UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Colour naming in young children Preuss, Renate Jutta 1981

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1981_A8 P74.pdf [ 10.61MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095066.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095066-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095066-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095066-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095066-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095066-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095066-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095066-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095066.ris

Full Text

COLOUR NAMING  I N YOUNG C H I L D R E N by  RENATE J U T T A B.A.,  A  The U n i v e r s i t y  THESIS THE  PREUSS  of British  Columbia,1978  SUBMITTED I N PARTIAL REQUIREMENTS  F U L F I L M E N T OF  FOR T H E DEGREE  MASTER  OF  OF  ARTS  in THE  F A C U L T Y OF GRADUATE  STUDIES  (LINGUISTICS)  We  accept to  THE  this  thesis  the required  UNIVERSITY  conforming  standard  OF B R I T I S H  May  •© R e n a t e  as  COLUMBIA  1981  Jutta  Preuss,  1981  In p r e s e n t i n g requirements  this thesis f o r an  of  British  it  freely available  agree that for  understood for  Library  shall  for reference  and  study.  I  for extensive  that  h i s or  her  copying or  f i n a n c i a l gain  be  shall  publication  not  be  Date  DE-6  (2/79)  c t e ,  198/  of  Columbia  make  further this  thesis  head o f  this  my  It is thesis  a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my  ^|ywJiis4f  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  the  representatives.  permission.  Department o f  copying of  g r a n t e d by  the  University  the  p u r p o s e s may by  the  I agree that  permission  department o r  f u l f i l m e n t of  advanced degree at  Columbia,  scholarly  in partial  written  ABSTRACT  Eighteen studied  as  terms:  to  their  and  PINK.  production a  (naming)  various  evolutionary, aspects  with  and  four-year-olds  use  of eleven  of  task,  perceptual  general  the  accuracy  task.  was  found t o have  proposed  which  by  groups  have  been  was a  task  showed  performance.  considered  Performance  the  i n the older  terms had  and  two  few  than  terms  by  the  no  claims could  more More  be  accurate terms  younger,  colour  about  terms.  had  parental  environment  reasons, this  r e s p e c t i v e l y , and  a l l eleven  d i d not  from  correlations of  behavior  notably  nor d i d  analyses.  For various  two-year-olds.  group  acquired  was  colours  practice obtained  u n r e l i a b l e and  d e t e r m i n a n t i n naming  than  and  & Kay,  other  of the  also  and  p r o p o s e d by  a group  questionnaires  possible  non-primary  behave  input  of  to  of primary,  the non-primary  of  task,  no c o r r e l a t i o n s  Berlin  In p a r t i c u l a r ,  Measures  a  o b j e c t i v e s were  environmental factors  conceptual  i n any  (selection)  The  studies. as  d e t e r m i n e d by  development.  order  achromatic colours  with  were  colour  differences in light  and  lexical  strong  was  a comprehension  (matching)  the evolutionary  reveal  of acquisition  performance  Performance  and  Level  discrimination  examine  it  knowledge  twenty  BLUE,GREEN,RED,YELLOW,BLACK,WHITE,GREY,BROWN,PURPLE,  ORANGE,  and  t w o - y e a r - o l d s and  information  environment  as  made. in  four-year-olds  been  the average s i x of  acquired  by  being  eight  the o l d e r  group  iii. Comprehension was more advanced f o r both ages than, production,  although more terms were produced than were  comprehended. analyses  No sex d i f f e r e n c e s were found a t a l l . Further  concentrated  on production  performance.  As expected, the number o f c o l o u r terms used  increased  with age and t h e i r use became more s t a b l e with age.  There  was no one c o l o u r term t h a t appeared i n a l l o f the s u b j e c t s ' l e x i c o n s , but the c o l o u r terms most l i k e l y to appear were the p r i m a r i e s and the non-primary ORANGE. though not s i g n i f i c a n t , preference  BLUE showed a marked,  a t both ages and s e v e r a l  p o s s i b l e reasons are suggested f o r t h i s . appeared l e a s t Colour  GREY, as expected,  f r e q u e n t l y , followed by the achromatics.  terms used most a c c u r a t e l y were ORANGE and PINK.  These appear to be the f i r s t c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s to emerge with separate  labels,  GREY again ranking  followed by the primary c o l o u r s and  lowest.  There were no terms which had  been acquired by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e number of two-yearo l d s and none by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y small number of four-yearolds.  Primary terms as a group were a l s o those most l i k e l y  to be used i n c o r r e c t l y .  Those terms most l i k e l y to be over-  extended by the younger subjects were a l s o those without a s t a b l e r e f e r e n t , while  f o r the o l d e r ones i t was those terms  which the subject a l r e a d y knew the c o r r e c t use o f .  The a c t u a l  e r r o r s d i d not seem to be based on any of the proposed perceptual  p r o p e r t i e s of c o l o u r .  I t i s suggested t h a t the c h i l d at these stages does not organize  h i s l e x i c a l or conceptual  c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s i n terms  of the a d u l t d i s t i n c t i o n s of primary/non-primary/achromatic or of h u e / s a t u r a t i o n / b r i g h t n e s s .  Further  in-depth  examination might r e v e a l a base of a s s o c i a t i v e or  contextual  c r i t e r i a i n s t e a d of the random, ad-hoc guesses they appear to be i n t h i s study.  I t i s f u r t h e r suggested that such  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c r i t e r i a are very i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c and fore w i l l not  there-  f i t the g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s made by previous  studies about colour-term a c q u i s i t i o n .  V.  Table of Contents page Abstract  i i  L i s t o f Tables  ix  L i s t of Figures  xi  L i s t of Appendices  xii  1.0 Information on Colour-Naming Behavior  1  1.1 I n t r o d u c t i o n  1  1.2 P r o p e r t i e s of Colour Perception  3  1.2.1 P h y s i c a l P r o p e r t i e s of Colour  3  1.2.2 Colour D i s c r i m i n a t i o n by Infants  4  1.3 Determinants of Colour-Naming Behavior  4  1.3.1 E v o l u t i o n a r y Development of Colour Categories  5  1.3.2 A Second E v o l u t i o n a r y Order  11  1.3.3 Development V i a Perceptual Categories  13  1.3.4 Environment as a Determinant i n Naming Behavior  17  1.3.5 Sex D i f f e r e n c e s i n Colour Naming  21  1.4 Theories of L e x i c a l Development  22  1. 4 .1. D i r e c t i o n o f Development  22 24  1.4.2 Development of Semantic/Lexical 1.4.3 The Nature of L e x i c a l  Categories  27  Categories  1.4.4 C a t e g o r i z a t i o n C r i t e r i a  31  . 1.5 A p p l i c a t i o n s of E r r o r A n a l y s i s  38  1.5.1 Using E r r o r s to Determine L e x i c a l S t r a t e g i e s  38  1.5.2 P r e d i c t i n g Types of Perceptual Overextensions  39 40  1.5.3 Status o f  Overextensions  43  1.5.'4 L a b e l l i n g S t r a t e g i e s 1.6 A c q u i r i n g Comprehension and Production 1.6.1 Order of A c q u i r i n g Task  Skills  Skills  44 44  1.6.2 C o g n i t i v e Requirements of Each Task  44  1.6.3 Support from Colour-Naming Studies  46  1.6.4 Overextensions  46  i n the Two Tasks  vi. page  1.7  O p e r a t i o n a l Hypotheses  48  2.0  Methodology  51  2.1  Subjects  2.2  Experimental  and  Design  51 Materials  2.2.1  Stimulus  2.2.2  Presentation of  2.3  Tasks  2.3.2  Orders  2.4  Colours  Experimental  2.3.1  and of  Potential  52 Colours  53  Instructions  54  Presentation  56  Experimental  Choice  of  2.4.2  Colour  Background  2.4.3  Size  2.5  53  Methods  2.4.1  of  52  Colour  Problems  Sample and  and  58  Lighting  Discrimination  S c o r i n g Method  2.5.2  T e s t i n g f o r P a r e n t a l Input  3.1  Orders  59 60 60  Performance of  :  Pre-tests  S c o r i n g Method  General  58 ;  Task  2.5.1  3.0  58  and  Child  Practice  Results  Performance  Accuracy  63 and  Acquisition  3.1.1  Orders  of  Accuracy  3.1.2  Orders  of  Percentage  3.1.3  Correlations  with  Comparable  3.1.4  Correlations  with  E v o l u t i o n a r y Orders  3.2  Performance  3.2.1  Age  3.2.2  Task  3.2.3  Sex  3.2.4  Colour  3.3  Colour  61  63 63  Having  Acquired  Each  Term  68  Studies  73 74  Variables  74  Variable  75  Variable  .  Variable  76 77  Variable  77  Terms A c q u i r e d  79  3.3.1  Terms A c q u i r e d  by  Two-Year-Olds  80  3.3.2  Terms A c q u i r e d  by  Four-Year-Olds  80  3.3.3  Acquisition Non-Primary  of Primary, Colours  Achromatic  and 80  page 3.4 Colour Terms Used  82  3.4.1 Terms Used by Two-Year-Olds  85  3.4.2 Terms Used by Four-Year-Olds  87  3.5 Measures of S t a b i l i t y  87  3.5.1 O v e r a l l Levels of S t a b i l i t y  88  3.5.2 S t a b i l i t y Levels o f Production  and Comprehension  3.6 Types of Colour L a b e l l i n g  93 99  3.6.1 Label-Types  ,  100  3.6.2 Frequencies of Label-Types  100  3.7 Matching E r r o r s o f D i s c r i m i n a t i o n  110  3.8 Types of E r r o r s  115  3.8.1 Rank Order C o r r e l a t i o n s  116  3.8.2. Performance V a r i a b l e s i n Error-Types  119  3.8.3 D i s t r i b u t i o n of E r r o r s  120  3.8.4 D i s t r i b u t i o n of "No Responses"  124  3.9 Overextensions - I n c o r r e c t Uses o f Terms and Samples  126  3.9.1 D i s t r i b u t i o n o f I n c o r r e c t Uses  126  3.9.2 A C l o s e r Look a t Production  130  Overextensions  3.9.3 S t a b i l i t y Levels of Overextended Terms  132  3.10 A p p l i c a t i o n of Overextensions  134  3.10.1 Existence of C o r r e c t Terms i n Vocabulary  134  3.10.2 A n a l y s i s of E r r o r P a i r s to Determine L e x i c a l Categories  135  4.0 D i s c u s s i o n o f Performance Results 4.1 C o r r e l a t i o n s of Rank Orders with Comparable 4.2 C o r r e l a t i o n s with E v o l u t i o n a r y 4.2.1 In R e l a t i o n to Previous 4.2.2 D i f f e r e n c e s i n Data  Order  Studies  14 0 Studiesl40 14 0 141 142  page 4.3  Performance  Variables  4.3.1  Age  4.3.2  Task  4.3.3  Colour  4.3.4  In R e l a t i o n  4.3.5  Sub-Group  143  Differences  143  Differences  14 3  to C o r r e l a t i o n Results  Terms A c q u i r e d  4.5  Colour  Terms as  4.5.2  I n d i v i d u a l Naming  a Lexical  Age  4.6.2  Predominant  4.6.3  Levels  Differences  Domain  148  Preferences  14 8 152  in Overall Stability  Colours  Levels  in Overall Stability  of Production  and  15 3  Levels  153  Comprehension  154  Labelling Strategies  4.7.1  Age  4.7.2  Order  156  Differences  Order  4.8.2  Task  156  of Acquiring  Performance  4.8.1  4.9  145  Stability  4.6.1  4.8  .  14 6  Colour  of  144  Used  4.5.1  Levels  144  Variables  Colour  4.7  142  Differences  4.4  4.6  i n Colour-Naming  Separate Labels  Variables  156  f o r Error-Types  Correlations/Analysis of Variance  159 Results  Differences  Distribution  159 160  of Error-Types  161  4.9.1  Individual Colours  161  4.9.2  Colour  161  4.10  Groups  Overextensions:  I n c o r r e c t Uses  o f Terms  and  Samples 4.10.1  162  Predominant  Colour  and  4.10.2 S t a b i l i t y  Levels  4.10.3  of Correct  Existence  5.0  The  Validity  Summary  of  Terms  and  162  Terms  16 3  i n Vocabulary  Categories  of Proposed  Results  Groups  of Overextended  4.10.4 L e x i c a l / C o n c e p t u a l 4.11  Colour  Colour  Conclusion  R e v e a l e d by Groups  165 Errors  165 166 171  Footnotes  175  Bibliography  178  Appendices  182-228  XX.  List  of  Tables page  1.  2.  3.  4.  5.  Rank Both  Orders Tasks  of  Accuracy  f o r Both  f o r Sub-Groups  C o m p a r i s o n o f Rank O r d e r s a n d S u b - G r o u p s 2A a n d 2B  of  Accuracy  Term  Subjects  Having  in Overall  Average  Performance  Number  of  i n Each  Colour  and  Both  Ages  Age  and  Age  in  70  Task  76 Colour  and  Task  for . 7 7 79  Number o f S u b j e c t s i n E a c h Age H a v i n g A c q u i r e d P r i m a r y , A c h r o m a t i c and N o n - P r i m a r y C o l o u r s . F r e q u e n c i e s and P r o p o r t i o n s o f by T w o - Y e a r - O l d s  Colour  F r e q u e n c i e s and P r o p o r t i o n s by F o u r - Y e a r - O l d s  Colour  Number o f  14.  C o l o u r F r e q u e n c i e s and L e v e l f o r Both Ages Number  of  75  Terms A c q u i r e d  Total  Terms  Terms  Terms  the 81  Used 83  of  Terms  Used 84  in Stability Criteria  .Levels  i n Each  88  Stability 90  15.  Total  16.  Colour Frequencies P r o d u c t i o n f o r AGE  in Stability 2  Levels  Colour Frequencies P r o d u c t i o n f o r AGE  in Stability 4  Levels  Colour Frequencies i n S t a b i l i t y C o m p r e h e n s i o n f o r AGE 2 a n d AGE  Levels 4  18.  69  Acquired  Performance  Scores  2 67  Each  of  13.  17.  f o r AGE  Percentage  Average Scores f o r Each Total Performance Average Scores f o r Each Combined Ages  12.  2B  Each  7.  11.  and  Percentage of Subjects Having Acquired C o l o u r Term i n B o t h Ages and T a s k s  Average  10.  2A  66  6.  9.  and 65  Orders of Accuracy i n Both Tasks  Colour  8.  Ages  i n Task  Stability  Levels  94  of 96 of 97 of 98  page 19.  Frequencies o f Label-Types  f o r Each Colour  and Age  101  20.  Confusion Matrix f o r Production at AGE 2  111  21.  Confusion Matrix f o r Production a t AGE 4  112  22.  Confusion Matrix f o r Comprehension a t AGE 2  113  23.  Confusion Matrix f o r Comprehension a t AGE 4  114  24.  Rank Orders of E r r o r s - I n c o r r e c t Responses and Frequencies of E r r o r s f o r Both Ages and Tasks Rank Orders of "No Responses" and Frequencies f o r Each Colour a t Both Ages and Tasks  25. 26.  117 118  Average Frequencies of C o r r e c t , I n c o r r e c t and No Responses  _  (  27.  P o s s i b l e Colour Groups and Expected  Proportions  28.  Rank Orders of I n c o r r e c t Uses f o r Both Ages i n  120 122  Both Tasks  127  29.  Frequencies f o r Overextended Terms  131  30.  S t a b i l i t y Levels of Overextended Terms  133  31.  P o s s i b l e E r r o r P a i r s i n Perceptual Categories  136  L i s t of F i g u r e s page 1.  Berlin  2.  Percentage of Subjects Having Acquired Each Colour Term i n Production Both Ages  71  3.  Percentage of Subjects Having Acquired Each Colour Term i n Comprehension Both Ages  71  4.  Percentage of Subjects Having Acquired Each Term i n T o t a l Performance Both Ages • 72  5.  P r o p o r t i o n s of Subjects Using Each Term i n AGE 2 and AGE 4  86  P r o p o r t i o n s of Subjects Using Each Term i n AGE 2A and AGE 2B  86  Colour Term S t a b i l i t y by P r o p o r t i o n of Subjects - STABLE Terms at Both Ages  91  Colour Term S t a b i l i t y by P r o p o r t i o n of Subjects - UNSTABLE Terms a t Both Ages  92  6. 7. 8. 9.  & Kay's Proposed  Order of Colour Emergence  5  Colour Term S t a b i l i t y by P r o p o r t i o n of Subjects - UNKNOWN Terms a t Both Ages  92  10.  Frequencies of Label-Types  at AGE 2  102  11.  Frequencies o f Label-Types  a t AGE 2A  103  12.  Frequencies of Label-Types  a t AGE 2B  104  13.  Frequencies of Label-Types  a t AGE 4  105  14.  Frequencies o f Label-Types  a t AGE 4A  106  15.  Frequencies of Label-Types  a t AGE 4B  107  16.  Proposed  Order of Emergence of Separate Labels  158  xii.  List  o f Appendices page  1.  2.  Tau V a l u e s f o r Betweenand Within-Group Comparisons o f Performance Tau Values the  f o r Comparisons  o f Performance  4.  Proportions o f Stable/Unstable/Unknown of S t a b i l i t y  8.  9.  10.  11.  12.  13.  Table  183  Summary  7.  with  E v o l u t i o n a r y Orders  3.  5.  18 2  f o r Analysis of Variance  #1 Levels  186  C o l o u r Group F r e q u e n c i e s S t a b i l i t y L e v e l - AGE 2  & Criterion  C o l o u r Group F r e q u e n c i e s S t a b i l i t y L e v e l - AGE 4  & Criterion  Proportions i n Stability f o r AGE 2 a n d AGE 4  Levels of Production  Proportions i n Stability f o r AGE 2 a n d AGE 4  Levels  C o l o u r Group F r e q u e n c i e s P r o d u c t i o n AGE 2  in Stability  C o l o u r Group F r e q u e n c i e s P r o d u c t i o n AGE 4  in Stability  C o l o u r Group F r e q u e n c i e s C o m p r e h e n s i o n f o r AGE 2  i n Stability  C o l o u r Group F r e q u e n c i e s Comprehension f o r AGE 4  in Stability  i n Each 187 i n Each 188  18 9 of  Comprehension 190 Levels of 191 Levels of 192 Levels of 193  K e n d a l l ' s Tau Values f o r Comparisons Orders o f E r r o r Types Table  184,185  Levels of 194 o f Rank  f o r Analysis of Variance  195  14.  Summary  #2  196  15.  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Responses (errors) i n Groups o f Primary,Non-Primary and Achromatic Colours f o r P r o d u c t i o n AGE 2 19 7  16.  