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . In c o n t r a s t , p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s have b e t t e r p r o b a b i l i t y where the v a r i e t y o f c o n t e x t s o f a s t i m u l u s i s h i g h r e l a t i v e t o i t s f r e q u e n c y . T h e r e f o r e , i n a s e n t e n c e , a s t i m u l u s i n w o r d - f i n a l p o s i t i o n must produce more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s than s y n t a g m a t i c because i t l a c k s subsequent c o n t e x t . A f t e r s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s o f c h i l d r e n ' s t e x t s ( c o u n t i n g g r a m m a t i c a l sequence and a s s o c i a t i v e r e s p o n s e s ) , E r v i n c o n c l u d e d t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a r e produced by " t r a i n i n g f o r w a r d c o n t i g u i t y i n speech," t h a t i s , t e a and c o f f e e a re a s s o c i a t e d i n the frame o f 'a cup o f t e a ' r a t h e r than as back and f r o n t are a s s o c i a t e d i n 'back door and f r o n t door'. I n d e e d , t h i s a s s o c i a t i o n i s the r e s u l t o f m e d i a t i o n p r o c e s s by c o n t i g u i t y as i n A- B, A- C - B- C. The i n c r e a s e i n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s caused by both i n c r e a s e d c o n t e x t u a l v a r i e t y and i n c r e a s e d v o c a b u l a r y , w h i c h r e d u c e s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . She a l s o f o u n d t h a t c l a n g r e s p o n s e s d e c r e a s e d markedly between k i n d e r g a r t e n and t h i r d g r a d e and r e a c h e d almost z e r o i n grade s i x . E r v i n ' s s t u d y i s armed w i t h s t a t i s t i c a l f i g u r e s , but the q u e s t i o n remains o f how t r u t h f u l l y c h i l d r e n ' s t e x t s r e f l e c t c h i l d r e n ' s a c t u a l l i n g u i s t i c e x p o s u r e and t h e r e f o r e , how r e l i a b l e the f i g u r e s w h i c h a r e u s e d t o t e s t t h e r e l a t i o n -s h i p between c o n t e x t u a l v a r i e t y and a s s o c i a t i o n can be. M c N e i l (1966) c a l l e d E r v i n ' s t h e o r y (1966) the "Erroneous A n t i c i p a t i o n Theory," which means t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s are caused by a n t i c i p a t i n g an a l r e a d y known word i n a f a m i l i a r sequence and then e n c o u n t e r i n g a d i f f e r e n t word i n s t e a d . As a r e s u l t , t h e s e two words are a s s o c i a t e d . In o t h e r words, i t i s a l s o c o n t i g u i t y which causes p a r a d i g m a t i c a s s o c i a t i o n . E n t w i s l e e t a l . (1964) i n t h e i r p r e l i m i n a r y r e p o r t on the massive norm of 1200 young c h i l d r e n , r e p o r t e d on the t e s t i n g of 500 c h i l d r e n w i t h 96 w o r d s . T h e i r s t u d y i s r e m a r k a b l e i n the sense t h a t v a r i a b l e s such as age, s e x , s o c i a l s t a t u s and I.Q. were a l l c o n s i d e r e d . They found the S-P s h i f t t o o c c u r between ages f i v e and n i n e but a t a d i f f e r e n t pace depending on form c l a s s . Noun r e s p o n s e s were f o u n d t o o c c u r f o r a l l f o r m c l a s s e s among young c h i l d r e n , and t h e r e f o r e , c o n s i d e r e d t o be most p r i m i t i v e . I t was found t h a t s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n s e s g r a d u a l l y r e p l a c e d noun r e s p o n s e s and reached t h e i r peak a t grade one. Then, the s h i f t toward p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s from s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n s e s o c c u r r e d f i r s t w i t h a d j e c t i v e s , then nouns and f i n a l l y w i t h v e r b s . Commonality i n c r e a s e was not c o n s i d e r e d to be the cause of the S-P s h i f t , but r a t h e r a d e v e l o p m e n t a l s h i f t of word o r g a n i z a t i o n was s u g g e s t e d , as " c l u s t e r s o f w o r d s , p r e s u m a b l y r e l a t e d t h r o u g h m e d i a t i n g r e s p o n s e s , a r e formed a l o n g d i f f e r e n t d i m e n s i o n s a t d i f f e r e n t ages" ( p . 2 7 ) . E n t w i s t l e e t a l . compared the r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y w i t h o t h e r s t u d i e s , and found t h a t compared t o the Woodrow and L o w e l l s t u d y , t h e r e was a marked i n c r e a s e i n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s among t h e i r s u b j e c t s . They s p e c u l a t e d t h a t t h e mass m e d i a c a u s e d t h e a c c e l e r a t i o n o f l i n g u i s t i c development, which r e s u l t e d i n an e a r l y S-P s h i f t . In c o n c l u s i o n , t h e s e r e s e a r c h e r s a c c e p t E r v i n ' s t h e o r y . E n t w i s l e , however, goes even f u r t h e r i n her f u l l r e p o r t o f the s t u d y i n 1966, p r o p o s i n g t h a t i t i s not age which i s c a u s i n g the S-P s h i f t but r a t h e r t h a t " A l l words may go t h r o u g h s i m i l a r s t a g e s o f development a t a r a t e t h a t depends on exposure but i s m o d i f i e d b o t h by d i s c r i m i n a b i l i t y o f s t i m u l u s and by c o n t e x t u a l c l u e s " ( p 7 4 ) . C o n s i d e r i n g the i n c r e a s e o f s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s g i v e n t o a d j e c t i v e s and nouns by c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s a f t e r the S-P s h i f t , she h y p o t h e s i z e d the Anomalous s t a g e (noun), f o l l o w e d by t h e E a r l y S y n t a c t i c - P a r a d i g m a t i c s t a g e , and f i n a l l y , by the L a t e S y n t a g m a t i c s t a g e . The development of t h e s e s t a g e s i s g o v e r n e d by i n c r e a s i n g exposure t o e v e r y word. When a l l t h e v a r i a b l e s had been c o n s i d e r e d she e x p l a i n e d t h i s development as the a d d i t i o n o f s e mantic markers t o the s e l e c t i o n a l r e s t r i c -t i o n s , t h e r e b y i n c o r p o r a t i n g M c N e i l l ' s semantic f e a t u r e hypo-t h e s i s . S i g n i f i c a n t l y , y e t more i m p o r t a n t l y , IQ and S-P s h i f t were found i n c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p , p r o v i n g s t a t i s t i c a l l y t h e g e n e r a l agreement of e a r l y s t u d i e s . E n t w i s l e seems t o e x p l a i n e a r l y S-P s h i f t by u s i n g E r v i n ' s t h e o r y t h a t p r o b a b i l i t y depends on c o n t e x t u a l v a r i e t y . A s s o c i a -t i o n s are p r o b a b l y g r a d u a l l y s t r u c t u r e d a c c o r d i n g t o s e mantic m a rkers. Y e t , her e x p l a n a t i o n t h a t "post p a r a d i g m a t i c s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n s e " i s d i f f e r e n t from c h i l d r e n ' s s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s not v e r y c l e a r except f o r the statement t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s r e s p o n s e s a r e based on g r a m m a t i c a l c o n t i g u i t y and l a t e r ones on "enlargement i n meaning". J u d g i n g from examples g i v e n such as " c o l o r - b r i g h t " and " b u t t e r f l y - y e l l o w , " she seems t o s u g g e s t t h e r e v e r s e d o r d e r o f c o n t i g u i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p as t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a d u l t s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n s e s ( e . g . , b r i g h t - c o l o u r ) . A l t h o u g h nouns, a d j e c t i v e s and h i g h f r e q u e n c y v e r b s have r e v e r s e d the t r e n d t o s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n d i n g between grade f i v e and c o l l e g e , t h i s f a c t e x p l a i n s o n l y p a r t of a l l the l a t e s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n s e s . In f a c t , t h e d a t a show t h a t the r e v e r s a l i s most prominent i n a d j e c t i v e - n o u n p a i r s r a t h e r than n o u n - a d j e c t i v e p a i r s , l e a v i n g the q u e s t i o n o f enlargement i n meaning u n c e r t a i n . Palermo and J e n k i n s (1963, 1964, Palermo 1963) t e s t e d 500 s t u d e n t s a t each o f t h e s e g r a d e s : f o u r t h r o u g h e i g h t , t e n , e l e v e n , and t w e l v e . They a l s o t e s t e d 100 c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s and r e p o r t e d an e x t e n s i v e c h r o n o l o g i c a l norm. A l i s t of 100 Kent and R o s a n o f f words and an a d d i t i o n a l 100 words were used as s t i m u l i . They found, c o n t r a r y t o o t h e r s t u d i e s showing a d u l t s g i v i n g more s u p e r o r d i n a t e r e s p o n s e s than c h i l d r e n , t h a t s u p e r -o r d i n a t e r e s p o n s e s reached t h e i r peak among grade f o u r , f i v e , and s i x s t u d e n t s and s t e a d i l y d e c r e a s e d t o the c o l l e g e l e v e l . O p p o s i t e r e s p o n s e s s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s e d w i t h age, but s u r p r i s i n g l y , t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o a d j e c t i v e s d e c r e a s e d between grades f o u r and t w e l v e , w h i l e the r e s t o f g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s showed the e x p e c t e d i n c r e a s e as age advanced. Palermo and J e n k i n s a l s o compared t h e i r r e s u l t s w i t h those o f Kent and Rosanoff and of Woodrow and L o w e l l , and found t h a t t o d a y ' s c h i l d r e n are much c l o s e r t o a d u l t s than t h e c h i l d r e n of 50 y e a r s ago. Thus, they s t a t e d , l i n g u i s t i c development i s much more r a p i d today ( t o the degree t h a t i t can be measured by word a s s o c i a t i o n b e h a v i o r ) . On a r e l a t e d m a t t e r , t h e y a l s o found t h a t h i g h f r e q u e n c y words now r e a c h t h e i r peak of s u p e r -o r d i n a t e r e s p o n d i n g much f a s t e r than i n the p a s t . They a l s o c o n f i r m e d the i n c r e a s i n g commonality of r e s p o n s e s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r age and r e p o r t e d c o n s i d e r a b l e o v e r l a p o f r e s p o n s e s and rank o r d e r s between a d j a c e n t age groups. Palermo (1971) d i d a d d i t i o n a l r e s e a r c h t o supplement h i s norm ( P a l e r m o and J e n k i n s 1964), t e s t i n g s t u d e n t s i n grades one through t h r e e ( m i s s i n g i n the e a r l i e r s t u d y ) . He found a s t e a d y i n c r e a s e i n the number o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s from grade one t h r o u g h c o l l e g e , w i t h a d r a m a t i c i n c r e a s e b e t w e e n grades one and two. The o r d e r o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g by form c l a s s was a l s o found, w i t h nouns f o l l o w e d by a d j e c t i v e s , v e r b s , and f i n a l l y a d v e r b s . Except f o r n o t i n g the i n c r e a s e d exposure t o language, he d i d not e x p l a i n why the S-P s h i f t o c c u r s . M c N e i l l (1966) t e s t e d the Erroneous A n t i c i p a t i o n H y p o t h e s i s put f o r w a r d by E r v i n (1961). He i n g e n i o u s l y d e v i s e d a way t o t e s t the h y p o t h e s i s by u s i n g nonsense s y l l a b l e s embedded i n an E n g l i s h sentence frame, so t h a t one o c c u p i e d an a d j e c t i v e p o s i t i o n and the o t h e r a noun p o s i t i o n . O vert a n t i c i p a t i o n was induced by a s k i n g f o r an a n t i c i p a t e d word t o f o l l o w i n t h e m i d d l e o f a s e n t e n c e . Three c o n d i t i o n s were s e t up w i t h d i f f e r e n t degrees o f o v e r t a n t i c i p a t i o n . T e s t s of word a s s o c i a t i o n t o nonsense s y l l a b l e s and r e c a l l were a d m i n i s t e r e d i m m e d i a t e l y f o l l o w i n g the l e a r n i n g t r i a l s . I f E r v i n ' s h y p o t h e s i s were c o r r e c t , then t h e group which d i d the l a r g e s t number of o v e r t a n t i c i p a t i o n t r i a l s s h o u l d have produced the most p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , but no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found. M c N e i l l t h e n added a p r o d u c t i o n game i n which s u b j e c t s were t o c r e a t e a s e n t e n c e u s i n g a n o n s e n s e s y l l a b l e . One g r o u p r e c e i v e d feedback on whether the use was c o r r e c t , the o t h e r d i d n o t , c r e a t i n g g r o u p s o f s u b j e c t s w i t h d i f f e r i n g s u c c e s s a t the game. The r e s u l t s showed t h a t those s c o r i n g h i g h on the language game used more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . The knowledge of the use o f d i s t r i b u t i o n c l a s s e s p r o d u c t i v e l y caused the p r o p o r t i o n of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s to i n c r e a s e . M c N e i l l s p e c u l a t e d t h a t those w i t h i n t e r m e d i a t e s c o r e s knew the use o f d i s t r i b u t i o n c l a s s e s p r o d u c t i v e l y but d i d not know the complete c o n t e n t s o f them, c a u s i n g the h i n d r a n c e t o p a r a d i g -m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . R e f e r r i n g t o Deese's (1962) f i n d i n g t h a t a d u l t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s o f t e n r e s o l v e d t o b i p o l a r d i s t i n c t i o n , M c N e i l l proposed t h a t t h e k n o w l e d g e o f b o t h t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n c l a s s and i t s membership were the p r e r e q u i s i t e s of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . T h i s s tems f r o m t h e more f u n d a m e n t a l p r i n c i p l e o f semantic f e a t u r e s , t h e c o l l e c t i o n of which completes the meaning of a word. He c o n c l u d e d t h a t the p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t " r e s u l t s from adding s u f f i c i e n t numbers of f e a t u r e s so t h a t t h e m i n i m a l c o n t r a s t f o r any word w i l l a l w a y s l i e w i t h i n t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e word's major g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s " (1966, p.556). Based on t h i s p r i n c i p l e , M c N e i l l d i f f e r e n t i a t e d those s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s of c h i l d r e n which v i o l a t e s s e l e c t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n s ( e g . d a r k -snow) , from s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s o f a d u l t s which do not and c a l l e d them "pseudo-syntagmatic r e s p o n s e s " . Pseudo-syntagmatic r e s p o n s e s were the r e s u l t o f an i n c o m p l e t e f e a t u r e l i s t o f a word f o r c i n g c h i l d r e n t o produce a s s o c i a t i o n s which s h a r e o n l y a s m a l l number of f e a t u r e s . T h i s view i s c a l l e d t h e S e m a n t i c F e a t u r e H y p o t h e s i s or the M i n i m a l C o n t r a s t h y p o t h e s i s . These s t u d i e s from Brown and Berko t o M c N e i l l have p r o v i d e d t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r an a r r a y o f s t u d i e s on word a s s o c i a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g S-P s h i f t . The f o l l o w i n g s t u d i e s t o be r e v i e w e d e i t h e r draw assumptions o r t e s t hypotheses from t h e s e p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s . N e e d l e s s t o say, those which t e s t the t h e o r i e s put f o r w a r d by t h e s e s t u d i e s a r e the most p r e v a l e n t . Semmel e t a l . (1968) u s e d 40 s t i m u l i t o compare word a s s o c i a t i o n by r e t a r d e d and normal c h i l d r e n . I n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r e t a r d a t e s , p u b l i c s c h o o l r e t a r d a t e s , c h r o n o l o g i c a l - a g e - m a t c h e d n o r m a l s and mental-age-matched normals were the f o u r s u b j e c t g roups. These r e s e a r c h e r s found t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g o c c u r r e d most f r e q u e n t l y among c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y matched normal c h i l d r e n , f o l l o w e d by m e n t a l l y - m a t c h e d c h i l d r e n , then p u b l i c s c h o o l r e t a r d a t e s , and l a s t l y i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d r e t a r d a t e s . They a l s o f o u n d t h a t c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y m a tched n o r m a l s gave s i g n i f i c a n t l y more paradigmatic responses to verbs, adverbs and pronouns, t h i s f i n d i n g agreeing with Entwisle's form class v a r i a b i l i t y of the S-P s h i f t ( i . e . verbs, adverbs and pronouns are the l a s t ones to undergo the s h i f t ) . C i t i n g data showing prepositions getting the fewest paradigmatic responses, they speculated that t h i s supports the Semantic Feature Hypothesis, for prepositions have the fewest number of semantic markers. Subject variables and the S-P s h i f t were further studied by Bartel et a l . (1973). They compared learning disabled children and normal children on a 50 item word association test, hypo-thesizing that learning d i s a b i l i t y might be due to a syntagmatic strategy a r i s i n g from an i n a b i l i t y to undergo the S-P s h i f t . Contrary to the expectation, S-P s h i f t was found in both types of children, although low IQ children displayed i t af t e r the age of ten, l a t e r than the other c h i l d r e n . A s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between IQ and age was found among d i s a b l e d children, suggesting that the S-P s h i f t i s not a simple function of IQ or age alone. Young and low-IQ c h i l d r e n gave many preservative responses ( r e p e t i t i o n of the same response to a number of s t i m u l i without any l o g i c a l connection). B r o s i e r (1974) i n v e s t i g a t e d the r e l a t i o n s h i p between paradigmatic responding and academic variables. He tested 400 students i n grades one through f i v e . The factors controlled were age; sex, race, academic variables such as vocabulary, reading comprehension and so forth; and the occupation, education and i n t e l l i g e n c e of the head o f the f a m i l y . A word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t and a sente n c e c o m p l e t i o n e x e r c i s e were the t a s k s a d m i n i s -t e r e d . He found t h a t v o c a b u l a r y s c o r e s , i n t e l l i g e n c e and age were s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . When the word a s s o c i a t i o n s c o r e s and the sente n c e c o m p l e t i o n t a s k s c o r e s were combined, r e a d i n g comprehension was a l s o s i g n i f i -c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . T h i s i s p l a u s i b l e f r o m M c N e i l l ' s p o i n t o f view s i n c e he h o l d s t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g r e q u i r e s the f u l l knowledge o f membership i n d i s t r i b u t i o n c l a s s e s . I t has been s u g g e s t e d t h a t i t i s not o n l y academic o r i n t e l l i g e n c e v a r i a b l e s but a l s o s o c i a l s t a t u s v a r i a b l e s which seem t o i n f l u e n c e the S-P s h i f t . Kumin (1973) t e s t e d 100 lower c l a s s and 100 m i d d l e c l a s s c h i l d r e n , u s i n g v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y s t i m u l i . Seventy noun and ve r b s t i m u l i were d i v i d e d and p r e s e n t e d h a l f o r a l l y and h a l f v i s u a l l y . In b o t h c a s e s , m i d d l e c l a s s c h i l d r e n p r o d u c e d more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . Modes o f p r e s e n t a t i o n a f f e c t e d o n l y k i n d e r g a r t n e r s and l o w e r c l a s s c h i l d r e n , w i t h v i s u a l p r e s e n t a t i o n c a u s i n g an i n c r e a s e i n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . In c o n t r a s t , f i f t h g r a d e r s gave more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o a u d i t o r y p r e s e n t a t i o n . When o n l y s o c i a l s t a t u s i s c o n t r o l l e d , the e f f e c t i s o f t e n t h a t l ower c l a s s e s tend t o have a lower l e v e l of i n t e l l i g e n c e , o r v e r b a l i n t e l l i g e n c e compared t o t h e norm o f t h e s o c i e t y ( l a r g e l y m o d e l l e d a f t e r m i d d l e o r upper c l a s s e s ) . T h e r e f o r e , i n o r d e r t o c o n c l u d e t h a t s o c i a l s t a t u s v a r i a b l e s a f f e c t p a r a d i g m a t i c responding, we must make the d i s t i n c t i o n as to what aspect of the v a r i a b l e i s e f f e c t i v e , the d e p r i v a t i o n of s o c i a l norm i n terms of v e r b a l c u l t u r e , or general i n t e l l i g e n c e . L u r i a (1981) looks on c h i l d r e n ' s l i n g u i s t i c development as the s h i f t from " s y m p r a c t i c a l " to "synsemantic" speech which i s r e f l e c t e d i n the S-P s h i f t . He b e l i e v e s that the syntagmatic p r i n c i p l e i s f i r m l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h p r a c t i c a l a c t i o n , and, t h e r e f o r e , paradigmatic responding i s of a higher l i n g u i s t i c l e v e l then syntagmatic responding. Many s t u d i e s seem to f a v o r a more fundamental e x p l a n a t i o n of the S-P s h i f t . Anderson and Beh (1968) c r i t i c i z e d M c N e i l l , s a y i n g t h a t the Semantic Feature Hypothesis does not completely e x p l a i n the s t a t u s of s e m a n t i c markers or how the marker system operates i n r e l a t i o n to s y n t a c t i c r u l e s . Yet Anderson and Beh agreed that the Semantic Feature Hypothesis i s s u p e r i o r i n i t s economical e x p l a n a t i o n of the r e g u l a t i o n of the word d i c t i o n a r y i n memory storage, and hypothesized that l e x i c a l memory goes from a d i r e c t word d i c t i o n a r y to an organized one by way of semantic markers. Anderson and Beh c r e a t e d two 70-item word r e c o g n i t i o n t e s t s u s i n g ten words each of c o n t r o l words, ten paradigmatic asso-c i a t e s , and t e n s y n t a g m a t i c a s s o c i a t e s . Grade one and two students and c o l l e g e students were the s u b j e c t s . The t a r g e t words were a l s o used as s t i m u l i i n word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k s . E r r o r s on p a r a d i g m a t i c a s s o c i a t e s were t w i c e as common as s y n t a g m a t i c a s s o c i a t e s among a d u l t s , i n d i c a t i n g a r e l i a n c e on p a r a d i g m a t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n i n memory. Sec o n d g r a d e r s a l s o showed a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between the number o f e r r o r s and p r o p o r t i o n o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g , w h e r e a s f i r s t g r a d e r s d i d n o t . These r e s e a r c h e r s c o n s i d e r e d the r e s u l t s more i n d i c a t i v e of S-P s h i f t than word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k s , y e t the f a c t t h a t f i r s t g r a d e r s d i d not show d e f i n i t e r e l i a n c e on s y n t a g m a t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n i n memory l e d A n d e r s o n & Beh t o the f o l l o w i n g i n c o n c l u s i v e s t a t e m e n t : p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t r e p r e s e n t s the a c q u i s i t i o n o f a tendency t o match some s o r t o f semantic markers i n r e c a l l . Beyond t h a t t h e y s u p p o r t t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t the l e x i c a l marker system i s i n t i m a t e l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h the p r o c e s s of s t o r a g e and r e c o g n i t i o n of words the system encodes. (1968, p.1052) M a s t e r s (1969) a l s o t r i e d t o e x p l a i n the S-P s h i f t from a se m a n t i c v i e w p o i n t but d i f f e r e n t l y . F o l l o w i n g the Werher and K a p l a n (1952) s t u d y o f synonym as t h e p r o d u c t o f s e n t e n c e d e f i n i t i o n , M a s t e r s s p e c u l a t e d t h a t s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a r e con n e c t e d w i t h a f u n c t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n t y p i c a l o f c h i l d r e n . Seventy c h i l d r e n , 12 each o f f o u r t h r o u g h n i n e y e a r - o l d s were t e s t e d w i t h a 24 s t i m u l i word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t and a d m i n i s t e r e d a word d e f i n i t i o n t e s t . The r e s u l t showed a s i g n i f i c a n t age e f f e c t on b o t h v a r i a b l e s , but the c o r r e l a t i o n between them was not s t r o n g enough t o c o n f i r m the h y p o t h e s i s , though a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n was found. T h e b a s i s o f M a s t e r s ' h y p o t h e s i s w a s t h a t m o s t s t u d i e s s h o w t h e S-P s h i f t s t a r t i n g a t t h e o n s e t o f e d u c a t i o n . T h u s , h e f e l t , t h e s y n o n y m o u s d e f i n i t i o n e n c o u r a g e d a t s c h o o l i s c a u s i n g p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . H o w e v e r , w h e n we c o n s i d e r t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s h a v e a l a r g e a m o u n t o f c o n t r a s t , t h i s s e e m s t o o s i m p l i s t i c . D a t a o f N a v a h o i n d i a n s g i v i n g l a r g e n u m b e r s o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s d e s p i t e a l a c k o f e d u c a t i o n p a r t i a l l y d i s c r e d i t s M a s t e r s ' t h e o r y . H o w e v e r , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a d e f i n i t i o n s t r a t e g y c o n t r i b u t i n g t o p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y s t i l l r e m a i n s . L i p p m a n ( 1 9 7 1 ) t e s t e d g r o u p s o f 4 8 s u b j e c t s i n k i n d e r -g a r t e n , g r a d e t w o , g r a d e f o u r a n d c o l l e g e , u s i n g s i x n o u n s a n d s i x a d j e c t i v e s o f h i g h c o m m o n a l i t y t o t e s t M c N e i l l ' s h y p o t h e s i s . N o t o n l y w a s a s s o c i a t i o n a d m i n i s t e r e d b u t s u b j e c t s w e r e a l s o a s k e d t h e r e a s o n why t h e t w o w o r d s g o t o g e t h e r . T h e S-P s h i f t w a s o b s e r v e d b e t w e e n g r a d e s t w o a n d f o u r . A c l o s e r l o o k a t r e a s o n s a n d a s s o c i a t i o n s r e v e a l e d t h a t n o m i n a l r e a s o n i n g a n d p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s c o r r e l a t e p o s i t i v e l y , b u t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o n o u n s a r e n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o f u n c t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g t o p e r c e p t u a l r e a s o n i n g , a n d t o r e l a t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g . A s f o r a d j e c t i v e s , o p p o s i t e a n d d i m e n s i o n a l r e a s o n i n g i n c r e a s e d w i t h a g e , b u t e x e m p l a r s a n d f l a t r e a s o n i n g ( e x . o n e i s h o t a n d t h e o t h e r i s c o l d ) d e c r e a s e d . T h e h i g h c o r r e l a t i o n o f 0.92 w a s f o u n d b e t w e e n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a n d c o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s . Lippman c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e s e r e s u l t s , e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e r e g a r d i n g c o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s t o a d j e c t i v e s , s u p p o r t the semantic f e a t u r e h y p o t h e s i s . I t was a l s o f o u n d t h a t t h e d o m i n a n t r e a s o n i n g u s e d by k i n d e r g a r t e n s was p e r c e p t u a l , f o l l o w e d by f u n c t i o n a l . O l d e r s u b j e c t s used almost the same q u a n t i t i e s of t h o s e t y p e s o f r e a s o n i n g , but r e l a t i o n a l r e a s o n i n g was dominant. Lippman c o n s i d e r e d t h a t t h e o r d e r i n g o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f r e a s o n i n g a g r e e i n g w i t h P i a g e t ' s c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n s i s e v i d e n c e o f a c l o s e t i e between c o g n i t i o n and s e mantic m arkers. As r e p o r t e d by Lippman's s t u d y , c o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s seem t o be c l o s e l y r e l a t e d . B e c a u s e antonym p a i r s p r o v i d e a model of minimum c o n t r a s t o f f e a t u r e , t h e development of c o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s has been s t u d i e d by s e v e r a l r e s e a r c h e r s . M a r s h a l l (1969) observed t h a t g e t t i n g the unmarked word from the marked word i s e a s i e r than g e t t i n g the marked one from the unmarked one, t h a t i s , the a c q u i s i t i o n o f unmarked comes b e f o r e marked. Heidenheimer (1975) n o t i c e d t h a t c h i l d r e n g i v e n o t - r e s p o n s e o r n e g a t i o n r e s ponse most o f t e n t o t h o s e s t i m u l i which have common antonyms and t h a t t h i s o c c u r s e a r l y when the t y p i c a l response i s a f a m i l i a r environment or l i n g u i s t i c c o n t e x t . She proposed a d e v e l o p m e n t a l sequence of " c o n t e x t - n e g a t i o n - antonym" f o r c h i l d r e n ' s antonym development, s i n c e c h i l d r e n do not y e t have marked words as d e r i v a t i v e s o f unmarked ones. I n H e i d e n h e i m e r 1 s s t u d y , 80 c h i l d r e n f r o m f o u r t o s i x y e a r s o l d were d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r age groups d i f f e r i n g from each o t h e r by a h a l f y e a r . They were then a d m i n i s t e r e d a 15 antonym p a i r word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k , adapted from Deese (1965). These antonym p a i r s were a d j e c t i v e s , e l i c i t i n g each o t h e r as p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s , and were p a i r s o f marked and unmarked a d j e c t i v e s which d i f f e r on o n l y one f e a t u r e , t h a t i s , whether t h a t f e a t u r e i s marked o r unmarked. The h y p o t h e s i s was t h a t c h i l d r e n do not y e t have marked a d j e c t i v e s as d e r i v a t i v e words from unmarked ones, and g i v e n e g a t i o n r e s p o n s e s b e f o r e s t a r t i n g t o g i v e marked c o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s . The r e s u l t s showed t h a t age e f f e c t was s i g n i f i c a n t i n b o t h n e g a t i o n and antonym r e s p o n s e s . The r e s p o n s e s were c l a s s i f i e d as t o c o n t e x t , n e g a t i o n , antonym, o t h e r , and "don't know" r e s p o n s e s . The l a s t two k i n d s of re s p o n s e s were c o n s t a n t a c r o s s age groups. C o n t e x t r e s p o n s e s showed a d r a m a t i c drop from age f i v e t o s i x , accompanied by a d r a m a t i c i n c r e a s e o f antonym r e s p o n s e s a t t h e same t i m e . I n t e r e s t i n g l y , n e g a t i o n r e s p o n s e s showed a sh a r p i n c r e a s e between ages 4.0 and 4.5 and d e c r e a s e d t h e r e a f t e r . H e i d e n h e i m e r i n t e r p r e t e d t h i s r e s u l t by s a y i n g "meaning must f i r s t undergo a p r o c e s s o f d e c o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n by the c h i l d from the f a m i l i a r terms and p h r a s e s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the v a r i o u s e x t r a l i n g u i s t i c o b j e c t s and c o n t e x t s t o which he i s exposed" (1975, p.761). Thus she e x p l a i n s antonym development u n d e r l y i n g S-P s h i f t as d e c o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n , the s t e p from e x t r a l i n g u i s t i c t o l i n g u i s t i c r e l a t i o n s . I n a d d i t i o n , she c o n t e n d s t h a t " n e g a t i o n f u n c t i o n s as a mechanism f o r c a t e g o r i z a t i o n o f m e a n i n g and , f o l l o w i n g t h a t , as a t r a n s i t i o n a l s t e p toward the p r o d u c t i o n o f the antonym r e s p o n s e s " (1975, p.760). I n o t h e r w o r d s , c h i l d r e n , as t hey mature, e s t a b l i s h the meaning of a word by r e f e r e n c e t o i t s o p p o s i t e , but have t o r e l y on c o n c r e t e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t o c a r r y the meaning. N e g a t i o n i s a t r a n s i t i o n a l s t e p in-between. Heidenheimer's argument seems v e r y c o n v i n c i n g , s i n c e a b s t r a c t i o n i s no doubt a h i g h e r c o g n i t i v e a c t i v i t y than c o n c r e t i z a t i o n , and c h i l d r e n , as V y g o t z k y c o n t e n d e d , must somehow grow f r o m b e i n g c a p a b l e a t t h e c o n c r e t e l e v e l t o b e i n g c a p a b l e of a b s t r a c t i o n ( L u r i a 1981). Heidenheimer (1978) f u r t h e r pursued her p o s i t i o n of v i e w i n g word a s s o c i a t i o n i n a c o g n i t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e by t e s t i n g 12 f o u r y e a r - o l d and f i v e - y e a r - o l d c h i l d r e n , d o i n g word a s s o c i a t i o n and f a l s e r e c o g n i t i o n t e s t s . Common nouns were u s e d as s t i m u l i and r e s p o n s e s were c l a s s i f i e d a c c o r d i n g t o d e t a i l e d a s s o c i a -t i o n l i n k s such as c o o r d i n a t i o n , a c t i o n o r p a r t i c u l a r i z a t i o n . I n word a s s o c i a t i o n , Heidenheimer r e c e i v e d m o s t l y a c t i o n r e s p o n s e s from b o t h groups. The f i v e - y e a r - o l d s d i d not show a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between a c t i o n and c o o r d i n a t i o n r e s p o n s e s , but p a r t i c u l a r i z a t i o n d e c r e a s e d . The f o u r - y e a r - o l d s showed s i g n i f i c a n t l y more a c t i o n r e s p o n s e s than e i t h e r c o o r d i n a t e or p a r t i c u l a r i z a t i o n r e s p o n s e s . Heidenheimer f e l t t h a t c o o r d i n a t e r e s p o n s e s a r i s e from the r e l a t i o n s h i p s among p r e v i o u s l y s t o r e d i n f o r m a t i o n , and t h a t no c l a s s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n i s i n t e n d e d on t h e p a r t o f c h i l d r e n . That i s , f o r c h i l d r e n , the g r a m m a t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n o f the S-P s h i f t i s m e a n i n g l e s s . Word a s s o c i a t i o n i s t h e most r e w a r d i n g t o o l f o r r e v e a l i n g t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e r e l a t i o n network. However, the form c l a s s d i s t i n c t i o n i m p l i e d by t h e S-P dichotomy does not t a k e i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e s e u n d e r l y i n g changes. For E n g l i s h and European languages, the f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t s can be made t o summarize c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n s t u d i e s : 1. C h i l d r e n tend t o g i v e c l a n g r e s p o n s e s and o t h e r r e s ponse f a u l t s ( u n r e l a t e d r e s p o n s e , s t i m u l u s r e p e t i -t i o n , e t c . ) w h i c h d i s a p p e a r r a p i d l y as c h i l d r e n grow o l d e r . 2. The S-P s h i f t seems t o appear between ages f i v e and n i n e , depending on t h e form c l a s s of s t i m u l i and the i n t e l l i g e n c e o f the c h i l d . 3. E x p o s u r e t o l a n g u a g e e n v i r o n m e n t , l e x i c a l memory o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s e m a n t i c knowledge, and c o g n i t i v e development seem t o p l a y a r o l e i n the S-P s h i f t . 4. C o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s p l a y a major p a r t i n p a r a -d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . STUDIES ON ADULTS S i n c e the Kent and R o s a n o f f Word A s s o c i a t i o n Norm, t h e r e have been v a r i o u s norms a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e s t u d i e s . Wohl and Izawa (1979) s u r v e y e d the a v a i l a b l e norms and found t h a t t h e r e a r e 47 norms i n the l i t e r a t u r e w i t h 20 t o 599 s t i m u l u s words per s t u d y . I n t o t a l , t h e y f o u n d t h a t 1595 d i f f e r e n t words had been used as s t i m u l i . They c o n s i d e r e d t h e s i z e of the a v a i l a b l e s t i m u l i p o o l as s t i l l t o o s m a l l . J e n k i n s and R u s s e l l (I960) compared f i v e norms from the Kent and R o s a n o f f (1910) t o the M i n e s o t a norm of 1952. They found t h a t , as t i m e p r o g r e s s e s , t h e norms change i n t h e f o l l o w i n g ways: 1. There i s an i n c r e a s e d f r e q u e n c y o f p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s ; 2. There a r e changes i n p o p u l a r r e s p o n s e s ; f i r s t p r i m a r i e s a r e t h e most s t a b l e ; 3. The h i e r a r c h i e s o f r e s p o n s e s t o a p a r t i c u l a r s t i m u l u s a r e s t a b l e ; 4. There i s a change from s u p e r o r d i n a t e t o c l a s s i f y i n g r e s p o n s e . They summarized the t r e n d m a n i f e s t e d i n the 1952 norm as o v e r a l l "more s p e c i f i c , more c o n c r e t e , [and] perhaps more d e t e r m i n e d by h i g h f r e q u e n c y v e r b a l sequence" (1960, p.297). I n c r e a s e d commonality as a h a l l m a r k o f the modern p o p u l a t i o n , i n t r i g u e d J e n k i n s (1960) t o d e f i n e "commonality" as "the degree t o which one i s l i k e the s t a n d a r d of the v e r b a l c u l t u r e . . . . The c o m m o n a l i t y d i m e n s i o n i s not a s i n g l e p r i m a r y d i m e n s i o n but r a t h e r a r e s u l t of many d i m e n s i o n s " (1960, p.311). He hypo-t h e s i z e d t h a t h i g h commonality s u b j e c t s would g i v e more p a r a -d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s and low commonality s u b j e c t s more s y n t a g m a t i c . U s i n g 200 s t i m u l i J e n k i n s t e s t e d 40 each of h i g h commonality and low commonality s u b j e c t s and t h e r e s u l t s s u p p o r t e d h i s view. He a l s o found t h a t h i g h commonality s u b j e c t s a r e h i g h l y c o n s i s t e n t i n t h e i r r e s p o n s e s o v e r t i m e . C o n f i r m i n g t h e h y p o t h e s i s , he r e l a t e d commonality and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g and s a i d t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g r e s u l t e d from n o r m a t i v e s t r e n g t h , b e c a u s e p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y i s t h e s t a n d a r d o f t h e v e r b a l c u l t u r e . However, J e n k i n s d i d n o t s p e c u l a t e as t o why p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g seems t o be the norm ex c e p t by i m p l y i n g i t s s t r e n g t h i n c u l t u r a l usage. When a n a l y z i n g g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s and word a s s o c i a t i o n , Deese (1962) c l e a r l y emphasized the l i n g u i s t i c a s p e c t s o f word a s s o c i a t i o n by employing a s t r i c t method o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f s t i m u l i and r e s p o n s e s . He t e s t e d 600 word s t i m u l i , 100 o f each of T h o r n d i k e ' s G-count ( g e n e r a l usage f r e q u e n c y ) , on 100 s u b j e c t s , t h e r e b y p r e s e n t i n g words of a l l f r e q u e n c i e s . The t e s t f r a m e was c o n s t r u c t e d t o e v a l u a t e g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s by s u b s t i t u t i o n . Deese's r e a s o n i n g about p r e d i c t i n g the k i n d of r e s p o n s e s t o each form c l a s s i s p u r e l y l i n g u i s t i c . He f e l t t h a t no m a t t e r what the l i n g u i s t i c environment was, nouns would e l i c i t m o s t l y noun r e s p o n s e s . S i n c e t h e f u n c t i o n o f v e r b s i s t o r e l a t e t e r m s i n d i s c o u r s e , t h e y e l i c i t r e s p o n s e s f r o m d i f f e r e n t f o r m c l a s s e s . Deese (1965) f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t e s on h i s p o s i t i o n t h a t those s y n t a g m a t i c a s s o c i a t e s t o nouns such as " d i f f i c u l t y — h a r d " and " g r a s s — green" a r e , r a t h e r , " p a r a d i g m a t i c a s s o c i a t e s t o nouns...." [They] d e f i n e paradigms o f meaning and do not neces-s a r i l y as do t h e s y n t a g m a t i c a s s o c i a t e s f o r t h e o t h e r form c l a s s , r e f l e c t the c o n t e x t i n which the s t i m u l u s word a p p e a r s . (1965, p.108-109) Thus he views the S-P dichotomy i n terms o f s t r u c t u r a l meaning and c o n t e x t u a l c o n c u r r e n c e . In a n o ther s t u d y , Jones and F i l l e n b a u m (1965) t e s t e d 466 male u n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s on 109 words of w e l l - d e f i n e d g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s . T h e i r s t u d y i s v a l u a b l e because b o t h s t i m u l i and r e s p o n s e s were s y s t e m a t i c a l l y a n a l y z e d a c c o r d i n g t o g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s . One h u n d r e d words o f t h e h i g h e s t f r e q u e n c y among r e s p o n s e s t o the V e r b a l T h e r a p e u t i c A p t i t u d e Test were used as s t i m u l i , a l o n g w i t h nouns and a d j e c t i v e s added t o b a l a n c e the form c l a s s e s . They found p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g t o be g r e a t e s t f o r nouns, f o l l o w e d by pronouns and a d j e c t i v e s , then a d v e r b s , v e r b s , and p r e p o s i t i o n s . Jones and F i l l e n b a u m c o n c l u d e d t h a t " t o the e x t e n t t h a t a s s o c i a t i o n d a t a c a n p r o v i d e u s e f u l i n f e r e n c e s c o n c e r n i n g f r e e - s p e e c h phenomena, i t i s more l i k e l y t h a t they a r e r e l e v a n t t o s e m antic r a t h e r than s y n t a c t i c , s e q u e n t i a l p r o p e r t i e s o f speech." (1965, p.254) T h i s marks a c l e a r d e p a r t u r e from the o t h e r s t u d i e s s t i l l p r e o c c u p i e d w i t h the a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y of c o n t i g u i t y o r g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s . T h i s s e m a n t i c p o s i t i o n was s u p p o r t e d by Rommetveit and Br o g g e r ' s (1979) s t u d y o f N o r w e i g i a n word a s s o c i a t i o n . They t e s t e d 208 words from a l l p a r t s of speech w i t h v a r y i n g i n f l e c -t i o n s . Only the nouns, a d j e c t i v e s and v e r b s have been a n a l y z e d and r e p o r t e d upon. The r a t e s o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g a r e : 83% t o nouns, 81% t o a d j e c t i v e s and 70% t o v e r b s . Concordance of forms was a l s o t e s t e d w i t h the r e s u l t s : 92% t o nouns, 93% t o a d j e c t i v e s and 84% t o v e r b s . By i n v e s t i g a t i n g t h e s y n t a g m a t i c p a i r of ' p e n c i l ' and ' w r i t e ' , they c o n c l u d e d t h a t i t i s se m a n t i c c o n c o r d a n c e , r a t h e r t h a n s y n t a c t i c c o n c o r d a n c e , w h i c h has te m p o r a l p r i o r i t y i n a s s o c i a t i o n . I n the same v e i n , i n f l e c t i o n concordance i s viewed as semantic r a t h e r than s y n t a c t i c . A v e r y d i f f e r e n t approach t o t h e S-P dichotomy came from Moran (1966). By a n a l y z i n g r e s p o n s e s i n terms o f c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g y r a t h e r t h a n mere g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s , he contended t h a t commonality i s p a r t i a l l y a f u n c t i o n o f t h e number o f s t i m u l u s words i n the l i s t t h a t happen t o be c o m p a t i b l e w i t h t h e s u b j e c t ' s s e t . The g r a m m a t i c a l f o r m o f a s s o c i a t e s i s i n f l u e n c e d by s e t , which Moran c a l l e d i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s (Moran e t a l . 1964). He proposed f o u r i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s : o b j e c t r e f e r e n t ( f u n c t i o n a l ) , concept r e f e r e n t ( s y n o n y m - s u p e r o r d i n a t e ) , dimension r e f e r e n t ( c o n t r a s t - c o o r d i n a t e ) and p e r c e p t u a l - r e f e r e n t ( p r e -d i c a t e ) . Based on t h e o b j e c t - s o r t i n g b e h a v i o r o f a d u l t s and 47 o t h e r s t u d i e s s t i l l p r e o c c u p i e d w i t h the a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y of c o n t i g u i t y o r g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s . T h i s s e m a n t i c p o s i t i o n was s u p p o r t e d by Rommetveit and Bro g g e r ' s (1979) s t u d y of N o r w e i g i a n word a s s o c i a t i o n . They t e s t e d 208 words from a l l p a r t s o f speech w i t h v a r y i n g i n f l e c -t i o n s . Only the nouns, a d j e c t i v e s and v e r b s have been a n a l y z e d and r e p o r t e d upon. The r a t e s o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g a r e : 83% t o nouns, 81% t o a d j e c t i v e s and 70% t o v e r b s . Concordance o f forms was a l s o t e s t e d w i t h the r e s u l t s : 92% t o nouns 93% t o a d j e c t i v e s and 84% t o v e r b s . By i n v e s t i g a t i n g the s y n t a g m a t i c p a i r o f ' p e n c i l ' and ' w r i t e ' , t hey c o n c l u d e d t h a t i t i s semantic c o n c o r d a n c e , r a t h e r t h a n s y n t a c t i c c o n c o r d a n c e , w h i c h has tem p o r a l p r i o r i t y i n a s s o c i a t i o n . In the same v e i n , i n f l e c t i o n concordance i s viewed as semantic r a t h e r than s y n t a c t i c . A v e r y d i f f e r e n t approach t o the S-P dichotomy came from Moran (1966). By a n a l y z i n g r e s p o n s e s i n terms o f c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g y r a t h e r than mere g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s e s , he contended t h a t commonality i s p a r t i a l l y a f u n c t i o n o f t h e number o f s t i m u l u s words i n the l i s t t h a t happen t o be c o m p a t i b l e w i t h the s u b j e c t ' s s e t . The g r a m m a t i c a l f o r m o f a s s o c i a t e s i s i n f l u e n c e d by s e t , which Moran c a l l e d i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s (Moran e t a l . 