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Responses (errors) i n Groups o f Primary,Non-Primary and Achromatic Colours f o r C o m p r e h e n s i o n AGE 2 198  17.  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Responses (errors) i n Groups o f Primary,Non-Primary and Achromatic Colours f o r P r o d u c t i o n AGE 4 199  X l l l  page 18.  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Responses ( e r r o r s ) i n G r o u p s o f P r i m a r y , N o n - P r i m a r y and A c h r o m a t i c Colours f o r C o m p r e h e n s i o n AGE 4 200  19.  Proportions  of  Errors  i n Decreasing  Ranks  f o r AGE  2  201  20.  Proportions  of  Errors  i n D e c r e a s i n g . Ranks  f o r AGE  4  202  21.  Proportions Non-Primary AGE 2  o f "No R e s p o n s e s " i n G r o u p s o f . P r i m a r y , and A c h r o m a t i c Colours for Production  22.  23.  24.  25.  26....  27.  28.  29.  30.  31.  32.  33.  203  P r o p o r t i o n s o f "No R e s p o n s e s " i n G r o u p s N o n - P r i m a r y and A c h r o m a t i c Colours for C o m p r e h e n s i o n AGE 2 Proportions Non-Primary AGE 4  204  205 "No  Responses"  i n Decreasing  Ranks 2 06  K e n d a l l ' s Tau V a l u e s o f I n c o r r e c t Uses  f o r Comparisons  of  Rank  Orders 207  o f I n c o r r e c t . Uses i n Groups'of Primary, and A c h r o m a t i c Colours for Production  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Uses i n Groups Non-Primary and A c h r o m a t i c Colours for C o m p r e h e n s i o n AGE 2 Proportions Non-Primary AGE 4  Primary,  o f "No R e s p o n s e s " i n G r o u p s o f Primary, and A c h r o m a t i c Colours for Production  Proportions of f o r B o t h Ages  Proportions Non-Primary AGE 2  of  of  Primary, 209  o f I n c o r r e c t Uses i n Groups o f Primary, and A c h r o m a t i c Colours for Production  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Uses i n Groups o f N o n - P r i m a r y and A c h r o m a t i c Colours for C o m p r e h e n s i o n AGE 4 Proportions of of Production  I n c o r r e c t Uses  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Uses of Comprehension  208  210  Primary, 211  i n Decreasing  Ranks 212  i n Decreasing  Proportions of Error Pairs i n Production l a b e l s , excluding i n d i v i d u a l trends)  Ranks 213  (including  P r o p o r t i o n s of E r r o r P a i r s i n Comprehension (including l a b e l s , excluding i n d i v i d u a l trends)  214  215  xiv.  page. 34.  35.  36.  37.  38.  39.  40.  Total Proportions of Error Pairs (including l a b e l s , excluding i n d i v i d u a l trends)  216  E r r o r - P a i r s Made M o r e T h a n O n c e (including l a b e l s , excluding i n d i v i d u a l trends)  217  Proportions of Error-Pairs i n Production (excluding l a b e l s , e x c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l trends)  218  E r r o r - P a i r s Made M o r e T h a n O n c e ( e x c l u d i n g l a b e l s , excluding i n d i v i d u a l trends)  219  Proportions of Error-Pairs i n Production (excluding l e b e l s , including i n d i v i d u a l trends)  22 0  E r r o r - P a i r s Made M o r e T h a n O n c e ( e x c l u d i n g l a b e l s , including i n d i v i d u a l trends)  221  Measurements o f Colour Nethuen N o t a t i o n  222  Samples  Used  by  41.  Questionnaire  42.  Rank O r d e r s o f O v e r a l l F r e q u e n c y a n d E x t e n t - o f - U s e with Tau Values f o r C o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h Performance and E v o l u t i o n a r y O r d e r s  226  K e n d a l l ' s Tau Values f o r Comparisons o f I n d i v i d u a l AGE 2 P e r f o r m a n c e w i t h P a r e n t a l I n p u t a n d C h i l d P r a c t i c e Measures  227  F r e q u e n c i e s and P r o p o r t i o n s o f S t a b i l i t y L e v e l s C o r r e s p o n d i n g w i t h L e v e l s o f Frequency and Extent-of-Use  228  43.  44.  223, 224,225  Acknowledgements My thanks must go to my three committee members—Dr.David Dr. Ken Reeder and Dr. Dale K i n k a d e — f o r producing  Ingram,  a l l t h e i r help i n  t h i s t h e s i s , and to Dr. Seong-Soo Lee and h i s a s s i s t a n t  Jupien f o r a d v i s i n g me on the s t a t i s t i c a l  analyses i n v o l v e d .  And, of course, g r a t e f u l thanks to a l l the c h i l d r e n i n the study, t h e i r parents and the v a r i o u s daycare centres that p a r t i c i p a t e d - Summer o f '73, L i l l i p u t , Canada Goose, T i l l i c u m , Unit 1 and Unit 2 — f o r t h e i r w i l l i n g and o f t e n eager cooperation.  1.  1.0  Information  1.1  Introduction A  significant  involves lying in  Behavior  of learning a native  system.  Studies general  and o f examining  have  looked  theories of  present  o f eleven  at this  study  English  representing  points.  the acquisition  focuses colour  Performance  and compared  It  i s hoped  that  governs  the results  and a f f e c t s  development Such  will  behavior  further information  tasks studies.  on  on  of adults lexical  i n general.  a study  n e c e s s a r i l y touches  on s e v e r a l  There  directly  and sometimes  e x c l u s i v e l y with  an o v e r a l l  involve  developmental  information  the colour-naming  information.  It  a t two a g e -  of previous  provide  relevant  view  i s required  the.scope  and e a r l y  and comprehension  to the results  c h i l d r e n and t o p r o v i d e  —what  specific  BLUE,GREEN,RED,YELLOW,  two d i f f e r e n t  i n production  analyzed  get  of  on t h e development  terms—  (at least)  is  and  both  lexical  BLACK,WHITE,GREY,BROWN,PURPLE,ORANGE,PINK—  what  i t s under-  areas.  The  points  language  i t s l e x i c o n and e s p e c i a l l y  o f developing  development lexical  part  acquiring  semantic  terms  use  on Colour-Naming  are studies  of the aspects  involves  first  this  have  widens  affects  this  behavior  i t , e t c . —  considerably.  o f a l l an o u t l i n e o f what  physically, since  dealt  topic, but to  o f colour-naming  f o r acquisition,what  of related material  which  areas f o r  has been  suggested  colours as a  major  2.  determinant i n both the developing o f c o l o u r words (Section 1.2).  of and the a d u l t use  Does a two-year-old have  the p h y s i c a l p r e r e q u i s i t e s he needs to be able to name c o l o u r s the way a d u l t s do?  This s e c t i o n a l s o  provides  some t e c h n i c a l terms to be used throughout the study. The  second major area  (Section 1.3) examines the  p o s s i b l e determinants o f colour-naming behavior. i t mentions c r o s s - c u l t u r a l s t u d i e s of a d u l t  As such,  colour-usage,  proposed e v o l u t i o n a r y development o f c o l o u r terms w i t h i n a language, n e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l aspects o f c o l o u r and p o s s i b l e environmental i n f l u e n c e s .  perception  Various  predictions  about o n t o l o g i c a l development are made on the b a s i s of t h i s information,  f o r example, the order o f a c q u i s i t i o n and the  types o f c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s , as w e l l as the types o f e r r o r s that might be expected. Since t h i s study examines a p a r t o f general development, the l a s t major area  lexical  (Section 1.4) examines  various aspects o f l e x i c a l t h e o r i e s as they might r e l a t e to or be supported by the development of the colour l e x i c o n .  3. 1.2  P r o p e r t i e s of Colour  1.2.1  Perception  Physical Properties of Colour  ways.  Colour  terms can be grouped f o r d e s c r i p t i o n i n s e v e r a l  This study focuses on the eleven b a s i c colour terms,  b a s i c i n t h a t they can be used to d e s c r i b e any c o l o u r . can be f u r t h e r d i f f e r e n t i a t e d as primary c o l o u r s green,yellow), colours  achromatics  (blue,red,  non-primary  (pink,purple,orange,brown,grey). Grey can a l s o be  considered  an achromatic c o l o u r and  brown i n t h i s category may  (black,white), and  These  vary,  as w e l l .  l a t e r analyses  will  some s t u d i e s have put  Because these c a t e g o r i e s  consider d i f f e r e n t achromatic  and non-primary groups as w e l l . * The p h y s i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of c o l o u r have u s u a l l y been explained  i n terms of three parameters: hue,  brightness.  s a t u r a t i o n and  In very s i m p l i f i e d language, "hue"  c o l o u r , such as red versus are eleven d i f f e r e n t hues.  green: i n the present Each hue  The  there  " S a t u r a t i o n " r e f e r s to  the d e n s i t y or deepness of a c o l o u r : pink, red.  study,  i n turn can have v a r i o u s  degrees of s a t u r a t i o n and b r i g h t n e s s .  c a l l e d a desaturated  i s the a c t u a l  f o r example, can  "brightness" of a c o l o u r i s  j u s t t h a t , white being the highest l e v e l of brightness  with  black at the other end o f the s c a l e . ^ * The convention followed i n t h i s r e p o r t and i n t a b l e s and appendices, with the exception of the d i s c u s s i o n on B e r l i n & Kay's theory, i s t h a t block l e t t e r s r e f e r to the term while r e g u l a r p r i n t r e f e r s to the r e f e r e n t i t s e l f , i n t h i s case, the colour NAME versus the c o l o u r i t s e l f .  be  4 .  These  are the physical  correspond not  also  t o colour-naming  i n a l l languages.  separate levels  aspects  labels,  such  of saturation  of colours  practices  Distinctly  i n English, i f  separate  a s RED v e r s u s  but they  hues  are given  GREEN, w h i l e  and b r i g h t n e s s  different  are described  by 2  modifiers 1.2.2  Colour The  to  such  a s DARK/LIGHT Discrimination  child  as  early  of  four  by  a t a very  early  between  colours  discriminate  perceptual  and VIVID/PALE r e s p e c t i v e l y . Infants age has t h e p h y s i c a l t h e way  d i s c r i m i n a t i o n between  a s 15 d a y s  o f age."^  t o s i x months  colours  Fagan  age c o u l d  adults  ability  do.  Simple  appears  at  found  that  (1974)  discriminate  least  between  infants different  4 hues and  , and C r u i s e brightness  that  the child  adult  sees,  realm  into  Moreover, or  (1977)  levels sees  there  at least  predictions  appears  lexical  the existence how  Since  to discriminate the colour  hue  realm  t o b e t h e same a s t h e o n e t h e p o t e n t i a l o f him d i v i d i n g categories  can pinpoint  about  an a b i l i t y  a t a g e 1;3.  i s a great  t h e same i f we  found  what  governs  o f , these  a child  will  that  the adult  this uses.  t h e development o f ,  categories categorize  we  c a n make  colours  at  d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f l e x i c a l development. 1.3 Determinants o f Colour-Naming Behavior What language colour predict  are the factors divides  categories orders  involved  the colour being  i n deciding  realm?  t h e way  they  I f there  a  given  i s a reason f o r  a r e , then  o f a c q u i s i t i o n of these  how  one  categories  might by c h i l d r e n .  5 .  There are a t l e a s t three such p o s s i b l e determinants o f naming behavior:  evolutionary  (Section 1.3.1), perceptual  (Section 1.3.3) and environmental 1.3.1  (Section 1.3.4).  E v o l u t i o n a r y Development o f Colour  Categories  I f a c h i l d l e a r n i n g h i s n a t i v e language can be compared to a language i n i t s e a r l y stages of development, then the same f a c t o r s o r c a t e g o r i z a t i o n s t r a t e g i e s might be i n v o l v e d i n both  cases.  Studies i n ethnology  and anthropology  which d i v i s i o n s of the conceptual  have examined  domain of c o l o u r w i l l  to become d i v i s i o n s i n the l e x i c a l domain, and f i n d c o n s i s t e n t tendencies  across languages.  tend  fairly  B e r l i n & Kay (1969),  a f t e r examining some 98 d i f f e r e n t languages, d e r i v e d a s c a l i n g o f c o l o u r terms based on which occurred most to l e a s t frequently.  This was i n t e r p r e t e d as a u n i v e r s a l e v o l u t i o n a r y  order o f the development of c o l o u r terms, i n d i c a t e d below i n Figure 1. F i g u r e 1 : B e r l i n & Kay's Proposed Order of Colour Emergence Stage:  I  II  Ilia  Illb  IV  V  VI  BLACK WHITE  BLACK WHITE RED  BLACK WHITE RED GREEN  BLACK WHITE RED YELLOW  BLACK WHITE RED GREEN YELLOW  black white RED green blue YELLOW  black white RED green blue YELLOW brown  VII black white red green blue yellow brown purple orange grey  6.  The terms two  theory  only,  claims  i tw i l l  that  have  i f a language  divided  c a t e g o r i e s o f LIGHT-WARM  Berlin  & Kay r e f e r  Languages colours  with  category  often  called four  Stage  terms  intact  ROW,  colour  Ilia  cool  colours  and  remaining into  either  order  greens  become  (Stage  t h e brown  apparently  and y e l l o w  red  category Brown  that  that there  grey  have  IV).  leaving the  category i s  i t RED.  Languages  d o n e o n e o f two t h i n g s :  referred  Illb  h a s ROW  accomplished i s then  (Stage  VI).  VII).  Lenneberg  lexical  from  (1978),  t o become  being  further  With  five  both  o f these, i n  divided reds  The l a s t  colour  into  blues  and y e l l o w s stage  and p u r p l e  involves,  from t h e  from t h e  5  orange  Kay & M c D a n i e l  into  t o a s GRUE,  an a b s t r a c t i o n o f orange  c a t e g o r i e s , and o f pink  (1976) q u o t e s  are. f i v e  & Kay c a l l  Stage  GRUE  category  (Stage  seems  third  V ) , and a l l d e s a t u r a t e d  distinguishing  stages.  This  blues), often  simultaneously,  red  a b s t r a c t e d a l l warm  and r e d c a t e g o r i e s .  a language w i l l (Stage  II).  have  colours.  yellow  (Stage I ) .  a s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e BLACK c a t e g o r y  terms,  and  will  have  into the  c o l o u r s , o r as  t h e WHITE c a t e g o r y ,  Berlin  (greens,  dark  a n d DARK-COOL  will  (Stage  terms  t h e c o l o u r domain  WHITE a n d BLACK  from  while  indicates  all  divided  three  (reds, yellows)  BLACK  with  t o them,  h a s two c o l o u r  & Roberts  yellow  1956 a s c l a i m i n g  i s one o f t h e l a s t  referring  differentiated  t o Kay 1975, c l a i m a t any stage  c a t e g o r i e s , and p o s s i b l y  even  once earlier.  7.  A l e s s r i g i d proposal, e v o l u t i o n a r y order,  s t i l l based on B e r l i n & Kay's  i s t h a t languages w i l l  primary c o l o u r s and achromatics before The  theory  categorize  non-primaries.  suggests a u n i v e r s a l i t y to the primacy of  c e r t a i n c o l o u r s over others w i t h i n a language, but i t would be wrong to read notions of innateness  into t h i s .  The  u n i v e r s a l i t y e x i s t s through the common p h y s i c a l apparatus by which these c o l o u r s are 1.3.1(a) Perceptual  perceived.  S a l i e n c e of E v o l u t i o n a r y  Categories  Rosch Heider (1971,19 72,19 73) and others,  f o r example,  suggest t h a t the proposed e v o l u t i o n a r y order and r e c o g n i t i o n and perceptual  r e c a l l phenomena are due  to the  s a l i e n c e of the c o l o u r s themselves.  various relative Those  c o l o u r s which are most s a l i e n t are going  to be encoded  sooner and more f r e q u e n t l y than o t h e r s .  Moreover, other  s t u d i e s have shown that languages tend to choose those examples which are maximally d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from each other, as best examples of v a r i o u s l e x i c a l c a t e g o r i e s .  Since  those  c o l o u r s which are most d i f f e r e n t are a l s o the most s a l i e n t , both views support The  B e r l i n & Kay's order.  r e c o g n i t i o n of t h i s feature i n c e r t a i n c o l o u r s i s  what causes c o l o u r s grouped around these f o c a l p o i n t s to become c a t e g o r i e s , so the c a t e g o r i e s w i l l a l s o be maximally distinguishable.  This i s a l s o h i g h l y d e s i r a b l e i n o r g a n i z i n g 6  l e x i c a l categories.  I t suggests some c o g n i t i v e mechanism ,  which s t r i v e s to maximize r e c a l l and r e c o g n i t i o n accuracy f i n d i n g the best way  to c a t e g o r i z e  information.  by  8.  1.3.1 (b) N e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l  Support  What makes c e r t a i n c o l o u r s more s a l i e n t than others? I t appears that the n e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l mechanisms i n v o l v e d i n c o l o u r p e r c e p t i o n have v a r i o u s l e v e l s of complexity. Theories o f c o l o u r p e r c e p t i o n suggest t h a t the most b a s i c outputs  from the perceptual apparatus i n the eye to the  i n t e r p r e t i v e component i n the b r a i n are the sets o f red-green and yellow-blue  to s p e c i f y hue and that of black-white to  s p e c i f y b r i g h t n e s s and s a t u r a t i o n levels'. ^ Kay  & McDaniel a l s o note the s i x fundamental neural  response c a t e g o r i e s as being the frequencies yellow,blue  and f o r black,white..  f o r green,red,  The i n t e r s e c t i o n s of these  c a t e g o r i e s give the non-primary c o l o u r s , and being  inter-  s e c t i o n s they may r e q u i r e a more complex n e u r o l o g i c a l mechanism, which would p a r t i a l l y e x p l a i n t h e i r occurrence.  later  S i m i l a r l y , the e a r l y emergence o f c a t e g o r i e s  such as DARK-COOL, LIGHT-WARM, ROW and GRUE, can be explained as these c o l o u r s being unions o f primary c a t e g o r i e s .  They are  thus even l e s s s t r i c t l y d e f i n e d i n terms o f n e u r a l response, making them somehow " e a s i e r " than primary or i n t e r s e c t i o n (non-primary) c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s . 1.3.1 (c) Supporting  Studies f o r E v o l u t i o n a r y Determinants  As noted e a r l i e r , a c h i l d has a l l the necessary apparatus f o r p e r c e i v i n g colour by the time he begins language.  physical acquiring  So t h e o r e t i c a l l y , we can expect a c q u i s i t i o n and  development of c o l o u r names to f o l l o w the same course as that  9. proposed by B e r l i n & Kay and supported n e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s noted above. do i n f a c t support  by p e r c e p t u a l and Several s t u d i e s  this.  Bateman (1915) found naming accuracy i n f i v e - and s i x year-olds to be i n the order: WHITE,BLACK,RED,BLUE,YELLOW, ORANGE,GREEN,PURPLE. however, s t i l l  Accuracy  i n the primary c o l o u r s was,  low a t these ages, roughly 50 to 80% o f the  subjects having acquired these terms. looked a t a younger age group  Hopmann (1972)  (3;3 to 4;3) and found a  s u b s t a n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t order i n r e c o g n i t i o n and naming accuracy: WHITE,RED+GREEN,BLACK,BROWN+PINK,YELLOW+ORANGE, BLUE+PURPLE+GREY.  8  *  A study by Karpf, Goss & Small  (1974) focused on  naming, s e l e c t i o n and o r d e r i n g o f twelve c o l o u r s : the four p r i m a r i e s and e i g h t intermediate c o l o u r s i n c l u d i n g pink, purple and orange.  Accurate naming of the p r i m a r i e s here  was 70, 88 and 95% f o r the three-, f o u r - and f i v e - y e a r - o l d s respectively.  Performance f o r the intermediate c o l o u r s was  low, with purple apparently w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d a t age f i v e , but pink and orange s t i l l  unstable.  Unfortunately, the terms  PINK, ORANGE and PURPLE were not used by the experimenter i n the s e l e c t i o n t a s k s , r a t h e r RED-BLUE, YELLOW-RED and BLUE-RED r e s p e c t i v e l y , so the r e s u l t i n g data i s r a t h e r i n a p p r o p r i a t e for  our comparative  purposes.  * The convention adopted i n r e l a t i n g rank orders i s as f o l l o w s : d i f f e r e n t ranks are separated simply by commas, while c o l o u r s which have equal standing and a t i e d rank are i n d i c a t e d as in A+B+C.  10.  Johnson  (1977) f u r t h e r t e s t e d naming accuracy of ten  c o l o u r s by a t o t a l of 669 p r e s c h o o l e r s aged 2;6 The rank order of correctly-named c o l o u r s was:  to  4;5.  RED,GREEN,  BLACK,WHITE,ORANGE,YELLOW,BLUE,PINK,BROWN,PURPLE.  This  c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with B e r l i n & Kay's order, and even more so when data f o r ORANGE was  deleted.  Johnson  suggests t h a t t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c o l o u r term had an e s p e c i a l l y high l e v e l of accuracy because i t a l s o r e f e r s to the  fruit  and might t h e r e f o r e be more memorable. Bartlett  (1978) s t u d i e d 33 two-  and t h r e e - y e a r - o l d s  over an eight-month p e r i o d , and found again that the p r i m a r i e s and achromatics were as a whole more a c c u r a t e l y named and recognized than the non-primaries. exception, being f i f t h The achromatics  PINK was  an  i n rank and preceding BLACK and WHITE.  d i d not, however, precede  c o n t r a r y to B e r l i n & Kay's p r o p o s a l .  the p r i m a r i e s ,  Bartlett  suggests,  moreover, that t h i s grouped order d i s t o r t s the a c t u a l p i c t u r e . A look at i n d i v i d u a l development found o n l y two out o f f i f t e e n s u b j e c t s a c q u i r i n g the p r i m a r i e s before other c o l o u r terms, and even then these were not i n the order p r e d i c t e d . There were examples of a l l the non-primary terms except GREY o c c u r r i n g as one of the f i r s t  s i x c o r r e c t l y - u s e d terms.  We expect then t h a t the present study w i l l r e f l e c t  the  e v o l u t i o n a r y order i n grouped measures of performance accuracy. In  p a r t i c u l a r , more c h i l d r e n i n both ages should have acquired  the achromatic  and primary c o l o u r terms than the  non-primaries.  11. 1.3.2  A Second E v o l u t i o n a r y  Order  There a r e f u r t h e r i m p l i c a t i o n s o f the e v o l u t i o n a r y order to o n t o l o g i c a l development.  B e r l i n & Kay a c t u a l l y  imply two orders w i t h i n the one shown i n Figure can  1; these  be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d by n o t i c i n g which terms are w r i t t e n 9  i n b l o c k - p r i n t and i n r e g u l a r - p r i n t .  In the theory,^ the  b l o c k - p r i n t terms i n d i c a t e c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s a l a r g e r range o f c o l o u r s  colours. colours  That i s , "BLACK" includes a l l  while "black"  includes only  a l l blue  Looking a t only the b l o c k - p r i n t  terms, the development i s one of f i r s t between b r i g h t and non-bright colours and  r e a l l y black  GREEN appears a t Stage I I I but i n c l u d e s u n t i l Stage V.  include  than the same-name category  indicated i n regular-print. non-bright c o l o u r s ,  which  a l l ensuing a b s t r a c t i o n s  distinguishing (WHITE and BLACK),  i n v o l v e various  hues being  d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from f i r s t the achromatics and then from other hues.  Looking a t only  the r e g u l a r - p r i n t terms i n d i c a t e s when  the terms a c t u a l l y r e f e r to only the " c o r r e c t "  colours.  1.3.2 (a) P r e d i c t i n g Order of Category A c q u i s i t i o n Studies which have t r i e d to e s t a b l i s h a c o r r e l a t i o n between e v o l u t i o n a r y  and developmental orders have compared  B e r l i n & Kay's o v e r a l l category sequence to the sequence i n which c h i l d r e n acquire  colour  terms.  But a c q u i s i t i o n orders  have always been determined by when the use of a term i s l i k e , the a d u l t ' s , and t h i s i s e x a c t l y what the second sequence represented by r e g u l a r - p r i n t indicates., not the f i r s t , The  12. i  present study hypothesizes that i t i s t h i s sequence which w i l l be the more l i k e l y to c o r r e l a t e with orders of accuracy, while the f i r s t w i l l c o r r e l a t e more with the development o f the c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s , i f these can be determined. sequencies w i l l be used to determine  Both  the v a l i d i t y of  e v o l u t i o n a r y orders i n language development I would suggest f u r t h e r t h a t both  interpretations  a c t u a l l y i n v o l v e the a c q u i s i t i o n of c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s , not n e c e s s a r i l y c o l o u r names.  C e r t a i n l y the former  i s revealed  by the l a t t e r , but the names a c h i l d uses to l a b e l h i s c a t e g o r i e s are not always going to be the c o r r e c t a d u l t ones. A c h i l d may have, f o r i n s t a n c e , a category grouping a l l green c o l o u r s together under one name X, but that name X i s i n c o r r e c t . I f the c h i l d does not use t h i s X to r e f e r to any non-green c o l o u r s , then we must admit that he has the a d u l t category although not y e t the l a b e l .  Comparison i s t h e r e f o r e  to the l e x i c a l c a t e g o r i e s the c h i l d demonstrates, a c t u a l l a b e l s used.  "green"  not the  The suggestion i s , then, t h a t a c h i l d ' s  naming behavior w i l l r e f l e c t u n d e r l y i n g c a t e g o r i e s of primary, achromatic  and non-primary c o l o u r s .  the importance  o f each of these groups w i l l vary with age or  with developmental precedence  I t i s a l s o expected t h a t  stage, and t h a t t h i s w i l l r e f l e c t a  of p r i m a r i e s and achromatics over  non-primaries.  13.  1.3.3  Development We  have  primary, to  discussed  achromatic  evolutionary  and  language  classifying  give  some  example,  having  differing  language  variable,  then  distinctly from  hierarchy  first hue.  1.3.3  (b) E v i d e n c e Evidence  on  naming,  example, are  easier  That to  separate  Berlin  hierarchy  that  colour  & Kay's  of basic  has been  sets  i n brightness colour  adjectival lines,  are given  the language,  never  Strategies  implied  varying  ranging  categories i n  abilities.  t o r e m e m b e r t h e names o f t h a n  a limited  colours  Categorization  and matching  to  hues, f o r  by  i s apparently  feature  extent  as a d i s t i n g u i s h i n g  with  Saturation  recognition  with  t o some  labels while  Along  that  Categories  be d e s c r i b e d  f o r Perceptual  i s , differences  adults  will  names v a r i e s  f o r this  has found  to colours,  use brightness  as a d i s t i n c t i v e  languages.^  support  brightness.  The number o f hues w h i c h  separate  adult  by a d u l t s  1.2.1).  two t o e l e v e n . ^  introduced  and  Lexical  o f separate  i n brightness  will  Adult  a r e used  (see S e c t i o n  respect  parameters  hue, s a t u r a t i o n  a status  only  modifiers a  parameters  with  neurophysiological  i s by t h e p h y s i c a l  earlier:  lexical  colours  of  A n a l t e r n a t i v e way o f  (a) P e r c e p t u a l l y - b a s e d These  of the categories  and non-primary  acquisition. colours  Categories  the status  development,  were m e n t i o n e d 1.3.3  V i a Perceptual  studies  Rosch, f o r  in  sets  by  brightness  varying  i n hue.  a r e more d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e  lexicon  than  differences i n  hue.  Furthermore, c o l o u r s chosen by adults of  various  c u l t u r e s and by c h i l d r e n as best examples of the b a s i c c o l o u r terms vary  eleven  from each other i n brightness  and  12 hue  but are equal  Ohsumi (19 71)  i n saturation.  A study by Indow &  found a d u l t s unable to judge the  between c o l o u r s of equal  similarity  s a t u r a t i o n but of markedly  d i f f e r e n t h u e s — " a saturated red and a s a t u r a t e d green are 13 simply  'extremely d i f f e r e n t " . 1  Does the c h i l d also, recognize use  these parameters f o r  i n c r e a t i n g h i s colour l e x i c o n ?  We  have already  noted  the e a r l y a b i l i t y to d i s c r i m i n a t e various l e v e l s of hue brightness.  and  There seems no evidence to suggest t h a t  p e r c e p t i o n of s a t u r a t i o n d i f f e r e n c e s i s not a l s o i n t a c t a t t h i s stage.  The p o s s i b i l i t y of using these as c o l o u r  l e x i c a l c a t e g o r i e s thus e x i s t s and  there are some s t u d i e s  that seem to support  this  1.3.3  Studies f o r Perceptual  (c). Supporting  suggestion.  C r u i s e notes t h a t i n her one used f o r a c o l o u r was age  1;4.  The  subject, the f i r s t name  a p p l i e d to any b r i g h t c o l o u r around  terms BLACK and WHITE when f i r s t used were  overextended, but by 1;11 achromatics.  Determinants  c o r r e c t l y r e f e r r e d only to  Terms f o r a c t u a l hue  to appear non-randomly before  2;0.  the  d i f f e r e n c e s d i d not seem Dougherty  (1978) a l s o  found the e a r l y c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s i n West Futana c h i l d r e n to be based on the p r e d i c t e d BLACK/WHITE or d i s t i n c t i o n , and  bright/nonbright  l a t e r development a l s o showed strong  correlations  with  this  proposed  order  of  category  development. Other the  use  studies  of  some c o l o u r  brightness  i s not  is  Mervis,  based.  judgment alone  of  the  than  Bartlett  could  explained  a  were  desaturated errors could  be  a  1.3.3  found  child  The  as  Errors  an  error  i n hue  number,  Recognizing  This  trend  is  supported  and  children could colours  Matching  by  of  until in  a  brightness  was,  to  the  number  of  of  total some  84%  dimension  accounted  of  for  age.  colours  similar level  categories  grouping  four  also  that  a  age  matching  match  alone  large  at  Perceptual by  brightness  a  these  judging  naming  age.2;6  of  with  that  lexical  suggesting  decreasing  of  that  his  (adjacency)  Order  by  Rather,  proportion  dramatically,  when  errors  has  that  saturation  basing  saturation,  (d)  2;6  3;6.  the  found  better  naming  child  upon which  (1975)  or  the  realizes  dimension  & Rosch  few  time  already  distinction.  on  explained  significant  age  as  colours.  saturation.  the  i n c l u s i o n was  found  based  increased  he  critical  bright/nonbright  errors  by  when e i t h e r hue  varied.  on  that  names,  Catlin  category  varied  be  suggest  Variables tasks.  of of  Cook  (1931)  s i m i l a r hue saturation  however,  less  by  by  age  accurate  at  14 this  age,  and  supposedly  even hue  less  at  age  then,  that  in  order  being  d i s t i n g u i s h i n g variables, while  ranking  of  brightness  i s not  clear.  are  The  suggest, as  saturation  2;6.  studies that  and  so  recognized the  Recognizing that a p a r t i c u l a r determining name a p p l i c a t i o n may excessive  use of i t — h e n c e  dimension i s used i n  apparently  l e a d to  an  the l a r g e number of e r r o r s  to s a t u r a t i o n between ages three and  due  four, when the c h i l d  also shows t h i s r e c o g n i t i o n of s a t u r a t i o n i n matching tasks.  The  present study hypothesizes that e r r o r s w i l l  r e f l e c t categories  of s a t u r a t i o n and  that the proportions  hue  (adjacency)  of these e r r o r s w i l l vary with  and age,  the former i n c r e a s i n g as the l a t t e r decreases. The  explanation  f o r the apparent lack of  on r e c o g n i t i o n of the brightness  information  dimension might a l s o  used to e x p l a i n the a d u l t ' s performance i n the mentioned e a r l i e r by Indow & Ohsumi. l e a r n i n g and  using  l e x i c a l c a t e g o r i e s w i l l undoubtedly  i n judging  naming behavior.  study  I would suggest that  i n f l u e n c e which dimensions are considered criterial  to be more  s i m i l a r i t y of c o l o u r s , and  A d u l t s , who  l o s t the a b i l i t y to use  thus i n  have long not used  s a t u r a t i o n dimension as a l e x i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n ,  the  seem to have  i t i n d i s c r i m i n a t i o n tasks.  or matching by colour has  ages.  However, t h i s a b i l i t y does not  before the colour-naming process begins and even then"^, so we  at  seem to occur  sometimes not  cannot determine by t h i s means what the  earliest distinctions certainly  Sorting  been suggested as a means of  determining which of these dimensions are recognized different  be  are.  Lexical differentiation  can  begin before the f i r s t colour terms are even  uttered, to  determine  into a  i n which  of  certainly already  3;6  a  parts.  had  a  names w i t h  age  terms  that  i n hue, of  first  By  l o t of  realize  lost  i t becomes  child  colour  differences  a  when a  labelled  number  case  the  1.3.3  Neurophysiological  for  this  naming of  i s also  primacy  p r a c t i c e s , and  brightness.  the  hue  eye's  Since  retina,  Support  over  of  the  the  hue  on By  their  BRIGHT, as  other  age  coloursuggesting  valid  naming  hue.  for  suspected  and  might  Hierarchy  neurophysiological  brightness  while  as  have  have  saturation.  qualifying  important  realm  largely  dimensions  some p o s s i b l e  of  or  and  They  i s based  remaining as  colour  children already  DARK, L I G H T o r  although  There  not  the  exposure.  already  like  impossible  vocabulary  brightness  criteria, (e)  most  naming  c h i l d r e n are  re-recognition of  2;6  in their  adult  adjectives  divides  language  not  virtually  two  support  dimensions  prelinguistic  is perceived  by  s a t u r a t i o n are  in use  rods  in  perceived  16 by  cones  at  the  , one  age  1.3.4  determines We  might  and  must  & Kay,  relative order have  be  of  also  as  remain a  stronger  trying  i s , however,  Environment  i s the  term.  