1964). He proposed f o u r i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s : o b j e c t r e f e r e n t ( f u n c t i o n a l ) , concept r e f e r e n t ( s y n o n y m - s u p e r o r d i n a t e ) , dimension r e f e r e n t ( c o n t r a s t - c o o r d i n a t e ) and p e r c e p t u a l - r e f e r e n t ( p r e -d i c a t e ) . Based on the o b j e c t - s o r t i n g b e h a v i o r o f a d u l t s and 48 c h i l d r e n , Moran proposes a h i e r a r c h i c a l r a n k i n g i n t e r m s o f l i n g u i s t i c s o p h i s t i c a t i o n o f the s e f o u r s e t s , s t a r t i n g w i t h p e r c e p t u a l r e f e r e n t , f o l l o w e d by o b j e c t r e f e r e n t , c o n c e p t r e f e r e n t and d i m e n s i o n r e f e r e n t . T h e o r e t i c a l s u p p o r t was drawn from both P i a g e t and V y g o t s k y . The c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between t h e s e s e t s and P i a g e t ' s f o u r s t a g e s o f d e v e l o p m e n t i s o f s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t . M e f f e r e d (1979a, 1979b) c o n s i d e r i n g i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s , warned a g a i n s t the s i m p l e use of the p a r a d i g m a t i c - s y n t a g m a t i c dichotomy. He s a i d t h a t the " p a r a d i g m a t i c e x p e r i m e n t a l c a t e g o r y r e s e m b l e s the e n c y c l o p e d i c s t y l e but i t c o r r e l a t e s more h i g h l y w i t h the o t h e r s y n t a g m a t i c s t y l e .... These a s s o c i a t e s may r e f l e c t a f o r m a l p r e - e x i s t i n g , e n a c t i v e - i c o n i c t y p e o f a s s o c i a t i o n , and t h i s p r o c e s s c o u l d be v i t a l l y i m p o r t a n t i n the e x p l o r a t i o n o f the s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t " (1979a, p.366). By t h i s , he means t h a t t h o s e p a i r s a r i s i n g f r o m t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t e m p o r a l , s p a t i a l , and f u n c t i o n a l c o n c u r r e n c e s u c h as k n i f e and f o r k , n e e d l e and t h r e a d , n i g h t and l i g h t s , e t c . . . a r e a c t u a l l y o f a s y n t a g m a t i c n a t u r e , a l t h o u g h they a r e c l a s s i f i e d as p a r a d i g m a t i c . Thus M e f f e r e d echos Heidenhiemer's emphasis on r e l a t i o n a l c a t e g o r i e s , d i s r e g a r d i n g g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s . B e a u v o i s (1973) r e p o r t e d i n the s t u d y t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c c r i t e r i a a r e v a l i d when used a l o n g s t r i c t l y s emantic l i n e s . H i s argument i s t h a t o p e r a t i o n a l r e s u l t s o f a t h e o r i z a t i o n o f the p r o c e s s e s i n v o l v e d i n t h e p r o d u c t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s a r e f e r e n c e t o t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s i n v o l v e d i n v e r b a l a s s o c i a t i o n . He t e s t e d the c o n t e x t e f f e c t by i m p o s i n g e i t h e r s y n t a g m a t i c o r p a r a d i g m a t i c c o n t e x t p r e c e d i n g s t i m u l u s words. He c o n s t r u c t e d two l i s t s o f t w e l v e nouns w i t h e i t h e r s y n t a g m a t i c o r p a r a d i g m a t i c c o n t e x t and a d m i n i s t e r e d a word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t . The r e s u l t s showed t h a t a p a r a d i g m a t i c response was g i v e n when a word p r e c e d i n g a s t i m u l u s was p a r a d i g m a t i c and t h a t a s y n t a g -m a t i c r e s p o n s e was t o a s y n t a g m a t i c p a i r . F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s showed t h a t the h i e r a r c h y of s u b c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i s : synonymy, i n c l u s i o n , e q u i v a l e n c e . The h i e r a r c h y of s u b c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i s : s t e r e o t y p e d q u a l i f i e r , cause-consequence and f u n c t i o n . Thereby he suggested the f o l l o w i n g model of a s s o c i a t i o n , i n c o r p o r a t i n g b o t h c o n t e x t and i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s . s u b j e c t + > a t t i t u d e s (S and P) s i t u a t i o n ^ s t i m u l u s — ^ a s s o c i a t i v e f i e l d c o n s t r a i n t s - - > Response(p. 1) B e a u v o i s ' argument may not be c o n s t r u c t e d p r o p e r l y , f o r t h e c o n t e x t e f f e c t he i n t r o d u c e d i s a c t u a l l y a p r i m i n g e f f e c t . We must remember t h a t the S-P dichotomy i s a l s o seen as a l a b o r a t o r y phenomenon where no c o n t e x t o r p r i m i n g e f f e c t i s p r e s e n t . The q u e s t i o n s are how t h i s a s s o c i a t i v e f i e l d i s d i s p o s e d t o produce e i t h e r s y n t a g m a t i c o r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s and how t h e a t t i t u d e which causes a person t o p r e f e r e i t h e r s y n t a g m a t i c o r p a r a d i g m a t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s i s c r e a t e d which were not a d d r e s s e d i n h i s argument. R e s t r a i n s ( 1 9 6 9 ) u s e d word a s s o c i a t i o n t o t e s t d e a f p e o p l e and matched normals. Two deaf s c h o o l s were chosen as s u b j e c t p o o l s w i t h one s u p p l y i n g 89 s t u d e n t s , n i n e t o 20 y e a r s o l d and the o t h e r s s u p p l y i n g 63 s t u d e n t s , n i n e t o 15 y e a r s o l d . The c o n t r o l group was comprised of 302 comparable s c h o o l s t u d e n t s o f n i n e t o 17 y e a r s o l d . The 200 word l i s t o f the P a l e r m o and J e n k i n s norm was used as s t i m u l i . The s u b j e c t s were d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e age groups and compared. There was a s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e i n c o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s as s u b j e c t s got o l d e r , i n agreement w i t h Palermo and J e n k i n s . Deaf s t u d e n t s gave more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s than normal s t u d e n t s . Among the t h r e e s c h o o l s , the most i m p o r t a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found i n the a r e a s o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , c o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s and p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s . One deaf s c h o o l which used an a n a l y t i c a l g r a m m a t i c a l approach c o n s i s t e n t l y s c o r e d the h i g h e s t , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t the t e a c h i n g method might be more i n f l u e n t i a l . Cross-Cultural Studies When r e v i e w i n g the few c r o s s c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s , i t s h o u l d be noted t h a t d i f f e r e n c e s a r e m a i n l y f o u n d i n t h e a r e a s o f p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s , commonality and i m p o r t a n t l y , S-P dichotomy and i t s s u b c l a s s e s . These are the same a r e a s i n which d i f f e r e n c e s are found between a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n . A l a r g e s c a l e c r o s s c u l t u r a l comparison of word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s was f i r s t r e p o r t e d by Rosengweig (1959, 1960) who used the R u s s e l s and J e n k i n s norm as t h e A m e r i c a n s a m p l e . He compared F r e n c h , German and I t a l i a n r e s p o n s e s t o t r a n s l a t i o n e q u i v a l e n t s o f the Kent and Rosanoff word l i s t w i t h the American norm. H i g h f r e q u e n c y p r i m a r i e s were almost the same a c r o s s d i f f e r e n t languages and low f r e q u e n c y p r i m a r i e s were d i s s i m i l a r . The most p o p u l a r r e s p o n s e s were u s u a l l y p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . In 1964, Rosengweig r e p o r t e d on the comparison of French c o l l e g e - a g e d workers and s t u d e n t s t o matched American samples, t h e r e b y p e r f o r m i n g a c r o s s - c u l t u r a l as w e l l as s o c i o - economic c o m p a r i s o n . I n t e r m s o f t h e number o f common p r i m a r i e s , U.S. workers and s t u d e n t s were the most s i m i l a r , f o l l o w e d by s t u d e n t s o f b o t h groups, and French s t u d e n t s and workers were the most d i s s i m i l a r . I n t r a g r o u p s i m i l a r i t y seems t o be g r e a t e s t f o r U.S. s t u d e n t s , f o l l o w e d by U.S. w o r k e r s , French s t u d e n t s , and French w o r k e r s . S u p e r o r d i n a t e r e s p o n s e s were more f r e q u e n t i n U.S. s u b j e c t s and were more f r e q u e n t among workers than s t u d e n t s French workers gave s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o many nouns and a d j e c t i v e s . R o s e n g w e i g c o n c l u d e d t h a t w i t h i n a language community th e language h a b i t s of a d u l t s d i f f e r a c c o r d i n g t o s o c i a l s t a t u s . He a l s o r e p o r t e d t h a t E n g l i s h and A u s t r a l i a n norms a r e found t o be v e r y c l o s e t o U.S. nouns. In agreement w i t h Rosengweig, V i k i s - F r i e b e r g s e t a l . (1976) a l s o found the F r e n c h more d i v e r s i f i e d . Canadian norms of 300 E n g l i s h s p e a k e r s and 300 F r e n c h s p e a k e r s i n M o n t r e a l were compared. E n g l i s h s u b j e c t s showed a l e s s d i v e r s i f i e d h i e r a r c h y o f commonality, which V i k i s - F r e i b e r g s e t a l . a t t r i b u t e d t o c u l t u r a l l y i n d u c e d response s e t s . The M o n t r e a l French norm was a l s o compared t o the norm of 288 s t u d e n t s and 115 workers i n P a r i s . There were s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the commonality and t h e k i n d s o f r e s p o n s e s . O v e r a l l , t h e E n g l i s h sample showed the s t r o n g e s t agreement a c r o s s sub-groups. M i l o n and W o l f ( 1964) a d m i n i s t e r e d a c o n t r o l l e d word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t t o 100 male h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s o f 12 l i n g u i s t i c c ommunities. The t e s t r e q u i r e d a m o d i f i e r , e i t h e r f o r phrase c o m p l e t i o n o r s e n t e n c e c o m p l e t i o n . They f o u n d t h a t some l i n g u i s t i c groups show a much g r e a t e r commonality of r e s p o n s e s , which they c a l l e d ' s t e r e o t y p e ' . The Japanese were found to be t h e most s t e r e o t y p e d w i t h A f g a n - F a r s i t h e l e a s t s t e r e o t y p e d . I s a and M a s k i l l (1982) a l s o c o n s i d e r e d c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e t o be the r e a s o n f o r i n t e r l a n g u a g e d i f f e r e n c e s i n word a s s o c i a -t i o n , and found h i g h e r commonality among M a l a y s i a n c h i l d r e n than S c o t t i s h c h i l d r e n . These c h i l d r e n were g i v e n a t e s t o f f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n t o s c i e n t i f i c w o r d s , and a t e s t o f c o n t r o l l e d a s s o c i a t i o n t o e l i c i t s c i e n t i f i c words. M a l a y s i a n c h i l d r e n produced more and u n i f i e d r e s p o n s e s . S i n c e they were matched f o r e d u c a t i o n and age, c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e was c o n c l u d e d t o be the c a u s e . As seen, commonality d i f f e r e n c e does seem t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e among l i n g u i s t i c c o mmunities. Pons e t a l . (1982) t e s t e d 173 Fr e n c h , 27 Japanese and 26 American s u b j e c t s on word a s s o c i a t i o n . They found t h a t the n a t u r e o f r e s p o n s e s i s s i m i l a r y e t commonality d i f f e r e n t i a t e d among s u b j e c t s . I n t e r e s t i n g l y , Pons e t a l found t h e o r d e r o f c o m m o n a l i t y and r e p e t i t i v e n e s s as A m e r i c a n , French and Japanese. K u r c z (1967) r e p o r t e d on h i s s t u d y o f word a s s o c i a t i o n o f P o l i s h s u b j e c t s . He a d m i n i s t e r e d the Kent and Rosanoff word l i s t t o 1000 P o l i s h s t u d e n t s and compared the r e s u l t s t o Rosengweig's s t u d y o f f o u r European l a n g u a g e s , and e s p e c i a l l y t o the R u s s e l and J e n k i n s norm. He found t h a t the P o l i s h r e s u l t s d i d not s u p p o r t Rosengweig*s h y p o t h e s i s o f h i g h commonality p r i m a r i e s b e i n g s i m i l a r a c r o s s l a n g u a g e s . Many P o l i s h p r i m a r i e s which a r e common w i t h o t h e r European languages had low c o m m o n a l i t i e s . These P o l i s h s u b j e c t s gave fewer p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s ( t o t a l c l a s s agreement of 5 6 % ) , and most s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s seemed t o be from o v e r l e a r n i n g f o l k l o r e , s o n g l i n e s and p r o v e r b s . K u r c z h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t when r e a c t i n g t o s t i m u l i , P o l i s h s u b j e c t s come up w i t h two r e s p o n s e s , one p a r a d i g m a t i c and the o t h e r s y n t a g m a t i c . He a d m i n i s t e r e d a n other t e s t g i v i n g t h e i n s t r u c t i o n , " g i v e t h e r e s p o n s e t h a t you t h i n k most o t h e r p e o p l e would g i v e " (1967, p.155). These r e s p o n s e s were much c l o s e r t o the American norm, and he took t h i s as p r o o f o f h i s h y p o t h e s i s . He a t t r i b u t e d t h e l o w c o m m o n a l i t y o f p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s and i n c r e a s e d v a r i e t y o f unique r e s p o n s e s o f P o l i s h s u b j e c t s i n t h e f i r s t t e s t t o the P o l i s h c u l t u r a l a t t i t u d e t h a t one s h o u l d t r y t o be more o r i g i n a l . Yet g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s were more s t a b l e than s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s and p a r a d i g m a t i c p r i m a r i e s a r e o f h i g h c o m m o n a l i t y , t h e r e b y a g r e e i n g w i t h t h e t r e n d o f o t h e r l a n g u a g e s . The r e s u l t o f K u r c z ' s second t e s t i s hard t o i n t e r p r e t , f o r the s u b j e c t knew what r e s p o n s e s o t h e r s might g i v e i n v o l u n t a r i l y . T h i s means t h a t the p o p u l a t i o n ' s consensus was v e r y c l o s e t o the American norm. Yet a c t u a l d a t a a r e f a r from the American norm. Does t h i s mean P o l i s h and American word a s s o c i a t i o n a re e s s e n t i a l l y s i m i l a r ? Are these the d u a l components o f c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y Moran t a l k e d about? Ekpo-Ufot ( 1 9 7 8 ) , u s i n g 30 words from the Kent and R o s a n o f f l i s t , compared c o n t i n u o u s word a s s o c i a t i o n by 115 N i g e r i a n s t u d e n t s t o the Min n e s o t a norm. A 42% e q u i v a l e n c e was found i n the t h r e e most p o p u l a r r e s p o n s e s , and N i g e r i a n s u b j e c t s g ave more noun r e s p o n s e s and f e w e r a d j e c t i v e and c o n t r a s t r e s p o n s e s than the U.S. p o p u l a t i o n . Ekpo-Ufot a t t r i b u t e d t h i s d i f f e r e n c e t o b a s i c c u l t u r a l and p e r s o n a l i t y d i f f e r e n c e . E r v i n (1963) t e s t e d 37 N a v a h o - s p e a k i n g a d u l t s i n f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n . She found t h a t t h e i r r e s p o n s e s were d o m i n a n t l y p a r a d i g m a t i c a l t h o u g h t h e r a t e was l o w e r t h a n t h a t o f t h e E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g norm (Noun 59%, Verb 52%, M o d i f i e r 4 2 % ) . The low commonality o f 17% was r e p o r t e d . She s p e c u l a t e d t h a t the r e a s o n s f o r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g were (1) i n t e r p r e t a -t i o n as " r e t u r n i n g l i k e s u b j e c t s " , (2) concept f o r m a t i o n (3) c o n t e x t u a l v a r i e t y (1963, p . 4 2 8 - 4 2 9 ) . The l a s t r e a s o n was c o n s i d e r e d t o be the most i m p o r t a n t one. A l t h o u g h the educated s u b j e c t s d i d r e s p o n d more p a r a d i g m a t i c a l l y , t h e f a c t t h a t non-educated Navaho s u b j e c t s gave l a r g e numbers of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s d e n i e s the f u n d a m e n t a l i n f l u e n c e o f e d u c a t i o n on p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y . Sharp and C o l e (1972) u s i n g 15 s t i m u l i , a d m i n i s t e r e d an e i g h t - r e s p o n s e f r e e w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t t o K p e l l e s p e a k i n g West A f r i c a n C h i l d r e n . Age and e d u c a t i o n were the v a r i a b l e s t o be c o n s i d e r e d . S e v e n t y - t w o p e r c e n t o f t o t a l r e s p o n s e s were nouns . S h a r p and C o l e f o u n d t h a t e d u c a t i o n i n f l u e n c e d the form c l a s s which produces l e a s t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s and t h a t i t s e f f e c t i n c r e a s e d w i t h age. The o r d e r o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s was nouns, v e r b s , then a d j e c t i v e s . These r e s e a r c h e r s f u r t h e r t e s t e d a f o r m - c l a s s - r e l a t e d t a s k and a word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k on E n g l i s h and K p e l l e s p e a k i n g b i l i n g u a l s . P a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g was g r e a t e r f o r E n g l i s h than f o r K p e l l e , though the d i f f e r e n c e was s l i g h t but r e l i a b l e . O l d e r s u b j e c t s p r o d u c e d more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t h a n younger ones. In the form c l a s s r e l a t e d t a s k , n o n - l i t e r a t e c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s a l i k e used f u n c t i o n words and c o n n e c t i v e words. Thus, Sharp and C o l e c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s between word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k s and form c l a s s t a s k s a r e not c o i n c i d e n t a l , b u t a r e r e l a t e d t o e a c h o t h e r , t h u s s u p p o r t i n g Brown and Berko's p o s i t i o n . T h i s s t u d y was r e p l i c a t e d on Mayan c h i l d r e n i n 1974. Mayan-Spanish s p e a k i n g secondary s c h o o l c h i l d r e n , m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n , and i l l i t e r a t e a d u l t s were compared. S e c o n d a r y s c h o o l s t u d e n t s c o n s i s t e n t l y gave more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s than the o t h e r two, thus p r o v i d i n g f u r t h e r e v i d e n c e o f t h e importance o f e d u c a t i o n . E n t w i s l e and Muuss (1968) extended t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s s t u d y of word a s s o c i a t i o n t o German r u r a l c h i l d r e n . By u s i n g High German s p e a k i n g and Low German s p e a k i n g samples as w e l l as American d a t a f o r c o m p a r i s o n , they t r i e d t o see whether i n t e r -l a n g u a g e d i f f e r e n c e w o u l d c a u s e d e v e l o p m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e . Twenty s u b j e c t s i n each of grades one, t h r e e and f i v e i n each d i a l e c t were t e s t e d on 96 s t i m u l i f r o m t h e 1966 E n t w i s l e norm. The i n c r e a s e i n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o a d j e c t i v e s and v e r b s was g r e a t e s t between grades one and t h r e e w i t h a moderate i n c r e a s e between grades t h r e e and f i v e . P a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o nouns showed o n l y a m o d e r a t e i n c r e a s e . High German s p e a k i n g s u b j e c t s c o n s i s t e n t l y gave more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t h a n Low German s p e a k i n g s u b j e c t s . A s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n of Form C l a s s x D i a l e c t x Grade was found. A c c o r d i n g t o t h e s e r e s e a r c h e r s ' h y p o t h e s i s , s i n c e the IQ f a c t o r f a v o r e d High German s p e a k e r s , t h e comparable American sample ( w i t h lower IQ) must show a lower number of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i f the IQ s c o r e s a r e shown t o be a f f e c t i n g v a r i a b l e s between H i g h and Low German s p e a k e r s . The r e s u l t showed the o p p o s i t e . Thus the s t u d y was i n c o n c l u s i v e i n s p e c i f y i n g a p a r t i c u l a r v a r i a b l e a f f e c t i n g the S-P s h i f t . When M a r s a l o v a (1975) r e p o r t e d on her s t u d y of the S-P s h i f t i n R u s s i a n , she r e p o r t e d a s t e a d y i n c r e a s e i n t h e number of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a c c o r d i n g t o age. Y e t , d i f f e r e n t from E n g l i s h , p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o nouns i n c r e a s e d not o n l y from grade one t o grade f i v e , but a l s o from grade f i v e up, whereas p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o a d j e c t i v e s and v e r b s i n c r e a s e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y o n l y between grades two and f o u r . A d j e c t i v e s showed t h e h i g h e s t r a t e o f s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e . By n o t i n g t h a t the S-P s h i f t i n R u s s i a n i s s l o w e r than i n E n g l i s h , she s p e c u l a t e d t h a t s i n c e i n R u s s i a n , th e a d j e c t i v e e n d i n g i s more i m p o r t a n t than the stem morpheme, t h i s r e s u l t e d i n the h i g h e s t r a t e o f s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n a l l t h r e e form c l a s s e s . M a r s a l o v a c o n c l u d e d t h a t " t h e a s s o c i a t i v e s t r u c t u r e c o u l d be u n d e r s t o o d as t h e r e s u l t o f the c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s i n g o f r e a l i t y which t a k e s p l a c e i n a c l o s e r e l a t i o n t o the use o f language" (1975, p . 3 ) . A l s o , she c o n t i n u e s t h a t " c o n s i d e r i n g the p a r a d i g m a t i c s t r u c t u r i n g of a s s o c i a t i o n s as a r e f l e c t i o n of the c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s i n g o f r e a l i t y , the language d e t e r m i n a t i o n cannot be n e g l e c t e d .... E v i d e n t l y i n i n f l e c t i n g S l a v o n i c languages, th e a s s o c i a t i o n t o a d j e c t i v e s w i l l be d e t e r m i n e d t o a c o n s i d e r a b l e degree by t h e language c o n t e x t " (1975, p.38). 58 In the Norwegian language, which i s a l s o i n f l e c t i o n a l , R o m m e t v e i t and B r o g g e r ( 1 9 7 9 ) l o o k e d a t t h e i n f l e c t i o n a l concordance i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . U s i n g 208 N o r w e g i a n words from a l l p a r t s o f speech and i n f l e c t i o n , t h ey found p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g t o be 83% f o r nouns, 70% f o r v e r b s and 8 1 % f o r a d j e c t i v e s . A l t h o u g h t h e v e r b s r e c e i v e d the l o w e s t number of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , ( d i f f e r e n t from R u s s i a n ) , i t i s hard t o comment, s i n c e we do not know how the c o n j u g a t i o n o f Norwegian v e r b s compares t o R u s s i a n a d j e c t i v e i n f l e c t i o n s . A p e r f e c t i n f l e c t i o n a l c o n c o r d a n c e was f o u n d i n noun r e s p o n s e s t o noun s t i m u l i . O v e r a l l , 92% o f r e s p o n s e s t o noun s t i m u l i , 93% t o a d j e c t i v e s , and 84% t o verb s t i m u l i were found i n i n f l e c t i o n a l c oncordance. S t u d y i n g c l o s e l y those which d i d n o t a g r e e i n i n f l e c t i o n , i t was u n d e r s t o o d t h a t a semantic f a c t o r t e m p o r a r i l y o v e r r u l e s i n f l e c t i o n a l f a c t o r s and t h e r e f o r e , i t was c o n c l u d e d t h a t i t i s the semantic f a c t o r s t h a t r u l e s a s s o c i a t i o n s r a t h e r t h a n g r a m m a t i c a l f o r m . I n f l e c t i o n a l concordance has semantic i m p l i c a t i o n s a f t e r a l l . Bilingual Studies The s t u d i e s r e p o r t i n g on b i l i n g u a l s ' word a s s o c i a t i o n a r e v e r y l i m i t e d i n number. T a y l o r (1976) a d m i n i s t e r e d c o n t i n u e d word a s s o c i a t i o n t o French and E n g l i s h b i l i n g u a l s and found t h a t the b i l i n g u a l s tend t o g i v e t r a n s l a t i o n e q u i v a l e n t s as r e s p o n s e s . T h i s may w e l l be the n a t u r a l r e s u l t of E n g l i s h and F r e n c h response s i m i l a r i t y . L a m b e r t and Moore ( 1 9 6 6 ) compared m o n o l i n g u a l F r e n c h Canadians, E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l s and E n g l i s h / F r e n c h b i l i n g u a l s , u s i n g the Kent and R o s a n o f f l i s t . B i l i n g u a l s were g i v e n b o t h the E n g l i s h and French t e s t s . Twenty p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s out o f 100 were common t o a l l groups. I t was noted t h a t the response p a t t e r n o f b i l i n g u a l s was s i m i l a r ( i f not the same) i n t h e i r f i r s t l a n g u a g e t o m o n o l i n g u a l s i n t h e language and i n the second language t o t h a t o f m o n o l i n g u a l s o f t h a t second language. The d i f f e r e n c e between E n g l i s h and French m o n o l i n g u a l groups suggested c u l t u r a l f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g a s s o c i a t i o n . The degree of p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y i n the L I and L2 of b i l i n g u a l s was s i m i l a r . R i g u e t (1980) a d m i n i s t e r e d the Kent and R o s a n o f f l i s t t o m o n o l i n g u a l T u n i s i a n s and F r e n c h - A r a b i c b i l i n g u a l T u n i s i a n s . Responses i n F r e n c h by b i l i n g u a l T u n i s i a n s were v e r y s i m i l a r t o t h e F r e n c h norm, y e t v e r y d i f f e r e n t from m o n o l i n g u a l A r a b i c s p e a k e r s . R i g u e t a t t r i b u t e d t h i s p a t t e r n t o t h e d i f f e r e n t e d u c a t i o n a l systems r a t h e r than c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e . G e k o s k i (1980) s t u d i e d the i n f l u e n c e o f language a c q u i s i t i o n c o n t e x t on word a s s o c i a t i o n s . He t e s t e d E n g l i s h and S p a n i s h b i l i n g u a l s s t r a t i f i e d by dominant language, and d i s t i n g u i s g e d between c o o r d i n a t e and compound b i l i n g u a l s . 1 C o n t r o l l e d and f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n were a d m i n i s t e r e d i n b o t h l a n g u a g e s , E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s t o S p a n i s h s t i m u l i and S p a n i s h r e s p o n s e s t o E n g l i s h S t i m u l i . Compound b i l i n g u a l s showed more s i m i l a r i t y i n t e r l i n g u i s t i c a l l y , y e t speed of r e a c t i o n t ime d i d not d i f f e r between compound and c o o r d i n a t e b i l i n g u a l s . R e a c t i o n time was s h o r t e s t i n i n t r a l i n g u a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , f o l l o w e d by L2 response t o L I s t i m u l i , and then by L I r e s p o n s e s t o L2 s t i m u l i . E n g l i s h n a t i v e s p e a k e r s gave r e s p o n s e s t h a t were more s i m i l a r and f a s t e r . B e r r u e t a - C l e m e n t (1978) s t u d i e d b i l i n g u a l s and m o n o l i n g u a l s i n Guatemala and found t h a t the two groups d i f f e r e d i n a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n s and c o m m o n a l i t y . I m p o r t a n t l y , b i l i n g u a l s u b j e c t s gave a s s o c i a t i o n s s i m i l a r t o m o n o l i n g u a l s p e a k e r s o f each language. Moran and Huang (1974) t e s t e d 74 Mandarin s p e a k i n g mono-l i n g u a l C h i n e s e c h i l d r e n i n f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n and f o u n d t h e i r r e s p o n s e s m a i n l y e n a c t i v e . In 1975, a d u l t m o n o l i n g u a l Chinese were t e s t e d and found e q u a l l y i c o n i c and e n a c t i v e . I n a d d i t i o n , 35 E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g b i l i n g u a l Chinese c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s were t e s t e d , and they gave d o m i n a n t l y l o g i c a l and Note: ICompound b i l i n g u a l s - those who a t t r i b u t e i d e n t i c a l meaning to c o r r e s p o n d i n g words and e x p r e s s i o n s C o o r d i n a t e b i l i n g u a l s - t h o s e who d e r i v e d i f f e r e n t o r p a r t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t m e aning f r o m words i n two languages ( M c L a n g l i n 1978, p.8) i c o n i c r e s p o n s e s . These r e s e a r c h e r s s p e c u l a t e d (as had Sharp and C o l e ) t h a t language t r a i n i n g had caused t h i s d i f f e r e n c e . Japanese Studies The f i r s t d e s c r i p t i o n i n E n g l i s h o f a word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t a d m i n i s t e r e d t o Japanese s u b j e c t s i s p r o b a b l y t h a t o f E r v i n - T r i p p ( 1 9 6 7 ) . She t e s t e d 36 war b r i d e s l i v i n g i n the U.S.A., and the s o - c a l l e d K i b e i - N i s e i (Japanese Americans educated i n J a p a n ) . She found t h a t when s t i m u l i were g i v e n i n Japanese, r e s p o n s e s were t y p i c a l o f the Japanese p a t t e r n and when s t i m u l i were g i v e n i n E n g l i s h , r e s p o n s e s f o l l o w e d the American p a t t e r n . Moran and Murakawa (1968) t e s t e d 258 Japanese young women and a matched sample o f 258 American women and a n a l y s e d the re s p o n s e s a c c o r d i n g t o f o u r i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s (Moran 1966) and c o m m o n a l i t y . When compared t o t h e A m e r i c a n s u b j e c t s , the Japanese s u b j e c t s gave f o u r t i m e s as many p r e d i c a t i v e a s s o c i a t i o n s but as l i t t l e as one t h i r d as many synonym and s u p e r o r d i n a t e a s s o c i a t i o n s , and one f o u r t h as many c o n t r a s t and c o o r d i n a t e r e s p o n s e s . Moran c o n c l u d e d t h a t " t h e s e l i n g u i s t i c h a b i t s ( f o u r i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s ) r e f l e c t fundamental a s s o c i a t i o n s t r u c t u r e s common t o language u s e r s and thus g a i n i n c r e d i b i l i t y " ( p . 1 8 0 ) . He amended h i s former p o s i t i o n on commonality by c o n s i d e r i n g the overwhelming tendency o f the Japanese t o g i v e r e s p o n s e s from the p e r c e p t u a l s e t , and o f f e r e d the f o l l o w i n g a l t e r n a t i v e . 62 The i d i o d y n a m i c h i e r a r c h y might be a c t i v a t e d by a s e t t o " a s s o c i a t e " , the common h i e r a r c h y might be a c t i v a t e d by a s e t t o "communicate" ... The l a t t e r [ s e t ] i s t h e more a c c e s s i b l e , more r e f l e x l i k e , o f t h e two h i e r a r c h i e s . (1968, p.180) Moran ( 1 9 7 3 ) a l s o f o l l o w e d b o t h Japanese and American c h i l d r e n l o n g i t u d i n a l l y . He t e s t e d t h e h y p o t h e s i s w h i c h he f o r m e r l y put f o r w a r d as t h e de v e l o p m e n t a l s h i f t of f u n c t i o n a l -i c o n i c - e n a t i v e - l o g i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s . I n t h e above c a t e g o r i e s t h e r e s p o n s e s of the N o r t h American p a r e n t s were 7, 8, 17, and 45% r e s p e c t i v e l y , whereas the res p o n s e s o f the Japanese a d u l t s showed more t h a n 7 0% i c o n i c r e s p o n d i n g . American c h i l d r e n showed the move from the e n a c t i v e t o t h e l o g i c a l norm, y e t J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n seemed t o move f r o m t h e e n a c t i v e t o the i c o n i c a d u l t norm. Moran i n t e r p r e t e d t h i s r e s u l t as showing t h a t a s s o c i a t i o n s a r e c u l t u r a l l y p r e d e t e r m i n e d . He a l s o c o n c l u d e d t h a t the e a r l y c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y i s an endogenerous c r e a t i o n , common a c r o s s any l i n g u i s t i c groups. Tanaka e t a l . (1976) p r e s e n t e d a s t u d y which may e x p l a i n t h e h i g h commonality o f M i l o n and W o l f ' s s t u d y ( s e e p. 5 2 ) . They t e s t e d Japanese, Japanese-Americans and C a u c a s i a n American s t u d e n t s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n s t o words such as ' d e p r e s s i o n . ' A l t h o u g h Americans ( b o t h Japanese and C a u c a s i a n ) p r e d o m i n a n t l y responded i n words d e s c r i b i n g the i n t e r n a l mood s t a t e s such as 'sad' and ' l o n e l y ' , Japanese s u b j e c t s gave e x t e r n a l r e f e r e n t and s o m a t i c words such as ' f a t i g u e ' . Thus they c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e i n s e l f - s t r u c t u r e which mediates t h e s u b j e c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e - Japanese u n i n d i v i d u a t e d , and Americans i n d i v i d u a t e d . I n o t h e r words, Japanese do not r e l y on the p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , emotion or p e r s o n a l judgement f o r a s s o c i a -t i o n s , but r e l y on s o c i a l l y a c c e p t e d v a l u e a t t a c h e d t o words. Evans (1981) a l s o gave an a f f e c t i v e word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t and m e a s u r e d t h e e x t e r n a l - i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f r e s p o n s e s . A comparison was made between Japanese and A m e r i c a n s u b j e c t s . In a g r e e m e n t w i t h T a n a k a ' s r e s u l t s , t h e J a p a n e s e produced more e x t e r n a l r e s p o n s e s than d i d the A m e r i c a n s . T h e r e b y i t was c o n c l u d e d t h a t word a s s o c i a t i o n s show c u l t u r a l - l i n g u i s t i c d i f f e r e n c e . In r e s p o n s e t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r e d u c a t i o n o r l i t e r a c y has something t o do w i t h word a s s o c i a t i o n i n terms of commonality o r the s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c dichotomy, S h e r i d a n (1982) r e p o r t e d t h a t the two Japanese w r i t i n g systems may be s t o r e d d i f f e r e n t l y i n the b r a i n . She c i t e d as e v i d e n c e , p a t h o -l o g i c a l d a t a showing t h a t Kana, the p h o n e t i c w r i t i n g system, i s more a f f e c t e d by b r a i n damage than K a n j i , the semantic ( p i c t o r i a l ) w r i t i n g system. S h e r i d a n r e p o r t e d t h a t 83% o f c h i l d r e n c a n r e a d by age f i v e and t h a t over 90% have t h e i r own books which a r e r e a d r e g u l a r l y . P a r e n t a l i n f l u e n c e i s much l a r g e r i n Japan than i n N o r t h A m e r i c a . The most i m p o r t a n t s t u d y o f J a p a n e s e s u b j e c t s as f a r as the p r e s e n t s t u d y i s c o n c e r n e d , was done by L e i c e s t e r (1981). L e i c e s t e r t e s t e d t h e word a s s o c i a t i o n o f Japanese s t u d e n t s s t u d y i n g E n g l i s h as a second l a n g u a g e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B.C. and compared i t t o t h a t o f a n a t i v e E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g c o n t r o l group. Two groups ( b e g i n n e r and advanced) were i d e n t i f i e d u s i n g an E n g l i s h placement t e s t . The major f i n d i n g s o f h i s study were t h a t the Japanese b e g i n n e r s r e s p o n d e d t o E n g l i s h word s t i m u l i independent o f t h e i r n a t i v e l anguage, though the a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n i s d i f f e r e n t from t h a t o f n a t i v e E n g l i s h s p e a k e r s . Advanced L e a r n e r s responded i n a manner s t a t i s t i c a l l y i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m t h a t o f n a t i v e s p e a k e r s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e r e was an i n c r e a s e i n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s from b e g i n n e r s t o advanced s t u d e n t s j u s t t h e r e i s an S-P s h i f t found i n m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n . Moreover , word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s were g r a d u a l l y a p p r o x i m a t e d t o n a t i v e s p e a k e r s ' r e s p o n s e s as t h e E n g l i s h a b i l i t y improved, t h u s p r o v i n g the i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p between second language a b i l i t y and word a s s o c i a t i o n i n t h a t second language. SUMMARY From r e v i e w i n g a l l t h e s e s t u d i e s , the f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t s can be made i n r e l a t i o n t o the p r e s e n t s t u d y . 1) l a n g u a g e c o m m u n i t i e s have d i f f e r e n t word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n s i n a d u l t norms, t h o u g h young c h i l d r e n seem t o agree i n h a v i n g many i d i o s y n c r a t i c , c l a n g , s y n t a g m a t i c ( e n a c t i v e , f u n c t i o n a l e t c . ) r e s p o n s e s and low-commonality r e s p o n s e s . The d e g r e e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g a l s o d i f f e r s among a d u l t s , t h e r e f o r e c a u s i n g some l a n g u a g e communities t o e x p e r i e n c e S-P s h i f t and o t h e r s n o t . 2) B i l i n g u a l s p e a k e r s tend t o have d i s t i n c t s e t s o f a s s o c i a t i o n s p e c u l i a r t o each language, each c l o s e r t o t h e m o n o l i n g u a l n a t i v e s p e a k e r s ' p a t t e r n f o r each language. Based on t h e s e two s t a t e m e n t s , we can f u r t h e r assume the f o l l o w i n g r e g a r d i n g E n g l i s h and Japanese word a s s o c i a t i o n s f o r the p r e s e n t s t u d y : 1) E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n undergo the S-P s h i f t b e f o r e age 10 and e v e n t u a l l y have p r e d o m i n a n t l y p a r a d i g m a t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s ; 2) Japanese c h i l d r e n do not undergo the S-P s h i f t and g i v e p r e -d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s ; 3) Word a s s o c i a t i o n i n E n g l i s h by J a p a n e s e l e a r n e r s o f E n g l i s h as a second language w i l l a p proximate t h a t of E n g l i s h n a t i v e s p e a k e r s as t h e i r E n g l i s h improves. Theories Regarding S-P Shift N e l s o n (1977) has w r i t t e n an e x t e n s i v e r e v i e w o f s t u d i e s on the S-P s h i f t i n which s t u d i e s a r e c l a s s i f i e d a c c o r d i n g t o f o u r t h e o r i e s : 1. A s s o c i a t i v e Theory T h i s t h e o r y e x p l a i n s S-P s h i f t by u s i n g a s s o c i a t i v e t h e o r i e s such as c o n t i g u i t y , f a m i l i a r i t y , commonality and f r e q u e n c y , or i n s h o r t , by a s s o c i a t i v e s t r e n g t h . T h i s i s a w e l l known b e h a v i o r -i s t i c v i e w . 66 2 . L i n g u i s t i c S t r u c t u r e Theory T h i s t h e o r y c o n s i d e r s t h a t word a s s o c i a t i o n i s t h e r e f l e c t i o n o f t h e l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e s u n d e r l y i n g i t . I n o t h e r words, an a s s o c i a t i o n i s based on the number of se m a n t i c f e a t u r e s one has a c q u i r e d f o r a c e r t a i n s t i m u l u s . 3 . L i n g u i s t i c - C o g n i t i v e Theory A c c o r d i n g t o t h i s t h e o r y , word a s s o c i a t i o n e x a m p l i f i e s the way i n w h i c h s e m a n t i c o r c o g n i t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n i s s t r u c t u r e d i n memory. That i s , word a s s o c i a t i o n i s t h e r e f l e c t i o n o f s u b j e c t i v e l e x i c o n . 4 . C o g n i t i v e t h e o r y A c c o r d i n g t o t h i s t h e o r y , word a s s o c i a t i o n i s a r e f l e c t i o n o f c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g i e s . As the c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g i e s change as a c h i l d matures, so does h i s word a s s o c i a t i o n . At a g l a n c e , t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system makes sense, y e t u n d e r c l o s e s t u d y t h e l a c k o f c l a r i t y o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n s s e p a r a t i n g one c l a s s f r o m a n o t h e r c r e a t e s c o n f u s i o n . F o r i n s t a n c e , t h e L i n g u i s t i c S t r u c t u r e Theory and the L i n g u i s t i c -C o g n i t i v e Theory both d e a l w i t h l e x i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n as t h e cause o f t h e S-P s h i f t . A l t h o u g h the name L i n g u i s t i c - C o g n i t i v e Theory i m p l i e s s o m e t h i n g between c o g n i t i v e and l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y , t h e ways t h i s t h e o r y d i f f e r s f r o m t h e L i n g u i s t i c S t r u c t u r e Theory a r e not a t a l l c l e a r . F o r i n s t a n c e , N e l s o n b e l i e v e s t h a t the Anderson and Beh s t u d y ( s e e p.37) s u p p o r t s t h e C o g n i t i v e L i n g u i s t i c Theory. Anderson and Beh (1968) a d m i n i s t e r e d a word r e c o g n i t i o n t e s t c o n s i s t i n g of t a r g e t words, p a r a d i g m a t i c a l l y - a s s o c i a t e d words t o t a r g e t words, s y n t a g m a t i c a l l y - a s s o c i a t e d w ords t o t a r g e t w o rds and u n r e l a t e d w ords and f o u n d t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c a l l y a s s o c i a t e d words caused t w i c e as many m i s t a k e s as t h e s y n t a g -m a t i c a l l y a s s o c i a t e d words. Developmental S-P s h i f t was shown b e t t e r i n t h i s t e s t than i n t h e word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t . From t h i s r e s u l t , t hey c o n c l u d e d : P a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t r e p r e s e n t s the a c q u i s i t i o n o f a tendency t o match some s o r t of s e m a n t i c markers i n r e c a l l . Beyond t h a t t h e y s u p p o r t t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e l e x i c a l marker system i s i n t i m a t e l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e p r o c e s s o f s t o r a g e and r e c o g n i t i o n o f words t h e system encodes. (1968, p.1052) Based on t h i s c o n c l u s i o n , Anderson and Beh d i f f e r from s e m a n t i c f e a t u r e t h e o r y i n two a s p e c t s : u s e o f ' s e m a n t i c marker' i n s t e a d of ' f e a t u r e l i s t ' and emphasis on s t o r a g e and r e c o g n i t i o n . These a r e minor p o i n t s c o n s i d e r i n g t h a t Anderson and Beh b a s i c a l l y s u p p o r t e d the p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e r e a r e some s e m a n t i c t a g s a t t a c h e d t o each word. Thus t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between them i s u n c l e a r . I t seems t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e l i e s i n t h e way t h a t e a r l y s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a r e e x p l a i n e d : t h e L i n g u i s t i c S t r u c t u r e Theory w i t h l a c k o f f e a t u r e s , and the L i n g u i s t i c - C o g n i t i v e Theory by c o n t i g u i t y . I f we u n d e r s t a n d the d i f f e r e n c e t h i s way, i t s h o u l d be c a l l e d something l i k e t h e " R e v i s e d a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y . " 68 A n other example of c o n f u s i o n c a n be f o u n d i n N e l s o n ' s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f t h e S t o l z and T i f f a n y (1982) s t u d y as an example t o t h e C o g n i t i v e Theory. I n t h i s s t u d y , S t o l z and T i f f a n y a d m i n i s t e r e d synonym p a i r s o f f a m i l i a r and u n f a m i l i a r a d j e c t i v e s , and r e p o r t e d t h a t the more f a m i l i a r t he s t i m u l u s was, t h e more l o g i c a l ( p a r a d i g m a t i c ) the a s s o c i a t i o n was. They a l s o found t h a t up t o a p o i n t , t r u e s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n d i n g a l s o i n c r e a s e d w i t h f a m i l i a r i t y , and then s t a b i l i z e d . W i t h t h e s e r e s u l t s , t h e y c o n c l u d e d i t was t h e c h i l d r e n ' s c o l l e c t i v e f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h a word t h a t caused the S-P s h i f t , and t h e r e f o r e , the S-P s h i f t was not a v a l i d c o n c e p t . S t o l z and T i f f a n y proposed the f o l l o w i n g model o f the r u l e s used i n a s s o c i a t i o n : S t e p 1) The s u b j e c t uses a p h o n o l o g i c a l form o f s t i m u l u s and r e t r i e v e s whatever word i s a v a i l a b l e ; a. I f t h e r e t r i e v e d word i n c l u d e s s e m a n t i c f e a t u r e s , t h i s i s a l o g i c a l s t r a t e g y ; b. I f t h e r e t r i e v e d word does n o t i n c l u d e s e m a n t i c f e a t u r e s , t h i s i s a s y n t a c t i c s t r a t e g y ; S t ep 2) I f s t e p 1) f a i l s , t he s u b j e c t s e a r c h e s a c c o r d i n g t o p h o n o l o g i c a l p a t t e r n . T h i s l e a d s t o a c l a n g a s s o c i a t i o n ( a s s o c i a t i o n of homophones). S i n c e S t o l z and T i f f a n y i n s i s t t h a t the S-P s h i f t i s caused by f a m i l i a r i t y and do not t h i n k t h a t c o g n i t i v e m a t u r a t i o n i s the cause o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g , t h e i r s t u d y might more a p p r o p r i a t e l y be c l a s s i f i e d under the L i n g u i s t i c - C o g n i t i v e Theory, f o r what they mean i s t h a t f a m i l i a r i t y , o r i n c r e a s e d amount of exposure t o a s t i m u l i , l e a d s t o the r e t r i e v a l o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . On t h e o t h e r hand, t h i s may mean t h a t f a m i l i a r i t y causes more p a r a d i g m a t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s , and t h a t i s i n t h e r e a l m of the A s s o c i a t i o n Theory. Indeed L i n g u i s t i c C o g n i t v e Theory sounds c l o s e t o A s s o c i a t i o n Theory. The d i f f e r e n c e among these f o u r t h e o r i e s seems t o r e s t on the f o l l o w i n g two p o i n t s : 1. Whether the S-P s h i f t i s d e v e l o p m e n t a l o r o n l y a l o g i c a l consequence o f a c c u m u l a t i o n o f a s s o c i a t i o n s ; 2 . Whether the S-P s h i f t i s connected w i t h something o t h e r t h a n l i n g u i s t i c a b i l i t y such as c o g n i t i o n and memory. The f i r s t p o i n t i s concerned w i t h the b a s i c argument o f b e h a v i o r i s t i c v e r s u s n a t i v i s t i c v i e w s . N a t i v i s t s v iew the S-P s h i f t a s c a u s e d by some preprogrammed change o c c u r r i n g i n c h i l d r e n , whereas b e h a v i o r i s t s argue t h a t i t depends on c h i l d r e n * ' s i n c r e a s e d e x p e r i e n c e . The second p o i n t i s concerned w i t h the framework i n which the S-P s h i f t i s d i s c u s s e d . E a r l y r e s e a r c h e r s d i s c u s s e d the S-P s h i f t i n a l i n g u i s t i c framework. In o t h e r words, t h e y t a k e the S-P s h i f t as a p u r e l y l i n g u i s t i c phenomenon. Many r e c e n t r e s e a r c h e r s , on the o t h e r hand, s t u d i e d the s h i f t i n a b r o a d e r framework such as c o g n i t i o n . The S-P s h i f t i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be r e l a t e d t o such b r o a d e r f u n c t i o n s as c o g n i t i o n and memory. In a d d i t i o n t o the need t o c l a r i f y t h e s e t h e o r i e s , t h e i m p l i c a t i o n o f each t h e o r y o f the S-P s h i f t f o r second language l e a r n i n g t h e o r y must be c o n s i d e r e d . The f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t s e x p r e s s the i m p l i c a t i o n s o f each t h e o r y f o r s e c o n d l a n g u a g e a c q u i s t i o n w i t h o u t v i o l a t i n g the fundamental p r i n c i p l e s o f any of t h e t h e o r i e s . 