This  study  Berlin it  these  when c h i l d r e n a r e  categories. present  of  and  perceptual  a  more  their  the  developed colour  scope  of  the  conjecture. i n Naming  Dougherty  have  s a l i e n c e of  acquisition discussed  form  f a r beyond  Determinant  Heider  to  or  of  the  the  Behavior suggested  colours  category  possibility  of  that  which  and  of  the  colour-  naming  behavior  colours and a  themselves.  maybe more  child  that  has  the  large  suggests  to  1.3.4 I  studies. exactly as  of  Hopmann  they  do  still have  use  television  dramatic  stimulation,  that it  age  children's  would  imply  determining  exposure notes  acquisition  this  d i d not  order  explain  She  relate  more  c o l o u r and  to  the  i t s name,  itself.  type  either and  as  i n various is  almost  more r e c e n t o r d e r s 1977  and  Bartlett  ordering,  time,  programs  and  but  such 1978  although  to.  amount o f  has  has  been  a  environmental that  changed has  changed  of  increased  a child  I f i t c o u l d be  environment i t has  with  there  non-verbal,  behavior that  orders  neurophysiological aspects  in this  daycare  done  f o r example,  i n the  The  i n comparing  ages  while  Johnson  i s exposed naming  for this  i n 1915,  v e r b a l and  factor  or  viable,  of  i n performance.  comparable  1972,  i n the  levels  type  as  Bartlett  development  evidence  & Kay's,  and  both  i s just  of  Environment  changed  change  parameters  and  accuracy  colour  differences  colour  amount  a particular  correlate.  not  of  and  the  accuracies at  some m a r k e d  these  of  indirect  show  of  to  in  Berlin  which  c o l o u r term.  order  Bateman's o r d e r  those  factor  differences  property  like  physical  evolutionary order,  exposure  Changes  the  actual  acquisition  found  naming  the  individual  any  (a)  i s the  overall  with  that  on  a particular  the  individual's than  based Another  so,  to  while  correlated  of  being  so  established  through always has  at  time,  been  the  acquisition,  or t h a t the i n f l u e n c e of environment is.much greater than i t was  at some e a r l i e r time.  scope of the present 1.3.4  (b)  Parental  Previous  This again  now  i s beyond the  study. Input  s t u d i e s on the c o r r e l a t i o n of input  with  a c q u i s i t i o n have shown mixed r e s u l t s and pointed out some of the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n drawing any d e f i n i t e e i t h e r way Cazden 1972,  (Newport,Gleitman & Gleitman 1975, Moerk 1980  to name a few).  conclusions Brown  1973,  I t appears t h a t no  such study has been done i n r e l a t i o n to c o l o u r terms. A thorough a n a l y s i s must examine the frequency of these eleven c o l o u r terms i n the language input t h a t each c h i l d receives.  Also i n v o l v e d i s the number of o b j e c t s a  term i s a p p l i e d t o .  One  would expect t h a t a term which i s  a p p l i e d to s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t s by a d u l t s w i l l recognized  by the c h i l d as separate  be  from those o b j e c t s  than a term which i s used only i n connection  with  sooner  one  p a r t i c u l a r object. 1.3.4  (c) Anglin  Child Practice (197 7) suggests that a more d i r e c t c o r r e l a t i o n  e x i s t s between the c h i l d ' s own  frequency of use and  a c q u i s i t i o n of c e r t a i n terms.  T h i s might s t i l l  his  show an  i n d i r e c t r e l a t i o n to p a r e n t a l i n p u t : the more f r e q u e n t l y he hears a term, the more he himself uses i t , the more feedback and c o r r e c t i o n he gets and  the f a s t e r he acquires i t .  20.  1.3.4 (d) A c q u i s i t i o n with L i m i t e d Exposure Even i f frequency of input has some d i r e c t or i n d i r e c t r e l a t i o n to a c q u i s i t i o n , there i s . a l s o evidence that a c h i l d can l e a r n a term a f t e r very l i m i t e d exposure.  Carey  (1978)  found that c h i l d r e n rearranged t h e i r c o l o u r category system when provided with a h i t h e r t o unknown term—CHROMIUM-- as a p p l i e d to the c o l o u r o l i v e . only exposed  Although the c h i l d r e n were  to t h i s term twice and then o n l y i n d i r e c t l y , as  i n "Give me the CHROMIUM one",  almost a l l o f them had some-  how i n c o r p o r a t e d t h i s knowledge i n t o t h e i r use of c o l o u r terms when t e s t e d three months l a t e r . that input i t s e l f occurs i n .  This suggests to me  i s not so important as the context i t  I t i s q u i t e probable that a c h i l d w i l l have b e t t e r  r e c a l l of a term t h a t he has encountered  i n an i n t e r e s t i n g  and r e l e v a n t s i t u a t i o n , than of a term he has experienced many more times but which has no importance to him. 1.3.4 (e) Environment  Versus Perceptual S a l i e n c e  I f frequency o f c o l o u r terms i n a d u l t usage i s , however, based on the p h y s i c a l p r o p e r t i e s o f c o l o u r , then one could still  argue f o r p e r c e p t u a l s a l i e n c e as being the major  determinant i n order of a c q u i s i t i o n of these c o l o u r terms. There i s some evidence that t h i s i s . a t l e a s t true.  Thorndike & Lorge  partially  (1944) found the most frequent  c o l o u r terms i n E n g l i s h to be: RED,ORANGE,YELLOW,GREEN,BLUE, 17 PURPLE,PINK,BROWN  i n decreasing frequency.  Battig. &  Montague (1969) asked u n i v e r s i t y students to l i s t as many  colour'terms examined order  as  they  which  was:  could  in a  terms were  given  given  time  most  period,  then  frequently.  This  B L U E ,.RED, GREEN, YELLOW, ORANGE , B L A C K , P U R P L E , WHITE ,  PINK,BROWN,VIOLET,GREY.  Also,  RED  was  the  first  colour  18 term  listed  close  by  319  similarity  orders,  of  to  1.3.5  accuracy of  had  colour  and  have  in  this  term  study  found  a  especially  age  that  of  can  see  these  and  the  obtained  achromatics  at  the  This  i t relates  r e s u l t s and  sex.difference  language  appears  than  difference  PINK,  sex-related.  Bateman's  colours  sex  to  this  well.  naming  colour  individual differences  a c q u i s i t i o n are  as  significant  for  influence.  boys.  suggesting seemed  to  true  study  in  of  apparently Johnson's  favour a  development  of  girls,  social-cultural  have b a l a n c e d  out  4;2.  A  study  Anyan  focusing  & Quillian  tendency.  Girls  did  on  better were  five-six that  in  primaries  suggested  a c q u i s i t i o n as better  girls  order  Naming  rate  contradictory  girls  by  of  One  i n Colour  variable  found  by  & Kay's  terms  Differences  Some s t u d i e s  have  students.  non-primaries.  Sex  Studies  442  Berlin  especially in  preceding  in  the  at  colours  age than  the  (1971)  did  RED  than  two-three the  boys  girls.  only  on  a  well  than  boys  were b e t t e r  colours  found  equally  BLUE and  better  they  on  RED,  YELLOW  slightly on  At  YELLOW,  a l l colours.  were  scoring  BLUE  different  a l l colours,  YELLOW. at  and  age  while  four-five  though  by  I t appears  higher  boys  on  a l l  age also the  Mervis, all  C a t l i n & Rosch found no sex d i f f e r e n c e s a t  i n ages 5;6 or 8;6.  None of the remaining s t u d i e s which  examined c o l o u r development looked factor.  a t sex as a p o s s i b l e  Because o f these c o n f l i c t i n g r e s u l t s , only the  n u l l hypothesis  w i l l be forwarded here, namely t h a t  there  w i l l be no s i g n i f i c a n t performance d i f f e r e n c e between male and female s u b j e c t s .  1.4  Theories o f L e x i c a l Development Given t h i s background o f p e r c e p t u a l , e v o l u t i o n a r y and  environmental information,  s e v e r a l p r e d i c t i o n s have been  made as to the development of conceptual colour categories.  and  linguistic  In p a r t i c u l a r , we have suggested a  c e r t a i n order o f a c q u i s i t i o n of colour c a t e g o r i e s and o f a c t u a l c o l o u r terms. lexical  Examining c u r r e n t t h e o r i e s of  development now w i l l l e a d to p r e d i c t i o n s on the  c h a r a c t e r o f these c a t e g o r i e s and how these terms are a c t u a l l y used. There are some major d i f f e r e n c e s i n such t h e o r i e s : d i r e c t i o n of development, the nature of the l e x i c a l / c o n c e p t u a l c a t e g o r i e s , and the type o f c a t e g o r i z a t i o n c r i t e r i a , a few. for  Studies i n colour-naming behavior  to name  have provided  support  some views and counter-evidence f o r o t h e r s .  1.4.1  D i r e c t i o n of Development  1.4.1 (a) General to S p e c i f i c In the t h e o r i e s presented Nelson  by Clark  (1971,72,77) and  (1974), the d i r e c t i o n o f development i n a c q u i r i n g words  i s from a general idea of the meaning of a term to a narrowed-down, s p e c i f i c and a d u l t - l i k e l e x i c a l e n t r y . Much of the support f o r t h i s view comes from examples o f overextensions, where the c h i l d uses a term f o r a l a r g e r group of o b j e c t s than the a d u l t would. well-documented,  This phenomenon i s  but i t i s only one of the ways i n which  the c h i l d ' s r e f e r e n t category can d i f f e r from the a d u l t ' s . Underextension i s perhaps the second most d e s c r i b e d phenomenon next to overextension. of  This i n v o l v e s a r e s t r i c t i o n  the a p p l i c a t i o n of a term, o f t e n only to the f i r s t  noted and recognized as such by the c h i l d .  There i s evidence  that underextensions occur a t the same developmental as overextensions, approximately ages 1;0 probably even e a r l i e r Bruendal 1977; 1.4.1  (b)  referent  to 2;6,  stage  and  (Bowerman 19 74,77,78; Huttenlocher 19 74;  Rice 1980).  S p e c i f i c to General  On t h i s b a s i s , B a r r e t t  (1978), Thomson & Chapman (1977)  and A n g l i n (1980) suggest that development proceeds i n the other d i r e c t i o n : from s p e c i f i c to general use of r e f e r e n t s . A c h i l d f i r s t uses a term only i n the s p e c i f i c context i n which he f i r s t n o t i c e d i t (underextension), then by the c h i l d ' s own  i n c r e a s i n g powers of l i n g u i s t i c o b s e r v a t i o n and  by a d u l t i n t e r v e n t i o n , the a p p l i c a t i o n i s extended  and  sometimes overextended before i t equals the a d u l t ' s . 1.4.1  (c)  Support from Colour-Naming Behavior  Which d i r e c t i o n i s supported by colour-name a c q u i s i t i o n ? Apparently, both are.  There are numerous examples of  24 . i c h i l d r e n using t h e i r f i r s t c o l o u r word f o r any c o l o u r , although i t i s d i f f i c u l t  to determine  i f this i s actually  t h e i r f i r s t use, s i n c e the knowledge of the term may w e l l have been underextended  before p r o d u c t i o n even s t a r t e d .  But there are a l s o d e f i n i t e examples o f underextension o c c u r r i n g a t the same e a r l y stage.  C r u i s e , f o r example,  found t h a t her son r e s t r i c t e d e a r l y use o f some c o l o u r terms to p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t s , although a t the same time he used GREEN f o r a l l b r i g h t c o l o u r s . I t appears, then, that d i r e c t i o n of development i s not one or the other, but can be one or the other.  The  extent o f underextension and overextension o c c u r r i n g i n 19 e a r l y word use may depend on the concept being l e a r n e d . Both types occur i n the e a r l y use o f c o l o u r words and C r u i s e ' s example suggests that both types may be e x h i b i t e d by the same s u b j e c t a t the same stage. 1.4.2 Development o f Semantic/Lexical Categories As we are- a l s o i n t e r e s t e d i n the development o f c o l o u r c a t e g o r i e s , another r e l e v a n t t h e o r e t i c a l i s s u e i s the r e l a t i o n between semantic and l e x i c a l category development. In p a r t i c u l a r , which comes f i r s t : correspondences  the colour-word/colour  or the broader concept o f c o l o u r i t s e l f as  a separate e n t i t y ? Is one necessary f o r the other to be acquired?  25.  1.4.2  (a) Order of Referent-Mapping/Category Bowerman & Kuczaj  Acquisition  (19 78) suggest that a r e f e r e n t i s  mapped out f i r s t , and then as use of the term improves  and  as more terms w i t h i n a category are acquired, the c h i l d can organize the category and recognize the r e l a t i o n s between l e x i c a l e n t r i e s , thereby a c q u i r i n g the a c t u a l a d u l t 20 semantic category. This order seems to occur i n a c q u i s i t i o n of p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s and s p a t i a l terms and v a r i o u s other l e x i c a l 21 categories.  However, i t appears that the c h i l d a l r e a d y  operates on a number of semantic c a t e g o r i e s when he f i r s t begins u s i n g words; overextensions are not j u s t random. Gruendel  (1977) found that one-year-olds based word use on  o b j e c t c a t e g o r i e s l i k e + human, + animal, and + v e h i c l e . Overextensions of words never went o u t s i d e of these broad 'natural' c a t e g o r i e s .  C l a r k suggests that these might  be 22  the " u n i v e r s a l semantic p r i m i t i v e s " proposed by B i e r w i s c h . 1.4.2  (b) Support from Colour-Naming Behavior Which of these orders of category/ referent-mapping  does colour-name a c q u i s i t i o n , follow? Nelson, Rice and B a r t l e t t suggest that the semantic f i e l d of c o l o u r i s acquired before the a c t u a l l e x i c a l terms i n that f i e l d are f u l l y charted out.  B a r t l e t t found t h a t almost a l l her  subjects responded with some c o l o u r name(s), and no other type of name, when asked to name some c o l o u r s even with no c o l o u r samples present.  This i n c l u d e d s u b j e c t s with fewer  than  four  age  colour  terms  2;6 a p p a r e n t l y  which  weren't,  COLOUR  occurs  this?"  o r "what  more  readily  being  and t h e i r  looks  like)  Parents  were  etc.  this  than  between  shape i s  connection  terms i s  of colour i s  represent  a  category? Proximity  presents  an i n t e r e s t i n g  one-year-olds suggesting,  naming  "what  the  colour  actually  V i a Temporal  because  follow  superordinate  "what c o l o u r i s  Thus  remained  as Rice  they  share  often  a pattern  alternative.  within  did,  the object But  properties,  i n temporal  o f : "this  these  i n memory.  physical  occurs  certain  that  (memory o f w h a t  systematically arranged  their  often  as a prompt  "object-schemas"  i s not only  but'because  may b e b e c a u s e  i s this?",  (1974)  categories,  words  this  this  of the colour  made b y t h r e e  words and  categories.  But does  Huttenlocher  semantic  the  r e i n f o r c e d and t h e concept  (c) C a t e g o r i e s  Errors  colour  and t h e r e l a t i o n  COLOUR a n d t h e a c t u a l  acquired.  knowledge  between  terms,  frequently  length  t h e word  constantly  that  Children at  knew w h i c h w e r e  colour  lexical  suggests  this?"  between  vocabulary.  i.e. the relation  COLOUR a n d o t h e r  1.4.2  already  and t h e v a r i o u s  Rice  i n their  nearness.  i s a NOSE a n d t h i s  23 is  an EYE, e t c . "  is  BLUE,  stored  etc."  under  , or i n this Thus  case:  the lexical  a superordinate  term  "this  i s RED a n d t h i s  e n t r i e s might like  n o t be  BODY-PARTS o r COLOUR  at a l l . Huttenlocher's of  West  Futana  view  children.  i s supported This  culture  by Dougherty's does  not place  study as  much importance on c o l o u r as an a b s t r a c t q u a l i t y and does not even have a superordinate  term to cover  domain, as i n E n g l i s h the term COLOUR does.  this  While  a c q u i s i t i o n of c o l o u r terms i s very l a t e here,  sometimes  12 to 14 terms already e x i s t by age three, and these were always a p p l i e d w i t h i n the c o r r e c t semantic domain, even though t o t a l l y random. 1.4.2 (d)  Development o f Conceptual Colour  Category  While the c h i l d does have some concept o f what c o l o u r is,  t h i s i s apparently  not recognized  as a v i a b l e conceptual  dimension u n t i l a l a t e r stage i n colour-term been reached.  a c q u i s i t i o n has  C h i l d r e n i n B a r t l e t t ' s study who had fewer  than four r e f e r e n t s could not s o r t by c o l o u r even when that was the only dimension that d i f f e r e d from one o b j e c t to the next, and even when the name used as a prompt was one i n 24 t h e i r own vocabulary.  At present, we can only suggest  t h a t i t i s the l i n g u i s t i c use of colour terms as a d e s c r i p t i v e and d i s t i n g u i s h i n g feature that leads to the c h i l d a b s t r a c t i n g the c o l o u r v a r i a b l e as a r e l e v a n t conceptual 1.4.3  category.  