1. A s s o c i a t i o n Theory E x p e r i e n c e d e t e r m i n e s the word a s s o c i a t i o n and the i n c r e a s e d amount o f e x p e r i e n c e w i t h a word i n d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t s l e a d s t o p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s -p o nding. T h e r e f o r e c h i l d r e n demonstrate the S-P s h i f t . T h i s i s a b e h a v i o r i s t i c p o s i t i o n and n a t u r a l l y L I and L2 a s s o c i a t i o n s would be the same. 2. Semantic F e a t u r e H y p o t h e s i s Theory. C h i l d r e n need somehow t o a c q u i r e semantic f e a t u r e l i s t s . E x p e r i e n c e i s needed i f the c h i l d i s t o p e r f e c t a f e a t u r e l i s t . An i n s u f f i c i e n t l i s t c a uses s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . A c c o r d i n g t o t h i s , when an a l r e a d y e s t a b l i s h e d f e a t u r e l i s t i s u s ed i n L 2 , t h e n a s s o c i a t i o n between L I and L2 w i l l be d i f f e r e n t . 3 . R e v i s e d A s s o c i a t i o n Theory C h i l d r e n f i r s t have a c o l l e c t i o n o f a s s o c i a t i o n s determined by t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e s , y e t economy f o r c e s them to o r g a n i z e t h e s e a s s o c i a t i o n s . T h i s i s a r e v i s e d a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y which i n c o r p o r a t e s o r g a n i z a t i o n , p r e d i c t i n g t h a t L I and L2 a r e t h e same i n o r g a n i z a -t i o n . 4. C o g n i t i v e Theory C o g n i t i v e a b i l i t y d e t e r m i n e s word a s s o c i a t i o n r e g a r d l e s s o f e x p e r i e n c e . P a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a r e t h e r e f l e c t i o n of f o r m a l o r l o g i c a l o p e r a t i o n , and t h e r e f o r e o c c u r l a t e r t h a n s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , which a r e t h e p r o d u c t o f p r e l o g i c a l o p e r a t i o n . Thus i f t h e L2 l e a r n e r i s o l d e r and more mature i n c o g n i t i o n , L2 a s s o c i a t i o n s w i l l be more p a r a d i g m a t i c than L I c h i l d r e n . 1. A s s o c i a t i o n Theory The famous S o v i e t c h i l d p s y c h o l o g i s t and l i n g u i s t L u r i a (1981) f a v o u r s t h i s t h e o r y c l a i m i n g t h a t word a s s o c i a t i o n d e p ends on t h e response f r e q u e n c y of t h e s u b j e c t s ' p e r s o n a l background. He no t e s the c l o s e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t ween l o g i c a l c o g n i t i v e a b i l i t y and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g , but d e s c r i b e s a s s o c i a t i o n s as a b a s i c p r i n c i p l e of c o g n i t i o n . T h i s s e p a r a t e s him from c o g n i t i v e t h e o r i s t s . L u r i a s t a t e s t h a t "a word not o n l y s u b s t i t u t e s f o r a t h i n g , but a l s o a n a l y z e s i t by i n t r o d u c i n g i t i n t o a system of complex a s s o c i a t i o n s and r e l a t i o n s " (1981, p.37). Here a s s o c i a t i o n comes b e f o r e c o g n i t i o n . E r v i n ' s e r r o n e o u s a n t i c i p a t i o n h y p o t h e s i s , as a l r e a d y mentioned, i s a c l a s s i c example of an a s s o c i a t i o n i s t i c e x p l a n a t i o n o f the S-P s h i f t . Yet her h y p o t h e s i s i m m e d i a t e l y p r e s e n t s a problem i n the case o f Japanese o r Chinese s p e a k e r s , f o r t h e i r i n c r e a s e d language e x p e r i e n c e does not seem t o r e s u l t i n a h i g h e r r a t e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . The Japanese case may be e x p l a i n e d by h i g h c o m m o n a l i t y as M i l o n and W o l f (1964) r e p o r t e d . The d e s i r e t o c o n f o r m t o s t a n d a r d i z e d language u s a g e may p r o d u c e r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e v a r i e t y o f c o n t e x t . P a l e r m o ( 1 9 7 1 ) a l s o a t t r i b u t e s the S-P s h i f t t o a s s o c i a t i v e s t r e n g t h . He, however, s t o p s s h o r t o f s p e c u l a t i n g on e x a c t l y what the u n d e r l y i n g p r o c e s s o f the s h i f t might be. I f one were t o pursue the a s s o c i a t i o n i s t p o s i t i o n to i t s extreme, one would have t o deny any meaning i n the S-P s h i f t , because one would see a s s o c i a t i o n s as a mere c o l l e c t i o n o f words r e s u l t i n g f r o m d i f f e r e n t amounts of h a b i t f o r m a t i o n . I n g e r r s o l l (1974) c r i t i c i z e d the v a l u e of the S-P s h i f t as an i n d i c a t o r o f l i n g u i s t i c m a t u r a t i o n by showing t h a t i t i s a f u n c t i o n o f f r e q u e n c y . He t e s t e d 20 each o f grade two, grade s i x and c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s , and a d m i n i s t e r e d a word l i s t o f h i g h and low f r e q u e n c y . The d a t a showed the c o r r e l a t i o n b etween homogeneous r e s p o n s e s and age, and homogeneous r e s p o n s e s and f r e q u e n c y . The p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y o f low f r e q u e n c y s t i m u l i g i v e n t o a d u l t s was almost the same as f o r h i g h f r e q u e n c y s t i m u l i g i v e n t o the second g r a d e r s . I g n e r r s o l l ' s r e s u l t s might have been more i n t e r e s t i n g had he used s t i m u l i which had the same f r e q u e n c y f o r b o t h a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n , and then compared the r e s u l t s . N o n e t h e l e s s , the f a c t t h a t t h e same c l a s s r e s p o n s e s f o r low f r e q u e n c y words among a d u l t s a r e comparable t o the c h i l d r e n ' s h i g h f r e q u e n c y s t i m u l i does p o i n t toward the v a l u e o f the S-P dichotomy. Howes (1957) went so f a r as t o s a y t h a t t h e " a v e r a g e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t a g i v e n word w i l l be l i m i t e d as a response e q u a l s i t s p r o b a b i l i t y i n g e n e r a l d i s c o u r s e " ( p . 8 4 ) . In h i s o p i n i o n , t h e S-P d i s t i n c t i o n may be a mere c o i n c i d e n c e o f i n c r e a s e d usage of words i n a p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p . By i n s i s t i n g t h a t the S-P s h i f t i s the r e s u l t o f i n c r e a s e d usage, t h i s t h e o r y p r e d i c t s t h a t t h e S-P s h i f t w i l l o c c u r among J a p a n e s e l e a r n e r s o f E n g l i s h as a second language as t h e i r use o f E n g l i s h i n c r e a s e s . S i n c e the q u a n t i t a t i v e p r e r e q u i s i t e o f t h e S-P s h i f t i s s u g g e s t e d , the S-P s h i f t o f the second language l e a r n e r may r e q u i r e the comparable amount of E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e as t h o s e m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n e x p e r i e n c i n g the S-P s h i f t i n o r d e r f o r i t t o o c c u r . In a d d i t i o n , the q u a l i t a t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f a s s o c i a t i o n s g i v e n by the second language l e a r n e r s may be s u b s t a n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t from the n a t i v e norm i f the n a t i v e - l i k e language environment i s not p e r m i t t e d . Semantic Feature Hypothesis Theory That t h i s t h e o r y s h a r p l y c o n t r a s t s w i t h a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y i s w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d by C l a r k : 74 Language s h o u l d not be thought of as a consequence of b u i l t - u p a s s o c i a t i o n s ; r a t h e r , word a s s o c i a t i o n s s h o u l d be thought of as a consequence of l i n g u i s t i c competence (1970, p.272) C l a r k e l a b o r a t e d on M c N e i l l ' s v e r s i o n by i n t r o d u c i n g h i e r a r c h y i n t o the f e a t u r e s . He proposed th e f o l l o w i n g h i e r a r c h y o f r u l e s t o e x p l a i n a l l t h e word a s s o c i a t i o n phenomenon. The h i g h e r a r u l e i s l i s t e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g , t h e more p r i o r i t y t h a t r u l e has. 1. G e n e r a l r u l e - e x p l a i n s most p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a) change the s i g n o f a f e a t u r e b) d e l e t e a f e a t u r e c) add a f e a t u r e Take the s i m p l e s t of t h e above t h r e e I f r u l e 1 does not work: 2. S y n t a g m a t i c R u l e s Take t h e f e a t u r e s s p e c i f i e d by s e l e c t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n s eg. a d j e c t i v e - noun 3. Idiom - C o m p l e t i o n R u l e Complete an i d i o m from l e f t t o r i g h t e.g. C o t t a g e — cheese I n a d d i t i o n , C l a r k s u g g e s t s t h a t j u s t as d i f f e r e n t language groups have d i f f e r e n t r u l e s , d i f f e r e n t p e o p l e have d i f f e r e n t r u l e s . Then, t h e l a n g u a g e s p e c i f i c a s s o c i a t i o n s c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d . One a d v a n t a g e o f t h i s t h e o r y o v e r a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y , can be found i n t h a t word a s s o c i a t i o n goes a l o n g the s e m a n t i c l i n e r a t h e r than b e i n g a mere c o e x i s t e n t . T h i s s u g g e s t i o n has been s t u d i e d by F l e k k o y (1975). He t e s t e d 126 Norwegians on 50 words from t h e K e n t / R o s a n o f f word l i s t and a n a l y z e d the t h r e e most f r e q u e n t r e s p o n s e s i n terms of s e m a n t i c f e a t u r e s . Those r e s p o n s e s d i d show a d e c r e a s i n g s e m a n t i c s i m i l a r i t y as t h e f r e q u e n c y o f response d e c r e a s e d . A f t e r s t u d y i n g t h e i n f l e c t i o n a l c o n c o r d a n c e w h i c h i s p r e v a l e n t i n Norwegian, Rommetveit and B r o g g e r ( 1 9 7 9 ) a l s o c o n c l u d e d t h a t s e m a n t i c s i s the d e t e r m i n a n t of a s s o c i a t i o n s ( c i t e d i n c r o s s c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s , p.58). S i n c e i n f l e c t i o n a l c o n c o r d a n c e means c o - o c c u r r e n c e , Norwegian p r e f e r e n c e f o r a s e m a n t i c a l l y s i m i l a r y e t i n f l e c t i o n a r i l y d i s c o r d a n t i t e m over a s e m a n t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t y e t i n f l e c t i o n a r y c o n c o r d a n t i t e m shows th e i m p o r t a n c e of s e m a n t i c s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . T h i s i n d i r e c t l y s u p p o r t s t h e Semantic F e a t u r e Theory. G e r s c h i t z (1978) t e s t e d 20 each of k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n and s e c o n d g r a d e r s and t e n c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s and found t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a l o r d e r of word a s s o c i a t i o n as f o l l o w s : 1. c l a n g response 2. o p p o s i t i o n r u l e - negated response by the a d d i t i o n o f no b e f o r e a s t i m u l u s o r a p r e f i x ' u n ' t o a s t i m u l i 3. s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n d i c a t e d by imagery 4. p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s based upon e x p l i c i t knowledge of t h e h i e r a r c h y o f semantic o r g a n i z a t i o n and a r b i t -r a r i n e s s of words A l t h o u g h she does not mention t h e t h e o r e t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s , G e r s c h i t z seems t o g i v e s u p p o r t t o t h e Semantic F e a t u r e Theory by s u g g e s t i n g l i n g u i s t i c s o p h i s t i c a t i o n as a p r e r e q u i s i t e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . T hese s t u d i e s g e n e r a l l y p o i n t o u t t h a t t h e s e m a n t i c o r i e n t a t i o n o f the t h e o r y i s i n t h e r i g h t d i r e c t i o n . However, when t h i s semantic s i m i l a r i t y i s broken down i n t o f e a t u r e s , the problem b e g i n s . In g e n e r a t i v e l i n g u i s t i c s , s emantic f e a t u r e s a r e the p r o d u c t o f a b s t r a c t i o n , and t h e r e i s l i t t l e p r o o f of t h e i r a c t u a l e x i s t e n c e i n the s p e a k e r . Even i f t h e y do e x i s t , t h e y may be q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from the ones M c N e i l l and C l a r k h y p o t h e s i z e d . The o n l y t h i n g we can do i s t o r e v i s e o r d e v i s e f e a t u r e l i s t s and r u l e s so t h a t they p e r f e c t l y e x p l a i n e v e r y l i n g u i s t i c phenomenon a v a i l a b l e . For i n s t a n c e , an o f t e n c i t e d c r i t i c i s m of the Semantic F e a t u r e H y p o t h e s i s i s i t s a p p arent f a i l u r e t o e x p l a i n the swim-water p a i r . We c o u l d someday f i n d some way t o e x p l a i n t h i s p a i r , y e t however p e r f e c t t h i s e x p l a n a -t i o n might sound, i t would remain a h o p e f u l s p e c u l a t i o n . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e r e a r e s t u d i e s s h o w i n g t h a t s e m a n t i c f i e l d ( o r g a n i z a t i o n o f s e m a n t i c a l l y r e l a t e d i t e m s ) and word a s s o c i a t i o n s a r e two d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s . The s t u d y done by F i g u e r o s e e t a l . (1976) i n t e n d e d t o d i s p r o v e the A s s o c i a t i o n T h e o r i s t p o s i t i o n t h a t meaning i s a c o l l e c t i o n o f a s s o c i a t i o n s . F i g u e r o s e e t a l . f o u n d e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e r e a r e o n l y a few w o rds common t o b o t h a s s o c i a t i o n and semantic f i e l d . They p r e s e n t e d t e n c o n c r e t e and t e n a b s t r a c t nouns t o 120 s t u d e n t s . The s t u d e n t s were d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r groups: Two groups were t o d e f i n e c o n c e p t s by f e a t u r e s , and rank the f e a t u r e s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r c l o s e n e s s . The t h i r d g r o u p was g i v e n a l i s t o f f e a t u r e s and asked t o a s s i g n them t o t h e same c o n c e p t s and r a n k t h e f e a t u r e s . The f o u r t h group performed a c o n t i n u e d word a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h the same concept words as s t i m u l i . The f i r s t and s e c o n d e x p e r i m e n t e s t a b l i s h e d by h i g h c o r r e l a t i o n t h a t the p e o p l e have a s i m i l a r s e m a n t i c f i e l d . The t h i r d e x p eriment was t o see whether the word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s share the semantic f i e l d s o f s t i m u l i . However, the semantic f e a t u r e s o f the a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s d i f f e r e d v e r y much from t h o s e a s s i g n e d t o s t i m u l i words. Thus th e r e s e a r c h e r s c o n c l u d e d t h a t word a s s o c i a t i o n i s d e t e r m i n e d more by i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r i e n c e than by semantic r e l a t i o n s . They c a l l e d t h i s k i n d o f a s s o c i a t i o n " r e c o n s t r u c t i v e memory p r o c e s s " and by d o i n g s o , s u p p o r t e d the A s s o c i a t i o n i s t i c Theory of word a s s o c i a t i o n . A n o t h e r c r i t i c i s m of the Semantic F e a t u r e Theory comes from the f i n d i n g s t h a t c h i l d r e n seem t o u n d e r s t a n d s e m a n t i c c l a s s v e r y e a r l y , y e t t o p r e f e r p h r a s e - s t r u c t u r e - t y p e r e s p o n s e s . F r a n c i s (1972) a d m i n i s t e r e d a t h r e e word o r a l matching t e s t t o seven y e a r - o l d s . Out o f the t h r e e words, two were always o f the same form c l a s s and the o t h e r was r e l a t e d e i t h e r s e m a n t i c a l l y o r g r a m m a t i c a l l y t o one o f the two. Then a c o n t r o l l e d word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t of two-word s t i m u l i w i t h the i n s t r u c t i o n t o ' s u p p l y a r e l a t e d word' o r ' s u p p l y an u n r e l a t e d word' was a d m i n i s t e r e d . I t was apparent t h a t the c h i l d r e n were c a p a b l e o f p r o d u c i n g s e m a n t i c word a s s o c i a t i o n s . However, the f a c t t h a t t hey s t i l l p r e f e r r e d phrase s t r u c t u r e t ype a s s o c i a t i o n s l e d t h e a u t h o r t o c o n c l u d e t h a t s e m a n t i c s o n l y p r o v i d e s a p a r t i a l e x p l a n a t i o n o f the S-P s h i f t . The Semantic F e a t u r e Theory p r e d i c t s t h a t young Japanese second language l e a r n e r s o f E n g l i s h , h a v i n g i n c o m p l e t e f e a t u r e l i s t s i n L I and L2, w i l l g i v e p r e d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a t f i r s t b o t h i n L I and L2. P r o v i d e d t h a t the f e a t u r e l i s t and/or a s s o c i a t i o n r u l e s i n L2 i s independent o f L I , more and more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i l l be g i v e n i n E n g l i s h as t h e f e a t u r e l i s t i n E n g l i s h i s p e r f e c t e d . In t h e case o f o l d e r s u b j e c t s who a l r e a d y have a f e a t u r e l i s t i n L]_, the q u e s t i o n becomes complex. F i r s t l y , a l t h o u g h the u n i v e r s a l i t y o f f e a t u r e l i s t s i s i m p l i e d by g e n e r a t i v e l i n g u i s t s , whether the complete l i s t o f L^ i s used by 1>2 or not i s u n c e r t a i n . S e c o n d l y , p r o v i d e d t h a t the f e a t u r e l i s t s a r e i n d e e d u n i v e r s a l among v a r i o u s l a n g u a g e s , the a s s o c i a -t i o n r u l e s may d i f f e r as C l a r k s u g g e s t e d . I f the b a s i c a s s o c i a t i o n r u l e s a r e i n n a t e l y l e a r n e d i n L^ and o l d e r l e a r n e r s must l e a r n them somehow o t h e r than i n t u i t i o n , do t hey f i r s t use t h e i r L^ r u l e s and then approximate L>2 r u l e s t o n a t i v e s p e a k e r s ? I f t h a t i s t h e c a s e , we can s t i l l e x p e ct t o see the S-P s h i f t among Japanese l e a r n e r s o f E n g l i s h as a second language who a r e o l d e r as w e l l as young l e a r n e r s . Revised Association Theory T h i s t h e o r y d i f f e r s f r o m A s s o c i a t i o n T h e o r y b e c a u s e o r g a n i z a t i o n o r s t r u c t u r e i n l e x i c a l memory i s deemed t o cause t h e S-P s h i f t . The proposed o r g a n i z a t i o n among words sound v e r y s i m i l a r t o t h e c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g i e s o f C o g n i t i v e Theory or the semantic f e a t u r e s o f the Semantic F e a t u r e H y p o t h e s i s . T h i s t h e o r y , however, d i f f e r s f u n d a m e n t a l l y from the C o g n i t i v e Theory and Semantic F e a t u r e Theory because the s t r u c t u r i n g of l e x i c a l memory i s thought t o r e s u l t from sheer economy r a t h e r t h a n m a t u r a t i o n . P e t r e y ( 1 9 7 7 ) c h a r a c t e r i z e s c h i l d r e n ' s a s s o c i a t i o n s by ' e p i s o d i c memory' w h i c h i s t h e memory o f p e r s o n a l l y e x p e r i e n c e d v e r b a l and s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t e x t . She contends t h a t the S-P d i s t i n c t i o n i s m e a n i n g l e s s , f o r young c h i l d r e n ' s r e s p o n s e s a r e the c l u s t e r s o f ' f o c a l element o f an e v e n t ' w i t h o u t any heed t o g r a m m a t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n s . As c h i l d r e n g e t o l d e r , ' a b s t r a c t semantic c o n t e n t * becomes t h e u n i t o f memory by o r g a n i z i n g many d i f f e r e n t c l u s t e r s f o r one word. She c o n c i s e l y s t a t e s as f o l l o w s : "The s t i m u l u s seems t o have been s t o r e d as a p r e d i c a t e e p i s o d e o f t h e s o r t o f s i t u a t i o n and a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l e p i s o d e d u r i n g which i t appeared as a f o c a l element. " (1977, p. 63) When a b s t r a c t semantic memory i s e s t a b l i s h e d , "the s t i m u l u s e f f e c t s immediate c o g n i t i v e i n p u t i n t o semantic memory , whose s e m a n t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n l e a d s t o a s e m a n t i c a l l y r e l a t e d r e s -ponse."(1977, p.62) Thus she h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t h i g h f r e q u e n c y words have many more c l u s t e r s than low f r e q u e n c y words, which i n t u r n e x p l a i n s why h i g h f r e q u e n c y words undergo t h i s s h i f t e a r l y . By i n v e s t i g a t i n g word p a i r s such as g a l l o p - h o r s e , she c o n f i r m e d her t h e o r y . Cramer (1973) showed t h a t memory o r g a n i z a t i o n does o c c u r by a d m i n i s t e r i n g word r e c o g n i t i o n t e s t t o 64 s e c o n d g r a d e r s and 64 s i x t h g r a d e r s . The s t i m u l u s l i s t o f t e n s y n o n y m - e l i c i t i n g words, t e n a n t o n y m - e l i c i t i n g words b o t h a t the same f r e q u e n c y and t e n c o n t r o l words was c o n s t r u c t e d . A l l t h r e e groups o f s t i m u l i had the same degree o f f a m i l i a r i t y . Each g r a d e was d i v i d e d t o c o n t r o l antonym i n s t r u c t i o n and synonym i n s t r u c t i o n g r oups. A s s o c i a t i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n d i d o c c u r , and e r r o r s were i n c r e a s e d w i t h antonym i n s t r u c t i o n f o r s i x t h g r a d e r s and w i t h synonym i n s t r u c t i o n f o r second g r a d e r s . Cramer t h e r e b y c o n c l u d e d t h a t a s s o c i a t i v e e r r o r s o c c u r i n newly a c q u i r e d c a t e g o r i e s , which shows t h e memory r e o r g a n i z a t i o n . F i n a l l y , M i l l e r (1969) sheds some l i g h t on the r e l a t i o n s between a s s o c i a t i o n s and memory. He p r e s e n t s a ' t r a n s f e r hypo-t h e s i s , ' and proposes t h a t knowing how t o speak h e l p s remembering what was s a i d and t h a t t h i s t r a n s f e r i s done t h r o u g h m e d i a t i o n of p r e e s t a b l i s h e d a s s o c i a t i o n s . M i l l e r d i s c u s s e s v a r i o u s t h e o r i e s o f memory o r g a n i z a t i o n by word a s s o c i a t i o n d a t a and c o n c l u d e s t h a t t h e p r e d i c t i o n h y p o t h e s i s ( l e x i c a l i t e m i s s t o r e d as ' c o l l i e i s a dog') f i t s b e s t w i t h t h e c u r r e n t word a s s o c i a t i o n d a t a w h i c h has t h e a s y r a e t r i c a l d i r e c t i o n s such as s u b o r d i n a t e - super o r d i n a t e and w h o l e - p a r t . Thus, i n t h i s t h e o r y , a s s o c i a t i o n s and l e x i c a l memory i n t e r a c t w i t h e a c h o t h e r i n t h e s e n s e t h a t a s s o c i a t i o n s t r i g g e r the r e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f l e x i c a l memory, and the r e o r g a n i z e d l e x i c o n produces d i f f e r e n t t y p e s of a s s o c i a t i o n s . D i s c u s s i n g t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s s t u d y i n s e c o n d language l e a r n i n g , one f a c e s the q u e s t i o n o f whether b i l i n g u a l s have a s e p a r a t e l e x i c a l s t o r a g e or a s h a r e d one. I f words a r e s t o r e d s e p a r a t e l y a c c o r d i n g t o languages ( E l i n & Ryan 1980, K i n s n e r a t a l 1984, Opoku 1982, Chen e t a l . 1982), i t means t h a t t h e L2 d i c t i o n a r y has t o be c o n s t r u c t e d i n d e p e n d e n t l y from th e L4 and n a t u r a l l y p r e d i c t s t h a t Japanese second language l e a r n e r s o f E n g l i s h w i l l have the S-P s h i f t i n L2 E n g l i s h . On the o t h e r hand, i f the l e x i c o n i s s h a r e d by b o t h l a n g u a g e s ( C a r a m a z z a e t a l 1980) a s s o c i a t i o n s t o L2 may f o l l o w t h e p a t t e r n o f . The r e v i e w of word a s s o c i a t i o n s t u d i e s o f b i l i n g u a l s (see c r o s s - c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s ) , however, seems t o s u p p o r t s e p a r a t e s t o r a g e , a t l e a s t when the f l u e n c y of second language r e a c h e s a p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t . I f i n d e e d l e x i c a l s t o r a g e system i s r e f l e c t e d i n t h e word a s s o c i a t i o n , we can i n f e r t h a t two languages e x i s t i n d e p e n d e n t l y i n b i l i n g u a l s from the d a t a showing t h a t b i l i n g u a l s have two s e t s of a s s o c i a t i o n s , each s i m i l a r t o t h e m o n o l i n g u a l a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n of r e s p e c t i v e languages. Cognitive Development Theory D i s c u s s i o n s o f the Semantic F e a t u r e H y p o t h e s i s i n s p i r e d more d e t a i l e d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s than the s i m p l e S-P dichotomy. With the impact o f the P i a g e t i a n t h e o r i e s o f c h i l d p s y c h o l o g y , some r e s e a r c h e r s s t a r t e d t o view t h e v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s o f r e s p o n s e s as the m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g i e s . In a d d i t i o n , t h e s t r o n g c o n n e c t i o n between the S-P s h i f t and age l e d some r e s e a r c h e r s t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e S-P s h i f t i s a m a t t e r o f development w i t h age r a t h e r than s i m p l e exposure t o language or l e a r n i n g s y n t a x ( P a l e r m o 1 9 7 1 ) . P i a g e t had suggested t h a t c h i l d r e n go through a s u c c e s s i o n o f s t a g e s , and a t each s t a g e t h e i r c o g n i t i v e a b i l i t y e x p e r i e n c e s a l e a p i n t o the next s t a g e . The age a t which the l e a p i n t o the f o r m a l o r l o g i c a l o p e r a t i o n s s t a g e s i s e x p e r i e n c e d seems t o match w i t h the age a t which the S-P s h i f t i s commonly found t o o c c u r . And, i n d e e d , p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s seem t o be the p r o d u c t s o f l o g i c a l t h i n k i n g . Thus the C o g n i t i v e Theory o f the S-P s h i f t was b o r n . The key argument i n t h i s t h e o r y i s t h a t c o g n i t i v e m a t u r i t y i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . In a d d i t i o n , the sequence o f a p a r t i c u l a r c l a s s o f r e s p o n s e s i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be an a p p r o x i m a t e m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h e sequence of the d e v e l o p m e n t a l s t a g e s o f c o g n i t i o n . One p i e c e o f e v i d e n c e i n s u p p o r t o f the C o g n i t i v e Development Theory comes from s t u d i e s showing t h a t i n s t r u c t i o n o r t r a i n i n g cannot i n d u c e c o g n i t i v e l y premature c h i l d r e n t o produce p a r a d i g -m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . M i l g r a m and Goodglass (1961) t e s t e d e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l c h i l d r e n on a m u l t i p l e c h o i c e word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t w h i c h i n s t r u c t e d them t o c h o o s e a r e s p o n s e young c h i l d r e n would g i v e and a d u l t s would g i v e . Grade two and t h r e e s t u d e n t s were not m o d i f i e d by e i t h e r i n s t r u c t i o n , whereas s t u d e n t s i n grade f o u r and up d i d change t h e i r r e s p o n s e s a c c o r d i n g t o the i n s t r u c t i o n . Routh and Tweney (1972) t r a i n e d c h i l d r e n t o produce more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . They used t h i r t y k i n d e r g a r t e n e r s and t h i r t y f i f t h g r a d e r s who were s y s t e m a t i c a l l y t r a i n e d , u s i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s , p r o m p t i n g , exemplars and r e w a r d g i v i n g . T h i s p r o c e d u r e was f o u n d t o i n c r e a s e the number of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o v e r b s and a d j e c t i v e s o n l y s l i g h t l y , and t o s l i g h t l y d e c r e a s e the number of noun r e s p o n s e s t o nouns among k i n d e r -g a r t n e r s . Routh and Tweney a t t r i b u t e d t h i s d e c r e a s e t o t h e r e d u c t i o n o f p r i m i t i v e noun r e s p o n s e s . In a l l e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s , f i f t h g r a d e r s were found t o g i v e more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t h a n k i n d e r g a r t n e r s . Thus the t r a i n i n g was found i n e f f e c t i v e i n i n d u c i n g p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . McClesky (1974) a l s o used p a r a d i g m a t i c language t r a i n i n g t o see whether i t would improve r e a d i n g r e a d i n e s s i n f i r s t g r a d e r s . She c o n c l u d e d t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c language i s a d e v e l o p -mental t a s k , not a t r a i n a b l e s k i l l . A second p i e c e of e v i d e n c e comes from s t u d i e s showing the c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between I.Q. o r e d u c a t i o n , and word a s s o c i a -t i o n . M e f f r e d (1979a) h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t the S-P s h i f t was a f u n c t i o n o f v e r b a l i n t e l l i g e n c e and a n a l y z e d a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s o f f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n u s i n g f a m i l i a r i t y - a n d a m b i g u i t y - c o n t r o l l e d s t i m u l i w i t h t h r e e varimax f a c t o r s , the WAIS v e r b a l IQ s c o r e , p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . He c o n c l u d e d t h a t " s i g n i f i c a n t l y , i n t e l l i g e n c e r e l a t e d f a c t o r i a l l y o n l y t o p a r a d i g m a t i c d e f i n i n g o r expanding response p a t t e r n s t h a t t e n d t o supplement the s y n t a g m a t i c response p a t t e r n of c h i l d h o o d " (1979a, p.923). R i e g e l (1970) s u p p o r t s the C o g n i t i v e view by s t a t i n g t h a t " t h e r e i s a q u a l i t a t i v e i n c r e a s e and d e c r e a s e i n v o c a b u l a r y a b i l i t y w hich cannot be i d e n t i f i e d " (1970, p.374) and c o n n e c t i n g i t w i t h " r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s " . He r e a c h e d t h i s c o n c l u s i o n by d i s c o v e r i n g t h e reappearance of i d i o s y n c r a t i c and s u b j e c t i v e judgement of s t i m u l i ( n o r m a l l y u s e d by young c h i l d r e n ) among 380 e l d e r s o v er age 55. Emerson and G e k o s k y ( 1 9 7 6 ) n o t i c e d t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s a r e not always c a t e g o r i c a l and h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t t h i s i s due t o t h e c h i l d ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of i n t e r a c t i v e and c a t e g o r i c a l r e l a t i o n s . They t e s t e d 124 c h i l d r e n of ages t h r e e t o n i n e on a word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t and on an i n t e r a c t i n g p i c t u r e g r o u p i n g t e s t w i t h j u s t i f i c a t i o n . Twelve s t i m u l i s e t s were c o n s t r u c t e d a l o n g w i t h f o u r r e s ponse p i c t u r e s (two c o n t r o l s , one i n t e r a c t i v e , and one c a t e g o r i c a l ) . Emerson and Gekosky found t h a t the p r e f e r e n c e f o r the i n t e r a c t i v e was e s t a b l i s h e d by age s i x , and c a t e g o r i c a l p a i r s reached an asymptote a t age e i g h t , w h i c h c o r r e s p o n d s w i t h t h e S-P s h i f t . P r e f e r e n c e f o r b o t h c a t e g o r i c a l and i n t e r a c t i v e p a i r s i n c r e a s e d a f t e r age 6;6 and reached an asymptote i n f r e q u e n c y a t age e i g h t . Emerson and Gekosky a t t r i b u t e d the S-P s h i f t t o t h e c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g y s h i f t i n g from i n t e r a c t i v e t o c a t e g o r i c a l . The c r i t i c i s m o f the t h e o r y t h a t the S-P s h i f t i s a r e s u l t o f c o g n i t i v e development came from measuring c o g n i t i v e a b i l i t y a g a i n s t word a s s o c i a t i o n . Haynes e t a l . (1977) a d m i n i s t e r e d a 16 i t e m p a i r e d a s s o c i a t e memory t a s k t o t h r e e groups o f c h i l d r e n d e v e l o p m e n t a l l y s t r a t i f i e d a c c o r d i n g t o c o n s e r v i n g m a s s , w e i g h t , and volume l e v e l s , the t h r e e l e v e l s P i a g e t s u g g e s t e d . Items t o be r e c a l l e d were c a t e g o r y i n c l u s i v e , p a r a d i g m a t i c ( c o o r d i n a t e ) , s y n t a g m a t i c , and u n r e l a t e d p a i r s . C a t e g o r y i n c l u s i v e and s y n t a g m a t i c p a i r s were f a v o r e d e q u a l l y , f o l l o w e d by p a r a d i g m a t i c p a i r s w i t h u n r e l a t e d p a i r s f a v o r e d l e a s t . The S-P dichotomy d i d not show any d e v e l o p m e n t a l t r e n d a c r o s s the t h r e e l e v e l s , and thus d i d not s u p p o r t the C o g n i t i v e Theory. T h i s s t u d y , however, does not f a l s i f y the C o g n i t i v e Theory s i n c e i t d i d not d i s c o u n t a l l the r e l a t i o n s between c o g n i t i o n and word a s s o c i a t i o n s . Upon c l o s e r e x a m i n a t i o n , we see t h a t the Haynes s t u d y conforms t o p r e v i o u s l y d e s c r i b e d c o g n i t i v i s t s t u d i e s i n the sense t h a t c o o r d i n a t e comes a f t e r i n c l u s i o n ( s u p e r o d i n a t e ) . We a l s o have t o remember t h i s c o n c l u s i o n was t e s t e d i n f r e e - r e c a l l . As a d i s c r e p a n c y between comprehension of a word and a c t u a l usage of a word i s v e r y p l a u s i b l e , p a r a -d i g m a t i c i t y may be e a s i e r t o h a n d l e a t an e a r l i e r age i n p a s s i v e t a s k s such as f r e e r e c a l l than i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . In a d d i t i o n , measuring c o g n i t i o n by g r o u p i n g c h i l d r e n a c c o r d i n g t o t h r e e l e v e l s o f c o n s e r v a t i o n may be a t f a u l t , f o r c o n s e r v a t i o n a b i l i t y c o u l d be the sum t o t a l of v a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f c o g n i t i v e development o r something u n r e l a t e d t o language a t a l l w h i l e t h e S-P s h i f t may be t r i g g e r e d by a s p e c i a l c o g n i t i v e s k i l l i ndependent o f c o n s e r v a t i o n a b i l i t y . T h e re i s some e v i d e n c e t h a t s u c c e s s i v e and s i m u l t a n e o u s modes o f c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s i n g may be the u n d e r l y i n g f o r c e of the S-P s h i f t . Cummins and Das (1978) t e s t e d 60 t h i r d g r a d e r s on word a s s o c i a t i o n , a m b i g u i t y judgement and c l a s s i n c l u s i o n t a s k s . They found t h a t s i m u l t a n e o u s p r o c e s s i n g and p a r a d i g m a t i c p r o c e s s i n g c o r r e s p o n d , though the correspondence i s not s t r o n g . Jarman (1980) s t a r t e d by q u e s t i o n i n g the p e r s i s t e n c e o f the a d u l t ' s s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g d e s p i t e h i s mature c o g n i t i o n . He t u r n e d t o the c o n c e p t s o f s i m u l t a n e o u s s y n t h e s i s and s u c c e s s i v e s y n t h e s i s f o r e x p l a n a t i o n and a t t r i b u t e d the former t o v e r b a l , l o g i c a l s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , the l a t t e r , t o s e r i a l / t e m p o r a l s e q u e n c i n g . He t e s t e d 104 two y e a r - o l d s and 52 n i n e y e a r o l d s w i t h h i g h I.Q.s He c o n c l u d e d t h a t " s i m u l t a n e o u s and s u c c e s s i v e s y n t h e s i s a re p r o c e s s e s which b o t h d e v e l o p i n the v e r y e a r l y y e a r s , but emerge a t d i f f e r e n t d e v e l o p m e n t a l p o i n t s i n language t h r o u g h t h e i r c o r r e s p o n d i n g forms of a s s o c i a t i o n s . S y ntagmatic a s s o c i a t i o n s may be dominant i n language, because most e a r l y l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g a t t h e s e n t e n c e l e v e l i s concerned w i t h a s p e c t s of p r e d i c t i o n and c l a u s e s t r u c t u r e " (1980, p.163). Yet the s y n t h e s i s argument seems u n l i k e l y when we c o n s i d e r two t h i n g s : (1) the S-P s h i f t seems l a n g u a g e - s p e c i f i c (2) on a word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k , the mature pe r s o n has two p r o c e s s e s t o choose from. T h i s t h e o r y does not e x p l a i n why one i s f a v o r e d over the o t h e r . There i s y e t a t h i r d v e r s i o n o f the C o g n i t i v e Development Theory which approaches c o g n i t i o n from a d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e . L u r i a r e p o r t e d t h a t p h o n e t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s i n a d u l t s appear " i n s p e c i a l s t a t e s o f c o n s c i o u s n e s s , . . . s u c h as t r a n s i t i o n f r o m w a k e f u l n e s s t o s l e e p , [ o r ] s e v e r e f a t i g u e , when the c e r e b r a l c o r t e x i s i n p h a s i c s t a t e " ( p . 7 4 ) . He a t t r i b u t e d p h o n e t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s t o "the l o s s o f s e l e c t i v i t y " . F u r t h e r p u r s u i n g p h o n e t i c a s s o c i a t i o n , L u r i a e x a m i n e d t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h i c h word i s a s s o c i a t e d t o a s t i m u l u s by m o n i t o r i n g r e f l e x e s and b l o o d v e s s e l s g i v i n g s u b j e c t s p a i n f u l shock a t the p r e s e n t a t i o n o f s t i m u l i . V a r i o u s r e s p o n s e s were p r e s e n t e d a f t e r s t i m u l i and any change i n r e f l e x e s and b l o o d v e s s e l s were m o n i t o r e d t o d e t e r m i n e which words were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s t i m u l i . Retarded c h i l d r e n showed response o n l y t o p h o n e t i c - a s s o c i a t i o n s , whereas m i l d l y r e t a r d e d c h i l d r e n responded to b o t h p h o n e t i c and semantic a s s o c i a t i o n s . Thus he c o n c l u d e d t h a t the p h o n e t i c a s s o c i a t i o n i s n o r m a l l y i n h i b i t e d i n mature c o g n i t i o n s and appears o n l y when s e l e c t i v i t y i s absent e i t h e r when the normal c o n s c i o u s i s b l o c k e d or c o g n i t i v e development i s not s u f f i c i e n t . T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between p h o n e t i c a s s o c i a t i o n and semantic a s s o c i a t i o n was t e s t e d by Hynd and Obrzut (1978) i n a word r e c o g n i t i o n t e s t on 40 s t u d e n t s each i n grade two, f o u r and s i x . They p r e s e n t e d o r t h o g r a p h i c , a c o u s t i c and v e r b a l a s s o c i a t i v e d i s t r a c t o r s t o see i f t h e r e i s a d e v e l o p m e n t a l t r e n d i n c h i l d r e n ' s p r e f e r e n c e . Grade two c h i l d r e n made s i g n i f i c a n t l y more m i s t a k e s i n o r t h o g r a p h i c d i s t r a c t o r s , but t h a t was t h e o n l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e found. S w e i d e l and N u c i f o r a (1982) t e s t e d the v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y p r i m i n g e f f e c t on a d u l t s and found t h a t a u d i o - p r i m i n g had more i n f l u e n c e on word a s s o c i a t i o n s t h a n v i s u a l p r i m i n g s . The s u p e r i o r i t y o f a u d i t o r y p r i m i n g i n a d u l t s seems t o have o t h e r s u p p o r t s . Timmermans and Kumin (1974) t e s t e d t e n a p h a s i c p a t i e n t s and t e n normals on a word a s s o c i a t i o n s t e s t which p r e s e n t e d s t i m u l i b o t h a u d i t o r i l y and i n p i c t o r i a l l y . F o r t y nouns and v e r b s were s e l e c t e d f r o m t h e P a l e r m o and J e n k i n s norm as s t i m u l i . A p h a s i c p a t i e n t s gave n o r m a l - l i k e r e s p o n s e s o n l y t o a u d i t o r y p r e s e n t a t i o n and had t o l a b e l t h e p i c t u r e b e f o r e r e s p o n d i n g t o p i c t o r i a l p r e s e n t a t i o n . Normal s u b j e c t s gave more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o a u d i t o r y p r e s e n t a t i o n . The d a t a showing t h a t the a p h a s i c p a t i e n t s had t o v e r b a l i z e t h e p i c t u r e b e f o r e a s s o c i a t i n g i t i s o f i n t e r e s t , f o r i t s u g g e s t s t h a t c o n c e p t s have t o be v e r b a l i z e d i n t e r n a l l y i n o r d e r t o be a s s o c i a t e d ( a t l e a s t i n a d u l t s . ) The a p h a s i c s seem t o have l o s t i n t e r n a l v e r b a l i z a t i o n , and t h i s may be t h e cause o f the d i f f i c u l t y t h e y e x p e r i e n c e i n language. Coren e t a l . (1976) d i d an i n g e n i o u s experiment r e g a r d i n g t h i s p o i n t , u s i n g g e o m e t r i c words and c o r r e s p o n d i n g forms as s t i m u l i i n two-word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t s . The i n s t r u c t i o n t o f o r m s t i m u l i was t o draw t h e f i r s t form which came t o mind. They found a h i g h degree o f commonality between t h e v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y t y p e s o f s t i m u l i , y e t t h e r e s p o n s e time was much s h o r t e r f o r v e r b a l s t i m u l i . They c o n c l u d e d t h a t " a s s o c i a t i o n i s a s y s t e m p r e d i s p o s e d toward v e r b a l e n c o d i n g , a l t h o u g h i t o f t e n encodes s t i m u l i v i a v i s u a l imagery" (1976, p.689). I n t e r e s t i n g l y , White (1965) s u g g e s t s t h a t a f a i r l y b a s i c and i m p o r t a n t change i n t h e c h a r a c t e r o f l e a r n i n g , w h i c h a p p e a r s t o ta k e p l a c e a f t e r age f i v e , i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h an i n c r e a s e d a p parent i n f l u e n c e o f language upon l e a r n i n g and the s h i f t t o v i s u a l from t a c t u a l e x p l o r a t i o n . He c i t e s as e v i d e n c e t h e f a c t t h a t c o l o r r a t h e r t h a n f o r m becomes d o m i n a n t i n p e r c e p t i o n among c h i l d r e n around age f i v e . I f we i n c o r p o r a t e White' s t h e o r y , namely, t a c t u a l - v i s u a l s h i f t i n t o v i s u a l - a u d i t o r y s u p e r i o r i t y s h i f t i n s t i m u l u s e n c o d i n g , we emerge w i t h an i n t e r e s t i n g developmental t r e n d , which i s , t a c t u a l - v i s u a l - a u d i t o r y ( v e r b a l ) s u p e r i o r i t y s h i f t i n s t i m u l u s e n c o d i n g . T h i s h y p o t h e t i c a l t r e n d from v i s u a l t o a u d i o ( v e r b a l ) seems t o f i t L u r i a ' s s t u d y (1981) (assuming t h a t we a r e t a l k i n g about the a b i l i t y t o l o a d o r e x t r a c t meaning from e i t h e r f o r m ) . P r o v i d e d t h a t v e r b a l e n c o d i n g - d e c o d i n g d e v e l o p e d from v i s u a l e n c o d i n g - d e c o d i n g which, i n t u r n , was based on t a c t i a l e n coding a b i l i t y , L u r i a ' s f i n d i n g t h a t a d u l t s s l i p back t o p h o n e t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s when t h e y a r e not f u l l y o p e r a t i v e seems v e r y p l a u s i b l e . P h o n e t i c a s s o c i a t i o n does seem t o be an e a s i e r o p e r a t i o n than semantic a s s o c i a t i o n . T h i s c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d by the f a c t t h a t language i s , i n e s s e n c e , p h o n e t i c and c o n s i s t s o f the a s s i g n i n g o f a meaning t o a sequence of sounds a r b i t r a r i l y , w i t h o u t d i r e c t c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between language and c o n c e p t , whereas a v i s u a l image i s u s u a l l y t h e o p p o s i t e . Now we have t o r e c a l l V y g o t z k y ' s emphasis on " s e l f - r e g u l a t o r y i n t e r n a l speech" i n c h i l d r e n ' s c o g n i t i v e and l i n g u i s t i c d e v e l o p -ment. The i m p o r t a n c e and e f f i c i e n c y o f i n t e r n a l speech i n subsequent d e v e l o p m e n t o f c o g n i t i o n c o u l d e x p l a i n L u r i a ' s s t u d y o f a p h a s i c s and o t h e r s t u d i e s c i t e d above which compare v i s u a l and a u d i t o r y s t i m u l i i n a s s o c i a t i o n . V e r b a l p r o c e s s i n g a t t a i n s e f f i c i e n c y and becomes almost a u t o m a t i c , and t h e i r v e r b a l c o d i n g o f v i s u a l images e v e n t u a l l y s u r p a s s e s v i s u a l c o d i n g . T h i s a b i l i t y i s l o s t o r h i n d e r e d i n the a p h a s i c s , r e t a r d a t e s o r when a p e r s o n i s not o p e r a t i v e . I f t h i s i s t r u e , even 91 though t h i s does not d i r e c t l y e x p l a i n the S-P s h i f t , i t does s u p p o r t i n d i r e c t l y some c o n n e c t i o n between word a s s o c i a t i o n and c o g n i t i o n . There i s a f o u r t h v e r s i o n o f the C o g n i t i v e Theory f o r m u l a t e d by Moran, which e x p l a i n s S-P s h i f t by measures o f " i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s , " o r components of a p e r s o n a l c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y (Moran, M e f f r e d & Kimble 1964, o t h e r s see b e l o w ) . The development of h i s s t u d y i s o u t l i n e d as f o l l o w s : 1964 By r e p e a t i n g word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t , c o n s i s t e n t appearance of the s i m i l a r r e s p o n s e s a t the same p r o p o r t i o n was t h e o r i z e d as ' i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s ' ; f u n c t i o n a l , synonym, s u p e r o r d i n a t e , c o n t r a s t and c o o r d i n a t e . C o m m o n a l i t y i s s e e n as t h e r e s u l t o f i n t e r a c t i o n o f s t i m u l i s e t s and i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s . 