The Nature of L e x i c a l Categories Related to these questions  i s the one. o f what these  l e x i c a l c a t e g o r i e s look l i k e as they are being  acquired.  The d i f f e r e n t views here r e f l e c t the d i f f e r e n t  opinions  noted e a r l i e r about how word-referent a c t u a l l y learned.  combinations are  What kind of a l e x i c a l entry might be  expected f o r e a r l y c o l o u r words?  28 .  i  1.4.3 (a) As a L i s t of Features In missing  f e a t u r e t h e o r i e s , such as C l a r k ' s , a  l e x i c a l entry c o n s i s t s o f a l i s t of features which r e f l e c t the c r i t e r i a the c h i l d uses a t that p a r t i c u l a r when to use a word and when not t o .  stage f o r  These features may be  s p e c i f i c or general, but more important, t h i s view assumes 25  them to be d i s t i n c t and i s o l a b l e .  That i s , i t assumes  t h a t features such as s i z e ,  shape or f u n c t i o n can be  a b s t r a c t e d from an o b j e c t .  This may be q u i t e  f o r the c h i l d . skill  difficult  In f a c t i t r e q u i r e s some degree o f c o g n i t i v e  to be able to a b s t r a c t c o l o u r from o b j e c t s and compare  c o l o u r s themselves t o each other, devoid o f any o f the other features of an o b j e c t . 1.4.3 (b) As a Prototype Heider,  A n g l i n and (to some extent) Nelson c l a i m that  the l e x i c a l entry i s not some l i s t of features but an a c t u a l prototype, normally  a master image of the type of o b j e c t a term  applies to.  When a new o b j e c t i s encountered,  comparison i s to the prototype,  but r a t h e r than one feature  being compared across o b j e c t s , i t i s a c o l l e c t i o n o f features 2g  — w h a t Rice has c a l l e d  "a m u l t i - a t t r i b u t e p r o c e s s i n g " .  A c h i l d l e a r n s a prototype  by noting s p e c i f i c  of a word's use and s u b t r a c t i n g n o n - c r i t e r i a l  instances  features u n t i l  27  the prototype  resembles the a d u l t ' s .  When a c h i l d or  a d u l t encounters a new o b j e c t or c o l o u r , he w i l l compare i t to a l r e a d y - e x i s t i n g memory-images with l a b e l s to see i f  any of these l a b e l s can apply to the new  object.  So when  we c a l l something X, we mean i t i s c l o s e r to our idea of what X i s than to our idea of Y or 1.4.3  Z.  28  (c) U n i v e r s a l Prototypes Since such c a t e g o r i e s and prototypes are based on  exposures and experiences, they are i n e f f e c t created by the c h i l d .  I f t h i s model i s c o r r e c t , there should  be  i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s even when these c a t e g o r i e s are the a d u l t ones.  Adult concepts  should vary from one  individual  to the next and q u i t e probably from c u l t u r e to c u l t u r e f o r the same reason.  In the case of c o l o u r , however, there i s  a l a r g e amount of agreement across i n d i v i d u a l s , across  age  l e v e l s and across c u l t u r e s , as to which c o l o u r s c o n s t i t u t e best examples of a term or which c o l o u r s w i l l be together.  classified  Several of these s t u d i e s were mentioned e a r l i e r .  Heider and her c o l l e a g u e s suggest t h a t a s e l f - c r e a t e d prototype model i s inadequate  i n e x p l a i n i n g c o l o u r category  29 development and use.  Based on c r o s s - c u l t u r a l  propose that these semantic  s t u d i e s , they  c a t e g o r i e s represent r e a l - w o r l d  c a t e g o r i e s , based on the perceptual s a l i e n c e of the c o l o u r s . One  example here should s u f f i c e to show the d i f f e r e n c e  between these two views.  If a c h i l d i s asked  to p i c k the  best red out of a number of red shades, he w i l l p i c k t h a t which i s c l o s e s t to h i s prototype. the c h i l d has c r e a t e d h i s own  RED  Under the f i r s t view, category and the best  3D.  example  would  labelled firmly had  RED  probably  i n h i s experience,  engraved  different  that  even second  the  same way,  reds  view,  some m i n i m a l  1.4.3  pick  Experiments  chose  notes  salience universal adult  relations This need  that  category  i s organized i n  was  shade  Catlin  t o b y X,  that while focal  this  might  of  they  decrease  category  consistently  such  example.  the perceptual  e x i s t e n c e as as f r e q u e n c y  in  name/focal-colour  or prototype  a c c u r a t e l y name them  isolated  t o some  C h i l d r e n , whoever,  i n naming  which,  likely.  a r e comparing  some p r o t o t y p e .  the l a t t e r  X) a s t h e b e s t  not prove  factors  and p o s s i b l e t r a i n i n g  can f a i r l y  example.  prove  he a l s o  c o l o u r s and t h e i r  categories, other  least  Behavior  & Rosch  (the focal  at  the majority of  as t h e b e s t  then  Under  reds the  has been  When t h e s u b j e c t knew  sample  real-object  case,  Colour-Selection  referred  a r e n o t as  there  does  t o be l e a r n e d and t h e r e f o r e n o t i n n a t e .  adults  unlikely  RED  In t h i s  by M e r v i s ,  o f these  input  i t i s highly  has  response.  t h e same  from  a particular  Heider  child  t h e same  to, provided  t o be c o r r e c t .  area  every  have  child's  experience.  (d) S u p p o r t  colour  i s t h e one most  Since  i n h i s experience,  exposed  should  prediction  since this  the category.  each  frequently  r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e number o f d i f f e r e n t  has been  children  into  t h e m a j o r i t y would  the  child  be t h e c o l o u r most  ability  of single  The f a c t  colours  remembered appear  apparently that  indicates  colour or to  t o have  c o l o u r s when  a marked, no  other  colours by  are present.  Bryant  such  (1974) w h i c h  1.4.4  have  yet to  have  even  half  general  complete,  indirectly  that  by l o o k i n g  tasks.  What  of objects  to place  and  lexical  are  used  1.4.4  t o form  child's errors  kinds lexical  made  early of  consists of  early  salience very and  categories.  tend  to abstract  i n t h e same  In p a r t i c u l a r , colour  and t h a t t h e  be d e t e r m i n e d  a child  and p e r c e p t i o n s  categories?  (a) T y p e s The  can  objects  and/or  to determine the  these  will  specific  i n colour-naming  I t i s easier  i n forming  names  on p e r c e p t u a l  can only  a t performance  to their  colour  based  category  show  words,  f o r each  This  used  use  of colours  colour  possibly  characteristics properties  31  c h i l d r e n may  category  universal.  colour-selection  study-  i n t e r n a l i z e d code which t h e  mapping  of prototype,  therefore  a  identification in  the superordinate  application of early  some k i n d and  that  before  lexical/conceptual  that  cite  Criteria  suggested  COLOUR i s l e a r n e d  some  acquire.  Categorization We  & Johnson-Laird  indicates  situations requires  children  is  Miller  what  and  conceptual  types  of  features  categories?  Features  of features system  i n naming,  that  should  are being  used  be r e v e a l e d  by l o o k i n g a t  i . e . overextensions.  be p e r c e p t u a l l y - b a s e d ,  where o b j e c t s  i n the  These  of similar  features perceptual  32 characteristics based,  where  together  are given  objects with 33 lexically.  t h e same name, similar functions  or functionallyare grouped  They might a l s o be features based on a s s o c i a t i o n or 1  contingency.  A n g l i n notes that a c h i l d may  always observe  a p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t i n the presence of some other o b j e c t ( s ) , and through a s s o c i a t i o n give both o b j e c t s the same name. Vygotsky  (1962) and  Inhelder  t h i s type of grouping 1.4.4  (b)  & Piaget  (1964) suggest t h a t  i s p r e v a l e n t i n two-  to f i v e - y e a r - o l d s .  Overextensions of Colour Terms  Perceptually-Based Overextensions on the b a s i s of perceptual  similarities  between c o l o u r s seem the most l i k e l y i n c o l o u r term  use,  s i n c e i t i s the p e r c e p t u a l , p h y s i c a l f e a t u r e s t h a t . a r e most inherent and the most c o n s i s t e n t across time and The only study which has d e a l t with c h i l d r e n ' s  the space.  overextension  of c o l o u r terms i n any d e t a i l i s B a r t l e t t ' s . B a r t l e t t c a t e g o r i z e d naming e r r o r s produced by 2% to f o u r - y e a r - o l d s to determine i f c h i l d r e n ' s naming p r a c t i c e s were based on underlying perceptual concepts of s a t u r a t i o n , b r i g h t n e s s or adjacency any evidence  (hue).  That i s , do c h i l d r e n show  of r e c o g n i t i o n of the perceptual dimensions  that a d u l t s encode l e x i c a l l y ?  Naming e r r o r s were sorted  i n t o p a i r s of c o l o u r s given the same name by the c h i l d approximately  h a l f of these could be explained as  perceptually-based.  and  being  This i s w e l l above chance e x p e c t a t i o n .  A f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d that the incidence of such p e r c e p t u a l l y - b a s e d  p a i r s was  across time i n c h i l d r e n who i n t h e i r vocabulary.  had  greater and more s t a b l e  seven or more c o l o u r terms  None of the c h i l d r e n with fewer than  33.  four colour  terms p r o d u c e d a s i g n i f i c a n t  adult-like pairs  p a i r s . What k i n d s  have been b a s e d  Function-Based  of  are  not  not  s o r t by being  by  an  other  Hence t h e actions,  colour  be  itself  of a d i f f e r e n t on  a valid  for colour  does n o t  Naming o f  the  the  a c t i o n being  b a s e d on  the  as  engaged i n .  there  appears to  child  is  raised against  or  be  is  not  overextending i t s colour-name.  colour  term  over-  Overextensions  does n o t  associated with  child  colour  such o b j e c t s  object-name, not  as  i n others,  o f h i s i n c o r r e c t use,  forgotten  occurring  be  colour  association.  In t h e s e c a s e s ,  b e c a u s e he  and  example, s i n c e t h e  Association-Based  conscious  colour,  notice  does  that object's  i n t e r p r e t e d by  the  categories  J u s t because a c h i l d  mean he  or  seem  f u n c t i o n a l g r o u n d s . However, t h i s  b e l i e v e s t o be  extension  their  certainly  c o l o u r , word i s a p p l i e d t o o t h e r  A s i m i l a r argument can  o r has  features  does n o t  easily  object  overextension  what he  features  inconceivable.  a d u l t may  really  types of  p a r t o f an o b j e c t .  naming t h e  could  Overextensions  totally  as  features  these  on?  While p e r c e p t u a l l y - b a s e d most l i k e l y ,  number o f  have t h e  i t . the  But  he  but  know what i t ' s c a l l e d  but  child  uses the  might w e l l  be  i n c o r r e c t term  c o r r e c t term i n h i s r e p e r t o i r e knows t h a t t h e  colour being  in its vicinity,  the  and  t e s t e d , perhaps  u s e s X as  i t has  term X i s somehow  i f to  often  say,"  some c o n n e c t i o n  to  I don't X."  These examples can  s t i l l be examined i n terms of which  word i s chosen, since t h i s "closeness" can be j u s t r e v e a l i n g as  ' r e a l ' overextensions  as  are.  Overextension by Function of Colour-Word One  other  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of overextensions  on the b a s i s  of f u n c t i o n i s i n looking at the f u n c t i o n of the word i t s e l f , r a t h e r than the o b j e c t .  Colour  terms are o f t e n used to  d i s t i n g u i s h a number of otherwise i d e n t i c a l o b j e c t s .  Thus  a c o l o u r term might be used as a means of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g o b j e c t s which d i f f e r i n some dimension other than c o l o u r . This would i n v o l v e a cross-over category,  i n t o another (adult)  or perhaps an o v e r l a p of two  l e x i c a l categories.  separate  lexical  adult  However, while i t i s c e r t a i n l y p l a u s i b l e  that a c h i l d ' s c a t e g o r i e s are not those of an a d u l t , i t does seem t h a t the broad c a t e g o r i e s , such as c o l o u r , are the same. So we would not expect t h i s type of extended use  for colour  terms. Colour  as a Basis of Overextensions  I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that colour i t s e l f seems to be used as a c r i t e r i a l  never  feature i n perceptually-  based overextensions.  Examples of shape, s i z e , sound,  t e x t u r e , movement and  t a s t e s i m i l a r i t i e s as a b a s i s f o r  overextensions  have been noted i n previous  none of c o l o u r  .  That i s , two  s t u d i e s , but  o b j e c t s of the same colour  are not given the same object-name i f they only resemble each other  i n t h i s one  dimension.  35  This might be  explained  by t h e a p p a r e n t f a c t t h a t even a f t e r  c h i l d r e n do n o t s o r t by c o l o u r  they have a c q u i r e d  some c o l o u r t e r m s ,  as  was  , •] . . 36 noted e a r l i e r . 1.4.4  (c)  Experiential  Carey that  (1978)  Features  s u g g e s t s some a d d i t i o n a l  characteristics  need t o be a b s t r a c t e d i n l e a r n i n g c e r t a i n t e r m s .  notes that part  She  o f o u r k n o w l e d g e o f word a p p l i c a t i o n  i n v o l v e s knowing which o b j e c t s a term n o r m a l l y a p p l i e s  to.  This requires  term's  use.  a l s o an o b s e r v a t i o n  of the contexts  T h i s t h e o r y c o u l d e x p l a i n why c e r t a i n e r r o r s ,  ones o c c u r r i n g o u t s i d e a semantic Moreover,  domain,  rarely  domain even b e f o r e t h a t  a separate e n t i t y , Similarly,  as  domain i s  i n the case of  such  as  occur.  i t m i g h t e x p l a i n how t e r m s c a n be a p p l i e d  the c o r r e c t as  of a  fully  within recognized  colour.  knowledge o f word a p p l i c a t i o n r e q u i r e s  knowing  which terms are n o r m a l l y used f o r c e r t a i n o b j e c t s or  entities.  While these a s p e c t s are  lexical  d o m a i n 37 , t h e y w i l l  at  not d i r e c t l y captured t i.m e s  i n f l u e n c e naming b e h a v i o r .  same c o l o u r may be g i v e n d i f f e r e n t situations;  by t h e  the c o l o u r of a c a r ,  names i n  The  different  f o r example,  would never  be  c a l l e d BLONDE a l t h o u g h t h e same shade i n h a i r w o u l d b e . Recognizing the c o l o u r i t s e l f give  appropriate  is  therefore  naming b e h a v i o r .  cause a g r e a t d e a l of c o n f u s i o n t r y i n g to a b s t r a c t c o l o u r s  n o t enough  to  This might i n c i d e n t a l l y  t o t h e c h i l d when he i s  and m a t c h them t o  names,  just  e s p e c i a l l y s i n c e h a i r , eye and r e f e r r e d to by parents  and  skin colour are so o f t e n  are a l s o those which seem to vary  most from the expected c o l o u r names.  E x p e r i e n t i a l features  thus seem an important p a r t of the l e x i c a l entry of a colour term. 1.4.4  (d)  Contrastive  Barrett  Features  (1978) suggests t h a t a c r u c i a l aspect  of  l e a r n i n g words i n v o l v e s the c h i l d noting the c o n t r a s t between a word-and-referent set and other word-and-referent sets.  He  l e a r n s the meaning of a word as much by  noting  which r e f e r e n t s are not A as by noting which ones are. This a p p l i e s to l e a r n i n g the a c t u a l concepts behind the words too. Schlesinger  (1977) notes t h a t "a concept has been acquired  only to the extent  t h a t one  knows what belongs to i t and  38 what does not." The notion of l e a r n i n g by c o n t r a s t s i s very  important 39  i n l e a r n i n g r e l a t i o n a l terms, s p a t i a l and p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s , and c o l o u r terms.  There i s no  sense t a l k i n g about round  o b j e c t s unless there are a l s o square ones, long  objects  unless there are a l s o short ones, or colour X o b j e c t s there are a l s o c o l o u r Y o b j e c t s .  A language's  unless  vocabulary  only has terms f o r these because the c o n t r a s t i s needed. The  Dani s t u d i e d by Rosch Heider have only two  because only the one Learning  c o l o u r terms  c o n t r a s t i s necessary to them.  by c o n t r a s t s i s r e l a t i v e l y s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d i n  the case of s p a t i a l and p o l a r a d j e c t i v e s .  Although these do  37.  i l i e along  a continuum, i t i s f a i r l y  safe f o r the  child  to assume t h a t i f something i s not X, i t i s Y, or a t l e a s t c l o s e r to Y than to X.  Given a s i t u a t i o n where the  must v e r b a l i z e the d i s t i n c t i o n between two given that he has a negative  child  objects,  and  some a c t i v e use of the r e l e v a n t terms,  a d u l t response to h i s use of X can be i n t e r p r e t e d  as meaning that Y i s the more appropriate  word to  use.  