1966 I d i o d y n a m i c s e t s were r e v i s e d as p e r c e p t u a l r e f e r e n t , o b j e c t r e f e r e n t , c o n c e p t r e f e r e n t , d i m e n s i o n r e f e r e n t s e t s and were c o n s i d e r e d t o p a r a l l e l P i a g e t ' s c o g n i t i v e development. 1968 The i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s were a l s o f o u n d among J a p a n e s e s p e a k e r s . However, comparison of Japanese and A m e r i c a n r e s p o n s e s r e v e a l e d t h a t Japanese dominant s e t s a r e d i f e r e n t from t h o s e of Americans. By t h i s r e s u l t , i t was t h e o r i z e d t h a t i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s were a c t i v a t e d f o r a s s o c i a t i o n , y e t common h i e r a r c h y e x i s t s f o r communication. 1973 L o n g i t u d i n a l s t u d y o f word a s s o c i a t i o n o f p a r e n t s and c h i l d r e n was done i n Japan and A m erica. B o t h c h i l d r e n had f u n c t i o n a l s e t as dominant s e t but the dominant s e t of a d u l t s d i f f e r e d . By t h i s i t was c o n c l u d e d t h a t e a r l y c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y i s common and i n n a t e l y d e t e r m i n e d but a d u l t norm i s c u l t u r a l l y o r i e n t e d . 1974 C h i n e s e c h i l d r e n were a l s o f o u n d t o have d o r a i n a n t l y f u n c t i o n a l s e t . T h e r e f o r e , f u n c t i o n a l s e t was s e e n as u n i v e r s a l c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y . 1975 Semantic r e g u l a r i t i e s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n i n t e s t - r e t e s t performance were d i s c o v e r e d . I d i o d y n a m i c s e t was c o n s i d e r e d t o be an i n t e r n a l s e l f r e g u l a t i n g s t r u c t u r e ; Word a s s o c i a t i o n i s a r e s u l t o f i n t e r a c t i o n o f the n o r m a t i v e p r o b a b i l i t y o f s p e c i f i c word p a i r s and i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s . 92 1977 C o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y was deemed t o c o n s i s t o f p e r s o n a l and common components and c a l l e d 'dual component s t r u c t u r e o f c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y ' . T h i s was found t o be c o m p a t i b l e w i t h c o g n i t i v e p s y c h o l o g y . C o g n i t i v e s k i l l s and word a s s o c i a t i o n t y p e s were c o n n e c t e d , namely e n a c t i v e , i c o n i c , f u n c t i o n a l and l o g i c a l r e l a t i o n s . 1980 R e t e s t o f 1977 c o n f i r m e d 1981 Free word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t of 666 s u b j e c t s w i t h ages from 3 t o 85 y e a r s o l d was a d m i n i s t e r e d , and i t was found t h a t c o m m o n a l i t y i s u n i v e r s a l i t y among a d u l t s i n t h e same community. S t a b l e h i e r a r c h i c a l s t r u c t u r e was found i n b o t h common and p e r s o n a l d i c t i o n a r y . Dual components tend t o f u n c t i o n as an i n t e g r a l system, and two s t a g e development p r e d i c t e d by P i a g e t was c o n f i r m e d . 1982 P r i m a r y mode o f word a s s o c i a t i o n i n v o l v e s a c t i o n , which c o r r e s p o n d s t o s t r u c t u r e d s e n s o r i m o t o r schemes of P i a g e t . " I f t he v e r b a l schemes ... a r e d e r i v a t i v e o f s e n s o r i -motor schemes, i t f o l l o w s t h a t t h e s e v e r b a l schemes s h o u l d share t o some e x t e n t the a c t i o n o r i e n t a t i o n of the l a t t e r " (p.149) The f o l l o w i n g o r d e r o f development was proposed. E n a c t i v e - i c o n i c - f u n c t i o n a l - c o - f u n c t i o n a l p h y s i c a l r e f e r e n t - D e f i n i t i o n (Synonnym) & c o n t r a s t . Moran and h i s c o l l e a g u e s ' t h e s i s can be summarized as f o l l o w s : 1. Word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s a r e governed by ' i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s ' . 2. T h e r e i s an i n n a t e d e v e l o p m e n t a l p a t t e r n o f i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s which a r e , i n t u r n , i n f l u e n c e d by the norm o f t h e language community. Penk (1971) t r i e d t o t e s t Moran's (1966) h y p o t h e s i s t h a t i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s show a d e v e l o p m e n t a l p a t t e r n o f o b j e c t -concept - di m e n s i o n r e f e r e n t . Ten boys and t e n g i r l s o f seven y e a r s t o 11 y e a r s o l d were t e s t e d on 24 s t i m u l i w h i c h were deemed t o e l i c i t a s s o c i a t e s t y p i c a l of one o f the t h r e e s e t s . The s u b j e c t s were d i v i d e d i n t o f i v e age groups, and the age e f f e c t was me a s u r e d t o see w h e t h e r a development p a t t e r n i s found among the t h r e e s e t s . She found t h a t the development o f word a s s o c c i a t i o n was complex, not f o l l o w i n g a l i n e a r p a t t e r n nor P i a g e t ' s h y p o t h e s i s . Y e t t h e c o n n e c t i o n f o u n d between c o n c e p t r e s p o n s e and age c o u l d s u p p o r t Moran's h y p o t h e s i s , and Penk s p e c u l a t e d t h a t " the r e s u r g e n c e o f an e a r l y e s t a b l i s h e d response s t y l e may presage a subsequent s h i f t i n s a l i e n c y t o newer modes o f c o g n i t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n " (1971, p . 6 0 ) . T h i s may w e l l be the s t a g n a t i o n p e r i o d P i a g e t s u g g ested t o e x i s t b e f o r e a jump t o the next h i g h e r l e v e l o f o p e r a t i o n . Y e t t h e s e d a t a were not c o n c l u s i v e i n terms o f c o r r e s -pondence w i t h P i a g e t ' s s t a g e s . Penk r e f r a i n e d from making any s p e c u l a t i o n s o t h e r than s t a t i n g the f o l l o w i n g : These d e v e l o p m e n t a l p a t t e r n s f o l l o w e d c o n t i n u i t y -- l i k e d e v e l o p m e n t a l changes w i t h s i m u l t a n e o u s p r o g r e s -s i o n s and r e g r e s s i o n a l o n g s e v e r a l c o e x i s t i n g forms of c o g n i t i v e v a r i a b l e s . (1971, p.60) The second h y p o t h e s i s of Moran i s t h a t the a d u l t norm i s c u l t u r a l l y d e t e r m i n e d . That i s e s p e c i a l l y i m p o r t a n t , s i n c e he i s e q u a t i n g i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s w i t h p e r s o n a l c o g n i t i v e s t y l e . I s t h e c o g n i t i v e s t y l e r e a l l y d i f f e r e n t from one c u l t u r e t o t h e o t h e r ? We have t o be c a u t i o u s i n p o s i n g a q u e s t i o n l i k e t h i s , f o r i t i s so easy t o t u r n t o the t o p i c o f c u l t u r e f o r h e l p i n e x p l a i n i n g a n y t h i n g found i n a c u l t u r e . T h e r e f o r e , l e t us r e p h r a s e the q u e s t i o n as " i s t h e c o g n i t i v e s t y l e u n d e r l y i n g word a s s o c i a t i o n d i f f e r e n t from one c u l t u r e t o the o t h e r ? " C o n s i d e r i n g t h i s q u e s t i o n , Moran's f i n d i n g t h a t t h e r e i s a s t r o n g i n d i v i d u a l tendency t o f a v o r a p a r t i c u l a r a s s o c i a t i o n type seems t o p o i n t out t h a t i t i s n a t u r a l t o have a c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e as the c o l l e c t i v e r e s u l t o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s from one c u l t u r e t o t h e o t h e r . However, the c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g i e s which a r e c o n s i d e r e d t o be c a u s i n g p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , such as c o o r d i n a t i o n , s u p e r o r d i n a t i o n e t c . , a r e a l l v e r y b a s i c and e s s e n t i a l c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s . There i s no doubt t h a t the Japanese and the Chinese have t h e s e p r o c e s s e s i n abundance. T h e r e f o r e , t h e h i g h e r e v a l u a t i v e judgment a t t a c h e d t o p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s r e g a r d l e s s o f c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g y o r l i n g u i s t i c o p e r a t i o n must be q u e s t i o n e d . We have t o l i m i t the v a l i d i t y o f c o n n e c t i o n s between p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g and c o g n i t i v e o r l i n g u i s t i c m a t u r i t y t o l a n g u a g e s such as the European languages which have p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s as t h e a d u l t norm. N e l s o n , a t the c o n c l u s i o n o f her r e v i e w o f s t u d i e s i n S-P s h i f t , f a v o r s c o g n i t i v e t h e o r y and s t a t e s : The c h i l d has many l a y e r s o f r e l a t i o n s , p r o p e r t i e s and f u n c t i o n s a v a i l a b l e f o r any concept a t any s t a g e i n development. What w i l l be e l i c i t e d i n the word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k w i l l depend upon the s a l i e n c e o f p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p s f o r a p a r t i c u l a r w o r d c o n c e p t . (1977, p.112) T h i s c o n c l u s i o n e x p l a i n s c u l t u r a l d i f f e r e n c e v e r y w e l l , i f we assume t h a t each c u l t u r e h i g h l i g h t s p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p s o f a p a r t i c u l a r word concept a t a d i f f e r e n t s t a g e of development. However, i f the statement i s a c c e p t e d , the q u e s t i o n o f what component o f c u l t u r e d e t e r m i n e s word a s s o c i a t i o n a r i s e s . C h inese and Japanese a re two t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t l a n g u a g e s . I f C h i n e s e and Japanese c u l t u r e s have s i m i l a r p a t t e r n s o f word a s s o c i a t i o n , c a n we i n f e r t h a t t h e common c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s between the two (which d i f f e r from European c u l t u r e s ) a r e the u n d e r l y i n g f o r c e s of word a s s o c i a t i o n ? Indeed, i t i s so easy t o use " c u l t u r e " t o e x p l a i n something, y e t i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o e x p l a i n the a c t u a l e f f e c t i t has o r , i n d e e d , t o e x p l a i n c u l t u r e i t s e l f . There i s a problem i n d i s c u s s i n g the C o g n i t i v e Theory o f word a s s o c i a t i o n i n the framework o f second language l e a r n i n g , f o r we a r e not s u r e what the f u l l r o l e o f c o g n i t i o n i s i n the whole language l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s . I f c o g n i t i o n i s the cause o f the S-P s h i f t i n the f i r s t l a nguage, how does t h e same c o g n i t i o n a f f e c t word a s s o c i a t i o n i n the second language? Would i t not p r o d u c e a s i m i l a r word a s s o c i a t i o n i n the l e a r n e r ' s second language as i n h i s f i r s t l a n g u a g e ? The p a t t e r n o f s e c o n d 96 language word a s s o c i a t i o n may be t i e d t o l i n g u i s t i c a b i l i t y r a t h e r than t o c o g n i t i o n . Summary In summary, p r o v i d e d t h a t the L2 l e a r n e r i s o l d e r than the L I l e a r n e r , b o t h the A s s o c i a t i o n Theory and t h e R e v i s e d A s s o c i a t i o n Theory ( w i t h s e p a r a t e l e x i c a l memory) p r e d i c t t h a t t h e development of a s s o c i a t i o n s w i l l be the same, and Semantic F e a t u r e Theory and C o g n i t i v e Theory p r e d i c t t h a t the development i s d i f f e r e n t between L I and L2 l e a r n e r s . In the case o f Japanese s p e a k e r s l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language, however, the C o g n i t i v e Theory causes some t r o u b l e , f o r c o g n i t i v e m a t u r i t y does not produce p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n Japanese. Even though t h i s i s t h e c a s e f o r m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h s p e a k e r s , i t i s v e r y d o u b t f u l t h a t a c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g y would produce p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n t h e s e c o n d l a n g u a g e and not i n the f i r s t . T h i s l e a d s one t o q u e s t i o n the v a l i d i t y o f the h i g h e r v a l u e a s s i g n e d t o p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n t e r m s o f l i n g u i s t i c o r c o g n i t i v e a b i l i t i e s n o t o n l y f o r E n g l i s h b u t a l s o f o r o t h e r European languages. The f a c t t h a t some l a n g u a g e s do n o t show any i n c r e a s i n g tendency toward p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s i n g s h o u l d be enough t o l i m i t t he e v a l u a t i v e c o n n o t a t i o n a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the S-P dichotomy. However, t h e e x i s t e n c e o f n o n - p a r a d i g m a t i c languages does not n e c e s s a r i l y r e f u t e c o g n i t i v e t h e o r i e s , f o r t h e r e may be some o t h e r k i n d s o f p r i n c i p l e s which work as the r e s u l t o f m a t u r i t y and one dependent on language o r c u l t u r e (see Moran's 'dual c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y , ' p.92) That s p e c u l a t i o n , i n t u r n , r e t u r n s us t o the o l d arguments of the "Whorfian t h e o r y . " Does the language d e t e r m i n e t h i n k i n g o r i s the language m e r e l y a t o o l f o r t h i n k i n g ? I f some languages have t h e i r word a s s o c i a t i o n s t i e d w i t h c o g n i t i o n and o t h e r s w i t h s o m e t h i n g e l s e , and i f i n d e e d , " t h i n k i n g i s p a r t i a l l y a s s o c i a t i o n i s t i c , " i s the p r e f e r e n c e f o r s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g by the Japanese and Chinese e v i d e n c e o f t h e i r d i f f e r e n t t h i n k i n g s t y l e ? These q u e s t i o n s a re too l a r g e t o be a n s w e r e d h e r e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , i t i s v e r y i n t e r e s t i n g t o l o o k a t t h e word a s s o c i a t i o n d a t a o f b i l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n , h o p i n g t h a t t h e s e d a t a may h i n t a t some answers. C o n c l u s i o n The d i r e c t i o n o f the c u r r e n t s t u d y must now be a p p a r e n t . I f t he S-P s h i f t i n E n g l i s h can be o b s e r v e d among J a p a n e s e s p e a k i n g c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language, t h a t c o u l d mean t h a t the second language l e a r n i n g i s indeed s i m i l a r t o f i r s t language l e a r n i n g , i n the sense t h a t t h i s i s a c h a r a c -t e r i s t i c o f m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n which cannot be observed i n the f i r s t language of the l e a r n e r s . I n a d d i t i o n , t h i s s t u d y w i l l shed some l i g h t on a s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r i e s i n terms o f the S-P s h i f t and language l e a r n i n g i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner: The S-P s h i f t i n the second language o f Japanese c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h i s : 1) i n acco r d a n c e w i t h the A s s o c i a t i o n Theory, f o r mere exposure and the r e s u l t a n t l a n g u a g e d e v e l o p m e n t g i v e s r i s e t o p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y ; 2) i s i n agr e e m e n t w i t h t h e R e v i s e d A s s o c i a t i o n Theory, p r o v i d e d t h a t L2 l e x i c o n i s o r g a n i z e d i n d e p e n d e n t l y from L j _ . T h i s t h e o r y a l s o supposes t h a t the f i r s t s t a g e i s the mere c o l l e c t i o n of e x p e r i e n c e s ; 3) i n c o n c l u s i v e i n r e g a r d t o the Semantic F e a t u r e Theory, f o r i t i s not c l e a r whether the f e a t u r e l i s t i s u n i v e r s a l among languages and t h e r e b y t r a n s f e r a b l e from the f i r s t language t o the o t h e r ; 4) i n c o n c l u s i v e w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e C o g n i t i v e Theory, because the l e v e l o f c o g n i t i v e development among Japanese c h i l d r e n may be p a r a l l e l t o m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n , and because i t i s n o t c l e a r w h e t h e r l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g i n v o l v e s t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f a new c u l t u r a l l y d e t e r m i n e d c o g n i t i o n o r no t . CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY  PURPOSE OF THE STUDY T h i s study w i l l examine the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s : 1. G i v e n t h e e x i s t i n g s t u d i e s showing t h a t m o n o l i n g u a l Japanese and E n g l i s h s p e a k e r s s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r i n t h e i r responses to w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k s , how do b i l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n of E n g l i s h and Japanese behave i n each language and compare to monolingual c h i l d r e n of each language? 2 . Given the e x i s t i n g s t u d i e s i n d i c a t i n g E n g l i s h monolingual c h i l d r e n have a p e c u l i a r developmental tendency i n t h e i r w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s , and indeed, Japanese a d u l t l e a r n e r s of E n g l i s h show the s i m i l a r development as t h e i r E n g l i s h improves, how do Japanese c h i l d r e n with E n g l i s h as a second language behave developmentally? . Hypotheses to be tested The f o l l o w i n g f i v e hypotheses are to be t e s t e d , the f i r s t two being the main hypotheses and the r e s t secondary, although r e l a t e d . 1. Japanese c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language w i l l g i v e predominantly syntagmatic responses i n Japanese i n a w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k , r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r grade l e v e l , and t h e r e f o r e , t h e i r responses are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e o f m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n responding i n E n g l i s h . 100 2. Ja p a n e s e c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language a t h i g h e r grade l e v e l s w i l l g i v e more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n a w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k t h a n t h o s e a t l o w e r grade l e v e l s , t h u s showing a s i m i l a r d e v e l o p m e n t a l t r e n d t o E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n . 3. Japanese c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language w i l l show p r o p o r t i o n a l l y d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n each language i n a word-a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k . 4. Japanese c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h w i l l g i v e q u a l i t a t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t r e s p o n s e s t o e q u i v a l e n t s t i m u l i i n b o t h l a n g u a g e s . 5. Ja p a n e s e c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language w i l l g i v e fewer p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e i n E n g l i s h t h a n m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n o f the same grade l e v e l do i n a w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k . THE TEST INSTRUMENT A t o t a l o f t w e n t y - s e v e n s t i m u l i i n b o t h Japanese and E n g l i s h were used w i t h a l l s u b j e c t s . These twenty seven words were s e l e c t e d t o o v e r l a p as much as p o s s i b l e w i t h the l i s t s used p r e v i o u s l y by o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s e s p e c i a l l y t h a t of L e i c e s t e r (1981) (see Ta b l e I ) . The word s t i m u l i were s e l e c t e d from words t h a t appear i n one o r more o f the f o l l o w i n g l i s t s : 1. Kent Rosanoff (1910) 2. Deese (1960; 1962) 3. R u s s e l and J e n k i n s (1964) 4. F i l l e n b a u m and Jones l i s t (1965) 5. E n t w i s l e (1966) 7. Moran (1973) 8. L e i c e s t e r (1981) The f r e q u e n c y of the s t i m u l u s words was d e t e r m i n e d a c c o r d i n g to the T h o r d i k e - L o r g e ( 1 9 44) g e n e r a l and j u v e n i l e (G- and J . c o u n t s ) l i s t s . Because t h e r e were n i n e nouns, n i n e a d j e c t i v e s and n i n e v e r b s i n the l i s t , t h e r e a r e t h r e e o f e a c h i n t h e t h r e e f r e q u e n c y c a t e g o r i e s ( h i g h , medium and l o w ) . The s e l e c t i o n o f s t i m u l i was done s t r i c t l y from an E n g l i s h v i e w p o i n t , but c a r e was t a k e n t o assume t h a t each s t i m u l u s had a c l e a r e q u i v a l e n t word i n Japanese. T r a n s l a t i o n s were tho s e o f t h e a u t h o r , a n a t i v e speaker of Japanese and checked by a n o ther n a t i v e speaker t o ensure the a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s . The f r e q u e n c y o f J a p a n e s e e q u i v a l e n t s i n the Japanese language has been c o m p l e t e l y i g n o r e d , y e t the f a c t t h a t t h e E n g l i s h s t i m u l i were a l l words b a s i c t o everyday l i f e s h o u l d a l l o w us t o assume t h a t t h e i r e q u i v a l e n t s i n Japanese have a comparable f r e q u e n c y o f o c c u r e n c e . A s s i g n i n g a g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s t o an E n g l i s h word i s a d i f f i c u l t t a s k , f o r t h e r e i s so much f l e x i b i l i t y i n E n g l i s h usage. Except f o r a few words which were not ambiguous, the f o r m c l a s s was a s s i g n e d a c c o r d i n g t o i t s e n t r y i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s so t h a t comparisons of the d a t a c o u l d be e a s i l y made. 102 T h i s a m b i g u i t y o f word c l a s s does not o c c u r i n Japanese, f o r word e n d i n g u s u a l l y s i g n i f i e s i t s g r a m m a t i c a l s t a t u s . Thus a l l 27 words were t r a n s l a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s assignment f o r the E n g l i s h s t i m u l i . Subjects The s u b j e c t s were grade one, grade t h r e e and grade f i v e s t u d e n t s o f Japanese supplementary s c h o o l s i n V a n c o u v e r and S e a t t l e . These s c h o o l s have c l a s s e s e v e r y S a t u r d a y and t e a c h Japanese, A l g e b r a o r M a t h , and S o c i a l S t u d i e s i n o r d e r t o m a i n t a i n t h e c h i l d r e n ' s e d u c a t i o n a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y the same l e v e l as c h i l d r e n i n Japan. I n s t r u c t i o n i s g i v e n e n t i r e l y i n Japanese by Japanese n a t i v e s p e a k e r s . The c l a s s e s s t a r t e i t h e r a t 8:30 o r 9:00 and l a s t u n t i l 3:30 or 4:00. Teaching m a t e r i a l s a r e s u p p l i e d by the Japanese government. The d i f f e r e n c e s between the Vancouver s c h o o l and S e a t t l e s c h o o l a r e : 1. The S e a t t l e s c h o o l i s l a r g e r , h a v i n g a f u l l c l a s s f o r each grade from K i n d e r g a r t e n t o grade 12, w i t h two c l a s s e s f o r grade one: The Vancouver S c h o o l has s e p a r a t e c l a s s e s from grade one t o grade s i x o n l y . Above t h a t two grades a r e combined to make one c l a s s . 103 2. The S e a t t l e S c h o o l has two t e a c h e r s p e r c l a s s . Because of i t s s i z e , the S e a t t l e S c h o o l f o l l o w s the Japanese s c h o o l system more c l o s e l y . F o r example, t h e r e i s a t e a c h e r s ' m e e t i n g e v e r y morning, and t h e r e a r e many e x t r a c u r r i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s . C h i l d r e n c o m i n g t o t h e s e s c h o o l s a r e m o s t l y i n N o r t h America because t h e i r f a t h e r s have been p o s t e d here by t h e i r c o m p a n i e s . The l e n g t h o f s t a y i n N o r t h America v a r i e s from a few y e a r s t o t e n y e a r s o r more. These s c h o o l s , as a r u l e , do not a c c e p t immigrant c h i l d r e n . S i n c e t h e companies which have o v e r s e a s p o s t s a r e , g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , r e s p e c t e d companies, we can assume t h a t t h e s e c h i l d r e n come f r o m t y p i c a l J a p a n e s e m i d d l e c l a s s f a m i l i e s . T h e i r f a t h e r s a r e s u r e l y u n i v e r s i t y g r a d u a t e s and mothers a t l e a s t j u n i o r c o l l e g e g r a d u a t e s . These p a r e n t s a r e h i g h l y m o t i v a t e d i n e d u c a t i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n . These c h i l d r e n , upon a r r i v a l i n N o r t h A m e r i c a , e n r o l l i n r e g u l a r p u b l i c s c h o o l s and l e a r n E n g l i s h m o s t l y w i t h o u t ESL c l a s s e s , though some of them e n r o l l i n second language t r a i n i n g . R e g a r d i n g t h e E n g l i s h a b i l i t y of t h e s u b j e c t s , i t was d e c i d e d t o t a k e the grade l e v e l as an i n d i c a t o r o f E n g l i s h l e v e l . Grade l e v e l i n t h i s case means t h e grade i n which t h e s u b j e c t i s e n r o l l e d i n E n g l i s h c l a s s i n t h e N o r t h American s c h o o l . 104 TEST ADMINISTRATION 1) D i s c r e t e v s . C o n t i n u e d When o n l y one response i s e l i c i t e d by each s t i m u l u s i t i s c a l l e d d i s c r e t e a s s o c i a t i o n . When as many r e s p o n s e s as p o s s i b l e i n a s e t time a r e e l i c i t e d by r e p e a t e d p r e s e n t a t i o n o f each s t i m u l u s , t h i s i s c a l l e d c o n t i n u e d a s s o c i a t i o n . The r e s p o n s e s o b t a i n e d by t h e s e two methods have been found t o be q u i t e s i m i l a r (Cramer 1968) because f o r b o t h methods the response h i e r a r c h y and the k i n d s o f r e s p o n s e s t o the same s t i m u l i a re the same. In g e n e r a l , d i s c r e t e a s s o c i a t i o n p r o v i d e s l e s s d a t a than c o n t i n u e d a s s o c i a t i o n . Yet the d i s c r e t e a s s o c i a t i o n method was employed i n the p r e s e n t s t u d y f o r the f o l l o w i n g two r e a s o n s : 1. Because the sample p o p u l a t i o n i s young, i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o ensure t h a t a l l t h e r e s p o n s e s o f c o n t i n u e d a s s o c i a t i o n a r e from the o r i g i n a l s t i m u l u s , and not from the p r e v i o u s r e s p o n s e . 2. Because o f the l i m i t e d time a l l o w e d t o t e s t the s u b j e c t s and the n e c e s s i t y t o c o l l e c t d a t a f o r a b a l a n c e d s t i m u l i l i s t , d i s c r e t e a s s o c i a t i o n was c o n s i d e r e d t o ta k e l e s s time f o r the same s t i m u l i l i s t t h an c o n t i n u e d a s s o c i a -t i o n . 2) W r i t t e n v s . A u r a l The e f f e c t on young s u b j e c t s o f s t i m u l u s p r e s e n t a t i o n and response e l i c i t a t i o n modes has been r e p o r t e d i n s e v e r a l s t u d i e s , a l t h o u g h t h e degree of i n f l u e n c e v a r i e s from s l i g h t t o sub-s t a n t i a l . For i n s t a n c e , Palermo (1964) found t h a t an o r a l -i n d i v i d u a l method i n c r e a s e d the f r e q u e n c y o f P r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s and p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s among grade f o u r c h i l d r e n . E n t w i s l e 105 and F o r s y t h ( 1 9 6 3 ) a l s o f o u n d t h a t t h e t h r e e most common r e s p o n s e s were g i v e n s i g n i f i c a n t l y more f r e q u e n t l y i n an i n d i v i d u a l - o r a l method. In t e s t i n g a l a r g e number of s u b j e c t s , however, the w r i t t e n mode p r o v i d e s the e a s i e s t method f o r d a t a c o l l e c t i o n . T h e r e f o r e , the n o r m a t i v e d a t a i n t h e p a s t ( e x c e p t f o r some s t u d i e s c o n c e r n i n g c h i l d r e n ) were c o l l e c t e d by w r i t t e n method. In t h i s s t u d y , th e method was somewhat of a compromise, and an o r a l p r e s e n t a t i o n and w r i t t e n response were b o t h employed. A u r a l p r e s e n t a t i o n was chosen because a l l t h e s u b j e c t s were a c q u i r i n g E n g l i s h n a t u r a l l y , t h e r e f o r e , t hey l e a r n e d v o c a b u l a r y t h r o u g h h e a r i n g r a t h e r than r e a d i n g . I n a d d i t i o n , many s t u d i e s o f c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n employ a u r a l p r e s e n t a t i o n . On t h e o t h e r hand, w r i t t e n response was employed because of i t s ease of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . O r a l response method r e q u i r e s i n d i v i d u a l t e s t i n g and t h i s was d e c i d e d t o be t o o g r e a t a t a s k t o h a n d l e . I n o r d e r t o compensate f o r t h e d i f f i c u l t y c h i l d r e n might have i n w r i t i n g t h e i r r e s p o n s e s , they were g i v e n t h e i n s t r u c t i o n t h a t t hey c o u l d w r i t e a word down by s o u n d , r e g a r d l e s s o f s p e l l i n g . G r a de one c h i l d r e n were a l l o w e d t o use KATAKANA, the Japanese p h o n e t i c system e x c l u s i v e l y used t o d e s c r i b e f o r e i g n words and o t h e r n a t u r a l and a r t i f i c i a l sounds. 106 D) PROCEDURE The s t i m u l u s words were p r e s e n t e d randomly t o s u b j e c t s i n each s e s s i o n . The E n g l i s h t e s t and t h e J a p a n e s e t e s t were s p a c e d w i t h a t l e a s t a week between. At each s e s s i o n , t h e f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n was r e p e a t e d t w i c e . We a r e g o i n g t o p l a y a l i t t l e word game today. When we hear a word, o f t e n we have some o t h e r word coming t o o u r mi n d . F o r e x a m p l e , w i t h t h e word r e d , I t h i n k o f a p p l e . My mother t h i n k s o f w h i t e . W r i t e down t h e f i r s t word which comes t o your mind when you h ear a word. When you do not know the s p e l l i n g , w r i t e i t as you t h i n k o r as i t sounds. T h i s i s not a t e s t so i t i s a l l r i g h t t o w r i t e a n y t h i n g i n any way. I j u s t want t o see what k i n d o f words you would get f o r t h e words I'm g o i n g t o g i v e you. Make s u r e t o do i t q u i c k l y f o r I am g o i n g t o g i v e you one word a f t e r t h e o t h e r v e r y f a s t . When you hear t h e next word b e f o r e f i n i s h i n g w r i t i n g a word, s t o p t h e r e and i m m e d i a t e l y do the next word. The answer sheet was p r e p a r e d by t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r w i t h 27 numbered spaces f o r r e s p o n s e s . The i n f o r m a t i o n t o be f i l l e d i n was: 1) Name 2) Age 3) Grade i n N o r t h American S c h o o l f o r E n g l i s h 4) Month and Year o f moving t o N o r t h A m e r i c a When a word l i s t was p r e s e n t e d , 15 seconds were g i v e n f o r each word. Each word was r e p e a t e d t w i c e t o ensure t h e under-s t a n d i n g . A t t h e V a n c o u v e r S c h o o l , the experiment was done a f t e r r e g u l a r s c h o o l hours and t h e r e f o r e , i t took s i x weeks t o t e s t t h r e e g r a d e s . A t t h e S e a t t l e s c h o o l , however, t h e s h o r t r e c e s s 107 between c l a s s e s o r a b i t o f c l a s s t i m e was g i v e n f o r t h e ex p e r i m e n t . Thus a l l t h e grades were t e s t e d i n two weeks. S i n c e t h e experiment was done over s e v e r a l weeks, t h e r e were s t u d e n t s who t o o k p a r t i n o n l y one p a r t o f t h e ex p e r i m e n t . The Vancouver s c h o o l had 18 s t u d e n t s i n grade one, 18 i n grade t h r e e and 20 i n g r a d e f i v e . The S e a t t l e s c h o o l had 34 i n grade one, 39 i n grade t h r e e and 30 i n grade f i v e . F o r t h e a n a l y s i s , t h e s u b j e c t p o o l o f 30 s t u d e n t s i n each grade was s e l e c t e d f r o m t h e c o m b i n e d s u b j e c t p o o l o f Vancouver and S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s . (See A n a l y s i s p r o c e d u r e ) The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s u b j e c t s was as f o l l o w s : S e a t t l e Vancouver T o t a l grade one 14 16 30 grade t h r e e 22 8 30 grade f i v e 13 17 30 E. CLASSIFICATION OF RESPONSES I . S-P Dichotomy There have been s e v e r a l d e f i n i t i o n s o f b o t h p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . One of them i s t o use gr a m m a t i c a l form c l a s s as t h e d e t e r m i n a n t o f c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . I f a response b e l o n g s t o the same form c l a s s as a s t i m u l u s , i t i s c a l l e d a p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e , and i f a response b e l o n g s t o a d i f f e r e n t form c l a s s , i t i s c a l l e d a s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e . Many e a r l y r e s e a r c h e r s s i m p l y f o l l o w e d t h i s r u l e . S i n c e E n g l i s h i s such 108 a f l e x i b l e language t h a t words can be u s e d as v a r i o u s f o r m c l a s s e s w i t h o u t c h a n g i n g t h e form, t h e r e remains a q u e s t i o n of how t r u t h f u l t h e assignment of f o r m c l a s s t o e a c h r e s p o n s e w i l l be. A s u b j e c t may not i n t e n d a response t o be i n any p a r t i c u l a r g r a m m a t i c a l c l a s s a t a l l . A n other d e f i n i t i o n comes from J e n k i n s (1954). A c c o r d i n g t o him, a p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e must be " s u b s t i t u t a b l e i n i d e n t i c a l frame" w i t h t h e s t i m u l u s , and s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s and t h e i r s t i m u l i must " f o l l o w one a n o t h e r i n u t t e r a n c e s . " Deese (1965) f o l l o w e d J e n k i n s ' l i n e by c o n s t r u c t i n g an e x p e r i -m e ntal frame f o r c l a s s i f y i n g p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . E n t w i s l e e t a l ( 1 9 6 4 ) , on the o t h e r hand, emphasized " f o l l o w one a n o t h e r " i n c l a s s i f y i n g s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n s e s . T h e i r c o n c e r n r e g a r d i n g s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s j u s t i f i e d by s a y i n g the c r i t e r i o n "the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n problem i s i m p o r t a n t c h i e f l y because a phase of s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n d i n g s u g g e s t s much more a b o u t t h e n a t u r a l p r o c e s s o f language a c q u i s i t i o n than a phase o f h e t e r o g e o u s r e s p o n d i n g " ( 1 9 6 4 , p . 2 1 ) . Thus " f o l l o w i n g each o t h e r " was i m p o r t a n t t o them b e c a u s e o f t h e i r a s s u m p t i o n s a b o u t word a s s o c i a t i o n and language a c q u i s i t i o n . E r v i n (1961) employed a method somewhat i n b etween t h e two above i n h e r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of r e s p o n s e s . She s e t the f o l l o w i n g two c o n d i t i o n s f o r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . 1. To o c c u r i n the same gr a m m a t i c a l c l a s s 109 2. Not t o o c c u r i n sequence s e p a r a t e d by a d e t e r m i n a n t i n o r d i n a r y speech. W i t h t h e s e two r u l e s , she s u c c e s s f u l l y e l i m i n a t e d such s t i m u l u s - r e s p o n s e p a i r s as t a b l e - c l o t h from t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c c a t e g o r y . S i n c e t h e purpose ( i n t h i s s t u d y ) o f a n a l y s i n g t h e d a t a a c c o r d i n g t o the S-P c r i t e r i o n was t o see whether the i n c r e a s e of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g can be found o r n o t , t h e gr a m m a t i c a l approach o f E r v i n ' s method was c o n s i d e r e d t o be s u f f i c i e n t . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s were not c l a s s i f i e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e ' f o l l o w one a n o t h e r ' c r i t e r i o n . Any response b e l o n g i n g t o a d i f f e r e n t form c l a s s than a s t i m u l u s was c l a s s i f i e d as a s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . II. Consideration in Classification C l a s s i f i c a t i o n was, i n most c a s e s , f a i r l y s t r a i g h t - f o r w a r d . The a u t h o r d i d the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n a l o n e and had i t checked by n a t i v e s p e a k e r s o f each language. When t h e r e were d i s a g r e e m e n t s as t o t h e i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g o f a r e s p o n s e t h e s u b j e c t was c o n s u l t e d . T h i s was c o n s i d e r e d n e c e s s a r y because t h e s u b j e c t s were young and t h e r e f o r e , t h e i r usage and a s s o c i a t e d meanings might be d i f f e r e n t from a d u l t s ' . There was a q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g c o l o r terms b o t h i n Japanese and E n g l i s h . When r e d — a p p l e i s t h e p a i r , t h e r e i s no q u e s t i o n 110 o f i t s s y n t a g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p . However, t h e f a c t t h a t t h e J a p a n e s e d a t a c o n t a i n e d both c o l o r a d j e c t i v e and c o l o r -noun r e s p o n s e s t o a noun s t i m u l u s r a i s e d some doubt as t o the v a l i d i t y of c l a s s i f y i n g c o l o r terms as a d j e c t i v e s i n a l l c a s e s . ex. S a l t ' S h i o ' — S h i r o ( w h i t e as a noun) S a l t ' S h i o ' — S h i r o i ( w h i t e as an a d j e c t i v e ) The q u e s t i o n i s whether the c h i l d r e n who a r e as young as grade one a r e c o n s c i o u s l y h a n d l i n g the d i s t i n c t i o n between ' s h i r o ' and ' s h i r o i ' . I f we a r e t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e between t h e s e two J a p a n e s e r e s p o n s e s s t r i c t l y i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h g r a m m a t i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n , t h e problem i s t h a t ' s h i r o ' (as opposed t o ' s h i r o i ' ) i s c l a s s i f i e d as a p a r a d a g m a t i c response but i t does not meet any of t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s s u c h as c o o r d i n a t e o r s u p e r o r d i n a t e . T h i s i s what Moran terms as a p e r c e p t u a l r e f e r e n t , r a t h e r than a p a r a d i g m a t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p . ' S h i o ' and ' s h i r o ' a r e o f more l i k e a p r e d i c a t i v e r e l a t i o n e x p r e s s e d i n t h e s e n t e n c e ' s h i o wa s h i r o , ' o r ' s a l t i s w h i t e . ' I n a d d i t i o n , o b v i o u s l y , ' s h i r o ' i s t h e r o o t o f ' s h i r o i ' and t h e r e f o r e , more p r i m i t i v e . I f we assume ' s h i r o ' comes b e f o r e ' s h i r o i ' , i t c o u l d mean t h a t a p a r a d i g m a t i c response come b e f o r e a s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e . C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t g r a m m a t i c a l concordance i s not i n t e n d e d by t h e s u b j e c t s i n t h i s c a s e , and t h a t t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e S-P dichotomy a r e based on t h e i r s u b c l a s s e s , ' s h i r o ' and ' s h i r o i ' were t r e a t e d t o g e t h e r as s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . I l l F. P r e p a r a t i o n of Data f o r A n a l y s i s The a n a l y s i s was done i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner. 1. Responses were c l a s s i f i e d i n t o f o u r groups: p a r a d i g m a t i c , s y n t a g m a t i c , response f a i l u r e s , t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s . R e s p o n s e f a i l u r e s i n c l u d e d no r e s p o n s e , u n i n t e l l i g i b l e r e s p o n s e , r e p e t i t i o n of s t i m u l u s , s e n t e n c e r e s p o n s e , c l a n g r e s p o n s e s , e t c . . T r a n s l a t i o n Responses were the r e s p o n s e s g i v e n i n E n g l i s h f o r a Japanese s t i m u l u s and i n Japanese f o r an E n g l i s h s t i m u l u s . 2. T hose s u b j e c t s who had more than 20% response f a i l u r e s i n a t l e a s t one o f t h e Japanese o r E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t s were e l i m i n a t e d . 3. The p e r c e n t a g e s of p a r a d i g m a t i c , s y n t a g m a t i c and t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s were c a l c u l a t e d so t h a t t h e t o t a l o f t h e s e t h r e e would be 100% f o r each s u b j e c t . 4. T hose s u b j e c t s e n r o l l e d i n E n g l i s h c l a s s e s below t h e i r Japnese grade l e v e l were e l i m i n a t e d . 5. Those s u b j e c t s who had been i n N o r t h America l e s s than a y e a r were e l i m i n a t e d and the s u b j e c t p o o l o f 30 i n each grade was made randomly from th e r e m a i n i n g s u b j e c t s . The p e r c e n t a g e d a t a of t h e above s u b j e c t s were the s c o r e s s u b m i t t e d f o r a n a l y s i s . 