Colour terms, however, are arranged on a much vaguer and  broader continuum.  I f the a d u l t responds with "no, i t ' s  not red", the c h i l d s t i l l  has no idea which c o l o u r term does  40 apply.  Moreover, the c o l o u r contxnuum a c t u a l l y c o n s i s t s of  a number of smaller continuums both p h y s i c a l l y and ally.  The  RED  linguistic-  p a r t of the c o l o u r realm, f o r example, runs  from what we would c a l l a near-PINK to a near-PURPLE; each hue  i n c l u d e s a s c a l e of v a r y i n g s a t u r a t i o n and  levels.  What i s accepted as a c o r r e c t use of RED  s i t u a t i o n i s not i n another s i t u a t i o n , as was above s e c t i o n . c a l l e d RED, it  brightness i n one  noted i n the  When a c h i l d l e a r n s t h a t an o b j e c t i s  he must recognize  that i t i s c a l l e d that because  i s not c a l l e d PINK or PURPLE or GREEN or BLUE i n t h a t  particular situation. This r e q u i r e s some knowledge of which terms r e f e r e n t s can be compared to.each other, of the between these terms or the r e c o g n i t i o n of the 42  and relation  superordinate  category COLOUR i n t h i s case.  This has  as being present  so the use of a comparative/  at t h i s stage,  already been noted  c o n t r a s t i v e technique i s c e r t a i n l y v i a b l e f o r a c h i l d  learning  colour  difficult very  approach  important  comparison  In are  used  i n naming,  the  connections  this  type  concept timethe or  of  with  it  child  i m p l i e s one  error,  an  of  to  the  the  to  test  child  object,  or  available In and is  a  making  be  be  a  shows  when  such  that a  made.  of  Strategies  f e a t u r e s and  child's  lexical  domain. vary  strategies  errors and  to  determine  conceptual  I t i s quite probable with  vary  the  category  within a  development,  four  an  and  preferring  error  things: a error  child's  own  vary  certain  that  or  category  i t may  conscious  errors  error in his  to  errors  of  i n naming totally  which  with  with  strategies  a  about  where  the  system  determine  first  random is  correct  that  and  term  child  uses  next  semantic  kind.  unconscious  attempt  i s the  the  and  conscious  c a t e g o r i e s , we  the  (overextension),  nonetheless  system,  his hypothesis  underlying conceptual not  poorer  Lexical  I t may  makes  label.which  looking at  to  others.  unconscious  according  a  f o r example,  using  will  of  be  i t appears  in effect  some c h i l d r e n  features over When a  semantic  stage  individual,  types  the  acquired.  to  Analysis  are  connection  being  and  we  between  i.e. his  study,  Determine  which  seem  use,  cannot  Error  E r r o r s to  to  i s markedly  samples  determining  domains,  child  performance  between  Using  i t would  Bryant's  Applications of  1.5.1  While  for a  one.  colour-naming  1.5  terms.  assume  by  that  an  closest. structures that  A l l other  a  child  options  allow t h i s kind o f i n s i g h t .  Of course i t i s o f t e n hard  to t e l l which o f these i s happening.  The existence of  some connection between the c h i l d ' s i n c o r r e c t and the a d u l t ' s c o r r e c t r e f e r e n t does not e l i m i n a t e  the p o s s i b i l i t y  of t h i s being purely chance, and the absence o f a connection might j u s t mean we are not l o o k i n g hard enough or are looking 1.5.2  f o r the wrong s o r t s o f connections. P r e d i c t i n g Types o f Perceptual Overextensions  We have already r e f l e c t perceptual  suggested that naming e r r o r s  will  s i m i l a r i t i e s between c o l o u r s .  Bartlett's  study allows f o r a more d e f i n i t e p r e d i c t i o n as to the a c t u a l character  o f colour-name overextensions.  Table  31, page 136  shows the p o s s i b l e e r r o r p a i r s which the a n a l y s i s was based on.  In t h i s case a s a t u r a t i o n e r r o r p a i r i n d i c a t e s that the  c h i l d i s grouping desaturated colours  together; a  e r r o r that b r i g h t and nonbright colours adjacency e r r o r s are colours  brightness  are separate  categories  of adjacent or s i m i l a r hues being  grouped together. P a i r s based on s a t u r a t i o n and adjacency each accounted f o r a w e l l above chance number o f e r r o r p a i r s , while p a i r s of brightness  d i d not.  Moreover, BROWN appeared to be  t r e a t e d as a desaturated c o l o u r ;  BLACK/BROWN e r r o r s  (brown  i s named BLACK o r v i c e versa) accounted f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e number o f e r r o r s on t h e i r own. Developmentally, the incidence  o f p a i r s based on  adjacency decreased with age ( i . e . with i n c r e a s i n g number o f colour trend.  terms), and that o f s a t u r a t i o n Those c h i l d r e n with ten c o l o u r  showed the opposite terms showed 84% o f  t h e i r e r r o r p a i r s to be based on s a t u r a t i o n dimension.''"' We  would expect then that e r r o r s i n naming c o l o u r s  w i l l be p e r c e p t u a l l y - b a s e d  and  r e f l e c t the parameters of hue brightness.  The  f i r s t two  and  should  two  ages being t e s t e d .  t h a t a m a j o r i t y of them w i l l (adjacency),  of these should be most p r e v a l e n t ,  show d i f f e r e n t proportions of t o t a l e r r o r s i n the In p a r t i c u l a r , we  of s a t u r a t i o n e r r o r s to i n c r e a s e with age e r r o r s based on hue 1.5.3 1.5.3  s a t u r a t i o n and  expect the number and  the number of  s i m i l a r i t i e s to decrease.  Status of Overextensions (a)  Existence of C o r r e c t Label i n Vocabulary  Another question here i s which terms w i l l a c h i l d i n overextensions  to unlabeled  o b j e c t s or c o l o u r s , and  use which  o b j e c t s or c o l o u r s w i l l be those i n c o r r e c t l y grouped under another term?  The  answer to the second part appears obvious:  those o b j e c t s which the c h i l d does not know the name f o r or whose name he has extension  forgotten.  B a r r e t t p r e d i c t s t h a t over-  w i l l not be a p p l i e d to an o b j e c t that the  child  already has a name f o r . Thomson & Chapman found t h a t some 16% of the overextended examples found i n f i v e c h i l d r e n aged 1;8  to 2;3  vocabulary.  d i d have the c o r r e c t word i n the c h i l d ' s  Having the c o r r e c t word, however, does not  mean i t i s being used f o r the c o r r e c t r e f e r e n t or t h a t i t is  "known".  production  I f word use and  i s c o n s i s t e n t l y c o r r e c t In  i n comprehension, there would- seem to be  no reason to extend some other word to become i t s l a b e l  as  well.  The present experiment does not allow f o r more  than one response to a given sample, so we can only determine i f the c o r r e c t l a b e l occurs i n r e f e r e n c e to some other sample. 1.5.3  This i s not expected to exceed a chance  level.  (b) Choice of Overextended T e r m s - S t a b i l i t y Levels There i s some disagreement i n p r e d i c t i n g which terms  w i l l be overextended and on the l e x i c a l  status of these same  terms.  When a c h i l d encounters an u n l a b e l l e d o b j e c t or c o l o u r  he w i l l  search h i s l e x i c o n f o r a concept or prototype which  appears the c l o s e s t and choose that word as a l a b e l .  I f he  has s e v e r a l such c l o s e prototypes, Carey suggests that he  may  choose a word which i s not yet s t a b l y connected with i t s concept.  Since the c h i l d does not know f o r sure what t h i s  a v a i l a b l e term can be a p p l i e d t o , and does not know the name of the o b j e c t being shown, he t e s t s a hypothesis about the two being r e l a t e d . Fremgen & Fay  (1980), on the o t h e r hand, found that a l l  of t h e i r 16 subjects aged 1;2 to 2;2 knew the c o r r e c t r e f e r e n t s f o r words they overextended. it  Thomson & Chapman suggest that  i s these more s t a b l e terms which w i l l be used i n over- .  extensions; terms more r e c e n t l y acquired w i l l  show the l e a s t  amount of o v e r e x t e n s i o n s . This study w i l l attempt to measure the s t a b i l i t y of a l l terms used, and i n p a r t i c u l a r those which are misused.  While  t h i s can only be a p a r t i a l i n d i c a t i o n based on the task performance, i t may overextended terms.  i n d i c a t e the r e l a t i v e status of these  42. I  1.5.3  (c) A c q u i s i t i o n and S t a b i l i t y  Criteria  Is i t p o s s i b l e that the disagreement about the status of overextended terms i s due to d i f f e r e n t c r i t e r i a f o r acquisition?  I f a term i s produced c o r r e c t l y and understood  c o r r e c t l y when i t s corresponding  concept  (colour) i s present,  that term i s g e n e r a l l y considered acquired. l e x i c a l s t a t u s questionable to other o b j e c t s .  I find  this  i f the same term i s overextended  Even i f the subject i s j u s t guessing and  does not r e a l l y b e l i e v e the o b j e c t to be c a l l e d by t h a t name, t h i s behavior  does, I think, i n d i c a t e a l e s s - t h a n - s t a b l e  r e l a t i o n s h i p between word and r e f e r e n t .  A n g l i n , on the  other hand, i m p l i e s t h a t such terms should s t i l l be considered  acquired.  The only remaining  possibility,  suggested by both C l a r k and Nelson, i s that the c h i l d gives a response to get the c o r r e c t answer.  just  Rather than  saying "I don't know", he gives what he knows to be an 44 i n c o r r e c t response, hoping to keep the i n t e r a c t i o n  going.  In t h i s case, Anglin's view would seem to be j u s t i f i e d . With the c r i t e r i a being used i n t h i s study, could not be considered  these terms  acquired, and thus i t i s hypothesized  that only f a i r l y unstable  terms are overextended.  This question of when a term i s considered has a l s o been i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o the experimental a pre-test.  acquired design as  D i f f e r i n g c r i t e r i a of when a c q u i s i t i o n has  occurred w i l l lead to d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t s , and the present study  suggests t h a t we must f i r s t e s t a b l i s h what c r i t e r i a  we are u s i n g and be c o n s i s t e n t i n our comparisons and claims. 1.5.4  Labelling Strategies There i s another question t h a t a r i s e s from examining  the types of conceptual groupings by naming e r r o r s .  that might be r e f l e c t e d  Are there c e r t a i n c o l o u r s which c h i l d r e n  by age two recognize as having i s o l a t e names and w i l l t h e r e f o r e not group with some other c o l o u r under one name? In other words, are there some c o l o u r s which w i l l be grouped with other c o l o u r s under a l a b e l , while at the'same stage, other c o l o u r s w i l l always be kept under a separate This does not seem to be d i r e c t l y addressed  label?  anywhere i n the  l i t e r a t u r e , although i t i s h i n t e d a t and seems the next l o g i c a l step i n examining naming strategies... The hypothesis would be t h a t c h i l d r e n w i l l  first  recognize those c o l o u r s which are maximally d i s t i n c t from each other as a l s o having d i f f e r e n t l a b e l s .  In the present  study, the eleven c o l o u r samples chosen do not d i f f e r each other i n the same degree.  from  J u s t i n terms o f the  p h y s i c a l parameters, red and purple, f o r example, appear much " c l o s e r " to each other than black and yellow-..-- I t i s t h e r e f o r e d i f f i c u l t to determine what a c h i l d w i l l consider to be of maximal d i s t i n c t i o n i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r a r r a y . I suspect t h a t these w i l l not be e n t i r e l y based on hue, s a t u r a t i o n o r b r i g h t n e s s contours, but r a t h e r on personal experiences with o b j e c t s o f each p a r t i c u l a r c o l o u r .  I f so,  then i t w i l l be a very i n d i v i d u a l matter as to which k i n d of l a b e l l i n g strategy i s used and there should be few group tendencies. however.  We would expect an age d i f f e r e n c e ,  The o l d e r c h i l d r e n would be expected to show  more c o l o u r s as having separate l a b e l s and fewer with shared l a b e l s than the younger c h i l d r e n . 1.6 1.6.1  A c q u i r i n g Comprehension and Production Order of A c q u i r i n g  Skills  Task S k i l l s  Another aspect i n examining l e x i c a l development and use of c o l o u r terms i s i n the two areas of comprehension and p r o d u c t i o n and t h e i r r e l a t i o n to each other.  These two do  not always proceed a t the same r a t e or e x i s t a t the same l e v e l of accuracy at a given time.  In e a r l y word development, i t i s  g e n e r a l l y comprehension t h a t exceeds production; c h i l d r e n  just 45  understand a l o t more than they can themselves a r t i c u l a t e . At l a t e r stages of development, however, i t appears that 46 production can precede comprehension i n s e v e r a l cases. 1.6.2  C o g n i t i v e Requirements of Each Task These d i s c r e p a n c i e s suggest t h a t d i f f e r e n t things are  happening as the c h i l d i s a c q u i r i n g comprehension versus production s k i l l s .  Comprehension  i n v o l v e s the r e c o g n i t i o n  of words and the a b i l i t y to r e c a l l the o b j e c t s , a c t i o n s or e n t i t i e s that they symbolize.  Demonstrating comprehension  does not r e q u i r e great v e r b a l s k i l l s i n e a r l y stages of language development; p o i n t i n g , reaching or some such A7 sensory-motor a c t i o n o f t e n w i l l . s u f f i c e .  Production s k i l l s , on the other hand, r e q u i r e an a b i l i t y to recognize an o b j e c t , a c t i o n or r e l a t i o n and the word which symbolizes verbally.  i t , and then produce that word  The d i f f e r e n c e , then, i s t h a t d i f f e r e n t  are i n v o l v e d .  recall  B a s i c a l l y production involves r e c a l l  processes (a  r e t r i e v a l of words) and comprehension i n v o l v e s r e c o g n i t i o n (a r e t r i e v a l of e x p e r i e n c e s ) . In other words, d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance i n the  two  modes r e l a t e to d i f f e r e n c e s between words and p e r c e p t i o n s , the l a t t e r being at a much more b a s i c c o g n i t i v e l e v e l the former.  than  One would expect t h a t comprehension s k i l l s are  the more e a s i l y acquired, and t h e r e f o r e appear before production s k i l l s and improve or develop f a s t e r . T h i s i s what our hypothesis f o r c o l o u r term production and comprehension accuracy w i l l  be.  But there are arguments t h a t seem to support the opposite precedence.  In some cases, a word might be e a s i e r 49  to r e c a l l than a concept terms.  and t h i s might be true f o r c o l o u r  As noted e a r l i e r , the r e c o g n i t i o n of c o l o u r as a  c r i t e r i a l a t t r i b u t e seems to appear r e l a t i v e l y l a t e i n the a c q u i s i t i o n process.  As performance i n comprehension tasks  r e q u i r e s t h i s knowledge while production does not, i t would seem t h a t colour-term production w i l l exceed  comprehension  accuracy at the e a r l y stages of a c q u i s i t i o n , , that i s , before c h i l d r e n can r e c o g n i z e c o l o u r as a separate dimension age t h r e e ) .  (about  46.  1.6.3  Support from- Colour-Naming Studies This precedence  of p r o d u c t i o n i s supported by e a r l i e r  s t u d i e s on colour-naming  behavior.  B a r t l e t t found  that  c h i l d r e n a t ages 2; 4 to 4; 0 produced' more c o l o u r terms than they comprehended. Karpf, Goss & Small found naming of red, green and blue samples to be more c o n s i s t e n t than  selection  by three, four and f i v e - y e a r - o l d s ; the other c o l o u r t e s t e d , yellow, showed equal a c c u r a c i e s i n both tasks at a l l ages. Moreover, i n the l a s t study these two tasks showed an  inter-  r e l a t i o n i n only a quarter of the youngest  while  age group,  almost h a l f of the f o u r - and f i v e - y e a r - o l d s showed comparable s k i l l s i n both.  However, none of these r e s u l t s make any  statements about the accuracy i n these two  t a s k s . What about  the i n c i d e n c e of e r r o r s , i . e . overextensions, i n each mode? 1.6.4  Overextensions  i n the Two  Tasks  Huttenlocher, Gruendel, Rice, Thomson & Chapman a l l found a l a r g e r  number of overextensions i n production than  i n comprehension.  Fremgen & Fay  comprehension at a l l .  (1980) found no examples i n  In these cases, i t was  also true that  comprehension exceeded production s k i l l . Assuming that the opposite sequence of accuracy occurs i n c o l o u r terms, as the s t u d i e s noted above seem to i n d i c a t e , a g r e a t e r number of overextensions should occur i n the comprehension mode.  However, there are other f a c t o r s which  would probably o v e r r i d e t h i s . When c h i l d r e n begin s e r i o u s l y l e a r n i n g c o l o u r names, they are already q u i t e adept at language  and have a f a i r - s i z e d  47.  vocabulary.  They have undoubtedly long r e a l i z e d  that  d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t s can have d i f f e r e n t names, and probably that d i f f e r e n t c o l o u r s can have d i f f e r e n t names. comprehension task a v a r i e t y  In a  of c o l o u r s are v i s i b l e ; the  c h i l d can compare them a l l and n o t i c e t h a t they are d i f f e r e n t and hence might have d i f f e r e n t names.  A production  task which presents only one c o l o u r a t a time does not allow t h i s comparison. prototype  The c h i l d who has not y e t e s t a b l i s h e d h i s  (or whatever allows him to l a b e l a colour c o r r e c t l y )  could e a s i l y f o r g e t e i t h e r  the c o l o u r he j u s t saw and named A,  or whether he has already used the term A to name a c o l o u r . Thus the l i k e l i h o o d of using one name f o r d i f f e r e n t samples  (overextension  i n production)  i s greater than that of  using one c o l o u r sample as an example of d i f f e r e n t names (overextension The hypothesis,  colour  colour  i n comprehension). then,  remains of comprehension performance  f o r c o l o u r terms being more accurate than colour-term although  the number of c o l o u r terms used  accuracy) w i l l probably  exceed those  production,  (regardless of  understood.  48.  1.7  O p e r a t i o n a l Hypotheses The preceding d i s c u s s i o n has l e d to a number o f  o p e r a t i o n a l r e s e a r c h hypotheses at two age l e v e l s .  about c o l o u r term usage  These are now summarized and itemized  below. 1. There w i l l be d e f i n i t e age d i f f e r e n c e s  in.performance,  f o u r - y e a r - o l d s showing fewer e r r o r s i n both tasks, more terms used and understood c o r r e c t l y , and o v e r a l l b e t t e r performance  than two-year-olds.  2. Order o f accuracy i n producing and comprehending the eleven c o l o u r terms w i l l r e f l e c t the p e r c e p t u a l s a l i e n c e of  the c o l o u r s and c o r r e l a t e with B e r l i n & Kay's proposed  e v o l u t i o n a r y order.  Accuracy w i l l be b e t t e r f o r the  p r i m a r i e s and achromatics as a group than f o r non-primaries, and the d i f f e r e n c e w i l l be g r e a t e r i n the younger age group. 3. Furthermore,  i t i s expected that naming behavior w i l l  reveal  conceptual c a t e g o r i e s based on these groupings o f primary, non-primary  and achromatic c o l o u r s .  These should vary i n  r e l a t i v e importance with age, primary and achromatic appearing more than  groups  non-primary.  Categories might a l s o be based on the parameters s a t u r a t i o n and b r i g h t n e s s .  of hue,  These are expected t o be based  on B e r l i n & Kay's proposed order of b r i g h t n e s s , then hue, then s a t u r a t i o n being recognized as l e x i c a l c o l o u r dimensions.  The p r o p o r t i o n of these w i l l vary with the  age of the s u b j e c t s , . r e f l e c t i n g t h i s proposed order.  Performance and  extent  of  frequency also  also  use,  and  correlate  and  extent  expected  the It  will  to  to  of  a  with  lesser  use.  correlate  The  with  child's  extent, latter  each  frequency  with  mother's  variables  are  other,  and  with  members o f  the  younger  evolutionary order. i s expected  age  group  they  can  that at  will  have  a  comprehend,  comprehension. greater  i n the  task  at  both  each  of  these  least  the  larger  number  suggesting  However,  ages.  The  tasks  task  be  terms  than  exceeds  i s expected  to  than  production  difference  should  lexical  that production  accuracy  comprehension  of  i n the  between  greater  be  accuracy  f o r the  in  younger  children. No  sex  difference  colours  or  practice  i n the  and  examination  in  the  of  from  label.  These  may  salience  or  An  analysis  error  names u s e d  physical first the  other are  particular  in correlations  with  these  proportion of  are  differences  recognized their  with  other  c o l o u r s under  levels  of  own  as  given  labels, one  perceptual  similarities,noted  i n hypothesis  reveal certain  consistencies in  In  these  will of  r e v e a l age  hence  reflect  should  parameters  and  grouped  also  which  of  or  types' w i l l  incorrectly.  two  tasks  c o l o u r s which  perceptual  overextensions  with  label  each  c o l o u r s which  i n accuracies of  measures.  proportions of  distinct  The  different  input  An  and  i s expected  particular,  be  hue, are each  will  p e r c e p t u a l l y - b a s e d on s a t u r a t i o n and/or  expected  to  be  varying with  be the-  brightness.  more the  3.  frequent,  age  group:  s a t u r a t i o n i n c r e a s i n g while adjacency e r r o r s decrease. S a t u r a t i o n e r r o r s should be the most frequent i n both groups. C h i l d r e n w i l l not name i n c o r r e c t l y  ( i . e . overextend  to)  a c o l o u r f o r which they already have the l a b e l .  Those  terms which are overextended  stable  w i l l be those l e a s t  i n the c h i l d ' s c o l o u r vocabulary or most r e c e n t l y acquired, and t h i s may  o v e r r i d e the e a r l i e r hypothesis 8  that overextensions w i l l be based similarities.  on.perceptual  2.0  2.1  Methodology  age groups  eighteen  o f twenty  Distribution  younger  (range  group  was o r i g i n a l l y  resulting 18  s u b j e c t s were  from  daycares  Columbia  students  equal  consent  forms  were  testing  occurred, outlining  some c a s e s ,  was  groups,  two-year-old balance  located  of the  on t h e U n i v e r s i t y  were  children of  of the university.  given or sent  this  second  to 4;7).  i n both  two  of  subjects.  campus' a n d a s s u c h  or staff  3;2  i n t h e uneven  only  British  consisting  1;11 t o 2;8) a n d t h e  having  faculty,  in  the f i r s t  of cooperation d i f f i c u l t i e s  were dropped,  All  tested:  f o u r - y e a r - o l d s (range  o f sexes  because  girls  were  two-year-olds  consisting  of  Design  Subjects Two  but  and  Parental  to the parents  the study  pre-empted  b e f o r e any  and i t s requirements;  by v e r b a l  consent  of the  daycares. Initially when  only  accidental  differences There  were  speak(s) native  environment.  have  apart from  language  from  c o u l d be o b s e r v e d  the tasks themselves,  i n understanding  no  but real  slackened.  whose p a r e n t ( s )  a n d who  one o f t h e s e  c o l o u r terms  chosen,  showed was  groups  a t home,  the native English  any problems  were  criterion  although  English  From what  this  i n the test  a t home,  o n l y uses  speakers  o f some n o n - n a t i v e s  two c h i l d r e n  a non-English  apparently  different  testing  i n performance,  language  behavior  native English  use  their  children  i n either of their they  speakers,  verbal  seemed  no  nor d i d they  instructions.  Subjects were not pre-screened f o r c o l o u r - b l i n d n e s s for  two  reasons.  There are apparently  no short, simple  r e l i a b l e t e s t s f o r c h i l d r e n at t h i s young age, f e l t t h a t any  i t was  r e l e v a n t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n problems would be  caught by a matching task. parents  and  and  had observed any  None of the daycare s t a f f or  such problems i n the c h i l d r e n being  tested. 2.2 2.2.1  Experimental M a t e r i a l s Stimulus The  eleven  Colours stimulus  c o l o u r s were: blue,green,red,yellow,  black, white, grey,brown,purple,orange,pink.  Most of  c o l o u r s t u d i e s use the Farnsworth-Munsell stimulus  the  colours  and measurements of f o c a l c o l o u r s a l l use t h i s n o t a t i o n . As t h i s m a t e r i a l was  not r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e f o r use or f o r  comparative purposes, attempts were made to convert a v a i l a b l e Methuen n o t a t i o n .  to  the  T h i s , however, showed some  d i s c r e p a n c i e s i n measurements of the f o c a l c o l o u r s . I t was for  t h e r e f o r e decided  the Experimenter  that the best approach  (E) to choose what she considered  was to  be good examples o f these c o l o u r s , even i f these were not the exact  focal colours.  The corresponding  n o t a t i o n f o r these i s shown i n Appendix 40. were " f l a t " and of a s i m i l a r t e x t u r e .  Methuen A l l colours  These were p r e - t e s t e d  with three a d u l t s under e s s e n t i a l l y the same c o n d i t i o n s to  v e r i f y t h e i r choice as good examples-.  The only c o l o u r  which r e c e i v e d some ambiguous response was  red; t h i s  was  r e p l a c e d by another shade and r e - t e s t i n g found t h i s to be acceptable. 2.2.2  P r e s e n t a t i o n of The  Colours  colour samples were arranged  i n a predetermined  random order on a wooden d i s p l a y board designed a house with windows.  Each of the twelve windows had  which could open and c l o s e without colours.  to look  covering up any  some d i v e r s i o n when necessary.  appearance and  a door  adjacent  Each window contained one c o l o u r , with one  a blank hole to give a symmetrical  like  being  provide  A d d i t i o n a l i d e n t i c a l colour  samples were placed on eleven small f l a t d i s c s f o r the matching task. L i g h t i n g was given c o n d i t i o n s .  kept as c o n s i s t e n t as p o s s i b l e under the A r e g u l a r 100-150watt bulb shone d i r e c t l y  on the p r e s e n t a t i o n board at .a d i s t a n c e of about 4 to 6 f e e t with some d a y l i g h t present as w e l l . 2.3  Experimental  Methods  A l l t e s t i n g was c h i l d r e n attended,  done i n the s i x daycares that the  with the exception of one  t e s t e d i n the c h i l d ' s home. s u p e r v i s o r s or the mother was minimally  subject  being  At times, one of the daycare present and i n t e r a c t e d  with the subject and E during the t e s t i n g . A c t u a l  t e s t i n g was  u s u a l l y accomplished during one  sitting  lasting  twenty minutes each f o r two-year-olds and about  five  minutes each f o r f o u r - y e a r - o l d s .  two-year-  o l d s who  needed more than t h i s one s i t t i n g , there was  more than a two-day gap. 2.3.1  For those few  Tasks and  never  1  Instructions  The experiment i t s e l f c o n s i s t e d o f three t a s k s : naming, s e l e c t i o n and matching to t e s t and d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s k i l l s 2.3.1  respectively.  (a) Production Task In  the  production,comprehension  the f i r s t task, the subject was  shown one c o l o u r on  board at a time, i n random order, and asked to t e l l the  E what c o l o u r i t was.  The s p e c i f i c i n s t r u c t i o n s were "what  colour i s t h i s one?" or "what's t h i s ? " or "what's t h i s colour c a l l e d ? " 2.3.1  (b) Comprehension Task The second task d i s p l a y e d a l l the c o l o u r s on the board  at once and the E asked the c h i l d to show her the X one, listing  colour terms i n random order again one at a time.  S p e c i f i c a l l y , the i n s t r u c t i o n s were "show me the X one" or "where's the X one?" I n s t r u c t i o n s i n both tasks, v a r i e d s l i g h t l y depending  on  whether the subject seemed to understand the o r i g i n a l i n s t r u c t i o n s and on the c h i l d ' s r e c e p t i v e n e s s and responsiveness; some c h i l d r e n j u s t needed more coaxing than o t h e r s . In e i t h e r task, when the subject gave no response or a negative response, E went on to the next colour sample or  c o l o u r term.  Subjects were not t o l d whether t h e i r  responses were c o r r e c t or not but a l l types of encouragement were used, o f t e n i n c l u d i n g p r a i s e even i f the response incorrect.  was  Whenever a c h i l d d i d not respond at a l l to the  f i r s t example of e i t h e r task, and appeared not to know what was  expected of him,  the c o r r e c t answer was  t h i s seemed enough f o r him to do the task. happened i n two used i n t h i s way the 2.3.1  provided  and  This only  cases and the c o l o u r term or colour sample as a demonstration was  re-tested later i n  task. (c) D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Task The  t h i r d task asked the subject to match a given  c o l o u r c h i p to the sample of the same c o l o u r on the board. This i n v o l v e d the c h i l d a c t i v e l y p l a c i n g the c h i p on  the  sample, or i n d i c a t i n g to the E which sample i t should placed on.  The  eleven c o l o u r chips were presented  sets of s i x c o l o u r s each. c h i l d these  be  i n three  Each set i n v o l v e d g i v i n g the  s i x chips and E opening the appropriate s i x  windows on the c o l o u r board.  The  brown, purple, red, blue, green: orange, grey, green; and  sets were (1) black, (2) pink, white,  yellow,  (3) pink, purple, orange, red,  brown, grey. I n s t r u c t i o n s here were much more v a r i a b l e than i n the previous  two  tasks.  The younger c h i l d r e n d i d not appear  to understand the words "match" or "same", so along  with  56.  continuing by  verbal  matching  up  In matching were  a  instruction, colour  tasks  sometimes  and  corresponding"colour to  correct  response  the  first  idea  the  one  and  on  or  the  c o r r e c t response  the  task,  asked  board.  task,  task  appeared  to  to  Notice  except  on  that  to  be  chip  i n the  production  or  the  and  in a  child;  the  child  again.  second  own.  random,  Only  shown t o  colour  a l l the  their  try again.  demonstration  response  child  another the find  that a  the this  visual  selection  was  task  is  now  clue  to  After got  Whenever the  chip  couple this  of  was  later  based  the  placement  was  removed  cases,  was  then  asked  It i s doubtful  trial  set.  samples  children  the  either  the  such  child  correct  from  hints,  and  particular  chip  two  and  that  and  demonstrated  provided.  incorrect  a  mother  simultaneously  completed  as  or  i s being  was  treated  the  selection  asked  E  f o l l o w i n g the•naming  named  similar  sample  the  to  match  that  on  memory  since  separated  i t and  the  demonstration. 2.3.2  Orders  2.3.2  (a)  Order  Within orders  of  of  the  Presentation of  tasks  presenting  counter-balanced In given in  to  Colours  each the  whatever  of  to  order  colour  samples any  matching at  he  Tasks  production  prevent  the  child  of  Within  once chose.  comprehension,  and  colour  order  tasks,  and  and  the  The  terms  were  effects.  a l l s i x samples child  sets  the  allowed  themselves  to  were proceed  were  always  in the order  (1) , (2) ,. (3) but the chance of an order  e f f e c t here i s very low given that the c h i l d the i n s t r u c t i o n s ;  the sets were i n t e r s p e r s e d with other  tasks and none of the c h i l d r e n with t h i s p a r t i c u l a r 2.3.2  understood  l o s t i n t e r e s t or grew t i r e d  task.  (b) Order o f Tasks The order of tasks given was to" some extent  by the c h i l d ' s ongoing behavior.  determined  Since two-year-olds  have  a l i m i t e d area of i n t e r e s t and a low a t t e n t i o n span and t o l e r a n c e f o r t h i n g s o u t s i d e o f t h e i r i n t e r e s t , the tasks were presented  i n the context of a game being played by the  subject and the E, and sometimes a l s o by the mother. approach was not necessary  This  f o r . t h e f o u r - y e a r - o l d s who were  q u i t e used to p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n " t e s t s " .  Any d i v e r s i o n s  i n i t i a t e d by the c h i l d were encouraged.when they served to maintain i n t e r e s t and d i d not appear to i n t e r f e r e with results.  In some cases, t h i s i n v o l v e d abandoning an ongoing  task i f the c h i l d was l o s i n g i n t e r e s t , and beginning the next one,  completing  the f i r s t a t a l a t e r time.  Only the naming  task remained i n a s t r i c t p o s i t i o n with r e l a t i o n to the other tasks and a l l attempts were made to avoid exposing the subject to the c o l o u r name before he had himself been asked to provide it.  Once the naming task had been completed t h i s was not  n e c e s s a r y because the name was being provided by E anyway. Those subjects who cooperated the order: matching task selection  f u l l y were given the tasks i n  (1), naming task, matching task (2),  task, and matching task (3).  