5. Those s u b j e c t s who had been i n N o r t h America l e s s than a year were e l i m i n a t e d and the s u b j e c t p o o l o f 30 i n each grade was made randomly from the r e m a i n i n g s u b j e c t s . The p e r c e n t a g e d a t a of the above s u b j e c t s were the s c o r e s s u b m i t t e d f o r a n a l y s i s . 113 TABLE I WORD LIST a b c WORDS GENERAL J-COUNT FREQUENCY OVERALL 1. man AA M H F J , M, D, KR, RJ, P J , E, BB L 2. hand AA M H F J , D, KR, RJ, P J E EV L 3. t a b l e AA M H M KR RJ P J E BB EV L 4. c h a i r AA 700 M D KR RJ P J E L 5. s a l t AA 534 M M KR RJ P J E L 6. music AA 660 M KR R J P J E L 7. b u t t e r f l y 22 138 L M, D, KR, RJ, P J , E L 8. ne e d l e 34 153 L M, KR, RJ, P J , E, BB L 9. i n s e c t AA 144 L D E 10. h i g h AA M H F J , M, D, KR, RJ, P J , E L 11. b l a c k AA M H M, D, KR, RJ, P J , E, L 12. dark AA ? H K R, BB R J P J F J E 13. y e l l o w AA 526* M M, D, KR, RJ, P J , E, L 14. sad A 500 M D P J 15. b r i g h t AA 555 M M, K R, RJ, P J , E 16. sour A 450 L E L M 17. rough A 345 L 18. b i t t e r A 240 L 19. run i n t r . AA M H 20. s i t i n t r . AA M* H 21. b e g i n t r . AA M* H 22. e n j o y t r . AA 566* M 23. examine t r . A 233 L 24. s l i p i n t . A 410* L 25. l i s t e n i n t . A 700 M 26. s t e a l t r . A 246* L 27. f o r g e t t r , i n t r . AA 700* M 114 M, D, KR, RJ, P J , E L M KR RJ P J E L D E L D P J E L E L E P J E P J PJ E P J PJ P J CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STIMULUS WORDS - NOTES 115 a. A = 50-99 o c c u r e n c e s / m i l l i o n words AA = 100 o r more G - count i s the o v e r a l l count based on T h r o n d i k e , L o r g e , J u v e n i l e , and Semantic l i s t s b. M = more than 1000 i n s t a n c e s / m i l l i o n words (words found i n 120 J u v e n i l e Books) c. Adapted from E n t w i s l e (1966) L e i c e s t e r (1981) Among words l i s t e d i n J - c o u n t s High 1000 o r more o c c u r e n c e s per m i l l i o n words Median 500 - 999 Low L e s s than 500 F J F i l l e n b a u m and Jones (1964) M Moran (1973) D Deese (1960, 1962) K R Kent R o s a n o l f (1919) R J R u s s e l l and J e n k i n s (1954) P J Parelmo and J e n k i n s (1964) E E n t w i s l e (1966) B B Brown and Berko (1960) EV E r v i n (1961) CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYSIS AND RESULTS The r e s p o n s e s o f e a c h s u b j e c t were c l a s s i f i e d i n t o s i x c a t e g o r i e s (Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c , Japanese s y n t a g m a t i c , Japanese t r a n s l a t i o n , E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c , E n g l i s h s y n t a g m a t i c , and E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s ) , and the pe r c e n t a g e o f each c a t e g o r y was c a l c u l a t e d a g a i n s t the t o t a l number o f r e s p o n s e s o f the same language, making the t o t a l p e r c e n t a g e f o r each s u b j e c t one hundred. The p e r c e n t a g e s c o r e s were e n t e r e d i n t o a c o m p u t e r f i l e a l o n g w i t h S u b j e c t I.D., Grade, Length o f Stay i n N o r t h A m e r i c a , and whether the s u b j e c t a t t e n d e d s c h o o l i n V a n c o u v e r o r S e a t t l e . In a l l , n i n e t y e n t r i e s were made as the d a t a base f o r t h i s s t u d y . The mean pe r c e n t a g e f o r each c e l l ( s i x r e s p o n s e c a t e g o r i e s x t h r e e grade l e v e l s ) was c a l c u l a t e d and means a r e d i s p l a y e d i n Ta b l e I I . A n a l y s i s of V a r i a n c e (SPSS X ANOVA) u s i n g a random e f f e c t s model was employed i r f * the a n a l y s e s d e s c r i b e d below. A one way a n a l y s i s was performed on each response v a r i a b l e w i t h grade l e v e l as the dependent v a r i a b l e i n o r d e r t o see the r e l a t i o n s h i p between grade l e v e l s (assumed t o p a r a l l e l E n g l i s h a b i l i t y i n t h e c a s e o f E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s ) and e a c h r e s p o n s e c a t e g o r y . As T a b l e I I shows, 60% of the Japanese r e s p o n s e s were s y n t a g -m a t i c r e g a r d l e s s o f g r a d e l e v e l . E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s , on t h e o t h e r hand, seemed t o behave i r r e g u l a r l y w i t h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g d e c r e a s i n g as t h e grade advanced, and s y n t a g m a t i c and t r a n s l a t i o n TABLE II MEAN OF EACH CELL TOTAL POPULATION = 90 GRADE 1 3 5 JAPANESE PARADIGMATIC 38.43 30.83 33.30 RESPONSE (30) (30) (30) JAPANESE SYNTAGMATIC 60.10 68.67 62.47 RESPONSE (30) (30) (30) JAPANESE TRANSLATION 1.17 0.50 4.53 (30) (30) (30) ENGLISH PARADIGMATIC 51.60 43.03 38.67 RESPONSE (30) (30) (30) ENGLISH SYNTAGMATIC 33.50 53.73 39.33 RESPONSE (30) (30) (30) ENGLISH TRANSLATION 14.70 3.30 22.00 RESPONSE (30) (30) (30) 118 r e s p o n s e s b e h a v i n g i n v e r s e l y , w i t h grade t h r e e s u b j e c t s r e s p o n d i n g q u i t e h i g h i n s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s and v e r y low i n t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s . T r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese were r a r e y e t d i d appear. T a b l e I I I v e r i f i e s what i s i n d i c a t e d i n T a b l e I I : There i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between grade l e v e l s i n J a p a n e s e r e s p o n s e s , b u t t h e r e i s a h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t g r a d e d i f f e r e n c e (F=0.002, p<0.01) i n E n g l i s h s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s and a l s o a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s (F=0.042, p<0.05). E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s d i d not r e a c h any s i g n i f i c a n t l e v e l (F=0.140), thus i t s d e c r e a s i n g t r e n d a c c o r d i n g t o grade l e v e l was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y p r o v e n . I t was d e c i d e d t o r e p e a t t h e a n a l y s i s w i t h t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s o f each language r e c l a s s i f i e d t o the a p p r o p r i a t e p a r a -d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c c a t e g o r i e s , f o r the p r e v i o u s a n a l y s i s ( T a b l e I I I ) had not y i e l d e d any s i g n i f i c a n t grade e f f e c t i n E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . A r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e number o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s were s u s p e c t e d t o have d i s t o r t e d the grade e f f e c t on E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , which would have shown up o t h e r w i s e . The r e c l a s s i f i e d t r a n s l a t i o n r e p o n s e s were t h e n added t o t h e o r i g i n a l p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s so t h a t the t o t a l p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e new p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s would be one hundred i n each language. These r e c l a s s i f i e d r e s p o n s e s w i l l be c a l l e d 'comprehensive r e s p o n s e s , * and a l s o added t o the d a t a base. A n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e was performed, and the r e s u l t s 119 TABLE I I I JAPANESE PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES WITH GRADES SOURCE OF VARIATION MAIN EFFECTS GRADE EXPLAINED RESIDUAL TOTAL SUM OF SQUARES 901.855 901.855 901.855 38591.657 39493.641 DF 2 2 2 2 89 MEAN SQUARE SIGNIF OF F 450.978 1.017 0.366 450.978 1.017 0.366 450.978 1.017 0.366 443.583 443.749 JAPANESE SYNTAGMATIC RESPONSES WITH GRADES SOURCE OF VARIATION MAIN EFFECTS GRADE EXPLAINED RESIDUAL TOTAL SUM OF SQUARES 1174.289 1174.289 1174.289 43716.399 44890.988 DF 2 2 2 87 89 MEAN SQUARE SIGNIF OF F 587.144 1.168 0.316 587.144 1.168 0.316 587.144 1.168 0.316 502.491 504.393 JAPANESE TRANSLATION RESPONSES WITH GRADES SOURCE OF VARIATION MAIN EFFECTS GRADE EXPLAINED RESIDUAL TOTAL SUM OF SQUARES 280.467 280.467 280.467 10955.109 11235.578 DF 2 2 2 87 89 MEAN SQUARE SIGNIF OF F 140.233 1.114 0.333 140.233 1.114 0.333 140.233 1.114 0.333 125.921 136.242 90 CASES WERE PROCESSED 120 TABLE I I I ENGLISH PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES WITH GRADES SOURCE OF VARIATION SUM OF SQUARES DF MEAN SQUARE F SIGNIF OF F MAIN EFFECTS GRADE 2597.267 2597.267 2 2 1298.633 1298.633 2. 2. 009 009 0.140 0.140 EXPLAINED 2597.267 2 1298.633 2. 009 0.140 RESIDUAL 56226.688 87 646.284 TOTAL 58823.957 89 660.943 ENGLISH SYNTAGMATIC RESPONSES WITH GRADES SOURCE OF VARIATION SUM OF SQUARES DF MEAN SQUARE F SIGNIF OF F MAIN EFFECTS GRADE 6507.754 6507.754 2 2 3253.877 3253.877 6. 6. 647 647 0.002 0.002 EXPLAINED 6507.754 2 3253.877 6. 647 0.002 RESIDUAL 42591.871 87 489.562 TOTAL 49099.625 89 551.681 ENGLISH TRANSLATION RESPONSES WITH GRADES SIGNIF SOURCE OF VARIATION SUM OF SQUARES DF MEAN SQUARE F OF F MAIN EFFECTS GRADE 5329.398 5329.398 2 2 2664.699 2664.699 3. 3. 288 288 0.042 0.042 EXPLAINED 5329.398 2 2664.699 3. 288 0.042 RESIDUAL 70502.250 87 810.371 TOTAL 75831.688 89 852.041 90 CASES WERE PROCESSED 121 a r e d i s p l a y e d i n T a b l e I V . T h i s a n a l y s i s r e v e a l e d t h a t t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n t o s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c c a t e g o r i e s d i d not a l t e r t h e r e s u l t s o f the Japanese r e s p o n s e s a t a l l , which was ex p e c t e d c o n s i d e r i n g the s m a l l number of t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese. Among E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s , h o w e v e r , b o t h p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g showed a s i g n i f i c a n t grade e f f e c t (F=0.004, p<0.01). T h i s e f f e c t seemed t o be caused by the h i g h p e r c e n t a g e of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g by grade one s t u d e n t s , f o r t h e mean p e r c e n t a g e s of 44.40% f o r grade t h r e e and 47.27% f o r grade f i v e s u b j e c t s do not d i f f e r s i g n i -f i c a n t l y . Why grade one s u b j e c t s , who a r e s u p p o s e d t o be t h e l o w e s t on t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c s c a l e , o u t p e r f o r m e d o l d e r s u b j e c t s remains a q u e s t i o n . S i n c e grade l e v e l d i d not show the ex p e c t e d e f f e c t on E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a t a l l , l e n g t h o f s t a y i n N o r t h A m e r i c a was t a k e n as a dependent v a r i a b l e i n s t e a d of grade l e v e l and the same a n a l y s e s w i t h b o t h c o m p r e h e n s i v e and o r i g i n a l r e s p o n s e c a t e g o r i e s as independent v a r i a b l e s were performed i n o r d e r to t e s t whether t h e l e n g t h o f s t a y v a r i a b l e would r e f l e c t t he s u b j e c t s ' E n g l i s h a b i l i t y b e t t e r t h a n t h e g r a d e l e v e l . No s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p was found between r e s p o n s e s and the l e n g t h of s t a y . T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e s u l t s a r e not p r e s e n t e d h e r e . P r o v i d e d t h a t E n g l i s h a b i l i t y d i d c o r r e l a t e w i t h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n E n g l i s h , and the l e n g t h o f s t a y i n N o r t h America d i d not show any s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n TABLE IV COMPREHENSIVE JAPANESE PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES WITH GRADE Analysis of Variance SOURCE D.F. SUM OF SQUARES MEAN SQUARES F RATIO F PROB. BETWEEN GROUPS WITHIN GROUPS TOTAL 2 87 89 1130.4222 37657.3667 38787.7889 565.2111 432.8433 1.3958 .2762 GROUP COUNT MEAN STANDARD STANDARD DEVIATION ERROR MINIMUM MAXIMUM 95 PCT CONF INT FOR MEAN GRP 1 GRP 3 GRP 5 30 30 30 40.0000 31.5667 34.0000 18.8607 18.1729 24.7498 3.4435 3.3179 4.5198 5.0000 9.0000 4.0000 78.0000 85.0000 84.0000 32.9573 TO 24.7808 TO 24.7583 TO 47.0427 38.3525 43.2417 TOTAL 90 35.1889 20.8763 2.2006 4.0000 85.0000 30.8164 TO 39.5613 COMPREHENSIVE JAPANESE SYNTAGMATIC RESPONSES WITH GRADE Analysis of Variance SOURCE D.F. SUM OF SQUARES MEAN SQUARES F RATIO F PROB. BETWEEN GROUPS WITHIN GROUPS TOTAL 2 87 89 1208.8222 37325.9000 38534.7222 604.4111 429.0333 1.4088 0.2500 GROUP COUNT MEAN STANDARD STANDARD DEVIATION ERROR MINIMUM MAXIMUM 95 PCT CONF INT FOR MEAN GRP 1 GRP 3 GRP 5 30 30 30 60.0667 68.7667 66.3333 18.8825 17.7583 24.8031 3.4474 3.2422 4.5284 22.0000 15.0000 16.0000 95.0000 91.0000 96.0000 53.0158 TO 62.1356 TO 57.0717 TO 67.1175 75.3977 75.5950 TOTAL 90 65.0556 20.8080 2.1934 15.0000 96.0000 60.6974 TO 69.4137 TABLE IV (Continued) COMPREHENSIVE ENGLISH PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES WITH GRADE Analysis of Variance SOURCE D.F. SUM OF SQUARES MEAN SQUARES F RATIO F PROB. BETWEEN GROUPS WITHIN GROUPS TOTAL 2 87 89 4969.6889 37010.2667 41979.9556 2484.8444 425.4054 5.8411 0.0042 GROUP COUNT MEAN STANDARD STANDARD DEVIATION ERROR MINIMUM MAXIMUM 95 PCT CONF INT FOR MEAN GRP 1 GRP 3 GRP 5 30 30 30 61.4000 44.4000 47.2667 20.8783 14.9910 24.8109 3.8118 2.7370 4.5298 8.0000 15.0000 8.0000 94.0000 80.0000 84.0000 53.6.39 TO 38.8023 TO 38.0021 TO 69.1961 49.9977 56.5312 TOTAL 90 51.0222 21.7183 2.2893 8.0000 94.0000 46.4734 TO 55.5710 COMPREHENSIVE ENGLISH SYNTAGMATIC REPONSES WITH GRADE Analysis of Variance SOURCE D.F. SUM OF SQUARES MEAN SQUARES F RATIO F PROB. BETWEEN GROUPS WITHIN GROUPS TOTAL 2 87 89 4969.6889 37010.2667 41979.9556 2484.8444 425.4054 5.8411 0.0042 GROUP COUNT MEAN STANDARD STANDARD DEVIATION ERROR MINIMUM MAXIMUM 95 PCT CONF INT FOR MEAN GRP 1 GRP 3 GRP 5 30 30 30 38.6000 55.6000 52.7333 20.8783 14.9910 24.8109 3.8118 2.7370 4.5298 6.0000 20.0000 16.0000 92.0000 85.0000 92.0000 30.8039 TO 46.3961 50.0023 TO 61.1977 43.4688 TO 61.9979 TOTAL 90 48.9778 21.7183 2.2893 6.0000 92.0000 44.4290 TO 53.5266 124 E n g l i s h , t h e r e i s a p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t E n g l i s h a b i l i t y d i d not i m p r o v e i n c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h the l e n g t h of exposure t o E n g l i s h , but reached some p l a t e a u a t a c e r t a i n p o i n t . C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t t h e s e s u b j e c t s have a c o g n i t i v e l i m i t a t i o n a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r age, t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y seems q u i t e p l a u s i b l e . Thus, the c u t - o f f p o i n t o f t h r e e y e a r s and f o u r y e a r s were chosen, based on the f a c t t h a t the Japanese businessman u s u a l l y r e c e i v e t h r e e y e ar p o s t i n g s . I f t h e y s t a y l o n g e r , the p o s t i n g i s not temporary any more, and the f a m i l y i s f o r c e d t o commit the m s e l v e s more t o the new l i f e . T h i s c a n be e x e m p l i f i e d by the g e n e r a l b e l i e f i n the Japanese community t h a t c h i l d r e n s t a y i n g here more than t h r e e y e a r s w i l l h ave a v e r y d i f f i c u l t t i me g o i n g back i n t o the Japanese s c h o o l system d e s p i t e the Japanese s c h o o l i n g g i v e n h e r e . They a r e o f t e n e n r o l l e d i n a s c h o o l e s p e c i a l l y d e s i g n e d f o r those ' r e t u r n i n g s t u d e n t s . ' Thus the s u b j e c t s were d i v i d e d i n t o two groups, t h o s e who had been i n N o r t h America f o r t h r e e y e a r s o r l e s s and those who had been here f o r f o u r y e a r s o r more. The c o m p r e h e n s i v e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese and E n g l i s h were used as i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s and t h e l e n g t h o f s t a y as a dependent v a r i a b l e . The grade v a r i a b l e was a l s o c o n -s i d e r e d . An a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e was performed, and t h e r e s u l t s a r e t a b u l a t e d i n T a b l e V ( c e l l means) and Va r e s p e c t i v e l y . The comparison of c e l l means i n Table V shows a d e c r e a s i n g t e n d e n c y t o use p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s as the grade advances r e g a r d l e s s o f language among those who had been i n N o r t h America 125 f o r t h r e e y e a r s o r l e s s , t h o u g h t h o s e who have been i n N o r t h America f o r f o u r y e a r s o r more do not show such an o r d e r l y t r e n d . Grade t h r e e s u b j e c t s performed the p o o r e s t i n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s -ponding . When the language d i f f e r e n c e i s i g n o r e d , t h e r e a r e s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t s f o r t h e l e n g t h o f s t a y and t h e grade on p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g (p<0.05). However, the l e n g t h o f s t a y appears t o have the e x p e c t e d e f f e c t o n l y among g r a d e f i v e s u b j e c t s , s h o w i n g i n c r e a s i n g p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n E n g l i s h among those who have been here f o r f o u r y e a r s o r more. The p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of E n g l i s h and Japanese d i f f e r s t a t i s t i c a l l y a t p=0.000 ( T a b l e V a ) . S i n c e the s u b j e c t s came from two s c h o o l s which a r e so f a r a p a r t as V a n c o u v e r and S e a t t l e , i t was s u s p e c t e d t h a t s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e might be a t work. The skewed d i s t r i b u t i o n of S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s among grade t h r e e , i n p a r t i c u l a r , caused some c o n c e r n , f o r t h e grade t h r e e s u b j e c t s had seemed t o behave d i f f e r e n t l y i n t h e a n a l y s e s made t o t h i s p o i n t . In o r d e r t o i n v e s t i g a t e the problem, a M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i o n was performed on E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s w i t h s c h o o l v a r i a b l e as the f i r s t , and grade the second v a r i a b l e . The r e s u l t s a r e d i s p l a y e d i n T a b l e V I . The same a n a l y s i s was a l s o performed on Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n o r d e r t o see whether the s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e appears i n the Japanese language o r n o t . The r e s u l t s a r e shown i n Table V I I . Table VI shows t h a t the s c h o o l v a r i a b l e was h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t (t=0.000, p=0.000) as i s grade (t=0.0161, p<0.05). Thus E n g l i s h TABUS V COMPREHENSIVE PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES OF ENGLISH AND JAPANESE CELL MEANS YRS GRADE MEANS JAPANESE 1 ENGLISH 2 MARGINAL COUNT STANDARD DEVIATIONS YRS GRADE JAPANESE ENGLISH LE3 1 GRADE! 35.85714 63.28571 49.57143 21 LE3 GRADE3 29.33333 49.33333 39.33333 6 FOR PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES LE3 LE3 GRADE1 GRADE3 PARA 1 2 19.41465 16.67076 Note 1. 15.55206 13.72103 LE3 GRADE5 23.78571 35.33333 29.75000 14 LE3 GRADE5 17.71214 21.16858 GE4 GRADE1 49.66667 57.00000 53.33333 9 GE4 GRADE1 14.03567 29.22756 GE4 GRADE3 31.16000 36.60000 52.73333 25 GE4 GRADE3 19.24552 16.01426 LE3 = Less than or equal to 3 years GE4 = greater than or equal to 4 years GE4 GRADE5 45.26667 60.20000 52.73333 15 GE4 GRADE5 26.24736 21.72622 MARGINAL 35.18889 51.02222 43.10556 90 TABLE Va ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SOURCE MEAN LENGTH OF STAY GRADE LENGTH ERROR PARA PARA X PARA X PARA X ERROR X GRADE LENGTH GRADE LENGTH X SUM OF SQUARES 271261.03461 2290.29060 4646.81156 4495.52983 46118.56905 8497.60641 682.22432 105.33847 GRADE 902.24495 18739.82238 DEGREES OF FREEDOM 1 1 2 2 84 1 1 2 2 84 MEAN SQUARE 271261 2290 2323 2247 549 8497 682 52 451 223 .03461 .29060 .40578 .76491 .03058 .60641 .22432 .66924 .12248 .09312 494.07 4.17 4.23 4.09 38.09 3.06 0.24 2.02 2-TAIL PROB. 0.0000 0.0442 0.0177 0.0201 0.0000 0.0840 0.7902 0.1388 03 TABLE VI MULTIPLE REGRESSION ON ENGLISH PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES WITH SCHOOL AND GRADE VARIABLES VARIABLE(S) ENTERED ON STEP NUMBER 1.. SCHOOL (VANCOUVER OR SEATTLE) NUMBER 2.. GRADE MULTIPLE R .53952 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE R SQUARE .29108 ADJUSTED R SQUARE .28302 REGRESSION STANDARD ERROR 21.76882 RESIDUAL VARIABLES IN THE EQUATION F = 36.13245 VARIABLE B SE B BETA T SIG T VOS -27.69587 4.60751 -.53952 -6.011 0.0000 (CONSTANT) 59.51220 3.39972 17.505 0.0000 DF SUM OF SQUARES 1 17122.50916 88 41701.59084 MEAN SQUARE •17122.50916 313.64019 VARIABLES NOT IN THE EQUATION SIGNIF F = .0000 BETA PARTIAL MIN T VARIABLE GRADE -.21448 -.25452 TOLER .99839 -2.455 SIG T .0161 TABLE VII MULTIPLE REGRESSION ON JAPANESE PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES WITH SCHOOL AND GRADE VARIABLES VARIABLE(S) ENTERED ON STEP NUMBER 1.. SCHOOL (VANCOUVER OR SEATTLE) NUMBER 2.. GRADE MULTIPLE R .54877 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE R SQUARE .30115 ADJUSTED R SQUARE .29321 STANDARD ERROR 17.70989 REGRESSION RESIDUAL F = 37.92069 VARIABLE VARIABLES IN THE EQUATION B SE B BETA SIG T DF SUM OF SQUARES 1 11893.45240 88 27600.33649 SIGNIF F = .0000 VARIABLES NOT IN THE EQUATION MEAN SQUARE 11893.45240 313.64019 VARIABLE BETA PARTIAL MIN TOLER-, SIG T VOS . -23.08263 3.74841 -.54877 -6.158 0.0000 (CONSTANT) 46.75610 2.76582 16.905 0.0000 GRADE -.11512 -.13766 .99925 -1.296 1983 128 p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t between the two s c h o o l s . The s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e was a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t (t=0.000, p=0.000) f o r the Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s ( T a b l e V I I ) . The grade d i f f e r e n c e was not found f o r the Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n agreement w i t h the one-way ANOVAs ( T a b l e I I I and I V ) . In a d d i t i o n , s c h o o l , grade and l e n g t h of s t a y v a r i a b l e s a r e f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e d by the A n a l y s i s of V a r i a n c e . Comprehensive p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s o f b o t h E n g l i s h and Japanese were a n a l y s e d as independent v a r i a b l e s i n o r d e r t o see how t h e s e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s a f f e c t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of the two languages and whether t h e r e i s any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between E n g l i s h and Japanese r e s p o n d i n g s . F i r s t , s c h o o l and g r a d e v a r i a b l e s were measured a g a i n s t E n g l i s h and Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , t h e r e s u l t s of which a r e d i s p l a y e d i n T a b l e V I I I and V i l l a r e s p e c t i v e l y ( C e l means and a n a l y s i s of V a r i a n c e ) . S e c o n d l y , the same a n a l y s e s were r e p e a t e d w i t h s c h o o l and l e n g t h o f s t a y v a r i a b l e s , the r e s u l t s o f which are p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e IX ( C e l l means) and Table IXa ( A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e ) . T a b l e V I I I shows t h a t the mean comprehensive p a r a d i g m a t i c s c o r e s of Vancouver s u b j e c t s a r e c o n s i s t e n t l y h i g h e r i n b o t h languages which i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y s u p p o r t e d by the s c h o o l e f f e c t (F=0.000, p=0.000). The grade e f f e c t i s a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t (F=0.0144, p<0.05). The s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n was s m a l l e r f o r S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s , meaning t h a t S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s a r e more u n i f o r m i n g i v i n g p a r a d i g m a t i c TABLE VIII COMPREHENSIVE PARADIGMATIC RESPONSES OF ENGLISH AND JAPANESE WITH SCHOOL AND GRADE VARIABLES GRADE SCHOOL TRAN S JAPANESE 1 ENGLISH 2 MARGINAL COUNT STANDARD DEVIATIONS GRADE GRADE1 GRADE1 VAN SEA GRADE 3 VAN 49.62500 29.00000 60.81250 62.07143 55.21875 45.53571 16 14 FOR 1-ST DEPENDENT VARIABLE VOS JAPANESE ENGLISH S 1 2 GRADE1 VAN TRAN 17.20029 22.96437 GRADE1 SEA 14.41687 19.05241 43.50000 58.25000 50.87500 8 GRADE3 VAN 25.13961 16.16654 GRADE3 SEA 27.22727 39.36364 33.29545 22 GRADE3 SEA 13.09283 11.11646 GRADE5 VAN 44.70588 59.47059 52.08824 17 GRADE5 VAN 26.94848 24.26190 GRADE4 SEA 20.00000 31.30769 25.65385 13 : GRADE5 SEA 11.71893 14.69345 MARGINAL 35.18889 51.02222 43.10556 90 TABLE Villa ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SOURCE MEAN GRADE SCHOOL GRADE X SCHOOL ERROR LANGUAGE LANGUAGE X GRADE LANGUAGE X SCHOOL LANG X GRADE X SCHOOL ERROR SUM OR SQUARES 313516.44479 4150.93048 13102.33992 2082.58254 39096.46204 10736.92462 759.46357 284.07509 1488.91234 18379.64525 DEGREES OF FREEDOM 1 2 1 2 84 1 2 1 2 84 MEAN SQUARE 313516 2075 13102 1041 465 10736 379 284 744 219 .44479 .46512 .33992 .29127 .43407 .92462 .73179 .07509 .45616 .01955 673.60 4.46 28.15 2.24 49.02 1.73 1.30 3.40 2-TAIL PROB. 0.0000 0.0144 0.0000 0.1131 0.0000 0.1829 0.2580 0.0381 CD 130 r e s p o n s e s . The l e v e l s of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n E n g l i s h and Japanese a l s o d i f f e r s t a t i s t i c a l l y (F=0.002, p 0.01). T a b l e IX c o n f i r m s Table X I I I , t h a t i s , S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s gave c o n s i s t e n t l y f e w e r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , b u t t h e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n i s l o w e r . The l e n g t h o f s t a y v a r i a b l e i s not s i g n i f i c a n t a t a l l ( F = 0 . 3 0 9 6 ) , b u t s c h o o l v a r i a b l e i s a g a i n h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t (F=0.000, p=0.000). In o r d e r t o compare E n g l i s h p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s w i t h Japanese p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s t o the e q u i v a l e n t s t i m u l i , the number of each E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e t o e a c h s t i m u l u s was f i r s t c o u n t e d , and the response f r e q u e n c y was c a l c u l a t e d . P r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s f o r e a c h s t i m u l u s were de t e r m i n e d as t h o s e r e s p o n s e s which made up more than 10% of the t o t a l r e s p o n s e s . P r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s a r e u s u a l l y d e t e r m i n e d as the f i r s t t h r e e or f i v e r e s p o n s e s o f the h i g h e s t r e s p o n s e f r e q u e n c i e s (Cramer 1968). However, the p r e s e n t d a t a had many r e s p o n s e s of the same fr e q u e n c y f o r each s t i m u l u s , making i t d i f f i c u l t t o s e l e c t a s e t number o f r e s p o n s e s a c c o r d i n g t o the f r e q u e n c y r a n k s . The c u t - o f f p o i n t of 10% seemed t o y i e l d t h r e e or f o u r p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s f o r most of the s t i m u l i . The f r e q u e n c i e s o f Japanese r e s p o n s e s were a l s o c a l c u l a t e d i n t h e same manner and A p p e n d i x A l i s t s a l l the r e s p onse and t h e i r f r e q u e n c i e s i n c l u d i n g t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n E n g l i s h and Japanese. The Japanese r e s p o n s e s were then t r a n s l a t e d i n t o E n g l i s h by the a u t h o r based on her i n t u i t i o n , c o n s u l t i n g the s u b j e c t s when a Table IX Comprehensive Paradigmatic Responses of English and Japanese with School and Length of Stay Variables Length of Stay = LE3 LE3 GE4 GE4 School = VAN SEA VAN SEA PARA JAPANESE 1 40.55556 23.13043 50.95652 28.19231 ENGLISH 2 53.94444 50.17391 64.30435 38.00000 MARGINAL 47.25000 36.65217 57.63043 33.09615 COUNT 18 23 23 26 MARGINAL 35.18889 51.02222 43.10556 90 STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR 1-ST DEPENDENT VARIABLE Length School JAPANESE ENGLISH LE3 VAN PARA 1 21.27197 2 23.65057 LE3 SEA 12.25971 20.33951 GE4 VAN 23.33448 19.77472 GE4 SEA 14.07983 15.65886 TABLE IXa ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SOURCE MEAN Length School Length X ERROR Language Language Language SUM OR SQUARES School X Lengths X School LangXLengthsXSchools ERROR 337012. 514. 13640. 2146. 42370. 11171. 824. 282. 816. 18906. 71403 67979 27501 44298 92140 29470 67685 64400 85527 24508 DEGREES OF FREEDOM 1 1 1 1 86 1 1 1 1 86 MEAN SQUARE 337012 514 13640 2146 492 11171 824 282 816 219 .71403 .68979 .27501 .44298 .68513 .29470 .67685 .64400 .85527 .84006 684.03 1.04 27.69 4.36 50.85 3.75 1.29 3.72 TAIL PROB. 0.0000 0.3096 0.0000 0.0398 0.0000 0.0561 0.2600 0.0572 132 Japanese word was ambiguous. The r e a d e r s h o u l d bear i n mind t h a t i t i s almost i m p o s s i b l e t o f i n d a p e r f e c t e q u i v a l e n c e i n t r a n s l a t i o n between the u n r e l a t e d languages s u c h as E n g l i s h and J a p a n e s e . F o r i n s t a n c e , t h e r e s p o n s e 'sun' appeared i n s e v e r a l forms i n Japanese. 'Taiyo' i s a n e u t r a l word d e s i g n a t i n g the s t a r around which the e a r t h i s r o t a t i n g . ' H i ' has the b r o a d e r meaning i n c l u d i n g 'sun,' ' d a y l i g h t , 1 'daytime,' ' s u n s h i n e , ' e t c . . 'Ohisama* i s a h o n o r i f i e d and p e r s o n i f i e d v e r s i o n o f ' h i ' common i n f o l k l o r e s and p a r e n t - c h i l d c o n v e r s a t i o n s . Onomatopoetic words v e r y common i n Ja p a n e s e , were p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t t o t r a n s l a t e . A f t e r a l l , t hey were l e f t as they were and d e s i g n a t e d w i t h the mark '0'. In a d d i t i o n , some s i n g l e words i n Japanese must be d e s c r i b e d w i t h s e v e r a l words i n E n g l i s h . I n s u c h a c a s e , t h e number '1' i s a t t a c h e d t o show t h e o r i g i n a l r e s p o n s e was a s i n g l e word. A Japanese response was det e r m i n e d t o be the same as the E n g l i s h one when the t r a n s l a t i o n t u r n e d out t o be a synonym of the E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e . For the a n a l y s i s , E n g l i s h s i n g u l a r and p l u r a l r e s p o n s e s were t r e a t e d as the same, f o r Japanese does not have a number d i s -t i n c t i o n . The J a p a n e s e r e s p o n s e s which were synonyms t o each E n g l i s h p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s were added and tho s e aggregate e q u i v a l e n t s o f more than 10% f r e q u e n c y were determined t o be Japanese p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s common t o E n g l i s h p r i m a r i e s . The s i m i l a r i t y s c o r e was then c a l c u l a t e d as: The t o t a l p e r c e n t a g e o f p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s i n E n g l i s h 133 d i v i d e d by the t o t a l p e r c e n t a g e o f J a p a n e s e p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s which a r e common w i t h E n g l i s h p r i m a r i e s = x score When t h e x s c o r e e q u a l s 1.0, i t means t h a t E n g l i s h and Japanese have an i d e n t i c a l r a t e of E n g l i s h p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s i n terms o f t h e t o t a l sum o f p e r c e n t a g e s . The f a c t t h a t a l l t h e synonyms o f E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese r e s p o n s e s a r e counted as e q u i v a l e n t i n f l a t e s t h e s i m i l a r i t y , but w i l l s t r e n g t h e n t h e d i f f e r e n c e found i n the a n a l y s i s . The r e s u l t s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e X. T a b l e X shows t h e s i m i l a r i t y s c o r e o f p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s between E n g l i s h and Japanese f o r each s t i m u l u s word. The g r e a t e r t h e d i s t a n c e from 1.0, p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e , t h e more d i f f e r e n t t h e p r i m a r y response p a t t e r n i s . The range o f s i m i l a r i t y s c o r e found i n t h i s s t u d y i s from 0 t o 15.83. When a s c o r e i s z e r o , i t means t h a t t h e r e i s no p r i m a r y . r e s p o n s e common t o E n g l i s h and Japanese. A s c o r e o f 15.83 means t h a t E n g l i s h p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e f r e q u e n c y as t h e t o t a l sum i s 15.83 t i m e s l a r g e r than the f r e q u e n c y of t h e e q u i v a l e n t p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese. S t i m u l i such as ' c h a i r , ' ' b r i g h t , ' and ' s i t ' r e c e i v e m o s t l y s i m i l a r p r i m a r y response p a t t e r n s , w h e r e a s s t i m u l i s u c h as ' h i g h , ' 'rough,' ' y e l l o w , ' ' f o r g e t , ' and ' s a l t ' have v e r y l i t t l e e q u i v a l e n c e . I f we s i m p l y d e c i d e t h a t 50% e q u i v a l e n c e i s t h e b o r d e r l i n e o f s i m i l a r / d i s s i m i l a r c a t e g o r i e s , the a l l o w a n c e o f 1.0+0.5 can be s e t as ' s i m i l a r ' c a t e g o r y . I n o t h e r words, i t i s d e c i d e d t h a t E n g l i s h and Japanese word a s s o c i a t i o n response p a t t e r n s t o an 134 Table X The Equivalence of Japanese and English Responses Based on English Primary Responses GI G U I GV HAND 1.43 0.97 1.81 MAN 1.37 2.25 1.49 TABLE 1.40 2.29 1.43 CHAIR 0.85 1.26 0.94 SALT 2.94 5.44 1.88 MUSIC 0 1.29 1.68 BUTTERFLY 0.88 1.17 1.16 NEEDLE 15.83 6.45 1.80 INSECT 1.82 1.67 2.14 HIGH 3.56 2.30 2.88 BLACK 1.79 2. 11 2.69 DARK 4. 70 1.44 1.23 YELLOW 2.21 3.01 3.78 SAD 1.25 2.15 2.62 BRIGHT 1. 50 1.133 1.11 SOUR 1.75 0.85 1.49 ROUGH 0 0 5.20 BITTER 3.58 5.84 0 RUN 1.21 1.74 1.70 SIT 1.10 0.98 0.99 BEGIN 1.31 1.54 1.66 ENJOY 3.50 3.23 1.92 EXAMINE X* 3.50 3. 17 SLIP 1.55 3.20 1.25 LISTEN 3.15 1.07 2.48 STEAL 0.88 1.00 0.58 FORGET 4.83 6.92 2.00 * 'Examine' d i d not have any p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s among grade one s u b j e c t s . 135 e q u i v a l e n t s t i m u l u s a r e s i m i l a r when t h e e q u i v a l e n t s o f E n g l i s h p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s appear 50% l e s s f r e q u e n t o r more among Japanese r e s p o n s e s than among E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s , o r when the e q u i v a l e n t s o f E n g l i s h p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s appear 50% more f r e q u e n t o r l e s s among Japanese r e s p o n s e s t h a n among E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s . Even though t h i s i s an a r b i t r a r y s t a n d a r d , 50% e q u i v a l e n c e seems low enough t o g i v e some c r e d i b i l i t y t o d i s s i m i l a r i t y f o u n d by t h i s method. A c c o r d i n g l y , grade one s u b j e c t s have 11 s i m i l a r and 16 d i s s i m i l a r s t i m u l i , g r a d e t h r e e and f i v e , 10 s i m i l a r and 17 d i s s i m i l a r . I n o r d e r t o make a comparison o f the d a t a of b i l i n g u a l J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n and m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n , d a t a on p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g from t h e E n t w i s l e s t u d y and d a t a from t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y d a t a i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e X I . I n o r d e r t o make a f u r t h e r c o m p a r i s o n , t h e p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s and t h e i r f r e q u e n c i e s of the common s t i m u l i t o t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , E n t w i s l e (1966) and L e i c e s t e r (1981) a r e t a b l e d i n T a b l e X I I . T a b l e XI shows t h a t grade one s u b j e c t s of t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y have a r e m a r k a b l y h i g h degree o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g compared t o t h e m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n i n the E n t w i s l e (1966) s t u d y . The p e r c e n t a g e o f c o m p r e h e n s i v e r e s p o n s e s i s c l o s e t o grade t h r e e s u b j e c t s of t h e E n t w i s l e s t u d y . As f o r g r a d e t h r e e and f i v e s u b j e c t s , t h e performance i s poor compared t o the E n t w i s l e sample. T a b l e X I I shows t h a t the c h i l d r e n i n t h i s s t u d y responded i n E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n more l i k e m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n TABLE XI Comparison of Paradigmaticity in English Response ENTWISLE ENGLISH COMPREHENSIVE LE=3 GE=4 SEATTLE VANCOUVER PARADIGMATIC GI 38.30 51.60 61.40 63.29 57.0 62.07 60.81 G U I 63 . 70 43 .30 44.40 49 . 33 36 . 60 39 . 36 58. 25 GV 72.10 38.67 47.40 35.73 52.73 31.31 59.47 GO T A B L E HI COMPARISON OF PRIMARY RESPONSES IN ENGLISH PRESENT STUDY ENGLISH JAPANESE ENTWISLE LEICESTER GI GUI GV GI GUI GV • GI GUI GV BEGINNER ADVANCED MAN woman lady sen •46 woman •14 boy .09 cool .26 woman .21 .12 •26 woman 8trong man .38 woman .16 strong .09 father •24 woman .12 father .10 man .18 woman .13 lady .11 hand 9.5 woman 12.9 woman 43.6 woman 6.5 lady 9.6 lady 9.3 boy 4.0 father 4.6 men 8.9 Btrong .40 woman .13 strong .13 .73 HAND finger feet hold foot .27 fingera .17 arm .10 feet .10 .21 fingera .13 foot .13 legs feet .17 foot .14 grab .10 pick .10 .19 finger .14 foot .12 pick .38 grab .13 finger .09 foot .16 fingera 6.8 arm 18.2 arm 23.8 finger •16 arm 4.6 fingers 8.6 fingeral4.5 arm .12 foot 4.6 finger 7.1 finger 9.5 foot .27 finger .13 clean .13 palm .33 .20 .20 TABLE chair eat desk .46 chair .25 eat .07 desk .53 chair .13 desk .11 eat .44 eat .11 chair .07 place .29 chair .22 eat .10 .21 chair .13 desk meal .27 chair .12 eat .10 s i t 36.1 chair 51.4 chair 47.0 cloth 6.4 desk 6.4 eat 7.5 chair 2.9 eat 4.6 desk 6.5 cover .47 chair .27 cloth .20 desk .31 .40 .40 HAIR sit table desk .34 s i t .28 table .10 desk .76 ait .21 table .02 desk .43 alt .29 table .11 chair .73 ait .12 table .08 .69 s i t .09 table desk .60 s i t .17 table .10 bear 25.0 s i t 29.3 s i t 32.0 table 20.7 table 18.9 table 20.5 desk 3.2 desk 10.4 desk 17.5 s i t down .47 desk .27 table .20 s i t .53 .47 .20 ALT pepper sugar .36 pepper •24 sugar sour .50 pepper •20 sugar .14 ocean .31 sugar .13 salty .13 salty .18 salty .18 salty .14 no good taste .29 salty .23 sea .09 sugar .21 pepper 44.3 pepper 56.4 pepper 47.0 sugar .19 water 5.4 water 10.7 water 8.5 white .15 sugar 2.1 sugar 6.4 sugar 7.0 pepper .40 sugar .33 pepper •13 sweet .53 .40 .20 nusic piano •17 song piano notes .29 rock .14 listen .20 piano .10 sing .07 song .40 pretty instruoent .10 .24 song .17 aing .15 piano •25 piano .21 happy .13 song .13 piano 13.6 sing 12.9 sing 10.5 jazz .10 sing 11.4 song 10.0 song 9.5 record .08 teacher 4.6 sound 7.5 sound 9.5 classic .27 jazz .20 singer .20 record .20 .20 .20 flJTTER-FLY fly pretty flower •17 insect .D fly .13 small .33 f l y .25 pretty •08 spring .33 fly .10 insect .10 pretty .29 fly .19 pretty •17 insect .40 f l y .21 pretty .09 flower .35 f l y .10 butter .10 bird 21.8 fly 20.0 insect 33.5 beautiful .27 BEAUTIFUL.27 7.9 insect 13.6 fly 8.0 yeUow .27 fly .27 3.9 bug 7.5 animal 7.0 fl y .20 insect .21 NEEDLE pin string .19 sharp .19 sew hurts .59 thread •08 sharp .05 sew hurt .24 painful .17 86W .10 needle .10 .44 painful •12 pointing .07 .50 painful .09 thread prick .23 thread 15.7 thread 31.1 thread 31.0 clothes .14 shot 7.9 pin 22.9 pin 15.5 pants .11 pin 7.5 sharp 6.1 sharp 14.5 sewing .13 thread .13 sew .1} machine .31 .20 .20 SLACK white dark brown .48 dark .13 white .13 .57 white .14 .41 white dark black(n) .20 white .20 dark .07 night .17 hair .17 white .17 night .15 white .13 blue .11 brown 12.1 white 49.3 white 53.0 white 9.6 color 8.2 color 16.5 cat 7.1 dark 7.5 dark 9.0 dog .26 white .26 hair .26 dark .53 .27 .20 t\im red white color light .17 bright •10 color •10 sun .10 •25 color .18 orange .15 blue bright .17 bright .13 color .10 yellow .10 .16 flower .11 sunflower .08 color .17 lemon .15 flower .10 .13 blue .13 red green 9.3 color 23.2 color 42.5 color 8.6 red 10.7 green 8.0 flower 7.9 blue 10.4 red 6.5 lemon •13 orange .13 red .13 signal .20 .20 .20 SOUR sweet salt lemon .31 lemon .23 sweet .15 .25 lemon •13 sweet .41 lemon .21 lemon .25 sweet .18 salt pickled plum.16 pickled plum .42 lemon •21 pickle plum .12 sweet .39 ollk .29 kraut .06 sweet 7.5 sweet 33.9 sweet 38.5 yellow 7.1 bitter 8.9 bitter 25.0 lemon 6.4 good 7.9 lemon 3.5 orange sweet .27 lemon .27 bitter .40 .33 .27 COMPARISON OF PRIMARY RESPONSES IN ENGLISH PRESENT STUDY ENGLISH JAPANESE ENTWISLE LEICESTER GI G U I GV GI G U I GV GI G U I GV BEGINNER ADVANCED ROUGH tough smooth nice soft . 1 3 fight . 1 3 . 1 3 . 1 3 .44 smooth rock . 2 1 itchy . 1 3 fine •45 name . 0 9 mad wave water . 0 9 wave . 0 9 storm . 0 9 fight . 0 9 . 1 0 dog . 1 0 tough . 1 0 fight 8 . 6 aoft 1 6 . 8 saooth 2 8 . 0 6 . 4 hard 1 5 . 7 hard 2 1 . 5 5 . 4 smooth 11 .8 soft 1 4 . 5 saooth . 2 0 surface . 3 1 tough . 1 3 HTTER sweet bad yuck sick .11 lemon .11 salt .11 .11 . 5 0 butter . 1 4 coffee . 0 9 salty •09 medicine bitter . 1 6 medicine . 1 0 green peppers •10 sweet . 2 4 medicine . 0 9 sweet . 0 9 not good . 3 4 butter . D sweet . 1 1 bit 6 . 8 sour 6 . 1 sweet 5 . 0 better 2 0 . 7 sour 1 8 . 6 sweet 4 . 6 cold 3 6 . 5 l i t t l e 2 2 . 0 stall 6 . 0 . 2 0 medicine . 4 0 . 1 3 sweet . 2 6 sour . 2 0 RUN walk fast ran .67 fast . 1 3 walk .07 Jog . 6 1 walk . 2 3 fast . 0 4 . 3 7 fast . 1 3 walk . 3 6 fast •30 walk move . 3 1 walk . 1 8 foot . 0 9 fast . 2 0 fast . 1 8 walk . 1 0 jun? 1 6 . 4 walk 11.5 fast 7 . 9 ran 3 3 . 9 walk 2 1 . 4 fast 1 3 . 4 ran 3 5 . 0 away 2 3 . 5 jogging 9 . 0 running . 4 7 jogging .47 . 2 7 fast . 2 0 . 1 3 walk . 2 0 S I T stand chair aat .37 chair . 3 3 stand .07 . 6 0 chair . 2 6 stand . 4 7 stand . 2 7 chair aat •37 chair . 3 3 stand .07 . 6 0 chair . 2 6 stand . 4 7 down . 2 7 chair stsnd 3 5 . 0 8tand 1 5 . 0 down 5 . 8 sat 3 0 . 3 stsnd 2 2 . 9 down 11 .0 chair 3 6 . 5 down 2 2 . 0 chair 1 5 . 0 on .67 chair . 5 3 . 5 3 down .47 . 1 3 stand . 4 0 BEGIN end start .48 start .20 end . 5 7 end . 2 2 start finish . 3 1 end . 2 7 study(n) . 1 6 start(n) . 1 9 end . 11 study(n) . 11 start(n) . 2 4 end . 1 8 test . 11 study(n) . 2 8 start . 2 6 work . 1 2 end 5 . 0 start 5 . 0 end 4 . 5 finish 2 4 . 3 start 1 7 . 9 end 4 . 7 stop 5 0 . 5 school 2 5 . 0 first 6 . 0 . 2 0 start . 6 7 . 2 0 finish .47 end .27 HIGH low bye . 6 5 low •06 cloud .41 low •10 sun . 5 5 snail . 0 9 low mountain . 2 3 building . 1 8 low . 0 9 .27 sky . 1 8 low mountain . 2 2 low . 1 9 sky . 1 4 down 2 1 . 8 low 3 . 6 up 3 . 2 bye 6 2 . 9 low 3 . 2 t a l l 2 . 1 hello 6 4 . 0 mountain 8 . 5 building 4 . 0 school .47 mountain . 5 3 . 2 7 low . 5 3 . 2 0 building . 4 0 139 t h a n a d u l t J a p a n e s e E n g l i s h l e a r n e r s o f t h e L e i c e s t e r s t u d y ( 1 9 8 1 ) . L e i c e s t e r ' s samples seem t o d i f f e r from E n t w i s l e ' s d a t a i n s t i m u l i such as ' t a b l e , ' ' s a l t , ' 'music,' ' i n s e c t , ' 'run' and ' h i g h . ' The Japanese c h i l d r e n i n t h i s s t u d y show E n g l i s h response p a t t e r n s i n t h o s e s t i m u l i s i m i l a r t o m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n . The d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n o f r e s p o n s e s b e tween E n g l i s h and Japanese s u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y i s a l s o seen though i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o q u a n t i f y t h e d i f f e r e n c e u n l e s s an a r t i f i c i a l s c o r e such as the one used i n T a b l e X i s employed. Results with Regard to Experimental Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: The h i g h r a t e of s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n Japanese ( T a b l e I I ) and t h e subsequent a n a l y s i s ( T a b l e I I I ) s h o w i n g no grade d i f f e r e n c e s u p p o r t t h e h y p o t h e s i s . The s i m i l a r p e r c e n t a g e of Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s o f V a n c o u v e r s u b j e c t s ( b o t h around 50%) n e i t h e r c o n f i r m nor deny th e h y p o t h e s i s , though S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s gave d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese a t a l l t i m e s . Thus the h y p o t h e s i s i s c o n f i r m e d as l o n g as t h e s c h o o l v a r i a b l e i s not c o n s i d e r e d . Even i f t h e s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e i s t a k e n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n , 50% o f s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g among grade t h r e e and f i v e s u b j e c t s a r e s t i l l h i g h e r t h a n t h e comparable d a t a of E n t w i s l e (1966) (see T a b l e X I I ) . The q u e s t i o n remains w i t h grade one d a t a because E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n gave more s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t h a n t h e g r a d e one J a p a n e s e s u b j e c t s i n Vancouver. 140 I n terms of the k i n d of r e s p o n s e s , T a b l e X I I s u g g e s t s t h a t i n d e e d t h e response p a t t e r n s of E n g l i s h and Japanese a r e d i f f e r e n t , though i t i s not p o s s i b l e w i t h p r e s e n t measurement t e c h n i q u e s t o q u a n t i f y t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n any r e l i a b l e way. T h e r e f o r e , except f o r the g r a d e one c h i l d r e n o f V a n c o u v e r , t h e d a t a show t h a t J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n g i v e s i g n i f i c a n t l y more s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n Japanese, which i s d i f f e r e n t from E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n ' s r e s ponse p a t t e r n . H y p o t h e s i s 1 i s o n l y p a r t i a l l y c o n f i r m e d . H y p o t h e s i s 2: H y p o t h e s i s 2 was not c o n f i r m e d a t a l l , f o r the e f f e c t s of grade and the l e n g t h o f s t a y i n N o r t h A m e r i c a v a r i a b l e s were s i g n i f i c a n t i n the o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n t o the one p r e d i c t e d . C o n t r a r y t o t h e h y p o t h e s i s , the grade one s u b j e c t s performed b e s t i n E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t f o r t h e s e s u b j e c t s t h e g r a d e l e v e l d i d n o t r e f l e c t E n g l i s h a b i l i t y as measured by t h e s h i f t toward p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . The o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y , o f c o u r s e , i s t h a t t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s n o t i n d i c a t i v e of language a b i l i t y , which i s c o u n t e r t o the L e i c e s t e r ' s f i n d i n g s . Thus th e d a t a d i d not show any i n c r e a s i n g tendency o f E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s as the grade l e v e l o f s u b j e c t s get h i g h e r nor as t h e s u b j e c t s were i n N o r t h America l o n g e r . Hypothesis 3: The a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e c o n s i s t e n t l y showed t h a t t h e p e r c e n t a g e of the p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s a r e s t a t i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t between Japanese and E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s . The p r o p o r t i o n of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t o t o t a l r e s p o n s e s i s h i g h e r when 141 J a p a n e s e s u b j e c t s r e s p o n d t o E n g l i s h t h a n when i n J a p a n e s e . H y p o t h e s i s 3 i s c o n f i r m e d . Hypothesis 4: I n terms of p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s , more than h a l f of the s t i m u l i used i n t h i s s t u d y r e c e i v e d d i f f e r e n t response p a t t e r n s i n E n g l i s h and Japanese. Thus t h e b i l i n g u a l Japanese c h i l d r e n gave q u a l i t a t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t r e s p o n s e s t o t h e e q u i v a l e n t s t i m u l i i n E n g l i s h and Japanese. Hypothesis 5: The grade one s u b j e c t s o f t h i s s t u d y o u t p e r f o r m e d t h e comparable s u b j e c t s i n the E n t w i s l e s t u d y ( 1 9 6 6 ) , r e f u t i n g t h e h y p o t h e s i s . A l t h o u g h t h e f a c t t h a t E n t w i s l e ' s d a t a were d e r i v e d from 2,240 r e s p o n s e s f o r grade one and t h r e e , and f r o m 1600 r e s p o n s e s f o r grade f i v e s u b j e c t s must be t a k e n i n t o con-s i d e r a t i o n , t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s s t i l l t o o l a r g e t o i g n o r e . The o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y i s t h a t t h e E n t w i s l e d a t a were c o l l e c t e d more than 10 y e a r s ago, and t h e c h i l d r e n ' s v e r b a l b e h a v i o r f u r t h e r s h i f t e d t o p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g s i n c e t h e n . The f a c t t h a t o n l y the grade one showed s u p e r i o r performance t o m o n o l i n g u a l s seem t o suggest t h a t grade one's performance i s genuine. Thus i t was not proven t h a t b i l i n g u a l Japanese c h i l d r e n g i v e fewer p a r a -d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s than the comparable E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n . Other Considerations There a r e t h r e e s u r p r i s i n g r e s u l t s i n t h i s s t u d y : One i s the s i g n i f i c a n t s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e found i n t h e p r o p o r t i o n s of p a r a -d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g found i n b o t h the languages. The second i s 142 the appearance o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s which had not been r e p o r t e d i n any b i l i n g u a l s t u d i e s r e v i e w e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e , though the a v a i l a b l e d a t a were v e r y l i m i t e d i n i t s number. The t h i r d i s the b e h a v i o r o f the grade one s u b j e c t s g i v i n g the l a r g e s t number o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s among the t h r e e g r a d e s , and more p r o p o r t i o n o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g than the comparable E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n . The s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e i s i n agreement w i t h R e s t a i n s (1969) st u d y which found t h e l a r g e s t d i f f e r e n c e between s c h o o l s r a t h e r t h a n age n o r p a t h o l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n o f deaf o r normal. T h i s d i f f e r e n c e appeared not o n l y i n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g b u t a l s o i n t h e t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n d i n g w i t h S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s , e s p e c i a l l y grade f i v e s u b j e c t s , g i v i n g a l a r g e number o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s and V a n c o u v e r s u b j e c t s v e r y few. In a d d i t i o n , the s i g n i f i c a n t s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e found i n the Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s f u r t h e r s u g g e s t s the v a l i d i t y o f t h i s s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e . T h i s d i f f e r e n c e s u g g e s t s t h a t some e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s t o t h e l e a r n e r s such as t e a c h i n g method, c l a s s s i z e , e t c . might be a f f e c t i n g the r e s u l t . The appearance o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i s i n c o n f l i c t w i t h L e i c e s t e r ' s s t u d y (1981) i n which L e i c e s t e r c o n c l u d e d J a p a n e s e a d u l t l e a r n e r s of E n g l i s h do not r e l y on t h e i r n a t i v e language i n word a s s o c i a t i o n even when they do not have t h e r e s o u r c e i n t h e i r second language. The l a r g e r number o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n E n g l i s h than i n Japanese i s v e r y u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , f o r i t e x e m p l i f i e s 143 t h e r e l i a n c e on L I when the L2 r e s o u r c e i s i n s u f f i c i e n t . The e x i s t e n c e o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n n a t i v e tongue, Japanese, may be t h e r e s u l t o f i n i t i a l c o n f u s i o n o f two l a n g u a g e s . The l a r g e number of t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s among o l d e r s u b j e c t s as w e l l as among S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s must be accounted f o r , s i n c e language m i x i n g seems t o be l i m i t e d to e a r l y s t a g e s o n l y ( R e d l i n e r e t a l . 1980). The p e r f o r m a n c e of grade one s u b j e c t s i n terms o f E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s has many t h e o r e t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s , e.g., f o r c o g n i t i o n . Even i f the grade l e v e l was not a p p r o p r i a t e as the i n d i c a t o r of E n g l i s h a b i l i t y , and indeed the grade one s u b j e c t s were t h e b e s t E n g l i s h s p e a k e r s o f the t h r e e groups, the h i g h e r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of the grade one s u b j e c t s than m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n c a n n o t be e x p l a i n e d b e c a u s e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s c o n s i d e r e d t o be the p r o d u c t o f h i g h e r c o g n i t i o n , and t h e r e f o r e , t h e g r a d e one s t u d e n t s a r e supposed t o have fewer p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s than t h e grade f i v e s t u d e n t s . In a d d i t i o n , the Japanese a r e b e l i e v e d t o be s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d e r s , and l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h i s supposed t o change them t o p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d e r s i n E n g l i s h c l o s e t o m o n o l i n g u a l s , not s u r p a s s i n g them. T h i s r e s u l t c o u l d i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e s e assumptions are wrong and t h a t t h e r e i s a s t r o n g age or grade f a c t o r a f f e c t i n g p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n a d i f f e r e n t way from p r e v i o u s l y b e l i e v e d . I t may be e a s i e r f o r the f i r s t g r a d e r s t o respond p a r a d i g m a t i c a l l y than 144 grade f i v e s t u d e n t s . The p o s s i b i l i t y w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n t h e next c h a p t e r . The u n e x p e c t e d l y h i g h r a t e o f Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of Vancouver s u b j e c t s , which i s c o n t r a r y t o the Moran and Murakawa (1968) and the Moran (1973) d a t a showing low p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g among a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n may be i n agreement w i t h Moran and Huang s t u d y (1975) which found E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g Chinese c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s g i v i n g more l o g i c a l ( p a r a d i g m a t i c ) r e s p o n s e s i n Chinese t h a n m o n o l i n g u a l Chinese s p e a k e r s . Moran a t t r i b u t e d the change t o language t r a i n i n g , but i f t h a t i s t h e c a s e , the S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s ' l o w p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n Japanese i n t h i s s t u d y must be accounted f o r . The f i n d i n g of the q u a l i t a t i v e l y d i f f e r e n t response p a t t e r n s i n E n g l i s h and J a p a n e s e i s i n agreement w i t h t h e l i t e r a t u r e (Lambert and Moore, 1966, B e r r u e t a - C l e m e n t 1978, L e i c e s t e r 1981), i n the sense t h a t the L2 response p a t t e r n i s independent o f L I and i s more l i k e L 2 . T h i s r e s u l t i s i n c o n t r a d i c t i o n o f the t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n a way, f o r t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s t h e m s e l v e s a r e the e v i d e n c e o f L I i n f l u e n c e on L2 a s s o c i a t i o n s . I n t e r f e r e n c e of L I shown by t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s may be temporary, as mentioned a b o v e , y e t w i t h o u t c o n t r o l l i n g E n g l i s h a b i l i t y w i t h i n a grade l e v e l , i t cannot be proven i n the p r e s e n t s t u d y . The t h e o r e t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s as w e l l as p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n s o f the above f i n d i n g s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n the f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r . Chapter 5 Discussion 145 The b a s i c h y p o t h e s i s u n d e r l y i n g t h i s s t u d y was that. E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n go t h r o u g h a s h i f t , from d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g -m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g t o d o m i n a n t l y p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t s , which i s c a l l e d the S-P s h i f t , w h i l e Japanese m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n c o n t i n u e t o g i v e s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . The f i n d i n g that, the b i l i n g u a l Vancouver s u b j e c t s i n t h r e e grades gave a h i g h p e r c e n t a g e of p a r a d i g m a t i c response (48%, 48.5% and 44.7%) i n Japanese undermined t h i s h y p o t h e s i s . One e x p l a n a t i o n can be f o u n d i n Moran and Huang's (1975) ' l a n g u a g e t r a i n i n g t h e o r y , ' as m e n t i o n e d i n t h e p r e c e d i n g c h a p t e r . T h i s t h e o r y contends t h a t the s e c o n d l a n g u a g e t r a i n i n g a f f e c t s t h e f i r s t , l a n g u a g e word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n , c a u s i n g more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n C h i n e s e s p e a k e r s even though Chinese i s a s y n t a g -m a t i c language. However, the h i g h e r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of Vancouver s u b j e c t s than h y p o t h e s i z e d cannot be s i m p l y a t t r i b u t e d t o E n g l i s h l a n g u a g e t r a i n i n g , s i n c e S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s , who had a l s o r e c e i v e d E n g l i s h t r a i n i n g i n N o r t h A m e r i c a , remained h i g h l y s y n t a g m a t i c i n Japanese word a s s o c i a t i o n . I t c o u l d be s p e c u l a t e d t h a t the E n g l i s h t r a i n i n g Vancouver and S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s r e c e i v e d was d i f f e r e n t , and a f f e c t e d Vancouver s u b j e c t s i n a p a r t i c u l a r way. Y e t , i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t p u b l i c s c h o o l E n g l i s h e d u c a t i o n i s so d i f f e r e n t , between Vancouver and S e a t t l e . In a d d i t i o n , Moran and Huang proposed t h i s e x p l a n a t i o n f o r a d u l t l e a r n e r s . From t h e i r v i e w p o i n t t h a t the e a r l y development of word a s s o c i a t i o n i s 146 bound t o c o g n i t i o n , the h i g h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g o f grade one s u b j e c t s c o n f l i c t s w i t h t h e i r c o n t e n t i o n t h a t young c h i l d r e n a r e no t c a p a b l e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g b e c a u s e o f c o g n i t i v e i m m a t u r i t y . The f i n d i n g t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s an u n t r a i n a b l e s k i l l , o f t e n r e p o r t e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e , a l s o s u g g e s t s t h a t language t r a i n i n g i s u n l i k e l y the ca u s e . We c o u l d , o f c o u r s e , a r g u e t h a t V a n c o u v e r s u b j e c t s were e x c e p t i o n a l l y b r i g h t and l i n g u i s t i c a l l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d . Yet t h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n t h a t t h i s was t h e c a s e . The f a c t t h a t Vancouver s u b j e c t s gave more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s than S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s not o n l y i n Japanese but a l s o i n E n g l i s h s u g g e s t s t h a t s y n t a g m a t i c and p a r a d i g m a t i c d i s t i n c t i o n i n word a s s o c i a t i o n may be i n f l u e n c e d by some v a r i a b l e ( s ) independent o f lan g u a g e s . What i t might be w i l l be d i s c u s s e d l a t e r i n t h i s c h a p t e r . The c e n t r a l h y p o t h e s i s o f t h i s s t u d y , t h a t E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s o f J a p a n e s e young E n g l i s h l e a r n e r s would undergo the S-P s h i f t i n word a s s o c i a t i o n , was not c o n f i r m e d e i t h e r . T h i s h y p o t h e s i s s t a r t e d w i t h the assumption t h a t the young c h i l d r e n , the grade one s u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y , have d p m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s whether they a r e E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l s o r Japanese m o n o l i n g u a l s , and t h a t Japanese c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language have the t y p i c a l word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n o f c h i l d r e n i n Japanese. The e f f e c t o f l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h on Japanese word a s s o c i a t i o n was not c o n s i d e r e d , f o r the E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n a t t h i s age i s s y n t a g m a t i c anyway. T h e r e f o r e , the h i g h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g 147 o f grade one s u b j e c t s i n V a n c o u v e r a c t u a l l y i n v a l i d a t e d t h a t a s s u m p t i o n , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t the S-P s h i f t on word a s s o c i a t i o n does not n e c e s s a r i l y r e f l e c t l a n g u a g e a b i l i t y i n t h e c a s e o f E n g l i s h L2 and Japanese L I , the t h e s i s s u p p o r t e d by L e i c e s t e r ( 1 9 8 1 ) . The f a c t t h a t t h e r e was not an i n c r e a s e i n E n g l i s h p a r a -d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g c o r r e s p o n d e n t w i t h an i n c r e a s e i n g r a d e l e v e l c a s t s doubt on the v a l i d i t y o f word a s s o c i a t i o n b e h a v i o r as an i n d i c a t o r o f l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y . Moreover, the t r e n d seems t o be downward o r to show no d i f f e r e n c e a t a l l (compared w i t h i n one s c h o o l , see T a b l e V I I I ) . The f a c t t h a t the s u b j e c t s behaved i n E n g l i s h so d i f f e r e n t l y from the a d u l t s u b j e c t s i n the L e i c i s t e r s t u d y , may be i n d i c a t i v e o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e which e x i s t s between c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s l e a r n i n g a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e . The s u p p o r t f o r t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n can be found i n t h e comparisons of p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s i n t h i s s t u d y w i t h L e i c e s t e r ' s . Japanese a d u l t b e g i n n e r s gave such word p a i r s as s i t - down, r u n - away, w h i l e Japanese c h i l d r e n gave E n g l i s h mono-l i n g u a l - t y p e r e s p o n s e s f r o m grade one, such as s i t - s t a n d and r u n - walk. The a b s e n c e o f t h e s e k i n d s o f ' s y n t a c t i c r e s p o n s e s ' among the young s u b j e c t s o f t h i s s t u d y may i n d i c a t e t h a t the s u b j e c t s i n t h i s s t u d y were more s o p h i s t i c a t e d t h a n t h e b e g i n n e r s i n the L e i c e s t e r s t u d y . The c h i l d r e n seemed t o adopt t h e t y p i c a l word a s s o c i a t i o n b e h a v i o r o f m o n o l i n g u a l s r i g h t from the s t a r t . 148 The h i g h e r commonality o f t h i s s t u d y than t h e comparable samples of the E n t w i s l e s t u d y a l s o suggest t h a t s o p h i s t i c a t i o n . Lambert and MacNamara (1973) s t u d i e d word a s s o c i a t i o n o f c h i l d r e n e n r o l l e d i n French immersion programs, and found t h a t b i l i n g u a l s t u d e n t s gave g e n e r a l l y s t e r e o t y p e d word a s s o c i a t i o n s . I f the h i g h commonality and h i g h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of the grade one s t u d e n t s o f t h i s s t u d y i s t h e r e s u l t o f s t e r e o t y p i c a s s o c i a t i o n as Lambert and MacNamara found, i t c o u l d suggest t h a t the young second language l e a r n e r s a r e more a d e p t a t l e a r n i n g s t e r e o t y p e d word a s s o c i a t i o n o f L2. In o t h e r words, t h e y may be o p e r a t i n g w i t h a l a r g e r s e t of u n i t s which might be t h o u g h t of as u n a n a l y z e d wholes. T h e r e i s , however, some p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t the a n o m a l i e s o f the p r e s e n t s t u d y are a r e s u l t o f t e c h n i c a l d e f i c i e n c i e s . One o f them i s t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t g r a d e l e v e l p a r a l l e l s E n g l i s h a b i l i t y r e f l e c t e d i n t h e change toward p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g , L e i c e s t e r ' s f i n d i n g . S i n c e the grade l e v e l i n which the s u b j e c t s were e n r o l l e d i n E n g l i s h c l a s s was t h e o n l y c o n t r o l , t h e d i f f e r e n c e o f E n g l i s h a b i l i t y w i t h i n a grade l e v e l was i g n o r e d . In a d d i t i o n , grade l e v e l may o n l y r e f l e c t a p a r t i a l p i c t u r e o f E n g l i s h language s k i l l s such as r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g , and t h e r e b y may have d i s t o r t e d t h e r e s p o n s e s o f the s u b j e c t s which c o u l d have been more s t r a t i f i e d i f the E n g l i s h a b i l i t y had been measured more p r e c i s e l y . I t i s p l a u s i b l e t h a t grade one s u b j e c t s w e r e , i n f a c t , s u p e r i o r i n E n g l i s h t o g r a d e t h r e e s u b j e c t s . T h i s e x p l a n a t i o n , o f c o u r s e , 149 cannot be v a l i d a t e d u n l e s s t h e comparison o f word a s s o c i a t i o n s b e t w e e n b e g i n n e r and advanced l e a r n e r s o f E n g l i s h i n the same grade l e v e l can be made o r u n l e s s a n o t h e r , r e l i a b l e measure o f l a n g u a g e a b i l i t y i s e m p l o y e d . W i t h o u t s u c h d a t a , t h e s t u d y r e p o r t e d here n e i t h e r s u p p o r t s n or r e f u t e s t h e c o n t e n t i o n o f L e i c e s t e r t h a t word a s s o c i a t i o n r e f l e c t s E n g l i s h l e a r n i n g as a second language i n i t s p r o p o r t i o n o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . These s u r p r i s i n g and somewhat anomalous r e s u l t s seem t o have stemmed from the h i g h p e r c e n t a g e of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g by grade one s t u d e n t s . One p o s s i b i l i t y i s t h a t because many grade one s u b j e c t s f a i l e d t o respond t o low f r e q u e n c y v e r b s ( s e e Ap-p e n d i x A) such as examine, the p a r a d i g m a t i c response p e r c e n t a g e was somewhat d i s t o r t e d . The d i s t o r t i o n , h o w e v e r , c o u l d n o t have been more t h a n 10%, b e c a u s e t h e s e v e r b s c o m p r i s e d o n l y t h r e e o u t o f t h e t o t a l t w e n t y - s e v e n s t i m u l i , and not a l l the s u b j e c t s f a i l e d t o respond . In a d d i t i o n , t h e c o n s i s t e n t l y h i g h p e r c e n t a g e o f p r i m a r y p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s by grade one s u b j e c t s s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s gen u i n e . W i t h t h e g r a d e one s u b j e c t s , t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g was s t r i k i n g l y g r e a t e r t h a n t h a t o f t h e m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h g r a d e one c h i l d r e n and E n t w i s l e ' s s u b j e c t s . Not o n l y p a r a d i g -m a t i c i t y , but a l s o p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s o f J a p a n e s e s u b j e c t s a r e more u n i f i e d . Does t h i s mean t h a t Japanese grade one s u b j e c t s a r e even more s o p h i s t i c a t e d i n l i n g u i s t i c b e h a v i o r than E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n i n the sense t h a t they a r e c l o s e r t o the 150 norm? Such i s u n l i k e l y , b u t i t i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d an e x p l a n a t i o n f o r the grade one s u b j e c t s b e h a v i o r . We c o u l d say t h a t immature c o g n i t i o n o r l i n g u i s t i c a b i l i t y o f grade one s u b j e c t s a c t u a l l y a l l o w e d them to a s s i m i l a t e the t y p i c a l E n g l i s h a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n more r e a d i l y than o l d e r s u b j e c t s . But t h e n , how d i d t h y l e a r n i t w h i l e t h e i r E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g p e e r s were s t i l l p e r f o r m i n g d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c a l l y ? D i d t hey l e a r n i t from the language s u r r o u n d i n g them such as T.V. o r d i d b e i n g b i l i n g u a l a f f e c t t h e i r b e h a v i o r i n E n g l i s h , and i n Japanese word a s s o c i a t i o n ? The l e n g t h - o f - s t a y v a r i a b l e , which was i n t r o d u c e d as a n o t h e r i n d i c a t o r of E n g l i s h a b i l i t y , f a i l e d t o show any o r d e r l y t r e n d f o r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . T h i s c o u l d a l s o mean e i t h e r t h a t t h e l e n g t h o f s t a y does not r e f l e c t E n g l i s h a b i l i t y measured by the S-P dichotomy, o r t h a t improved E n g l i s h s k i l l i s not r e f l e c t e d i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . The f a c t t h a t t h e c u t - o f f p o i n t s o f t h r e e and f o u r y e a r s were i n t r o d u c e d based on a n e c d o t a l s p e c u l a t i o n s t r o n g l y s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e l e n g t h o f s t a y v a r i a b l e i n t h i s s t u d y i s not an a c c u r a t e i n d i c a t o r o f E n g l i s h a b i l i t y , and t h e r e f o r e , t h a t the r e s u l t d e r i v e d from the a n a l y s i s w i t h t h e l e n g t h - o f - s t a y v a r i a b l e n e i t h e r r e f u t e s nor s u p p o r t s the h y p o t h e s i s . The c o n s i s t e n t l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e found between E n g l i s h and Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n the a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e ( T a b l e V I I I & IX) shows t h a t the word a s s o c i a t i o n s o f two languages d i f f e r i n t e r m s o f t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s g i v e n , and E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n i s always more p a r a d i g m a t i c 151 than Japanese. T h i s r e s u l t i s i n agreement w i t h the l i t e r a t u r e (Moran and Murakawa 1968), a l t h o u g h the r e s u l t o f t h i s s t u d y d i d not show Japanese word a s s o c i a t i o n t o be d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c , as f o u n d i n Moran and Murakawa. Even those Vancouver s u b j e c t s who responded h i g h l y p a r a d i g m a t i c a l l y i n Japanese gave even more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n E n g l i s h . T h i s r e s u l t v a l i d a t e s t h e c o n s t r u c t o f t h i s s t u d y , which was p r e s e n t e d r a t h e r more n e g a t i v e l y e a r l i e r w i t h the i n c o n c l u s i v e r e s u l t f o r h y p o t h e s i s one. Word a s s o c i a t i o n i n J a p a n e s e i s p r e d o m i n a n t l y s y n t a g m a t i c , and t h e r e b y d i f f e r s from p a r a d i g m a t i c E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n . E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n o f Japanese l e a r n e r s must move from the Japanese l e v e l of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e h i g h e r l e v e l o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of E n g l i s h , i f indeed t h e mastery o f E n g l i s h a l s o accompanies the a p p r o x i m a t i o n o f word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n t o the E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l norm. The c o m b i n a t i o n o f the t e s t r e s u l t s o f hypotheses one and t h r e e means t h a t t h e l e v e l of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n Japanese might be h i g h e r than t h e l e v e l a n t i c i p a t e d from t h e l i t e r a t u r e , a t l e a s t among young c h i l d r e n , and t h a t the change r e a l i z e d i n word a s s o c i a -t i o n as a s h i f t from Japanese-type s y n t a g m a t i c t o E n g l i s h - t y p e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g may not be so s a l i e n t as o r i g i n a l l y e x p e c t e d . In t h i s r e g a r d , the q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e f o u n d between E n g l i s h and J a p a n e s e p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s c o n f i r m s the c o n t e n t i o n t h a t b i l i n g u a l Japanese c h i l d r e n have two d i f f e r e n t networks i n E n g l i s h and Japanese, i n accordance w i t h the l i t e r a t u r e ( K o l e r s 152 1963). A l t h o u g h the f a c t t h a t the method used i n the a n a l y s i s was d e v i s e d by the a u t h o r might cause some c r i t i c i s m r e g a r d i n g the a u t h e n t i c i t y o f i t s r e s u l t , t h e c l o s e e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e r e s p o n s e s does r e v e a l t h a t c u l t u r a l l y d i s t i n c t i v e a s s o c i a t i o n s do not t r a n s f e r t o t h e o t h e r language. For i n s t a n c e , ' p i c k l e d p l u m , ' t h e r e s p o n s e common i n Japanese t o the s t i m u l u s 'sour' i s a v e r y sour t r a d i t i o n a l Japanese food and d i d not appear a t a l l i n E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s . On the o t h e r hand, the response 'pepper' t o ' s a l t ' t h e most common r e s p o n s e i n E n g l i s h i s r e p l a c e d by words meaning ' s a l t y ' i n Japanese: A l t h o u g h s a l t and pepper do show up i n Japanese meals, they do not form a s t r o n g a s s o c i a t i v e c o n n e c t i o n i n Japanese. The c o m p a r i s o n o f p r i m a r y r e s p o n s e s o f t h i s s t u d y t o the m o n o l i n g u a l d a t a of E n t w i s l e and of L e i c e s t e r does p r o v e t h a t E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n o f Japanese c h i l d r e n i s v e r y c l o s e t o the E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l d a t a , c o n s o l i d a t i n g f u r t h e r the assu m p t i o n t h a t b i l i n g u a l s g i v e m o n o l i n g u a l L I word a s s o c i a t i o n t o L I and m o n o l i n g u a l L2 word a s s o c i a t i o n t o L 2 . The anomalous performance o f the grade-one s u b j e c t s ( r e l a t i v e t o t h e o l d e r s u b j e c t s ) , however, r a i s e s the q u e s t i o n of what i s t h e m o n o l i n g u a l norm i n word a s s o c i a t i o n f o r the young second language l e a r n e r . H y p o t h e s i s f i v e assumed t h a t i t would be the norm o f the m o n o l i n g u a l s o f comparable age. The r e s u l t , c o n s i d e r e d t o be genuine even w i t h t h e d i f f e r e n c e o f sample s i z e between t h e E n t w i s l e s t u d y and the p r e s e n t one, may mean t h a t the t a r g e t i s 153 always t h e a d u l t norm r e g a r d l e s s o f how o l d t h e l e a r n e r i s . Depending on t h e a b i l i t y of t h e l e a r n e r , he o r she c o u l d sometimes s u r p a s s t h e l e v e l o f h i s / h e r contemporary m o n o l i n g u a l s . The f a c t t h a t the two o t h e r grade s u b j e c t s d i d not produce more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s t h a n t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s and t h a t g r a d e one s u b j e c t s a r e c o n s i d e r e d t o be s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n d e r s e i t h e r by c o g n i t i v e l i m i t a t i o n o r l i m i t e d l i n g u i s t i c e x p e r i e n c e i s p e r p l e x i n g . M o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n , t o o , a r e s t r i v i n g f o r t h e a d u l t norm. Why can second language l e a r n e r s go c l o s e r t o t h e t a r g e t norm b e f o r e t h e m o n o l i n g u a l s ? Does t h e f a c t t h a t they a r e b i l i n g u a l s c o n t r i b u t e i n any way? I n o r d e r t o answer t h e s e q u e s t i o n s , more d a t a w i t h more c o n t r o l i n E n g l i s h a b i l i t y a r e needed. The p r e s e n t d a t a i n d i c a t e t h e p r o b l e m s , b u t do n o t p r o v i d e t h e a n s w e r s . The q u e s t i o n of whether b e i n g b i l i n g u a l promotes l i n g u i s t i c s o p h i s t i c a t i o n l e a d s us t o unexpected r e s u l t s of t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s e s p e c i a l l y i n E n g l i s h . Even though t h e language i n which a s s o c i a t i o n s were t o be made was not s p e c i f i e d , t r a n s l a t i o n was not e x p e c t e d because no s t u d i e s , i n c l u d i n g L e i c e s t e r , r e p o r t e d any. I n f a c t , L e i c e s t e r c o n c l u d e d t h a t " J a p a n e s e ESL s t u d e n t s do not r e v e r t t o t h e i r n a t i v e tongue v o c a b u l a r y s t o r a g e system f o r v o c a b u l a r y i t e m s they need i n E n g l i s h " (1981, p.91). I n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , however, t h e s u b j e c t s sometimes d i d r e l y on t h e i r n a t i v e language i n g i v i n g r e s p o n s e s t o E n g l i s h s t i m u l i . One e x p l a n a t i o n might be found i n the f a c t t h a t t e s t a d m i n i s t r a t i o n was made i n a t o t a l l y Japanese environment i n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y . The p r e s e n c e o f t h e J a p a n e s e e x p e r i m e n t e r , and t h e J a p a n e s e 154 s c h o o l s e t t i n g may have a l l c o n t r i b u t e d t o k e e p i n g the Japanese s t a t e o f mind i n the s u b j e c t s , w h i l e the L e i c e s t e r s t u d y was done i n a c o m p l e t e l y o p p o s i t e environment, a t a Canadian u n i v e r s i t y by a C a n a d i a n e x p e r i m e n t e r w i t h n o t h i n g a v a i l a b l e t o remind the s u b j e c t s of Japan. B e s i d e s t h i s c i r c u m s t a n t i a l e x p l a n a t i o n , t h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e t h a t language m i x i n g does o c c u r i n i t i a l l y among young s u b j e c t s . R e d l i n g e r e t a l . (1980) r e p o r t e d t h a t the i n i t i a l h i g h m i x i n g was observed t o d e c r e a s e w i t h language development, w i t h nouns t h e most f r e q u e n t l y mixed. A l t h o u g h the R e d l i n g e r s t u d y i s on a c t u a l d i s c o u r s e , i t i s p l a u s i b l e t h a t m i x i n g i n word a s s o c i a t i o n o c c u r s i n i t i a l l y . I t does n o t , however, e x p l a i n grade f i v e s t u d e n t s ' h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s ( u n l e s s t h e i r E n g l i s h a b i l i t y was o v e r e s t i m a t e d ) . The many t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s were t h e d i r e c t t r a n s l a t i o n o f s t i m u l i w o r d s , w h i c h , upon i n t r o s p e c t i o n , the a u t h o r f i n d s v e r y u n d e r s t a n d a b l e . I f o n e - t o - o n e m a t c h i n g o f J a p a n e s e and E n g l i s h words i s the way t o l e a r n E n g l i s h , i t i s n a t u r a l t o have Japanese t r a n s l a t i o n as a response t o a word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t i n E n g l i s h . I f one i s t o c o n s t r u c t a second language v o c a b u l a r y w i t h o u t t h e m e d i a t i o n o f the f i r s t l anguage, i t i s by c o n n e c t i n g d i r e c t l y E n g l i s h words and c o n c e p t s , t r a n s l a t i o n response i s u n l i k e l y t o happen. I f i n d e e d the young l e a r n e r s a c q u i r e second language v o c a b u l a r y i n d e p e n d e n t l y from t h e i r f i r s t l a nguage, and t h e o l d e r l e a r n e r s by a s s o c i a t i n g second language v o c a b u l a r y to the f i r s t language v o c a b u l a r y , t h e h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f grade f i v e s t u d e n t s can be e x p l a i n e d . The young l e a r n e r s , h a v i n g l i t t l e i n t e r f a c e between t h e Japanese and E n g l i s h language systems, produce a s s o c i a t i o n s o n l y w i t h i n each s y s t e m , w h i l e i n t h e o l d e r l e a r n e r s , h a v i n g an E n g l i s h system l a r g e l y based on Japanese, a s s o c i a t i v e c o n n e c t i o n s are s t r o n g between the two systems as w e l l as w i t h i n each language system, r e s u l t i n g i n the h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s . T h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n d i r e c t l y s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e i s an age d i f f e r e n c e i n language l e a r n i n g , though i t does not n e c e s s a r i l y s u p p o r t the s u p e r i o r i t y o f the young. A l t h o u g h the f i r s t language i n t e r f e r e n c e i n the second language has the n e g a t i v e c o n n o t a t i o n , b u i l d i n g up a v o c a b u l a r y system from n o t h i n g may be more d i f f i c u l t t h a n a t t a c h i n g a d i f f e r e n t system t o the a l r e a d y e x i s t i n g one e s p e c i a l l y a t the i n i t i a l s t a g e . T h i s c o u l d be v e r y t r u e a t the i n i t i a l s t a g e , and may have r e s u l t e d i n the b e t t e r performance o f a d u l t l e a r n e r s than c h i l d r e n i n v a r i o u s language a t t a i n m e n t e x p e r i m e n t s (see i n t r o d u c t i o n ) . Hammerly (1974) i n f a c t , found t h a t the use o f f i r s t language i s s u p e r i o r t o the use of p i c t u r e s ( d i r e c t a s s o c i a t i o n between a concept and a word) i n v o c a b u l a r y t e a c h i n g . I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h i s i n i t i a l s u p e r i o r i t y o f o l d e r s u b j e c t s wears o f f as t h e v o c a b u l a r y system e v o l v e s i n t o a more c o m p l e x n a t i v e - l i k e system i n c o r p o r a t i n g language s p e c i f i c s u b t l e semantic d i f f e r e n c e s and s e l e c t i o n a l r e s t r i c t i o n s . The p a r t o f the second l a n g u a g e system dependent on the f i r s t language must shake o f f 156 the f i r s t language i n f l u e n c e and a t t a i n t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e n a t i v e s y s t e m a t t h e same t i m e . The h i n d r a n c e o f t h e a d u l t l e a r n e r s i n s e c o n d l a n g u a g e may stem f r o m t h i s p r o c e s s . At t h i s p o i n t , the f i r s t language i n t e r f e r e n c e can be t r u l y i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h second language development. I f t h i s i s t h e c a s e , however, the lower r a t e o f t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s o f grade t h r e e s u b j e c t s than grade one and f i v e must be a c c o u n t e d f o r . A s s u m i n g t h a t g r a d e t h r e e s u b j e c t s w o u l d have g i v e n t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s somewhere between t h o s e o f g r a d e one and f i v e s t u d e n t s w i t h e v e r y t h i n g e l s e e q u a l , one p o s s i b i l i t y i s t h a t the E n g l i s h l e v e l o f grade t h r e e s u b j e c t s was not s u p e r i o r t o the two o t h e r g r a d e s , r e s u l t i n g i n l e s s r e l i a n c e on the f i r s t l anguage. T h i s i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n , a g a i n cannot be c o n f i r m e d u n l e s s t h e o v e r a l l E n g l i s h a b i l i t y o f each grade l e v e l i s known. The o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y i s t h a t grade t h r e e s u b j e c t s , b e i n g i n t r a n s i t i o n from independent second language l e a r n i n g of grade one t o dependent second language l e a r n i n g o f grade f i v e , behave r a t h e r e r r a t i c a l l y . In any c a s e , we need more i n f o r m a t i o n on each grade l e v e l b e f o r e we can a s c e r t a i n whether the i n c r e a s i n g t r e n d of E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s as the grade advances i s t r u e . In the s e c t i o n on the R e v i s e d A s s o c i a t i o n Theory, we touched upon the argument about 'shared' o r ' s e p a r a t e ' v o c a b u l a r y systems. The l i t e r a t u r e s h o w i n g t h a t b i l i n g u a l s respond i n a language-s p e c i f i c manner t o each language seems t o s u p p o r t t h e s e p a r a t e h y p o t h e s i s ( K o l e r s 1963). The p r e s e n t d a t a show the language-s p e c i f i c p a t t e r n v e r y w e l l , as a l r e a d y m e n t i o n e d . The most 157 p l a u s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n which i s not i n c o n f l i c t w i t h e i t h e r t r a n s l a -t i o n r e s p o n s e s and the d i f f e r e n t p a t t e r n s o f E n g l i s h and Japanese r e s p o n s e s i s t h a t grade f i v e c h i l d r e n i n i t i a l l y a t t a i n s e c o n d l a n g u a g e v o c a b u l a r y by e q u a t i n g a word t o a word i n the n a t i v e tongue and then g r a d u a l l y d e v e l o p i n g an i n d e p e n d e n t v o c a b u l a r y system. Whether the younger s u b j e c t s r e l y on the n a t i v e language f o r t he i n i t i a l c o n s t r u c t i o n o f v o c a b u l a r y needs more e x t e n s i v e s t u d y b e f o r e i t can be answered. T h i s does not c o n f l i c t w i t h the o t h e r f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y t h a t g r a d e f i v e s t u d e n t s had a r a t h e r low r a t e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . A p a r t from t h e r e s u l t s r e g a r d i n g the h y p o t h e s e s , t h e l a r g e s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e found i n the a n a l y s i s i s p e r p l e x i n g . I f t h e s e two s u b j e c t groups d i f f e r on some v a r i a b l e which f u n d a m e n t a l l y a f f e c t s word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s , t h e n t h i s d i f f e r e n c e i s g e n u i n e , and t h e V a n c o u v e r p o p u l a t i o n i s d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e S e a t t l e p o p u l a t i o n . I f the d i f f e r e n c e i n p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s caused by secondary f a c t o r s such as t e s t i n g environment, t h e n the two p o p u l a t i o n s might not d i f f e r i n word a s s o c i a t i o n b e h a v i o r b e c a u s e t h e c i r c u m s t a n t i a l v a r i a b l e s c o u l d have t e m p o r a r i l y m o d i f i e d i t . As f o r the v a r i a b l e s which might s e p a r a t e the p o p u l a t i o n s , one p o s s i b i l i t y i s t h a t they c o l l e c t i v e l y have a d i f f e r e n t l e v e l o f E n g l i s h a b i l i t y . S i n c e the s t u d e n t s a r e e n r o l l e d i n p u b l i c s c h o o l s i n a r e a s as f a r a p a r t as Vancouver and S e a t t l e , i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e s c h o o l s i n S e a t t l e have lower s t a n d a r d s f o r 158 a d m i t t i n g second language s p e a k e r s t o t h e i r E n g l i s h c l a s s e s than t h o s e i n Vancouver. T h i s r e l a t e s t o the h y p o t h e s i s t h a t improved E n g l i s h a b i l i t y p roduces i n c r e a s e d p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . The d i f f e r e n c e f o u n d i n Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g , however, s u g g e s t s t h a t the two s u b j e c t groups d i f f e r not o n l y i n E n g l i s h but a l s o i n Japanese. I t may be e v i d e n t t h a t Vancouver s u b j e c t s have a f u n d a m e n t a l l y h i g h e r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e p a t t e r n . I f t h a t i s the c a s e , the q u e s t i o n i s : what causes Vancouver s u b j e c t s t o have such a b e h a v i o r p a t t e r n ? I t c o u l d be t h a t t h e t e a c h i n g methods of t h e two Japanese supplementary s c h o o l s p l a y a major r o l e . As a l r e a d y mentioned, t h e s e two s c h o o l s c l e a r l y d i f f e r i n t h e i r s t r u c t u r e s and c l a s s o p e r a t i o n s . The S e a t t l e s c h o o l , h a v i n g l a r g e r c l a s s e s and two t e a c h e r s i n charge of each c l a s s , may v e r y w e l l g i v e more Japanese i n p u t t o i t s s t u d e n t s , r e s u l t i n g i n t h e i r l o w e r p e r c e n t a g e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . S i n c e t h e c o s t o f m a i n t a i n i n g t h e s c h o o l , i n c l u d i n g wages f o r t e a c h e r s , i s l a r g e l y p a i d f o r by t h e p a r e n t s t h e m s e l v e s , i t c o u l d be t h a t S e a t t l e p a r e n t s a r e more eager t o m a i n t a i n the Japanese e d u c a t i o n o f t h e i r c h i l d r e n by p a y i n g t w i c e as much f o r the t e a c h e r s . As R e s t r a i n s (1969) found o u t , t h e t e a c h i n g method i s sometimes r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g . However, n o t h i n g i s known about th e a c t u a l t e a c h i n g e x c e p t f o r t e x t b o o k s . The t e a c h i n g i s e n t i r e l y up t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r s , y e t as M e f f r e d e t a l . (1979b) found c o r r e l a t i o n s between d i d a c t i c t e c h n i q u e s and 159 word a s s o c i a t i o n , the p o s s i b i l i t y remains t h a t Vancouver t e a c h e r s employ d i f f e r e n t t e a c h i n g methods than S e a t t l e t e a c h e r s . Another e x p l a n a t i o n might, be f o u n d i n t h e f a c t t h a t t h e t e s t i n g e n v i r o n m e n t was t o t a l l y d i f f e r e n t , b e t ween t h e s e two s c h o o l s . For i n s t a n c e , when the t e s t was a d m i n i s t e r e d i n Vancouver, no t e a c h e r was p r e s e n t , but i n S e a t t l e , t h e r e was always a t l e a s t one t e a c h e r p r e s e n t . In Vancouver, t h e t e s t was a d m i n i s t e r e d a f t e r r e g u l a r s c h o o l h o u r s . U s u a l l y , t h e r e were p a r e n t s w a i t i n g i n the c o r r i d o r t o p i c k up t h e i r c h i l d r e n . In S e a t t l e , the t e s t was a l w a y s done r i g h t a f t e r t h e c l a s s broke f o r a r e c e s s , o r r i g h t b e f o r e the c l a s s . The q u e s t i o n a r i s e s - d i d the Vancouver s u b j e c t s have more time p r e s s u r e i n the t e s t because they wanted t o go home as soon as p o s s i b l e ? I f t h i s i s t r u e , the f a c t t h a t t h e y s t i l l p e r f o r m e d h i g h i n Japanese p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g p u z z l e s us, f o r i t i s n o r m a l l y a d u l t s who respond t o time p r e s s u r e by g i v i n g same f o r m c l a s s r e s p o n s e s ( S i i p o l a e t a l . 1 9 5 5 ) . E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n n o r m a l l y g i v e s p a t i a l - t e m p o r a l c o n t i g u i t y r e s p o n s e s (Cramer 1968). The Vancouver group showed more p a r a d i g m a t i c i t y i n b o t h E n g l i s h and Japanese r a t h e r l i k e a d u l t s . In a d d i t i o n , t h e r e was t i m e p r e s s u r e f o r S e a t t l e s u b j e c t s t e s t e d a t r e c e s s , f o r t hey c o u l d p l a y a f t e r the t e s t was o v e r . Thus time p r e s s u r e i s not l i k e l y t he cause. Theoretical Implications I f t h e s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e r e s u l t e d f r o m t e a c h i n g method and i f t h e t e a c h i n g method a d i f f e r e n c e i n c a u s e d c o g n i t i v e 160 d i f f e r e n c e a t t h e s e Japanese s c h o o l s , t h i s s u p p o r t s the C o g n i t i v e Theory of the S-P s h i f t which contends t h a t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i s c o g n i t i v e l y bound. T h e r e f o r e , the h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e o f E n g l i s h p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s by the s u b j e c t s of t h i s s t u d y compared t o m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n cannot, be e x p l a i n e d , f o r t h e low p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of grade one m o n o l i n g u a l s was supposed t o be caused by l i m i t e d c o g n i t i o n of t h a t age. Even i f we assume t h a t grade-one s t u d e n t s of t h i s s t u d y has e x c e p t i o n a l IQs, t h i s cannot, e x p l a i n t h e s u p e r i o r p e r f o r m a n c e by f i r s t g r a d e r s as compared t o f i f t h g r a d e r s . U n l e s s we c o n t r o l IQs and v a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f E n g l i s h a b i l i t y , the d a t a a r e i n c o n c l u s i v e i n t h i s r e g a r d , though s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e does suggest the e x i s t e n c e o f a v a r i a b l e which i n f l u e n c e s p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y . P r o v i d e d t h a t the sample p o p u l a t i o n had normal i n t e l l i g e n c e , one t h e o r y which c o u l d e x p l a i n the h i g h e s t p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g o f g r a d e one s t u d e n t s w o u l d be the A s s o c i a t i o n i s t Theory t h a t the s u b j e c t s have been exposed t o p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e - i n d u c i n g language samples. The f a c t t h a t they had been i n N o r t h American s c h o o l s from the s t a r t o f E n g l i s h language may e x p l a i n t h a t . A n o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y i s s u g g e s t e d by the Semantic F e a t u r e Theory. Grade one s t u d e n t s who may s t i l l have an a c t i v e language a c q u i s i t i o n d e v i c e n a t u r a l l y absorb the t y p i c a l word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n of E n g l i s h , w i t h an a c c e l e r a t e d f e a t u r e l i s t c o n s t r u c t i o n , by b e i n g e x p o s e d t o two l a n g u a g e s . Y e t , as mentioned, t h e r e i s no way of knowing t h i s from t h e p r e s e n t d a t a . 161 The e x i s t e n c e of t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s and the d i s t i n c t i v e a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n s o f two l a n g u a g e s i n t h i s s t u d y seem t o s u p p o r t the R e v i s e d A s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y . I f words i n t h e • s e c o n d l a n g u a g e were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c o r r e s p o n d i n g words i n the f i r s t l anguage, the c o l l e c t i o n of t h i s t y pe of a s s o c i a t i o n o b v i o u s l y becomes u n e c o n o m i c a l as t h e s e c o n d language v o c a b u l a r y grows. When s p e a k i n g a second language, a word must be mediated by the f i r s t language a l l the t i m e . Thus the c o n s t r u c t i o n of an independent second language v o c a b u l a r y s t a r t s g r a d u a l l y w i t h f a m i l i a r words r e o r g a n i z e d e a r l y and u n f a m i l i a r words s t i l l m ediated by the f i r s t language. By i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e S e m a n t i c F e a t u r e T h e o r y , we c o u l d assume t h a t young l e a r n e r s such as f i r s t g r a d e r s s i m p l y o r g a n i z e t h e s e c o n d l a n g u a g e v o c a b u l a r y a c c o r d i n g t o the same f e a t u r e l i s t as the f i r s t language. A l t h o u g h t h e r e i s some c o n f u s i o n i n i t i a l l y , t h e y i n s t i n c t i v e l y a c q u i r e the a s s o c i a t i o n r u l e s of second language and t h i s produces the second language a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n r i g h t away. The o l d e r s u b j e c t s , h o w e v e r, no l o n g e r have the a b i l i t y t o a s s i g n f e a t u r e s d i r e c t l y t o second language words, and t h e r e f o r e , c o n s t r u c t a word l i s t ( i n accordance w i t h the R e v i s e d A s s o c i a t i o n T h e o r y ) , r e s u l t i n g i n t h e r e l a t i v e l y l ow p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g o b s e r v e d i n t h i s s t u d y . As t h i s m o d i f i e d t h e o r y s u g g e s t s , i f we assume t h a t young l e a r n e r s o f a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e produce the second language word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n e f f e c t i v e l y form the s t a r t , t h i s i m p l i e s t h a t the young 162 do have t h e a d v a n t a g e i n s e c o n d l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g . T h i s i s e x a c t l y t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e c r i t i c a l p e r i o d h y p o t h e s i s , which contends t h a t c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s d i f f e r i n language l e a r n i n g . In o r d e r t o v e r i f y t h i s t h e o r y , however, one has t o a s c e r t a i n whether the o l d e r s u b j e c t s would have d i f f i c u l t y i n g i v i n g t h e most common response the m o n o l i n g u a l s p e a k e r s of L2 would g i v e , whereas the young s u b j e c t s would have no such d i f f i c u l t y . More i m p o r t a n t l y , many more s t u d i e s s h o u l d be done on b i l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n s t o d i s c o v e r whether the r e s u l t s of the present, s t u d y a r e u n i v e r s a l . Word Association as Measurement of Similarity and Dissimilarity As s e e n , t h i s s t u d y does n o t p r o v e t h a t i n t h e c a s e o f J a p a n e s e s u b j e c t s , t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g c o u l d be used as an i n d i c a t o r o f s i m i l a r i t y o r d i s s i m i l a r i t y of L I and L2. However, the present, s t u d y cannot be c o n s i d e r e d as c o n t r a d i c t i n g L e i c e s t e r s i n c e the E n g l i s h a b i l i t y of the s u b j e c t s was not so w e l l c o n t r o l l e d i n t h i s s t u d y w i t h younger l e a r n e r s . In a sense, the r e s u l t s do i n d i c a t e the v a l i d i t y of the S-P s h i f t f r o m a t h e o r e t i c a l v i e w p o i n t . The l o w r a t e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g of grade f i v e c h i l d r e n i n E n g l i s h do i n d i c a t e t h a t c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g i e s do not t r a n s f e r . The c o n t e n t i o n t h a t c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g y i s not t r a n s f e r a b l e from language t o l a n g u a g e i s a l s o s u p p o r t e d by K o l e r s (1964). K o l e r s t r a i n e d b i l i n g u a l s u b j e c t s t o say the E n g l i s h a l p h a b e t backwards and t e s t e d i t i n the s u b j e c t s ' 163 n a t i v e language, and d i d the o p p o s i t e t o o t h e r s u b j e c t s . T r a n s f e r d i d not o c c u r when the two languages were v e r y d i f f e r e n t . Thus K o l e r s c o n c l u d e d t h a t c o g n i t i v e o p e r a t i o n does not t r a n s f e r t o o t h e r l a n g u a g e s . Thus, however w e l l d e v e l o p e d c o g n i t i v e l y the l e a r n e r may be, word a s s o c i a t i o n seems t o s t a r t from s t e p one i n a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e . A c l o s e l o o k a t t h e raw d a t a r e v e a l s t h a t indeed t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n t a s s o c i a t i v e r e s p o n s e s t o the same s t i m u l u s a c c o r d i n g t o the language. The example o f ' s a l t ' y i e l d i n g 'pepper' would be termed c o o r d i n a t e . The l a n g u a g e - s p e c i f i c a s s o c i a t i o n s do seem t o be c u l t u r a l as seen i n the example o f ' p i c k l e d plum.' I f word a s s o c i a t i o n i n v o l v e s the a c q u i s i t i o n o f c u l t u r a l h a b i t s , t h i s may be e s s e n t i a l i n communication. Moran (1968) t h e o r i z e d a 'common h i e r a r c h y ' t o be used i n communication and ' i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s ' f o r a s s o c i a t i o n . Word a s s o c i a t i o n o f second language l e a r n e r s c o u l d be a c t u a l l y a common h i e r a r c h y , not p e r s o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , which r e s u l t i n s t e r e o t y p e d r e s p o n s e s found by Lambert and MacNamara (1973). S i n c e s u c h l a n g u a g e s as Ja p a n e s e and Chinese a t t e s t t h a t a 'common h i e r a r c h y ' i s not n e c e s s a r i l y b a s e d on a p a r t i c u l a r c o g n i t i v e s t r a t e g y n o r on minimum c o n t r a s t r u l e s , n e i t h e r the C o g n i t i v e Theory n o r t h e S e m a n t i c F e a t u r e T h e o r y d e n i e s t h a t the g r a d u a l a p p r o x i m a t i o n o f word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n i s connected w i t h improved second language a b i l i t y . 164 The d a t a t h a t the k i n d s o f r e s p o n s e s t o t h e same s t i m u l i i n E n g l i s h and Japanese do d i f f e r even among grade f i v e s u b j e c t s (who have t h e l o w e s t r a t e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g ) shows t h a t E n g l i s h v o c a b u l a r y i s b u i l t up i n d e p e n d e n t l y of Japanese. T h i s p o i n t s u g g e s t s t h a t word a s s o c i a t i o n may be i n d i c a t i v e o f l a n g u a g e d e v e l o p m e n t , b u t s t i l l , t he t r a n s l a t i o n r e s p o n s e s l e n d some doubt t o t h i s c l a i m . The q u e s t i o n r e m a i n s : P r o v i d e d t h a t g r a d e one s t u d e n t s have a low r a t e o f p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g i n E n g l i s h , would t h e s e r e s p o n s e s s t i l l be d i f f e r e n t from those i n Japanese a s s o c i a t i o n ? Do grade one s t u d e n t s r a t h e r behave l i k e m o n o l i n g u a l k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n ? Thus, we need more d a t a c o n t r o l l e d f o r i n t e l l i g e n c e and E n g l i s h a b i l i t y . Only then we can answer whether L e i c e s t e r ' s f i n d i n g s h o l d t r u e f o r c h i l d r e n o r n o t , and whether the S-P s h i f t r e f l e c t s i n c r e a s i n g E n g l i s h a b i l i t y . As a f i n a l n o t e , the c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l format o f t h i s s t u d y must be d i s c u s s e d i n terms of t h e method of s t u d y i n g word a s s o c i a -t i o n . T h i s method has been employed by m o n o l i n g u a l n o r m a t i v e s t u d i e s such as E n t w i s l e (1963) and Palermo and J e n k i n s (1964), and t h e r e s u l t s were c o n s i d e r e d t o be r e l i a b l e . The use by L e i c e s t e r (1981) a l s o seems t o be s u c c e s s f u l , y i e l d i n g a p e r s u a d i n g r e s u l t . In the s t u d y o f young b i l i n g u a l s u b j e c t s , however, t h e r e seem t o be too many v a r i a b l e s which must be c o n s i d e r e d and con-t r o l l e d , and a l o n g i t u d i n a l d e s i g n would have been more r e v e a l i n g . 165 The c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e c h i l d r e n ' s c o g n i t i v e m a t u r a t i o n and f i r s t l anguage development a l o n e makes the c o n t r o l of E n g l i s h a b i l i t y d i f f i c u l t . For example, are we t o c o n t r o l t h e l e v e l o f a t t a i n m e n t of the second language a g a i n s t the maximum l e v e l a t t a i n a b l e a t a p a r t i c u l a r age, o r are we t o c o n t r o l t h e l e v e l o f a t t a i n m e n t compared t o the mastery o f t h e i r f i r s t language? With c o g n i t i v e development c l e a r l y a f f e c t i n g t h e p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g , a t l e a s t w i t h i n t h e same age l e v e l , a r e we t o compare c h i l d r e n based on t h e i r m ental age r a t h e r than c h r o n o l o g i c a l age? Should we a l s o measure the f i r s t language p r o f i c i e n c y ? How a r e we t o c o n t r o l e x p o s u r e t o s e c o n d l a n g u a g e o f c h i l d r e n ? e t c , e t c . Moran's t h e s i s o f ' i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s ' a l s o s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e i s a l a r g e i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e which may cause a d i f f e r e n c e i n the s t a t i s t i c s a t l a r g e . A c c o r d i n g t o Moran, we'd b e t t e r t e s t a group o f i n d i v i d u a l s who have s i m i l a r i d i o d y n a m i c s e t s . With a l l t h e s e q u e s t i o n s c o n s i d e r e d , i t seems v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o e x t r a c t a genuine p i c t u r e o f l a n g u a g e d e v e l o p m e n t t h r o u g h l a n g u a g e phenomenon e a s i l y a f f e c t e d by e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s . Word a s s o c i a t i o n , b e i n g one o f them, may be b e t t e r s t u d i e d i n t h e l a r g e s c a l e l o n g i t u d i n a l s t u d i e s i n which a group o f s u b j e c t s i s t e s t e d p e r i o d i c a l l y as Moran d i d i n t h e c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d y o f A m e r i c a n and J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n ( 1 9 7 3 ) . The number o f the f a c t o r s t o be c o n t r o l l e d w i l l be much s m a l l e r , and e s p e c i a l l y the b a s i c ones s u c h a s i n t e l l i g e n c e , f i r s t l a n g u a g e a t t a i n m e n t , exposure t o second language w i l l be t a k e n c a r e o f . 166 Summary and Conclusion Three groups o f Japanese s p e a k i n g c h i l d r e n a c q u i r i n g E n g l i s h as a second language were a d m i n i s t e r e d a word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t i n E n g l i s h and Japanese c o n s i s t i n g of n i n e nouns, n i n e a d j e c t i v e s and n i n e v e r b s . There were t h i r t y c h i l d r e n i n e a c h o f g r a d e s one, t h r e e , and f i v e . Data were taken from two s c h o o l s . T h e i r grade l e v e l was assumed t o i n d i c a t e t h e i r E n g l i s h p r o f i c i e n c y l e v e l . 1. I t was p r e d i c t e d t h a t , as i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s , the Japanese c h i l d r e n w o u l d g i v e m o s t l y s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n the Japanese word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k . No s i g n i f i c a n t grade d i f f e r e n c e was found among the t h r e e g r o u p s , y e t the d a t a are i n c o n c l u s i v e , f o r the grade one s u b j e c t s o f one s c h o o l produced fewer s y n t a g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s than even m o n o l i n g u a l E n g l i s h c h i l d r e n o f the same grade. 2. I t was p r e d i c t e d t h a t the h i g h e r grade s t u d e n t s would g i v e more p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s i n E n g l i s h t h a n l o w e r g r a d e s t u d e n t s , a c c o r d i n g t o L e i c e s t e r ' s s t u d y ( 1 9 8 1 ) , f o r the h i g h e r grade s t u d e n t s have a h i g h e r l e v e l o f E n g l i s h a b i l i t y . The r e s u l t s were c o n t r a r y t o the p r e d i c t i o n , w i t h grade one s t u d e n t s g i v i n g the h i g h e s t number of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . T h i s suggested two e x p l a n a t i o n s : 1) t h a t the p r e d i c t i o n i s g e n u i n e l y a t f a u l t 2) t h a t the a s s u m p t i o n o f E n g l i s h a b i l i t y c o r r e l a t e s w i t h g r a d e l e v e l i s a t f a u l t . F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s showed a s i g n i f i c a n t s c h o o l d i f f e r e n c e , and t h e d i f f e r e n c e of E n g l i s h a b i l i t y and of t e s t i n g 167 environment were suggested as i t s cause. The e d u c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e c o u l d n o t , however, be h e l d s o l e l y i n f l u e n t i a l . 3. I t was p r e d i c t e d t h a t the p e r c e n t a g e of p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n d i n g w o u l d d i f f e r i n E n g l i s h and J a p a n e s e r e s p o n s e s . T h i s p r e d i c t i o n was c o n f i r m e d , w i t h E n g l i s h always b e i n g more p a r a d i g m a t i c . T h i s i s i n agreement w i t h t h e l i t e r a t u r e s t a t i n g t h a t b i l i n g u a l s have two d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f word a s s o c i a t i o n s and t h a t s e c o n d l a n g u a g e word a s s o c i a t i o n i s s i m i l a r t o t h e m o n o l i n g u a l p a t t e r n o f t h a t l anguage. 4. I t was p r e d i c t e d t h a t Japanese c h i l d r e n have d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of r e s p o n s e s t o t h e e q u i v a l e n t s t i m u l i i n J a p a n e s e and E n g l i s h . E n g l i s h r e s p o n s e s d i d have t y p i c a l l y E n g l i s h - t y p e r e s p o n s e s and Japanese r e s p o n s e s , t y p i c a l l y Japanese. S e p a r a t e a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n s were f u r t h e r c o n f i r m e d . 5. I t was p r e d i c t e d t h a t J a p a n e s e c h i l d r e n as compared t o E n g l i s h m o n o l i n g u a l c h i l d r e n , would g i v e f e w e r p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s . However, g r a d e one s t u d e n t s produced n e a r l y t w i c e as many p a r a d i g m a t i c r e s p o n s e s , w i t h t h e o t h e r two grades e i t h e r s i m i l a r o r l o w e r . T h i s f i n d i n g s u g g e s t s t h a t grade one s t u d e n t s , b e i n g v e r y young, might have the advantage i n l e a r n i n g the t y p i c a l word a s s o c i a t i o n p a t t e r n o f t h e s e c o n d l a n g u a g e , y e t w i t h o u t c o n t r o l i n the i n t e l l i g e n c e and E n g l i s h a b i l i t y v a r i a b l e s , t h e r e s u l t i s i n c o n c l u s i v e . Bibliography Anderson, F. and Beh, W. The r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of v e r b a l memory i n c h i l d h o o d . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1968, 7: 1049-0153. A s c h a f f e n b u r g , G. E x p e r i m e n t e l l e S t u d i e s uber A s s o c i a t i o n s . In E s p e r , E.A. A n a l o g y and a s s o c i a t i o n s i n l i n g u i s t i c s and  p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga: U. of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. A s h e r , J . , and G a r c i a , R. The o p t i m a l age t o l e a r n a f o r e i g n language. The Modern Language J o u r n a l , 1969, 53:334-341. In K rashen, S.D., S c a r c e l l a , R.C., and Long, M.H. ( e d s . ) , C h i l d - a d u l t d i f f e r e n c e s i n second language a c q u i s i t i o n . Rowley, MA: Newbery House P u b l i s h e r s , 1982. B a r t e l , N.R., G r i l l , J . J . a n d B a r t e l , H.W. The s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g -m a t i c s h i f t i n l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l e d and n o r m a l c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of L e a r n i n g D i s a b i l i t i e s , 1973, 6:518-523. B e a u v o i s , J.L. V a l i d i t y of P/S c r i t e r i o n f o r c l a s s i f y i n g a s s o c i a t i v e r e s p o n s e s : Two e x p e r i m e n t s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of Psycho- l i n g u i s t i c s , 1973, 2:55-70. B e t t n e r , L.G., Blum, J.E. and J a r v i k , L.F. Kent R o s a n o f f word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t : Age t u r n s w i t h and w i t h o u t demenetia. A c t a  G e n e t i c a l M e d i c a l e t G e m e l l o l o g i c a l : Turn R e s e a r c h , 1982, 31:1-7. B e r r u e t a - C l e m e n t , J.R. E t h n i c and I n t r a - e t h n i c d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n  i n c o g n i t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : A s t u d y o f b i l i n g u a l s and  m o n o l i n g u a l s i n Neba.j , G u a t e m a l a . U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , 1978. B j o r k l a n d , D.F. and Thompson, B.E. C a t e g o r y t y p i c a l i t y e f f e c t s i n c h i l d r e n ' s memmory performance : q u a l i t a t i v e and q u a n t i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e s i n the p r o c e s s i n g of c a t e g o r y i n f o r m a t i o n . J o u r n a l  of E x p e r i m e n t a l C h i l d P s y c h o l o g y , 1983, 35:329-344. B l e u l e r , E. Upon the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f A s s o c i a t i o n e x p e r i m e n t s . In J ung C.G., S t u d i e s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . L o n d o n : W i l l i a m Heinemann ( M e d i c a l Books) L t d , 1918. B l e u r e r , E. Textbook of p s y c h i a t r y . New York: M a c M i l l a n , 1924. Blum, H.P. The c hanging use of dreams i n p h y c h o a n a l y t i c p r a c t i c e : Dreams and f r e e a s s o c i a t i o n s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of Psycho- A n a l y s i s , 1976, 57:315-324. B r o s i e r , G.F. The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f P a r a d i g m a t i c b e h a v i o r t o  s e l e c t e d v a r i a b l e s , U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a , 1974. 169 Brown, D.H. P r i n c i p l e s of Language L e a r n i n g and T e a c h i n g . New J e r s e y : P r e n t i c e - H a l l I n c . , 1980. Brown, R.W. and Berko, J . Word A s s o c i a t i o n and the a c q u i s i t i o n of grammer. C h i l d Development, 1960, 31:1-14. Brown, R. A f i r s t language. Cambridge, Mass.: Ha r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1973. C a r a m a z z a , A. and B r o n e s , I . L a x i c a l a c c e s s i n b i l i n g u a l s B u l l e t i n of the P s y c h o s o m a t i c S o c i e t y , 1979, 13:212-214. Carrow, E. Comprehension of E n g l i s h and S p a n i s h by p r e s c h o o l M e x i c a n - A m e r i c a n c h i l d r e n . Modern Language J o u r n a l , 1971, 55:299-307. C a t t e l , J.M. E x p e r i m e n t s on the a s s o c i a t i o n of i d e a s . In E s p e r , E.A. Analogy and a s s o c i a t i o n i n l i n g u i s t i c s and p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga.: U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. C a t t e l , J.M. and B r y a n t , S. M e n t a l a s s o c i a t i o n i n v e s t i g a t e d by e x p e r i m e n t . I n E s p e r , E.A. A n a l o g y and a s s o c i a t i o n i n  l i n g u i s t i c s and p s y c h o l o g y . A t h e n s , Ga.: U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. Chen, H. and J u o l a , J.F. Dimensions of l e x i c a l c o d i n g i n Chinese and E n g l i s h Memory and C o g n i t i o n , 1982, 10:216-224. Chomsky, N. A s p e c t s of the t h e o r y of s y n t a x . Cambrige, Mass.: M.I.T. P r e s s , 1965. C l a r k , H.H. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s and l i n g u i s t i c t h e o r y . In Lyons, J . ( e d . ) , New h o r i z o n s i n l i n g u i s t i c s . Harmondsworth, Middx.: Penguin Books, 1970. C l a r k , E.V. On the c h i l d ' s a c q u i t i o n of antonyms i n two s e m a n t i c f i e l d s . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1972, 11:750-758. C o f e r , C.N. and M u s g r a v e , B.S. V e r b a l B e h a v i o r and L e a r n i n g . New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1963. Coren, S., Parae L. , and Ward, M. Commonality of word and form a s s o c i a t e s . J o u r n a l of P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1976, 42:683-690. Cramer, P. Word A s s o c i a t i o n . New York: Academic P r e s s , 1968. Cramer, P. E v i d e n c e f o r a d e v e l o p m e n t a l s h i f t i n the b a s i s f o r memory o r g a n i z a t i o n . J o u r n a l of E x p e r i m e n t a l C h i l d P s y c h o l o g y , 1973, 16: 12-22. 170 Cramer, P. I d i o d y n a m i c s e t s as d e t e r m i n a n t s o f C h i l d r e n ' s f a l s e r e c o g n i t i o n e r r o r s . Developmental P s y c h o l o g y , 1974, 10:86-92. Cummins, J . and Das, J.P. S i m u l t a n e o u s and s u c c e s s i v e s y n t h e s i s and l i n g u i s t i c p r o c e s s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of P s y c h o l o g y , 1978, 13:129-138. Dauber, J . Uber b e v o r z u g t e A s s o z i a t i o n e n und verwandte Phanomene. In E s p e r , E.H. Analogy and a s s o c i a t i o n s i n l i n g u i s t i c s and  p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga.: U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. D a v i d s o n , R.S. and Longo, N. C o n c e p t u a l development r e f l e c t e d i n age J o u r n a l of G e n e t i c P s y c h o l o g y , 1960, 96:85-92. Deese J . Form c l a s s and t h e d e t e r m i n a n t s o f A s s o c i a t i o n s . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1962, 1: 79-84. Deese J . The s t r u c t u r e o f A s s o c i a t i o n i n language and t h o u g h t . B a l t i m o r e , Md.: John Hopkins U. P., 1965. D e V i l l i e r s , J . and D e V i l l i e r s , P.A. Language A c q u i s i t i o n . H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1978. D i V e s t a , F . J . A s i m p l e a n a l y s i s of changes w i t h age i n r e s p o n s e s t o r e s t r i c t e d word a s s o c i a t i o n t a s k . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g  and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1964, 3:505-510. D u l a y , H.C., and B u r t , M.K. N a t u r a l sequences i n c h i l d second language a c q u i s i t i o n . Language L e a r n i n g , 1974a, 24:37-53. D u l a y , H.C., and B u r t , M.K. E r r o r s and s t r a t e g i e s i n c h i l d second language a c q u i s t i o n . TESOL Q u a r t e r l y , 1974b, 8:37-53. D u p h i l h o , J.H., M e t t e r e d , R.B. and W i e l a n d , B.A. I n f l u e n c e o f e a r l y f o r m a l r e a d i n g t r a i n i n g on commonality i n c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s . J o u r n a l o f V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1969, 8: 150-151. Eastman, F.C., and R o s a n o f f , A . J . A s s o c i a t i o n i n f e e b l e - m i n d e d and d e l i q u e n t c h i l d r e n . American J o u r n a l of I n s a n i t y , 1912, 69:125-141. E b e r h a r d , C. and Owens, W.A. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s as a f u n c t i o n of b i o d a t a s u b g r o u p i n g . Development P s y c h o l o g y , 1975, 11:159-164. E b b i n g h a u s , H. Ueber das G e d a c h t n i s . In E s p e r , E.H. Analogy  and a s s o c i a t i o n s i n l i n g u i s t i c s and p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga: U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. 171 E h r i , L.C., and Ryan, E.B. Performance of b i l i n g u a l s i n a p i c t u r e -word i n f e r e n c e t a s k . J o u r n a l of P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c R e s e a r c h , 1980, 9:285-302. E k p o - U f o t , A. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s : A c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d y among c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s i n N i g e r i a and the U n i t e d S t a t e s . J o u r n a l  of C r o s s - C u l t r u a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1978, 9:455-468. Emerson, H.F. and Gekosky, W.L. I n t e r a c t i v e and c a t e g o r i c a l g r o u p i n g s t r a t e g i e s and t h e s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t . C h i l d  Development 1976, 47:1116-1121. E n t w i s l e , D.R., F o r s y t h , D.F. and Muuss, R. The s y n t a c t i c - p a r a -d i g m a t i c s h i f t i n c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n s . J o u r n a l of  V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1964, 3: 19-29. E n t w i s l e , D.R. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s of young c h i l d r e n . B a l t i m o r e , M a r y l a n d : The Johns Hopkins U.P., 1966. E n t w i s l e , D.R. Form c l a s s and c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n s . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v o i r , 1966, 5:558-565. E n t w i s l e , D.R. and Muuss, R. Word a s s o c i a t i o n of r u r a l German c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1968, 7: 201-206. E r v i n - T r i p p , S.M. The l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n and communicative C h o i c e . S t a n f o r d , C a l i f o r n i a : S t a n f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1973. E r v i n , S.M. Changes w i t h age i n the v e r b a l d e t e r m i n a n t s of word a s s o c i a t i o n . American J o u r n a l of P s y c h o l o g y , 1961, 74:361-362. E r v i n , S.M. C o r r e l a t e s o f a s s o c i a t i v e f r e q u e n c y . J o u r n a l of  V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1963, 1:422-431. E r v i n - T r i p p , S.M. An I s s e i l e a r n s E n g l i s h . J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l I s s u e s , 1967, 2: 78-89. E s p e r , E.A. Analogy and a s s o c i a t i o n i n l i n g u i s t i c s and p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga.: U. of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. E v a n s , H.M. I n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l l o c u s of c o n t r o l and word a s s o c i a t i o n : R esearch w i t h Japanese and American s t u d e n t s . J o u r n a l o f C r o s s - C u l t u r a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1981, 12: 372-382. F i g u e r o s a , J.G., G o n z a l e z , E.G. and S o l i s , V.M. An approach t o the p r o b l e m of meaning: Semantic Networks. J o u r n a l o f Psycho- l i n g u i s t i c s R e s e a r c h , 1976, 5:107-115. F i l l e n b a u m , S. and Jones, L.V. Grammatical c o n t i n g e n c i e s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1965, 4:248-255. 172 F l e k k o y , K. Semantic meaning and a s s o c i a t i v e r e s p o n d i n g . S c a n d i n a v i a n J o u r n a l o f P s y c h o l o g y , 1975, 16:149-151. F r a n c i s , H. Toward an e x p l a n a t i o n of the s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t . C h i l d Development, 1972, 43:949-959. Fromme, D.K., M e r c a d e l , D.E. and M e r c a d e l , P. The e f f e c t s of p o s i t i o n and n e g a t i v e feedback and reward on o r i g i n a l i t y . J o u r n a l of Research i n P e r s o n a l i t y , 1976, 10: 237-244. G a l t o n , F. P s y c h o m e t r i c e x p e r i m e n t s . B r a i n , 1879, 2: 149-162. G a l t o n , F. P s y c h o m e t r i c e x p e r i m e n t s . In E s p e r , E.H. Analogy  and a s s o c i a t i o n s i n l i n g u i s t i c s and p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga.: U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. Gekosky, W.L. Language a c q u i s i t i o n c o n t e x t and language o r g a n i z a t i o n i n b i l i n u a l s . J o u r n a l o f P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c R e s e a r c h , 1980, 9:429-449. Gerow, J.R. I n s t r u c t i o n a l s e t and word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t (WAT) re s p o n s e s of c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s . J o u r n a l o f G e n e t i c P s y c o l o g y , 1977, 130: 247-254. G e r s c h i t z , E.M. Modes of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , the e p i s t e m i c s u b j e c t  and d e v e l o p m e n t a l word a s s o c i a t i o n phenomena. U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , C i t y U n i v e r s i t y of New York, 1979. G o l d f a r b , R. and H a l p e r n , H. Word a s s o c i a t i o n of time a l t e r e d a u d i t o r y and v i s u a l s t i m u l i i n a p h a s i a . J o u r n a l of Speech and  H e a r i n g R e s e a r c h , 1981, 24: 233-246. Goodenough, F.L. The use of f r e e a s s o c i a t i o n s i n the o b j e c i t v e measurement o f p e r s o n a l i t y . I n McNeman, Q. and M e r r i l , M.A. ( e d s . ) S t u d i e s i n P e r s o n a l i t y , New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1942. Hakuta, K. A case s t u d y of a Japanese c h i l d l e a r n i n g E n g l i s h as a second language. Language L e a r n i n g , 1974, 26:326-351. Hammerly, H. P r i m a r y and secondary a s s o c i a t i o n s w i t h v i s u a l a i d s as s e m a n t i c c o n v e y o r s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l R e v i e w o f A p p l i e d  L i n g u i s t i c s , 1974, 12:119-125. Haynes, C.R., Walker, C. and J e t t e r s , C. O r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s and d e v e l o p m e n t a l r e c a l l . J o u r n a l o f P s y c h o l o g y , 1977, 96:187-196. H e i d e n h e i m e r , P. The s t r a t e g y of n e g a t i v e and the l e a r n i n g of antonymic r e l a t i o n s . Developmental P s y c h o l o g y , 1975, 11:757-762. 173 Heidenheimer, P. Semantic p r o c e s s i n g i n young c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l  o f E x p e r i m e n t a l C h i l d P s y c h o l o g y , 1978, 25, 143-159. Heidenheimer, P. L o g i c a l r e l a t i o n s i n the semantic p r o c e s s i n g of c h i l d r e n between s i x and t e n : Emergence of autonym and synonym c a t e g o r i z a t i o n . C h i l d Development, 1978, 49: 1243-1246. H i n e s , T.M. The i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e of languages i n b i l i n g u a l memory. U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Oregon, 1978. Howes, D. On the r e l a t i o n between the p r o b a b i l i t y of a word as an a s s o c i a t i o n and i n g e n e r a l l i n g u i s t i c usage. J o u r n a l o f  Abnormal S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1957, 54:75-85. H o u s t o n , S. A s u r v e y o f p s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c s . The H a g u e - P a r i s : Monton, 1972. Hynd, G.W. and Obrzut., J.E. Developmental s h i f t h y p o t h e s i s and p r e f e r r e d memory a t r r i b u t e s i n e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l c h i l d r e n . P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , 1978, 46: 167-170. I n g e r s o l l , G.M. E f f e c t s of age, form c l a s s , and word f r e q u e n c y on homogeneous word a s s o c i a t i o n s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1974, 35: 59-64. I n h e l d e r , B. and P i a g e t , J . The e a r l y growth of l o g i c i n the  c h i l d : c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s and s e r i a t i o n . London: R o u t l e d g e and Kagan P a u l , 1964. I s a , A.M. and M a s k i l l , R. A comparison of s c i e n t i f i c word meaning i n the c l a s s rooms of two d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s : S c o t t i s h i n t e g r a t e d s c i e n c e i n S c o t l a n d and i n M a l a y s i a . B r i t i s h  J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1982, 52: 188-198. J a c o b s o n , R.D. S t u d i e s i n c h i l d l a n g u a g e and a p h a s i a . The Hague: Monton, 1971. Jarman, R.F. C o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s and s y n t a c t i c s t r u c t u r e : A n a l y s i s of p a r a d i g m a t i c and s y n t a g m a t i c a s s o c i a t i o n s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l  R e s e a r c h , 1980, 41: 153-167. J e n k i n s , J . J . T r a n s i t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s : A s s o c i a t i o n t e c h -n i q u e s . I n C E . Osgood and T.S. sebeok, eds., P s y c h o l i n - g u i s t i c s . B a l t i m o r e : Waverly P r e s s , 1954. J e n k i n s , J . J . E f f e c t s of word a s s o c i a t i o n of the s e t t o g i v e p o p u l a r r e s p o n s e s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1959, 5:94. J e n k i n s , J . J . Commonality of a s s o c i a t i o n as an i n d i c a t o r of more g e n e r a l p a t t e r n s of v e r b a l b e h a v i o r . In Sebeok, T.S., ( e d . ) , S t y l e i n language. New York: W i l e y , 1960: 307-329. 174 J e n k i n s , J . J . Mediated A s s o c i a t i o n s p a r a d i g m s and s i t u a t i o n s . I n C.N. C o f e r and B.S. Musgrave, eds., V e r b a l b e h a v i o r and  l e a r n i n g . New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1963 pp.210-245. J e n k i n s , J . J . and Palermo, D.S. M e d i a t i o n p r o c e s s e s and the a c q u i s i -t i o n of l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e . In B e l l u g i , U., and Brown, R. ( e d s . ) , The a c q u i s i t i o n of language. Monographs of the S o c i e t y f o r Research i n C h i l d Development, 1964, 92:29:141-169. J e n k i n s , J . J . and R u s s e l l , W.A. S y s t e m a t i c c h a n g e s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n norms: 1910-1952. J o u r n a l of Abnormal S o c i a l  P s y c o l o g y , I960, 60:293-304. J o h n s t o n , M.H. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s o f s c h i z o p h r e n i c c h i l d r e n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1974, 35:663-674. Jung, C.G. S t u d i e s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . London: W i l l i a m Heinemann ( M e d i c a l Books) L t d . , 1918. K a r e e r , Y. A p r i m i n g s t u d y o f d e v e l o p m e n t a l c h a n g e s i n the a s s o c i a t i v e s t r e n g t h of c l a s s r e l a t i o n s . C h i l d Development, 1982, 53:1038-1045. Kent, G.H., and R o s a n o f f , A . J . A s t u d y of a s s o c i a t i o n i n i n s a n i t y . American J o u r n a l of I n s a n i t y , 1910, 67:37-96. K e s s l e r , C. and I d a r , I . The a q u i s i t i o n o f E n g l i s h s y n t a c t i c s t r u c t u r e s by a Vietnamese c h i l d . In M c L a u g h l i n , B. Second  language a c q u i s i t i o n i n c h i l d h o o d . H i l l s d a l e , N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum A s s o c i a t e s , 1978. K i r s n e r , K., Smyth, M.C., L o c k h a r t , R.S., K i n g M.L. and J a i n , M. The b i l i n g u a l l e x i c o n : Language s p e c i f i c u n i t s i n an i n t e g r a t e d n e t w o r k . J o u r n a l o f V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1984, 23:519-539. K o l e r s , P.A. I n t e r l i n g u a l word a s s o c i a t i o n s . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l  L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1963, 2:291-300. K o l e r s , P.A. S p e c i f i c i t y of a c o g n i t i v e o p e r a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f  V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1964, 3:244-248. Kra s h e n , S.D. A c c o u n t i n g f o r c h i l d - a d u l t d i f f e r e n c e s i n s e c o n d language r a t e and a t t a i n m e n t . In Krashen, S.D., S c a r c e l l a , R.C. and Long, M.M. (eds.) C h i l d - a d u l t d i f f e r e n c e s i n second  language a c q u i s i t i o n . Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House P u b l i s h e r s I n c . , 1982. K r a s h e n , S.D. F o r m a l and i n f o r m a l l i n g u i s t i c e nvironments i n language l e a r n i n g and language a c q u i s i t i o n . TESOL Q u a r t e r l y , 1976, 10:157-168. 175 Kumin, L. Free word a s s o c i a t i o n and form c l a s s i n m i d d l e - c l a s s and s o c i a l l y d i s a d v a n t a g e d c h i l d r e n . P e r c e p t u a l and Motor  S k i l l s , 1973, 36:45-46. K u r c z , I . I n t e r l a n g u a g e comparison of w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of P s y c o l o g y , 1967, 1967, 1:151-161. L a m b e r t , W.E. L a n g u a g e , P s y c h o l o g y , and c u l t u r e . S t a n f o r d , C a l i f o r n i a : S t a n f o r d U.P.. 1972. L a m b e r t , W.E. and MacNamara J . Some c o g n i t i v e consequences of f o l l o w i n g a f i r s t - g r a d e c u r r i c u l u m i n a second language i n Brockman, L. ( e d . ) , C h i l d Development. M a c l e l l a n d and Stewart. 1973 pp.295-309. Lambert, W.E. andMoore.N. W o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s : Comparisons of American and F r e n c h m o n o l i n g u a l s w i t h Canadian m o n o l i n g u a l s and b i l i n g u a l s . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1966, 3:313-320. L e i c e s t e r , P.F. M u l t i p l e response f r e e - w o r d a s s o c i a t i o n and the  s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t i n Japanese a d u l t s l e a r n i n g  E n g l i s h as a second language. U n p u b l i s h e d M a s t e r ' s t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1981. Lennenburg, E.H. B i o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n s of Language. New York: W i l e y , 1967. Lippman, M.Z. C o r r e l a t e s of c o n t r a s t word a s s o c i a t i o n s : D e v e l o p -mental t r e n d s . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1971, 10: 392-399. L u r i a , A.R. Language and C o g n i t i o n . Wertsch, J . V . ( e d s . ) , Washington D.C: V.H. Winston and sons, 1981. McKaughan, P.L. I n f l u e n c e s of semantic a s s o c i a t i o n s i n a c o n c e p t u a l  Task: A d e v e l o p m e n t a l view. U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r i a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of H a w a i i , 1979. M c L a u g h l i n , B. Second language a c q u i s i t i o n i n c h i l d h o o d . H i l l s d a l e , N.J.: Lawrence erebaum a s s o c i a t e s , 1978. McClesky, J . S p e c i f i c language t r a i n i n g as a method of f a c i l i t a t i n g r e a d i n g r e a d i n e s s f o r a s e l e c t , group of f i r s t , grade c h i l d r e n . Sout.hen J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h , 1974, 8:236-254. MacNamara, J . and K u c h n i r , S.L. L i n g u i s t i c independence of b i -l i n g u a l s : The i n p u t s w i t c h . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and  V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1971, 10: 480-487. 176 M c N e i l l , D. A s t u d y o f word a s s o c i a t i o n . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l  L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1966, 5:548-557. M a r s a l o v a , L. Schematic a s s o c i a t i o n s i n S l o v a k language. S t u d i a  P s y c h o l o g i a , 1975, 17:31-40. M a s t e r s , J.C. Word a s s o c i a t i o n and the f u n c i t o n a l d e f i n i t i o n of words. Developmental P s y c h o l o g y , 1969, 1:517-519. M a s t e r s , J.C. and Anderson, G.W. Delay and i n s t r u c t i o n s as d e t e r -minants of o r i g i n a l i t y i n word a s s o c i a t i o n s . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l  L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1968, 7: 432-433. Mayer, A., and O r t h , J . Zur q u a l i t a t i v e n Untersuchung der A s s o c i a -t i o n . In E s p e r , E.H. Analogy and a s s o c i a t i o n s i n l i n g u i s t i c s  and p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga.: U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. M e f f e r d , R.B. Word a s s o c i a i t o n : V e r b a l i n t e l l i g e n c e . P s y c h o l o g i c a l  R e p o r t s , 1979a, 44:919-924. M e f f e r d , R.B. Word a s s o c i a t i o n : g r a m m a t i c a l , s e m a n t i c , and a f f e c t i v e d i m e n t i o n s of a s s o c i a t e s t o homonyms. P s y c h o l o g i c a l  R e p o r t s , 1979b, 45: 359-374. M e f f e r d , R.B. Word a s s o c i a t i o n : Response and s t i m u l u s words. P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1980, 46:277-278. M e f f e r d , R.B., D u f i l h o y J.H. and Dawson, N.E. Word a s s o c i a t i o n and f o r m a l t r a i n i n g of the w r i t t e n language: C o n s o l i d a t i o n of the response base. P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1979, 45:615-628. M e f f e r d , R.B., D u f i l h o y J.H. and Dawson, N.E. Word a s s o c i a t i o n and f o r m a l t r a i n i n g of the w r i t t e n language: changes i n s y n t a c t i c and s e m a n t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s of a s s o c i a t i o n s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l  R e p o r t s , 1979, 45:743-752. M i l g r a m , A. and Goodglax, G. R o l e s t y l e v e r s u s c o g n i t i v e matura-t i o n : word a s s o c i a t i o n s f o r a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n . J o u r n a l  of P e r s o n a l i t y , 1961, 29: 81-93. M i l l e r , G.A. The o r g a n i z a t i o n of l e x i c a l memory: Are word a s -s o c i a t i o n s s u f f i c i e n t ? In T a l l a r d , G.A., and Waugh, N.C., ( e d s . ) , The p a t h o l o g y of memory. New York: Academic P r e s s , 1969. M o r a n , L . J . G e n e r a l i t y o f w o r d - a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s e t s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Monographs. 1966, 80 (4, Whole No. 612). M o r a n , L . J . C o m p a r a t i v e growth o f Japanese and N o r t h American c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r i e s . C h i l d Development, 1973, 44:862-865. 177 Moran, L . J . Lens s t r u c t u r e of f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n s . P s y c ho- l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1975, 36:87-95. Moran, L . J . P e r s o n a l and common components of c o g n i t i v e d i e t i o n a r i e s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1977, 40: 795-806. Moran, L . J . I d i o g r a p h i c p r e d i c t i o n of f r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n . P e r c e p t u a l and motor s k i l l s , 1980, 51:186. Moran, L . J . E v i d e n c e f o r the u n i v e r s a l s t r u c t u r e of the c h i l d ' s c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y . J o u r n a l of S e v e r a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1981, 105: 149-154. Moran, L . J . D e s i g n f o r a d u a l component, c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y . Canadian J o u r n a l of P s y c h o l o g y , 1982, 36:628-640. Moran, L . J . and Huang, I . Note on c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y s t r u c t u r e of C h i n e s e c h i l d r e n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1974, 34:154. Moran, L . J . and Huang, I . Note on c o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y s t r u c t u r e of adult. C h i n e s e and on a P i a g e t i a n s e mantic u n i v e r s a l . Psycho- l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1975, 36:180. Moran, L . J . and M e f f e r d , R.B. and K i m b l e , J.P. I d i o d y n a m i c s e t s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Monograph, 1964, 78 ( 2 , Whole No. 579). Moran, L . J . and Murakawa, N. Japanese and American a s s o c i a t i o n s t r u c t u r e s . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1968, 7:176-181. N e l s o n , K. Concept, word, adn s e n t e n c e : i n t e r r e l a t i o n s i n a c q u i s t i o n and development. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1974, 81: 267-285. N e l s o n , K. The s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t r e v i s i t e d ; A r e v i e w of r e s e a r c h and t h e o r y . P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 1977, 84:1:93-116. Opoku, J.Y. B i l i n g u a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l systems and i n t e r l i n g u a l t r a n s f e r of l e a r n i n g . J o u r n a l of C r o s s - C u l t u r a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1982, 13, 470-480. O t i s , M. A s t u d y o f a s s o c i a t i o n s i n d e f e c t i v e s . J o u r n a l o f  E d u c a t i o n a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1915, 6:271-288. Palermo, D.S. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s and c h i l d r e n ' s v e r b a l b e h a v i o r . In L i p s i t t , L.P., and S p i k e r , C C . (eds.) Advances i n c h i l d  development and B e h a v i o r . V o l . 1 New York: Academic P r e s s , 1963, pp.31-68. 178 Palermo, D.S. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s o b t a i n e d from c h i l d r e n i n grades one th r o u g h f o u r . D e v e l o p - mental P s y c h o l o g y , 1971, 5:118-123. Palermo, D.S. P s y c h o l o g y of L e a r n i n g . I l l i n o i s : S c o t t , Foresrnan and Company, 1978. P a l e r m o , D.S. and J e n k i n s , J . J . F r e q u e n c y o f s u p e r - o r d i n a t e r e s p o n s e s t o a word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t as a f u n c t i o n of age. J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1963, 1:378-383. P a l e r m o , D.S. and J e n k i n s , J . J . Word a s s o c i a t i o n norms. Grade  s c h o o l t h r o u g h c o l l e g e . M i n n e a p o l i s : U. of M i n n e s o t a P r e s s , 1964. Penk, W. Developmental changes i n i d i o d y n a m i c set. res p o n s e s of c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n s . Developmental P s y c h o l o g y , 1971, 5:55-63. P e t r e y , S. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s and t h e development, of l e x i c a l memory. C o g n i t i o n , 1977, 5:57-71. Pons, L. and E c o r a s s e , M. Commonality and r e p r o d u c t i o n of a word a s s o c i a t e d r e sponse i n t h r e e samples of F r e n c h , American and Japanese s t u d e n t s . P s y c h o l o g i a - An I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l of  P s y c h o l o g y i n O r i e n t , 1982, 25: 205-212. P o s t m a n , L. and K a p p e l , G., (eds.) Norms of word a s s o c i a t i o n . New York: Academic P r e s s , 1970. P r e s s e i n , B.Z., G o l d s t e i n D. and A p p e l , M.H. (eds.) T o p i c s i n  C o g n i t i v e Development V o l . 2: Language and o p e r a t i o n a l t hought. New York: Plenum P r e s s , 1978. P u l a s k y , M.A.S. U n d e r s t a n d i n g P i a g e t : An i n t r o d u c t i o n t o c h i l d r e n ' s  c o g n i t i v e development. New York: Harper Row P u b l i s h e r s , 1980. Rapaport, D. The h i s t o r y of the concept of A s s o c i a t i o n of Id e a s . New York: I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1974. R e d l i n g e r , W. and Pa r k , T.S. Language m i x i n g i n young b i l i n g u a l s . J o u r n a l of Canadian Language, 1980, 7: 337-352. Rees, H.W. a n d L i p s i t t , L.P. (eds.) E x p e r i m e n t a l C h i l d P s y c h o l o g y . New York and London: Academic P r e s s , 1970. R e e s , O.A. Language o r g a n i z a t i o n s and language change i n b i -l i n g u a l s . Q u a r t e r l y J o u r n a l of E x p e r i m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1979. 179 R i e g e l , K.F. The language a c q u i s i t i o n p r o c e s s : A r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of r e l a t e d r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s . In G o u l e t , L.R., and B a l t e s , P.B. (eds.) L i f e - s p a n d e v e l o p m e n t a l p s y c h o l o g y : Research and  t h e o r y . New York: Academic P r e s s , 1970. R e s t a i n s , L.C. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s o f Deaf and H e a r i n g c h i l d r e n . In R e s e n s t e i n , J . and M a c G i n i t i c , W.H. (eds.) V e r b a l B e h a v i o r  of the deaf c h i l d . New York: Teachers C o l l e g e P r e s s , 1969. R i g u e t , M. Word a s s o c i a t i o n : A c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d y between b i l i n g u a l T u r n i s i a n ( A r a b i c - F r e n c h ) and m o n o l i n g u a l T u r n i s i a n s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l Review of A p p l i e d P s y c h o l o g y , 1980, 29: 183-204. R i l y , L. and F i f e , G. S y n t a g m a t i c v e r s u s p a r a d i g m a t i c p a i r e d a s s o c i a t e a c q u i s i t i o n . J o u r n a l of E x p e r i m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1974, 103: 375-376. Robin s o n , E.S. A s s o c i a t i o n t h e o r y today; an essay i n s y s t e m a t i c  p s y c h o l o g y . New York London: Cen t u r y Co., 1932. R o s a n o f f , I.R., and R o a n o f f , A . J . A s t u d y of a s s o c i a t i o n i n c h i l d r e n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1913, 20:43-89. Rommetveit, R. and B r o g g e r , J . S y n t a c t i c s t i m u l u s - r e s p o n s e con-cordance i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . In Rommetveit, R., and B l a k a r , R.M. (eds.) S t u d i e s of Language, Thought, and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r . New York, London: Academic P r e s s , 1979. R o s e n z w e i g , M.R. C o m p a r i s o n s bewteen French and E n g l i s h word a s s o c i a t i o n norms. American P s y c h o l o g i s t , 1959, 14:363. Routh, D.K. and Tweney, R.D. E f f e c t s o f p a r a d y m a t i c r e s p o n s e t r a i n i n g on c h i l d r e n ' s word a s s o c i a t i o n s . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i - m e ntal c h i l d P s y c h o l o g y , 1972, 14: 398-307. Rosenzweig, M.R. Comparison among word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s i n E n g l i s h , F r e n c h , German and I t a l i a n . American J o u r n a l of  P s y c h o l o g y , 1961, 74: 347-360. Rosenzweig, M.R. Word a s s o c i a t i o n s of French workmen: Comparisons w i t h a s s o c i a t i o n s of French s t u d e n t s and American workmen and s t u d e n t s . J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1964, 3:57-69. Rosenzweig, M.R. and M i l l e r , K.M. Comparisons of word a s s o c i a t i o n r e s p o n s e s o b t a i n e d i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , A u s t r a l i a and England. J o u r n a l of V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1966, 5:35-41. R u s s e l l , W.A. Assessment, v e r s u s e x p e r i m e n t a l a c q u i s i t i o n o f v e r b a l h a b i t s . I n C o f e r . C . N . ( e d . ) , V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l  B e h a v i o r . New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1961: 110-123. 180 R u s s e l l , W.A. and J e n k i n s , J . J . The complete M i n n e s o t a norms f o r  r e s p o n s e s t o 100 words from the K e n t - R o s a n o f f word a s s o c i a t i o n  test.. T e c h n i c a l Report. No. 11, U n i v e r s i t y of M i n n e s o t a , 1954. S c a r b o r o u g h , D.C, G e r a l d , L. and C o r t e s e , C. Independence of l e x i c a l a c c e s s i n b i l i n g u a l word r e c o g n i t i o n . J o u r n a l of  V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1982, 15:84-99. Schmidt, F. E x p e r i m e n t e l l e Untersuchungen z u r A s s o c i a t i o n s l e h s e . In E s p e r , E.H. Analogy and a s s o c i a t i o n s i n l i n g u i s t i c s and  p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga: U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. S e l i n g e r , H.W., K r a s h e n , S.D., and Ladefoged, P. M u t u r a t i o n a l c o n s t r a i n t s i n the a c q u i s i t i o n of second l a n g u a g e s . Language  S c i e n c e s , 1975, 38:20-22. In S.D. Krashen, S c a r c e l l a , R.C, and Long M.H. ( e d s . ) . C h i l d - A d u l t , d i f f e r e n c e s i n second  l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g a c q u i s i t i o n . Rowley, MA: Newbury House P u b l i s h e r s , 1982. Semmel, M.J., B a r i t t , L.S., B e u n e t t , S.W. and P e r f e t t i , C.A. A g r a m m a t i c a l a n a l y s i s of word a s s o c i a t i o n s of e d u c a b l e m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d and n o r m a l c h i l d r e n . American J o u r n a l of M e n t a l  D e f i c i e n c y , 1968, 72: 567-576. S h a r p , D., and C o l e , M. P a t t e r n s o f r e s p o n d i n g i n the word a s -s o c i a t i o n s of West A f r i c a n c h i l d r e n . C h i l d Development, 1972, 43:55-65. Sharp, D. and C o l e , M. P a t t e r n s of r e s p o n d i n g i n the word a s s o c i a -t i o n s o f West A f r i c a n c h i l d r e n . C h i l d Development, 1971, 43:55-65. S h e r i d a n , E.M. E a r l y R e a d i n g i n Japan. Reading World, 1982, 21: 326-332. S i i p o l a , E., Walker, W.N., and K o l b , D. Task a t t i t u d e s i n word a s s o c i a t i o n , p r o j e c t i v e and n o n p r o j e c t i v e . J o u r n a l o f  P e r s o n a l i t y , 1955, 23:441-459. Snow, C.E., and H o e f n e g e l - H o h l e , M. Age d i f f e r e n c e s i n second language a c q u i s i t i o n . In Hatch, E.M. (ed.) Second Language  A c q u i s i t i o n . Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House P u b l i s h e r s , 1978. S t o l z , W.S. and T i f f a n y , J . The p r o d u c t i o n of ' c h i l d - l i k e ' word a s s o c i a t i o n s by a d u l t s t o u n f a m i l i a r a d j e c t i v e s . J o u r n a l of  V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 1972, 11:38-46. S w a r t z , J.D., Moran, L . J . and C l e l a n d , C C C o g n i t i v e d i c t i o n a r y s t r u c t u r e of the e l d e r l y B u l l e t i n of the P s y c h o s o m a t i c S o c i e t y , 1980, 16: 383-384. 181 S w e i d e l , G.B. and N u c i f o r a , D.A. E f f e c t , of c o n t e x t u a l p r i m i n g i n v i s u a l v s . a u d i t o r y p r e s e n t a t i o n . P e r c e p t u a l and Motor s k i l l s , 1982, 54:1083-1086. S z a l a y , L.B. and D e e se, J . E . S u b j e c t i v e meaning and c u l t u r e . H i l l d a l e , N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum A s s o c i a t e s P u b l i s h e r s , 1978. S z a l a y , L.B. and B r y s o n , J.A. Measure of p s y c h o c u l t u r a l d i s t a n c e : A comparison of American Backsand w h i t e s . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y  and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1973, 26: 161-177. Tanaka-Matsumi, J . and M a r s e l l a , A . J . C r o s s - c u l t u r a l v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l e x p e r i e n c e o f d e p r e s s i o n : w o r d a s s o c i a t i o n s t u d i e s . J o u r n a l o f C r o s s - C u l t u r a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1976, 7:376-396. T a y l o r , I . S i m i l a r i t y between French and E n g l i s h words: A f a c t o r t o be c o n s i d e r e d i n b i l i n g u a l language b e h a v i o r ? J o u r n a l of  P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c R e s e a r c h , 1976, 5:85-94. T h o r n d i k e , E.L. and L o r g e , I . The t e a c h e r ' s word book of 30,000  words. New York: Bureau of P u b l i c a t i o n s , Teacher's C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , 1944. Timmenmans, B. and Kumin, L. F r e e word a s s o c i a t i o n of adult, a p h a s i c s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1974, 34:389-390. Thumb, A. and Marbe, K. E x p e r i m e n t a l U n t e r s u c h u n g e n u b e r d i e p s y c h o l o g i s h e n Gaundlagen der s p r a c h l i c h e n A n a l o g i e b i l d u n g . I n E s p e r , E.A. A n a l o g y and a s s o c i a t i o n i n l i n g u i s t i c s and  p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga.: U. of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. T r a u t s h o l d t , M. E x p e r i m e n t e l l e S t u d i e s uber A s s o c i a t i o n s . In E s p e r , E.A. A n a l o g y and a s s o c i a t i o n s i n l i n g u i s t i c s and  p s y c h o l o g y . Athens, Ga: U. of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. Underwood, B. J . and Lund, A.M. I n c i d e n t a l development, of a s s o c i a -t i o n s i n s i m u l t a n e o u s l e a r n i n g . B u l l e t i n of P s y c h o s o m a t i c  S o c i e t y , 1980, 16:411-413. Upmanyu, V.V. Study o f Kent. R o s a n o f f word a s s o c i a t i o n t e s t i n r e l a t i o n t o response e n t r o p y . P e r s o n a l i t y Study and Group  B e h a v i o r , 1981, 1: 45-52. V i k i s - F r e i b e r g s , V. and F r e i b e r g s , I . Free a s s o c i a t i o n s norms i n F r e n c h and E n g l i s h : I n t e r - L i n g u i s t i c and i n t r a - l i n g u i s t i c com-p a r i s o n s . Canadian J o u r n a l of P s y c h o l o g y , 1976, 30:123-133. W a l l e n h o r s t , R. Some r e l a t i o n s between r e a c t i o n time and c h o i c e of response i n word a s s o c i a t i o n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 1965, 17:619-626. 182 Watt, H.J. Ueber A s s o z i a t i o n s r e a k t i o n e u , d i e auf o p t i s c h e R e i z w o r t e e r f o l g e n . I n E s p e r , E.H. A n a l o g y and a s s o c i a t i o n s i n  l i n g u i s t i c s and p s y c h o l o g y . A t h e n , Ga.: U n i v e r s i t y o f G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. W e i n g a r t e n , M. and A i n s f i e l d , M. The s y n t a g m a t i c - p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t i n d i c h o t i c l i s t e n i n g . J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l C h i l d  P s y c h o l o g y , 1981, 31:271-278. Werner, H. and K a p l a n , B. The a c q u i s i t i o n of word meanings: A d e v e l o p m e n t a l s t u d y . Monographs of the S o c i e t y of Research  i n C h i l d Development, 1952, 15: No.51. White, S.H. E v i d e n c e f o r a h i e r a r c h i c a l arrangement, of l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s . In L i p p s i t t , L.P. and S p i k e r , C C . (eds.) Advances  i n c h i l d development, and b e h a v i o r V o l . 2. New York, London: Academic P r e s s , 1965. Wohl, M.K. and Izawa, C D i s c r e t e n o r n a t i v e a s s o c i a t i o n s o f s e l e c t e d words. J o u r n a l of G e n e r a l P s y c h o l o g y , 1979, 100: 183-198. Woodrow, H. and L o w e l l , F. C h i l d r e n ' s a s s o c i a t i o n f r e q u e n c y t a b l e s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Monographs, No.22, 1916, 1-110. Woodworth, R.S. and S c h l o s b e r g , H. E x p e r i m e n t a l p s y c h o l o g y ( 3 r d ed.) New York: H o l t , Rinehart. and Winston, 1971. Wreschner, A. D i e R e p r o d u k t i o n und A s s o z i a t i o n von V o r s t e l l u g e n . In E s p e r , E.H. Analogy and A s s o c i a t i o n i n l i n g u i s t i c s and psy- c h o l o g y . Athen, Ga.: U n i v e r s i t y of G e o r g i a P r e s s , 1973. 183 APPENDIX G I G III G V B U T T E R F L Y ENG f l y pretty flower bird small yellow wing beautiful insect bee bug beetle butter (17.3) (13.0) (13.0) (8.6) (8.6) (4.6) I'd] (4.6) (4.6) (4.6) (4.6) (4.6) insect f l y small colour pretty yellow bird chrsally's wind l i t t l e f l i e s wing cute (32.5) (25.0) (7.5) (5.0) (5.0) (5.0) 8:8 (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) f l y pretty spring sky free worm organism wings yellow bug flower hamburger insect beautiful animal bee (33.3) (10.0) (10.0) (6.6) (3.3) (3.3) iK) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) N=23 N=40 N=30 JPN f l y insect pretty flower butterfly (synonym; ladybug i s f l y i n g catch a butterfly cut see c a t e r p i l l a r f l o a t (two words) paste fast butterfly catch (28.5) f l y (19.0) pretty (16.6) insect (4.7) small cute (2.3) butterfly insect flower airplane sky white yellow bird (40.3) (21.0) (8.7) S3 (3.5) (1.7) f l y (35.4) pretty (10.4) flower insect (8.3) disgusting (4.1) butterfly butterfly flour (2.0) painful f a i r y thin bee paste grass l i k e (adj.) N=42 N=57 N=48 OO G I G III G V C H A I R ENG a i t table desk heavy no chair children rest seat black bench small (34.4) (27.5) (10.3) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) B:« (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) s i t (76.1) s i t (42.8) table (21.4) table (28.5) desk (2.3) desk (10.7) furniture (3.5) go (3.5) small (3.5) stee l (3.5) cushion (3.5) N=29 N=42 N=28 s i t (68.4) s i t (60.4) table (8.7) table (16.6) chair (5.2) desk (10.4) s i t chair (2.0) desk (1.7) sofa low wood wood cushion something to s i t big t i r e d s i t t i n g JPN s i t table chair rest s i t pillow (73.0) (11.5) (7.6) (3.8) (1.9) big dig N=52 N=57 N=48 00 Oi G I G III G V H A N D ENG finger feet hold foot head more response eat r i c e two hands eat close big l e f t (26.6) (16.6) (10.0) (10.0) (6.6) (6.6) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) fingers (20.5) fingers (17.2) arm (12.8) foot (13.7) feet (12.8) legs (10.3) write (10.2) feet (10.3) hold (5.1) finger (6.8) foot (5.1) mouth (6.8) big (2.5) write (3.4) useful (2.5) thumb (3.4) fork (2.5) small (3.4) do (2.5) body (3.4) feel (2.5) arm (3.4) hand (2.5) l i f t (3.4) feet (2.5) teeth (3.4) dirty (2.5) skin (3.4) marks (2.5) big (3.4) moving (2.5) part of your body (3.4) leg &l] fine wash (2.5) N=30 N=39 N=29 JPN foot grab pick finger hand use more write move play piano take pencils eat meal mouth five big (19.0) (14.2) (11.9) (7.1) (4.7) (2.3) finger (38.1) grab foot (12.7) finger pick (9.0) foot n a i l (7.2) hand hand (5.4) big smelly (3.6) touch big dirty dirty (1.8) palm reading 1 write arm wrestling punch get d i r t y gloves cut round pick touch palm arm five skin color 1 five fingers orange color 1 flowers wash pencil meal skin arm not big use N=42 N=55 N=49 G III I N S E C T ENG bug ant bee outside flower t a l l c a t e r p i l l a r lady bug spider up creatures small (28.5) (9.5) (9.5) (9.5) (9.5) (4.7) (4.7) «:?! (4.7) (4.7) (4.7) N=21 bug (36.1) bug (33.3) bugs (11.1) butterfly (20.8) small (5.5) lady bug (4.1) f l y (5.5) ant (4.1) butterfly (5.5) f l i e s (4.1) animal (5.5) s i x (4.1) dragonfly (2.7) slug (4.1) grouse (2.7) autumn (4.1) black (2.7) c a t e r p i l l a r (4.1) bee (2.7) small (4.1) beetle (2.7) hated (4.1) mosquito body's division (2.7) small bee (4.1) (2.7) wine (4.1) s i x ??? SI:?! d i r t y N=36 N=24 insect (15.7) small small (10.5) weird weird (7.8) lady bug ca t e r p i l l a r (5.2) insect dirty (5.2) beetle butterfly ant dragonfly bee catch sun BunBun (2.6) grasshopper Beetle cicada noisy grass sound stung by a mosquito bird itchy cicada fun feeler butterfly f l y cricket butterfly small creature eat dragonfly boy small grasshopper numerous person ant f l y JPN N=38 smelly grass N=53 (28.3) butterfly (13.2) beetle (9.4) weird (5.6) insect (5.6) small (3.7) insect (3.7) moth (1.8) larva ant cockroach cute leaf grasshopper bird insect cage straw raincoat flower blue bee f l y hate (adj.) round itchy (12.7) (10.6) (6.3) (4.2) (2.10 N=47 G I G III G V N A N ENG woman (45.7) lady (14.2) men (8.5) boy (5.7) mother (2.8) small (2.8) fat (2.8) big (2.8) no (2.8) hot (2.8) g i r l (2.8) drinking (2.8) P.A. (2.8) woman boy cool lady strong person t a l l big working man length g i r l people O.5.S. awesome human father (26.4) (20.5) (11.7) (5.5) (5.5) (5.5) (5.5) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (1:8 (2.9) woman boy human lady male t a l l W . C . man gentlemen bathroom parts walk dad Japanese work f a l l person (26.4) (8.8) (8.8) (8.8) (5.8) (5.8) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) i i : ! ! (2.9) N=35 N=34 N=34 JPN woman strong man woman i s person father car rice big smoke cigarette blue adult papa 37.5 (15.6) (9.3) (6.2) (3.1) woman (24.0) woman (£3 strong (12.0) father father (10.0) man ( i i . i ) adult (6.0) teacher (4.9) t a l l papa man dumb beard (4.0) strong human big smart (2.0) smart (2.2) glad • (2.0) Nevina (N) funny (2.0) popoye company (2.0) person clumsy (2.0) thin dirty (2.0) woman make (N) (2.0) run person (2.0) human boy (2.0) g i r l nice (2.0) fat wear trousers (2.0) adult big (2.0) man neektle (2.0) nice chin-chin (N) (2.0) strangeman 1 short hair N=32 N=50 N=45 G I I I M U S I C ENG piano sing song loud record sound hear ear pretty music tapes nice dance band happy singing cry noise instrument (17.2) (6.8) (6.8) (6.8) (6.8) (6.8) (6.8) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) song piano notes guitar sing instrument nice loud melody band trumpet bad v i o l i n retarded art dance record (29.2) (19.5) (7.3) (4.8) (4.8) (4.8) (4.8) (2.4) (2.4) (2.4) (2.4) (2.4) (2.4) 8:8 (2.4) (2.4) rock piano song instrument radio sings c l a s s i c a l funny dancing dance hear c l a s s i c ealk record pretty funny fun v i o l i n 3ing N=29 N=41 N=29 (13.7) (10.3) (10.3) (10.3) (6.8) (6.8) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) &8 JPN sing (7.6) song l i s t e n (23.5) sing pretty (14.7) piano song (5.8) pretty sound noisy note (2.9) happy don't know instrument tone deaf record dance sound want to l i s t e n 1 tambourine laugh minuet Yamaha music Run Run 0 melody noisy flute good sound l i s t e n trumpet play (24.5) piano (20.7) happy (13.2) song (5.6) l i s t e n rock (3.7) concert instrument fl u t e (1.8) piano score keyboard wrote Mozart record c l a s s i c f l u t e choir music l i k e very much going pretty orchestra chorus sound voice practice stereo set Jsl=14„ N=53 N=39 00 CO G I G III G V N E E D L E ENG p i n string sharp thread hurt thread pencil sew spider hurts string ouch (19.0) (19.0) 8:3 (9.5) (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) 8:3 (2.5) (2.5) sharp sew hurts poke ouch short pointing sting hurt pencil thread (59.3) (7.6) 8:3 (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) (2.5) thread (24.1) sharp (17.2) sew 10.3) hurt (10.3) swing (6.8) pin (6.8) sting (3.4) blood (3.4) clothes (3.4) hot (3.4) saw (3.4) point (3.4) N=21 N= 32 N=29 painful (43.9) painful sew (12.1) thread needle (7.3) sew dangerous (4.8) pointing prick needle thread nice of clock (1.8) sewing pencil blood by hand small pointing s o i l make yarn don't l i k e (adj.) pin ouch f l y ouch (variation) pricking (V) steel pin stick (50.0) painful (22.7) (7.4) thread (13.6) (7.4) prick (11.3) (9.2) pointing (9.0) (3.7) sewing needle (6.8) thin (4.5) (1.8) fishing (2.2) shot (N) amend pin sharp prick ( i n t r ) blood space needle easy (adj.) sewing N= 41 N=54 N=44 pepper sugar vinegar sour S A L T sink not very good ENG salty butter white orange N=25 sugar s a l t y # salty sour pour JPN white s a l t shake eat salty pepper paper to food parapara 0 G III (36.0) pepper (24.0) sugar (8.0) 30ur (8.0) yuck (4.0) hot (4.0) eat (4.0) s p i c y (4.0) s a l t y 4.0) white 4.0) N=36 (17.9) s a l t y * salty (15.3) no good taste 1 (10.2) sugar (7.6) sea white (5.1) sour (2.5) salty white (N) soap bi t t e r N=39 N=52 (50.0) pepper (31.2) (18.4) sugar (12.5) (13.8) ocean (12.5) (2.7) white (6.2) (2.7) spice (6.2) (2.7) sea (6.2) (2.7) sour (3.1) (2.7) sweet (3.1) (2.7) calorie Salt Lake City N=32 8:8 (28.8) salty (20.8) (23.0) sea (18.7) (9.6) sugar $ 1 4 * 5 j sour (IO.4) (7.6) s a l t (8.3) (5.7) sea water 1 (2.0) white color (3.8) white (adj.) (1.9) crab tongue potato chips sara sara 0 salty N=48 G I chair (46.4) eat (25.0) desk (7.1) chair-table (3.5) T A B L E metal (3.5) hard (3.5) ENG f i s h (3.5) seat (3.5) big (3.5) N=28 eat (29.2) chair (21.9) place (9.7) place a thing (7.3) table (4.8) JPN use (2.4) s i t eat meal at the table d i r t y table spider desk place a plate hand book hard N=41 G III chair (52.6) chair (44.4) eat (13.1) desk (11.1) desk (10.5) eat (7.4) work (5.2) furniture (3.7) tree (5.2) table cloth (3.7) f l a t (2.6) wood (3.7) food (2.6) work (3.7) hard (2.6) food (3.7) homework (2.6) brown (3.7) write (2.6) smooth (3.7) l i v i n g room B:?l dinner vase (3.7) N=38 N=27 chair (20.8) chair (26.5) eat (12.5) desk (12.2) place (8.3) meal (10.2) wood wood (4.0) dirty eat clean meal desk (6.2) supper big breakdown s i t at 1 (2.0) Kotatsm brown (N) board snack snack table festive food 1 meal game write f l a t hard hard food every where brown (Adj.) (Two words predicate) desk narrow study (N) brown (N) s i t lunch occasional table 1 food table N=48 N=49 G I G III G V white (48.2) dark (13.7) brown (13.7) night (3.4) B L A C K yellow (3.4) hair (3.4) ENG blue (3.4) long (3.4) cat (3.4) color (3.4) dark (57.1) white (40.6) white (14.2) hair (9.3) night (9.5) dark (9.3) hair (7.1) darkcola (4.2) color (2.3) cat (6.2) I don't l i k e (2.3) bat (6.2) g o r i l l a koo (2.3) stranger (3.1) cloud (2.3) yellow (3.1) my hair (2.3) bright (3.1) my puppy (3.1) dogs (3.1) red (3.1) my hair color (3.1) N=29 N=42 N=32 white dark black (N) red (Adj.) can't see complete darkness JPN crayon insert hair white (N) yellow (Adj.) very black blue beard big bright house eraser cold hair night bat (20.0) (6.6) (4.4) (2.2) white (16.9) hair (15.2) dark white (13.0) night (13.2) night (10.8) color hair (6.5) hair (1.8) black (N) (4.3) pretty China ink 1 very black (N) thread burned dark insect not white (2.1) complete darkness penmanship dark color hair butterfly weird paint piano shoes my hair crow di r t y china ink 1 head crayon china ink cat s i t cloak insect bright white (N) t i r e N=45 N=53 N= G I G III G V B I T T E R ENG sweet yuck bad sick b i t t e r not b i t t e r cheese butter mouth mud excellent good sour mushroom (11.1) (11.1) (11.1) (11.1) (5.5) (5.5) (5.5) (5.5) (5.5) (5.5) (5.5) IKJ (5.5) N=18 lemon (50.0) butter (9.0) s a l t (14.2) coffee (9.0) Japanese tea (3.5) mad (4.5) sweet (3.5) b i t t e r (4.5) bite (3.5) drugs (4.5) sick (3.5) wood (4.5) grapes (3.5) bad (4.5) potato (3.5) bread (4.5) yuck (3.5) sow (4.5) taste (3.5) hand (4.5) 3picy (3.5) no (4.5) b i t t e r (3.5) sweet l o t s bite wine s a l t (4.5) (4.5) (4.5) (4.5) (4.5) food It?) juck sweet f r u i t peel (4.5) N=28 N=22 salty (16.1) medicine medicine (9.6) green peppers b i t t e r sweet not good 1 (6.4) lemon not delicious sour sweet s a l t delicious ice sour salty s a l t (3.2) vinegar don't l i k e (Adj.) leaf no coffee no good peanuts mustard mustard pickled plums soda coffee 1 raw egg 1 don't l i k e (Adj.) beer sound not good 1 sugar hamper (N) onion tea black tea salty (24.4) medicine (34.2) (8.8) sweet (13.1) not good 1 (10.5) (6.6) sour (7.8) (4.4) salty (5.2) not sweet Chinese cabbage candy (2.2) t e a th i n g s I d i s l i k e c e r o l y c o f f e e blood no way lemon beer N=31 N=45 N=38 G I G III G V B R I G H T ENG dark (40.9) l i g h t (13.6) red (9.0) ahine (9.0) bad (4.5) star (4.5) yellow (4.5) wings (4.5) pink (4.5) see well (4-5) N=22 lig h t (52.6) dark (35.7) dark (10.5) l i g h t (17.8) sun (10.5) sun 17.8) morning (2.6) yellow (10.7) pretty (2.6) morning (3.5) rainbow (2.6) shinny (3.5) lump (2.6) fun (3.5) moon (2.6) print (3.5) color (2.6) gold (3.5) yellow (2.6) cheerful (2.6) shining (2.6) sky (2.6) N=38 N=28 dark (29.5) li g h t (36.7) sun glaring dark (12.2) l i g h t see (11.3) sun (10.2) dark l i g h t (6.8) li g h t (8.1) bright bright (4.5) glaring (6.1) sun place (2.2) sun moon hot morning sky yellow warm pretty think broadly day man f l y comic book happy sun lamp enjoying (adj black (N) laugh daytime shine yellow (N) sweet red (N) chandelier N=44 N=49 shine l i g h t stand electronic touch see star N=48 CD Ol G III l i g h t (54.5) night (45.2) l i g h t (26.6) black (13.6) black (16.6) night (20.0) green (4.5) bright (9.5) black (20.0) white (4.5) li g h t (7.1) bright (16.6) bright (4.5) scary (7.1) midnight (3.3) D A R K cloudy (4.5) moon (2.7) ghost (3.3) blue (4.5) unlight (2.3) eyes (3.3) ENG dog (4.5) cave (2.3) sunny (3.3) seary (4.5) color (2.3) bat (3.3) can't see anything (2.3) N=22 N=42 N=30 bright (39.0) night (31.8) night (52.0) dark (9.7) bright (15.9) bright (24.0) scared (9.7) scared (9.0) dark (4.0) can't see (7.3) black (N) (6.8) ghost (2.0) black (7.3) house blackout (2.0) JPN black (N) (4.8) dark (4.5) scared (2.0) complete dark 1 (2.4) can't see 1 (4.5) end of the world (2.0) might (2.4) ghost (2.2) darkness (2.0) -li g h t (2.4) mean black (N) (2.0) where (2.4) bad introvert (2.0) ghost (2.4) paint house (2.0) broken (2.4) room house (2.0) dissy (2.4) black (adj.) tunnel (2.4) moon hole (2.4) N=41 N=44 N=50 G I G III G V low (64.5) low (41.0) low (54.5) bye (6.4) mountain (6.5) sun (9.0) cary (3.2) building (6.5) t a l l (4.5) hallow (3.2) cloud (10.5) mountain (4.5) H I G H small (3.2) sky (5.1) building (4.5) wall (3.2) sears (2.5) empire (4.5) ENG by (3.2) t a l l (2.5) bird (4.5) mad (3.2) airplane (2.5) plane (4.5) l i t t l e (3.2) jump (2.5) spaceneedle (4.5) fat (3.2) roof (2.5) sky (4.5) flower (3.2) scary (2.5) big (2.5) plane (2.5) good-bye (2.5) mouth (2.5) tree (2.5) N=31 N=39 N=44 small 22.7) (18.1) building sky (21.6) (18.9) low low (17.8) low mountain (9.0) tree (8.9) mountain (13.5) t a l l mountain (8.9) building (8.1) meet (4.5) t a l l (5.3) scared (5.4) hello grow (3.5) clock (2.7) difference sky tree building person (1.7) thing sky stick thread everyone up towering long teacher plane blue plane big under scared sunflower building climb thing big giant friend building skyscraper t a l l evere3t spaceneedle N=22 N=56 N=37 G I G III G V R O U G H ENG tough (12.5) fight (44.1) smooth smooth (12.5) bad (5.0) rock nice (12.5) hurt (2.9) 3 0 f t soft (12.5) rock (2.9) hard slow (6.2) hard (2.9) road mad (6.2) football (2.9) fight hard (6.2) road (2.9) fighting bad (6.2) cement (2.9) carpet fight (6.2) pencil (2.9) unsoft carpet (6.2) sand paper (2.9) bank weak (6.2) soft (2.9) bomb not rough (6.2) sick (2.9) Rocky mountain dog (2.9) not easy tree (2.9) I don't know smooth (2.9) leather punch (2.9) battle (2.9) wrestling (2.9) tough (2.9) (20.8) (12.5) (8.3) (8.3) (8.3) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) N=16 N=34 N=24 JPN itchy (45.4) name (8.6) wave time (9.0) mad storm white (adi.) (4.5) wave fight red (adj.) water stone water storm rough sea pool gentle (4.3) boy sea fight deep good boy snow violence painful green pepper football zara zara 0 mourn d o l l giza giza 0 painful sand roof face strong soft flow Tsuru Tsuru 0 burosun fine dekoboko 0 rough sea laundry garigari 0 plate truck bread s t i t c h thorn no rugby gang (9.6) (6.4) (3.2) N=22 N=23 N=31 CO 00 G III happy (58.6) cry mad (10.3) unhappy crying (10.3) happy people (3.4) cried S A D unhappy (3.4) tears sound (3.4 fight ENG rain (3.4) tear (3.4) slow (3.4) N=29 N=41 cry happy joyous I laugh quarried with friend get mad lonely lousy i s crying not crying lonely N=33 (42.4) (15.1) (9.0) (6.0) (3.0) tear cry happy lonely not poor song die joyous (68.2) (12.1) (12.1) (2.4) (2.4) (2.4) (44.6) (38.4) (4.6) (3.0) (1.5) happy cry unhappy tears friend l o s t lonely death N=28 N=62 cry tear sad happy book someone k i l l e d interesting die beautiful person scared mean lonely farewell dog laughter (53.6) (25.0) (10.7) (7.1) (4.0) (4.0) (4.0) (4.0) N=38 G I G III G V sweet (30.7) lemon (25.0) lemon (40.6) s a l t 23.0) 3weet (12.5) sweet (25.0) lemon (15.3) broken &8 vinegar (6.2) medium (7.6) sa l t pop (6.2) thin (7.6) l i n e (4.1) french f r i e s (3.1) sugar (7.6) sugar (4.1) spices (3.1) good (7.6) glass (4.1) sourcream (3.1) feeth (4.1) s a l t (3.1) piece (4.1) hurt (3.1) test (4.1) lemons (3.1) goob (4.1) cut (3.1) cranky (4.1) apple (4.1) salt (4.1) sugarclips (4.1) creble lemon (4.1) N=13 N=24 N=32 lemon (21.0) lemon (42.3) lemon (38.7) sweet (18.4) s a l t (21.1) pickled plums 1 (28.5) picked plums 1 (15.7) pickled plums 1 (11.5) sweet (6.1) sour (13.1) a l i t t l e (3.8) b i t t e r (4.0) salty (10.5) vinegar s a l t (2.0) JPN salty (5.2) salty (1.9) not sweet pickles (2.6) sudachi (N) grapefruit painful candy no suppaman (clang) dung lemon soda l i k e very much sweet vinegar (one word adj.) vinegar pickles b i t t e r rough sukigaki s a l t don't l i k e (adj.) salty salty N=38 N=52 N=49 to o o G I G III G V Y E L L O W ENG red white color l i g h t green blue black yellow butter apples bright color sun bright banana 3et c o l o r f u l (16.6) (10.0) (10.0) (10.0) (6.6) (6.6) (6.6) (6.6) (3.3) mi (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) bright (25.0) color (16.6) color (17.5) orange (13.3) sun (15.0) blue (10.0) flower (10.0) bright (10.0) lemon (7.5) flower (6.6) banana (5.0) pink (3.3) jacket (2.5) lemon (3.3) papers (2.5) flowers (3.3) I l i k e (2.5) butter (3.3) sunflower (2.5) moon (3.3) l i g h t (2.5) green (3.3) red (2.5) wood (3.3) pee (2.5) l i g h t color (3.3) blue (2.5) gold isedal (3.3) black (3.3) sun (3.3) autumn (3.3) banana (3.3) N=30 N=40 N=30 JPN bright (16.2) flower (17.3) lemon color (10.8) sunflower (15.3) flower yellow (8.1) color (9.6) sun sun (5.4) lemon (5.7) bright l i g h t (2.7) yellow (5.7) red (N) sun (2.7) sun (5.7) dandelion red (adj.) (2.7) red (3.0) color white (adj.) (2.7) bright (3.0) yellow (N) black (N) (2.7) chick (3.0) sun sun (2.7) moon (3.0) pretty paper folding (2.7) shine (3.0) thread thin (2.7) dark (1.9) blue hair (2.7) egg (1.9) raincoat sunny side up (2.7) orange (1.9) sound flower (2.7) dandelion (1.9) t r a f f i c l i g h t 1 pretty (2.7) sun (1.9) rainbow sunflower (2.7) bee (1.9) moon balloon (2.7) cloak (1.9) f a l l e n leave black (N) (2.7) hair (1.9) sunflower 1 banana (2.7) sun (1.9) rapeseed flower drink (2.7) pain (1.9) egg yolk lemon (2.7) t u l i p (1.9) crayon orange (2.7) picked radish 1 white (N) (2.7) bee blue (2.7) swallowtail pencil (2.7) (13.3) (6.6) (4.4) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) !I:I! (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) Nr37 N=52 N=45 G III end (48.0) start (20.0) last (8.0) B E G I N school (8.0) f i n i s h (4.0) ENG paper (4.0) bad (4.0) run (4.0) start (52.6) end (21.9) la s t (4.8) f i n i s h (4.8) race (2.4) school (2.4) paint (2.4) test (2.4) f i r s t (2.4) work (2.4) end (30.7) start (26.9) f i n i s h (15.3) race (7.6) begin (3.8) school (3.8) study (3.8) run (3.8) starting (3.8) N=25 N=41 N=26 end (18.5) end study (N) (11.1) study (N) start (N) (11.1) start (N) end (N) (7.4) end (N) do (7.4) write begin (7.4) school not begin (7.4) begin (intr) fasty (7.4) beginning do besty (7.4) slow runy (7.4) end (tr) at f i r s t (7.4) go schooly (7.4) test (N) read a text book (7.4) at f i r s t l a st (7.4) do end (N) (7.4) meaningless competition one (23.6) (18.1) (10.9) (9.0) 8:1! (3.6) (3.6) (1.8) (1.8) (1.8) (1.8) (1.8) (1.8) (1.8) (1.8) (1.8) end test study (N) begin gym class homework start (N) meal start (N) end (N) commies experiment competition a t h l e t i c meet start (27.9) (25.5) (11-6) (6.9) 11:8 (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) N=27 N=55 N=43 to O to G III E N J O Y ENG happy fun not happy sad not enjoy grass mad joy stupid play N=19 JPN not enjoyable play fun mourn crying cartoon birthday recess play (N) chair happy matchmaking enjoy party lovely rope skipping 1 eat not enjoy (21.0) (21.0) (10.0) (10.0) (10.0) (5.0) (5.0) (5.0) (5.0) (5.0) fun happy party joy l i k e s playing l i k e park play book ride soccer sad (32.5) (20.0) (17.5) (5.0) (5.0) (2.6) (2.6) (2.6) (2.6) 8:8 (2.6) (2.6) N=40 (27.2) enjoyable (15.1) play (9.0) happy (3.0) fun (adj.) music party candy birthday song score l i k e very much circus football lonely mourn sad l i k e (adj.) amusement park laugh play (N) happy fun party f r i e n d swimming boring j o y f u l candy enjoy bi r t h d a y Christmas enjoyed play joy dance t r i p game sad shine unhappy not fun N=29 .Al=33_ (19.5) party (17.3) play (V) (15.2) game (6.5) get happy (4.3) fun (adj.) happy (2.1) enjoy play (N) mourn cartoon painting music continue flower t r i p hockey friend not enjoy joke laugh disney land not interesting s i s t e r movies amusement part (20.6) (10.3) (6.8) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (3.4) (11.6) (11.6) (6.9) (4.6) (2.3) N=43 CO o to G I G III G V watch (20.0) test (15.0) check (16.6) x-ray (20.0) look (10.0) test (10.0) arithmetic (20.0) bones (10.0) doctor (6.6) operate (20.0) house (5.0) look (6.6) E X A M I N E fun (20.0) eye (5.0) pass (3.3) check (5.0) observe (3.3) ENG sc i e n t i s t (5.0) desk (3.3) project (5.0) no (3.3) rock (5.0) hard (3.3) explain (5.0) piano (3.3) doctor (5.0) show (3.3) science (5.0) short (3.3) body (5.0) people (3.3) leg (5.0) dumb (3.3) x-ray (5.0) examine professor ray chemistry hospital excuse me dictionary science (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) (3.3) N=5 N=20 N=30 get t i r e d 1 (33.3) dictionary (22.5) dictionary (25.7) look (13.3) understand (10.0) research (8.5) not examine (6.6) study (N) (10.0) dictionary (5.7) dictionary (6.6) look (7.5) experiment (5.7) homework (6.6) look closely 1 (2.5) study (5.7) think (6.6) look for character (2.8) man (3.3) Chinese character investigation (2.8) JPN examine an insect (3.3) society (2.8) book (3.3) forget word (2.8) encyclopedia (3.3) word look (2.8) get angry (3.3) notebook detective (2.8) desk (3.3) find accident (2.8) look for (3.3) myself library too much work no way textbook research book investigator (two words) n a i l examination test (N) population butterfly meaning look for notebook piano score book not examine 1 (2.8) (2.8) (2.8) (2.8) (2.8) (2.8) (2.8) (2.8) (2.8) month dictionary insect N=30 N=40 N=35 CO O G I remember (55.5) brought (3.7) water (3.7) lost (3.7) play (3.7) forgot (3.7) bring 3.7) my name (3.7) Hargot [I'M school butterfly (3.7) think (3.7) begin (3.7) go again (3.7) N=27 not forget (11.5) remember forget (7.6) no (3.8) person (3.8) not know (7.6) JPN homework book ottot 0 something forget homework r e c a l l test calculation not scolded 1 understand crayon not good pencil not bring N=26 G III remember (54.0) homework (8.0) hint (8.0) birthday (2.7) brain (2.7) bad (2.7) coat (2.7) thing (2.7) head (2.7) memories (2.7) learn (2.7) play (2.7) forgot (2.7) amnesia (2.7) N=37 remember (15.3) homework (13.3) books (6.6) forgot (10.0) lo s t (6.6) l e f t (3.3) stupid (3.3) pencil (3.3) baggage (3.3) misplaces (3.3) N=30 homework (15.7) homework (20.0) remember (7.8) remember (10.0) forgot (5.2) fool (7.5) study (N) r e c a l l (5.0) re c a l l forget not know notebook tool Chinese character dumb (N) hurried person 1 l e f t get scolded test (2.5) take time umbrella not remember forget head forgotten a r t i c l e 1 forgot not know schedule diary think not forget fool book feed a dog not know test meal thing tool not know study year 1 space get relieved (V) leave get hurried book have N=38 N= 40 G I G III G V L I S T E N ENG hear (47.6) hear (46.3) music (25.9) owet (4.7) ear (21.9) hear (22.2) not l i s t e n (4.7) talk (7.3) talk (14.8) teacher (4.7) teacher (4.8) ears (11.1) talk (4.7) dil u t i o n (2.4) pay attention (7.4) door (4.7) piano (2.4) record (3.0) music (4.7) read (2.4) concertiate (3.0) work (4.7) word (2.4) not l i s t e n i n g (3.0) didn't l i s t e n (4.7) quiet (2.4) classroom (3.0) sleep (4.7) radio (2.4) ear/sound (3.0) TV (4.7) headphone (2.4) didether (4.7) speak (2.4) N=21 N=41 N=27 ear (15.1) ear (56.3) ear hear hear (7.2) music T.V. (9.0) talk sound want to l i s t e n hear (5.4) talk can't hear (6.0) noisy (3.6) hear noisy record (1-8) talk hear sound hear think (3.0) music radio heard teach talk (N) radio mishearing medicine not l i s t e n to teacher mother school play nose t e l l fortune record talk (N) to teacher bad reply funny flower telephone hear often touch remember well music enter l i s t e n to teacher man make noise cosmos flower JPN (54.0) (10.6) i t i ) (2.1) N=26 N=38 N= 40 CO O G I walk (66.6) f a s t (13.3) ran (6.6) k i d s (3.3) R U N I'm running (3.3) speed (3.3) ENG e x e r c i s e (3.3) N=30 f a s t (36.3) walk (29.5) run (6.8) get t i r e d 1 tough (2.2) JPN play too bad ran marathon foot f a l l q u i c k l y person N=44 G III ifrSi f a s t (61.7) walk (36.6) walk (23.4) f a s t (13.3) jog (4.2) l e g (6.6) running (2.1) stop ran ( 2.l) summer Olympic people (2.1) jog (3.3) hop (2.1) f e l l (3.3) race (2.1) e x e r c i s e (3.3) t r i p (3.3) shoes (3.3) trac k (3.3) runner (3.3) rock (3.3) run (3.3) N=47 N=30 f a s t (30.9) walk (19.6) walk (18.1) f o o t (17.6) move (9.0) f a s t (9.8) a t h l e t i c meet 1 (7.2) run r e l a y (2.6) a t h l e t i c meet 1 marathon r e l a y (3.9) competition competition s l i p 50 m race get t i r e d (1.8) f a l l c o o l car wind slow road woman foot race gym today dangerous jump soccer run running shoes 1 get t i r e d 1 slowly house N=55 N=51 G I G III S I T ENG stand chair sat s i t f a l l s i t down not s i t t i n g start run 18:3 (7.4) (3.7) (3.7) (3.7) (3.7) (3.7) (3.7) chain stand couch down homework sat 59.5 (26.1) (4.7) (4.7) (2.3) (2.3) N=27 N=42 JPN chair stand rest s i t sleep 1 i s standing f a l l down 1 floor remain not s i t 1 (36.1) (27.74) (11.1) (5.5) (5.5) (2.7) (2.7) (2.7) (2.7) (2.7) chair s i t stand table breakdown painful (83.9) (3.5 (3.5) (3.5) (3.5) (3.5) N=36 N=56 G V chair (46.6) stand (26.6) up (3.3) near (3.3) seat (3.3) 3tand up (3.3) down (3.3) get up (3.3) f e l l down (3.3) comfortable (3.3) N=30 chair (62.0) stand (12.0) get t i r e d 1 (4.0) get sore buns (2.0) good feeling (2.0) bums (2.0) get oneself conformable 1 (2.0) s i t (order) (2.0) desk (2.0) cross legged (N) (2.0) study (N) (2.0) cushion (2.0) bed (2.0) f a l l (2.0) N=50 to O OO G I G III G V S L I P ENG f a l l (18.1) s l i d e (18.1) ice (18.1) hurt (13.6) s l i p (4.5) tree (4.5) slap (4.5) slippery (4.5) shoe (4.5) ouch (4.5) ice f a l l s l i d e hurt ouch skip icy my butt banana sorp sky (65.1) (11.6) (4.6) 8:3 (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) (2.3) f a l l ice s l i d e f a l l down ice skating under bed stand b i t mop sorp skate N=22 N=43 N=32 s l i d e (23.5) s l i d e painful (11.7) ice f a l l ( t r i p l e ) (5.8) painful not s l i p ice skate ice s l i p fast f a l l skating (N) (2.9) water skiing (N) ice run skating f a l l snow walk skiing scared s l i p not s l i p scared go down walk slippery o i l toboggan paper fun (adj.) dangerous s l i p (28.1) (25.0) (15.6) 8:3 (3.1) (3.1) (3.1) (3.1) (3.1) (3.1) (3.1) JPN (38.8) (20.3) (5.5) (3.7) (1.8) ice s l i d e f a l l skating skiing painful fun (adj.) snow run s i t f a l l down 1 mud toboggan s l i p f a l l down 1 hallway banana skin s l i p (N) r o l l e r skate Nr34 N=54 N=49 to O CO G I G III G V S T E A L ENG robber (16.6) robber hard (16.6) cake take (8.3) hard hurt (4.1) money watch (4.1) things money (4.1) baseball naughty (4.1) metal dog (4.1 pencils broken (4.1) l i a i s o n s i t (4.1) buy metal (4.1) meddle kidnap (4.1) t i e (4.1) strong (4.1) chair (4.1) rob (4.1) (26.4) (26.4) (17.6) (8.8) (2.9) (2.9) (2.9) mi (2.9) (2.9) robber th i e f hard money fork rob/stork no lose can give friend robbing give back bad bring (14.2) (14.2) (10.7) (7.1) (3.5) (3.5) (3.5) B:I! (3.5) (3.5) (3.5) (3.5) (3.5) (3.5) JPN N=24 N=29 N=34 thief (34.4) thief (37.5) thief take (17.2) take (27.0) take not steal (10.3) wrong (12.5) money help (3.4) money (6.2) wrong hard hard ribbon eraser pawn (2.0) catch string treasure gloves i s taking wrong toy brother heavy pickpocket s i t return stole toy wrong thing take N=48 N=28 N=40 (60.0) (10.0) (7.5) (5.0) (2.5) 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0078288/manifest

Comment

Related Items