58. 2.4  Potential  2.4.1  Choice There  Experimental  of Colour  which  The  of these  found  that  likely  might  the expected  give still  category.  basic  the p o s s i b i l i t y  have  Heider  they  using  though  different  results,  were  p o i n t than  c o l o u r s names when  that  given 'different  Even  just  (1971)  more f o r less  three  adults  tested, colour  especially  there  samples  i n the younger  group.  2.4.2  Colour  Background  Perception colour  "colour" been  used  three  Lighting  wooden b a s e  the white,  i n other  black  studies,  Rosch  (1972),  (1975)  control latter  for lighting, using  comparing  violet, --high  Johnson  are the only  found  high  was  the background the different chosen  and grey  especially  c o l o u r s were, t h e m s e l v e s Heider  with  a g a i n s t and w i t h  A light  than  and  of colour varies  i s presented  conditions.  in  of that  f o r the focal  design  the results.  c o l o u r s used.  the c o l o u r term  t o use i t c o r r e c t l y  did  age  adversely affected  i f c h i d r e n knew  members  would  have  of the experimental  i s the actual  definite  is  Sample  a r e some a s p e c t s  described major  Problems  being (1977)  as a more  backgrounds as i n t h i s  intensity  and M e r v i s ,  two u s i n g  lamps  neutral  that  case  these  Catlin  &  appear to  daylight  i n Lo p o s i t i o n .  and t h e Beare  perception of red,orange,yellow,green,blue no d i f f e r e n c e s  and low i n t e n s i t y .  between  What  have  tested.  relevant studies that  the f i r s t  lighting  two l e v e l s  i s probably  of  (1961), and  luminance  more i m p o r t a n t i s  the  type  present from  of  This  conditions  one  2.4.3  light.  daycare  Size The  of  naming  problems.  of  the  to  been  actual  task  possible  predicted (1978)  of  unequal  be  along  She  Of  the  her  28/55  set-up,  problems But a  for  into  possible were  It  thus  to  task  errors  the on  the  of  occur. groups  matching than  of  errors one  i s probable  vary  have  to  cover might  colours  could  are  not  evidence  reason,  colours (40/55).  cause the  each, Now  be  the  the  three  would  brightness.  not  be  made  in  brown/blue.  accounted as  for  in  discrimination orange/black).  for  or  i f any  colours  against such  were  accounting also  groups  errors  and  or  errors  made.  into  and  explain  the  such  a l l  that  blue/white no  individually  require  saturation  to  discrimination  convenience,  that  which  hard  that six  For  errors  problem:,being For  to  determine  geared  black/purple  be  would  be  assumption  hue,  pairs  to  would  eleven  ( f o r example, we  would  designed  naming  was  perceptual  made a n d  be  appear  the  another.  task  previously.  many w o u l d  i n more  a  errors  possible  others,  three  such  not  under  Task  due  in particular  anyway  did  subjects  some m a t c h i n g  discrimination  error  to  dimensions  that  set-up,  of  matching  based  regulate  did  divided  size,  the  notes  this  must  to  performance  were  analyzed  matching  Bartlett  the  errors  Ideally  towards have  group  hard  Discrimination  purpose  whether  but  was  naming split  for  several  more  colours  set.  that  performance  improves  the  smaller  the number-of choices i s ; having p a r t of t h i s f a c t o r .  equal  sets e l i m i n a t e s  However i t might have been b e t t e r to  have chosen equal groups of a smaller number. found i n p r e - t e s t s t h a t 2%-year-olds  Bartlett  c o u l d not scan  array of more than s i x items, and even s i x appeared for  some of the youngest s u b j e c t s .  array of c o l o u r s was near the bottom  random, one  hard  Also,because the board  set i n v o l v e d f i v e c o l o u r s  ( i . e . nearest to the c h i l d ) and  by i t s e l f at the top of the board. had  an  the  last  Consequently subjects  to be c o n t i n u a l l y t o l d to look at a l l the open c o l o u r s  before making a c h o i c e . other two 2.5  not a problem with  the  sets.  Scoring Method and  2.5.1  This was  Pre-tests  Scoring Method Scoring was  task.  The  o r i g i n a l l y done i n two ways w i t h i n each  f i r s t method merely scored r i g h t or wrong on  each c o l o u r term or colour sample requested.  The  second  method d i d t h i s as w e l l , but i n a d d i t i o n , account was of the i n c o r r e c t use of each term or sample.  taken  Pre-testing  showed no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between rank orders obtained by e i t h e r method, but the second produced c o n s i s t e n t l y lower scores than the f i r s t ,  reflecting a stricter  a c q u i s i t i o n and performance c r i t e r i o n . was  used throughout the r e s t of the  T h i s second method  study.  Subject A would score, f o r example, 0.6  i n the  production  task of BLUE, having named the blue sample BLUE but a l s o  the green and grey samples  ( i . e . two-thirds or 0.6 o f h i s  responses of BLUE were wrong). his  In the comprehension task,  score was 0.5 because he picked the blue sample f o r  GREY as w e l l as f o r BLUE  ( i . e . h a l f or 0.5 of h i s responses  of i n d i c a t i n g the blue sample were i n c o r r e c t ) .  The lower  the score, the more accurate the performance, a p e r f e c t score being 2.5.2  zero.  T e s t i n g f o r Parental Input and C h i l d P r a c t i c e To measure the importance o f environment i n the  subject's colour-naming behavior, to  q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were given  the mothers of a l l the two-year-olds and to the mothers  of h a l f of the f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . these asked questions  As Appendix 41 shows,  about the mother's frequency 1  of using  each of the eleven c o l o u r terms and the number of o b j e c t s each term was g e n e r a l l y a p p l i e d to (extent of use).  The  same questions were asked o f the c h i l d ' s colour-naming i n the home. 2.5.2  (a) U n r e l i a b i l i t y of Unfortunately,  Information  t h i s c o l l e c t e d information was  u n r e l i a b l e f o r s e v e r a l reasons.  I t assumed f i r s t o f a l l  that the parents were being f a i r l y i n t h e i r responses,  considered  accurate and o b j e c t i v e  and i t was e s p e c i a l l y d i f f i c u l t f o r  the mothers o f f o u r - y e a r - o l d s to a c c u r a t e l y monitor t h e i r c h i l d ' s speech f o r one week.  Secondly, i t assumed t h a t  parents were basing t h e i r responses on the general performance of one week, not j u s t a couple of hours or one day.  This  presented  a more t e c h n i c a l problem; some mothers took much  longer than the p r e s c r i b e d one week to complete the questionnaire.  That i s , some of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e  does not correspond  data  to the same time p e r i o d as the tasks  and may i n f a c t r e l a t e to a d i f f e r e n t and more advanced stage i n the c h i l d ' s colour-term  performance.  L a s t l y , no matter how r e l i a b l e such information might have been  (given b e t t e r c o n t r o l s or checks),  measures p a r e n t a l i n p u t .  only  This i s only a p o r t i o n o f the  l i n g u i s t i c exposure any of the present had,  i tstill  subjects would have  even by age two; t e l e v i s i o n , daycare programs, other  a d u l t s might a l s o have c o n t r i b u t e d . 2.5.2 (b) Analyses  Done  The r e s u l t s of analyses  t h a t were d o n e — c o r r e l a t i o n s  between rank orders of frequency  of parent and c h i l d ,  c o r r e l a t i o n s with e v o l u t i o n a r y order and with  task  performance, and correspondences o f the l e v e l s o f frequency and  extent-of-use  with s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s —  Appendices ^2 to 44  f  respectively.  are i n d i c a t e d i n  The r e s u l t s were l a r g e l y  n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t and c o n t r a d i c t e d the hypotheses that q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y of input are d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to performance accuracy.  But, f o r the reasons noted above, we can draw  no conclusions e i t h e r way from these p a r t i c u l a r  results.  3.0  General Performance  Results  3.1  Orders of Performance Accuracy and A c q u i s i t i o n One way of examining performance i n the tasks i s to  rank each- c o l o u r term and c o l o u r sample by i t s performance socres.  Such rank orders allow a comparison of each term's  performance with those remaining, showing, f o r example, which terms are used most o f t e n c o r r e c t l y or which samples are i n c o r r e c t l y named l e a s t f r e q u e n t l y .  Compiling rank orders  a l s o allows a comparison with r e s u l t s found by other s t u d i e s . To determine whether any of these rank orders c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with each other, the s t a t i s t i c of Kendall's tau f o r t i e d ranks was used. c r i t i c a l value of  IS =.45  Any tau value greater than the (an 0.05 s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l ) would  i n d i c a t e a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n between the rank o r d e r s . That i s , they do not d i f f e r from each other above a chance level. To confirm the hypothesized age d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance, the rank orders of each task's performance and o v e r a l l performance f o r the two ages should not c o r r e l a t e with each other.  S i m i l a r l y , to confirm a task d i f f e r e n c e ,  rank orders f o r the two tasks by each age should not c o r r e l a t e with each other. 3.1.1 3.1.1  Orders of Accuracy (a) Age-Group Rank Orders Scores f o r each c o l o u r term and c o l o u r sample were  averaged w i t h i n each task and age-group, and then arranged  in  rank  orders  score).  These  circled  colour  each  In  of  terms  indicate  of  orders with  other,  both  to  3.1.1  sampling  (b) The  regardless  of  (as  means  their  Rank  number  of  these  to  11  terms.  it  was  felt  that  splitting observed then  varied  nine  a more  Age  2B  Rank o r d e r s  of  of  3.78  this  correlate  not  are due  into  two  terms  the  1).  with 1). signifi-  to  chance  8.7  used,  two  terms  age-groups.  with  terms  a  range  with  large individual  analysis  vocabulary  could  sub-groups  be  based  variance, made on  by  the  subject.  subjects with  fewer  than  four colour  i s those  four or  4A  with  includes those  (n=6)  and  Age  4B  more c o l o u r  Age  with  2A  terms  terms  subjects with  those  of  range  each  Age  size  -  a  of  c o l o u r terms terms  not  i n Appendix  orders  are  between  thorough  age-group  Similarly,  more c o l o u r  these  average  Because  colour-term  while  (n=ll).  in  an  includes those  (n=7),  than  each  did  Within  i n Appendix  colour  f o u r - y e a r - o l d s averaged  4  1;  Orders  0 of  B  differences  used  while  A  ages  rank  Two-year-olds 9,  i n Table  orders.  tasks  i n Row  two  the  rank  two  i n Row  different  accuracy,  to  indicated  ranks.  f o r the  task  (i.e. increasing  error.  Sub-Group total  tied  f o r the  this  and  are  (indicated  accuracy  cases,  different a  other  w i t h i n each  these  accuracy  between  accuracy  each of  low  accuracy  age,  cantly or  orders  to  were done  did orders  each  high  Comparisons  correlate Nor  from  nine  fewer or  (n=14). were o b t a i n e d  sub-groups,  indicated  f o r performance i n Table  2.  i n both  Table  tasks  3 allows  a  65.  TABLE  Rank O r d e r s o f A c c u r a c y f o r B o t h Ages a n d B o t h T a s k s  1  Production  Comprehension AGE  2  pink orange green purple brown white black blue yellow red grey  AGE  4  black red brown  purple pink__y yellow grey  Total AGE  2  orange pink white purple green blue yellow brown red black grey  AGE  2  orange pink white yellow blue red purple brown green grey black  Performance AGE  4  red black yellow green pink orange brown blue white purple grey  AGE  4  red yellow green pink black orange blue brown white purple grey  TABLE  2:  Orders of Accuracy i n Both Tasks  code:  AGE 2A: two-year-olds  with  <4  AGE 2B: two-year-olds  with  =^4 c o l o u r terms: n = l l  Comprehension AGE 2A pink orange brown green blue) black) white [yellow grey_ purple red  AGE 2B  1  purple green orange pink white black brown yellow blue red grey  f o r Sub-Groups 2A and 2B colour terms; n= 7  Production AGE 2A blue pink ' orange (yellow'" black white green grey purple |brown__y red  T o t a l Performance AGE 2A pink orange blue brown white green black [yellow) Urey J purple red  AGE 2B orange pink purple white yellow green red brown blue . black grey  AGE 2B orange pink white yellow red purple blue brown green grey black  TABLE  3:  Comparison of.Rank Orders o f Accuracy f o r AGE 2 a n d S u b - G r o u p s 2A a n d 2B  Total AGE  2  orange pink white purple green blue yellow brown red black grey  Performance AGE  2A  pink orange blue brown white green black f yellow) Iqrey J purple red  AGE  2B  orange pink purple white yellow green red brown blue black grey  comparison of the rank orders of Age 2 as a whole to i t s subgroups of 2A and  2B.  Rank order c o r r e l a t i o n s done between these orders r e v e a l e d some s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s .  Again comparisons  between sub-groups i n each task i n d i v i d u a l l y and i n o v e r a l l performance showed no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s i n Row  E i n Appendix 1 ) .  (as i n d i c a t e d  This supports the d i v i s i o n of two-  y e a r - o l d s i n t o two sub-groups, performance v a r y i n g  signifi-  c a n t l y depending on vocabulary s i z e . The orders shown i n Table 3 would be expected to c o r r e l a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y with each other since those of the sub-groups are r e a l l y only p a r t of the l a r g e r group of twoyear-olds.  Appendix 1 Rows C and D show t h i s to be t r u e ,  with the exception of some of the comparisons of Age 2 to 2A This again supports our d i v i s i o n of Age 2, and e s p e c i a l l y the  i s o l a t i o n of those subjects with fewer than the average  number of c o l o u r terms--sub-group 3.1.2  2A.  Orders of Percentage Having Acquired Each Term Another view of performance i s given by t a b u l a t i n g the  percentage o f s u b j e c t s having acquired each term. orders are i n d i c a t e d i n Tables 4 and 5, and graphs ing  The rank illustrat  age-group, c o l o u r and task d i f f e r e n c e s are i n Figures 2,  3 and 4.  The orders are i d e n t i c a l to those orders of  accuracy noted i n Table 1, except f o r the t o t a l  performance  measures' f o r both ages. These orders give d i f f e r e n t information from those noted above i n Table 1, however.  The percentage-acquired  69.  T A B L E * 4:  Percentage of Subjects Having Acquired Each Colour-Term i n Both Ages and Tasks  Comprehension AGE orange pink purple green brown white blue yellow black red grey  AGE  2 55 % 55 50 38 . 9 38.9 33 27.8 27.8 27.8 22 * 16.6  black red blue green brown orange white purple pink yellow grey  4  * TOO 95 * 85 * * . 85 85 * 85 * 80 * * 80 80 * 75 65  Production AGE orange pink yellow white purple red blue green grey black brown  * =  2  * * * * * *  AGE 50 % 33 27.8 27.8 22 16. 6 16.6 5 5 0 0  significant  yellow red green black pink orange white brown purple blue grey  proportion at  .05  4  * * * * * *  85 85 85 80 80 80 75 70 65 55 40  level  70.  TABLE  5:  Percentage o f Subjects Having Acquired Each Colour-Term i n O v e r a l l Performance  AGE orange yellow pink purple white blue red green black brown grey  *  =  2  * * * * * *  AGE 33 % 27.8 22 22 22 16. 6 11 5 0 0 0  significant  4  green red black orange pink yellow white brown blue purple grey  proportion  at  Both  .05  * * *  85 85 80 75 75 75 70 60 55 55 30  level  %  Ages  71. FIGURE  2 :  Percentage o f Subjects Having Acquired Each C o l o u r Term i n P r o d u c t i o n Both Ages  AGE 2 : I///////J 0  10  RED YELLOW  30  40  50  60  70  80  90 1 0 0  %  500  60  70  80  90 100  %  a/Mi  BLUE GREEN  20  AGE 4 :  v/im  MMMM  BLACK WHITE GREY BROWN PURPLE  W 7 M M M M M M  ORANGE PINK 0  FIGURE  10  3:  0  20  30  40  Percentage o f Subjects Having Acquired Each C o l o u r Term i n Comprehension B o t h Ages  AGE  1-.Y7777/,  10  20  30  AGE 4 40  50  60  70  80  90 1 0 0  %  90 100  %  BLUE GREEN  '///////A  RED  W/////////M,  YELLOW BLACK WHITE GREY BROWN PURPLE ORANGE PINK  7/////////////////////////\  ^///////////////////m t  0  10  20  30  40  50  60  70  80  Percentage o f Subjects Having Acquired Each Term i n T o t a l P e r f o r m a n c e Both Ages  FIGURE  AGE  10 BLUE  2  :  W  20  AGE  M  30  40  4 :  50  60  70  80  90  100  50  60  70  80  90  100  W//////A  GREEN RED YELLOW  W////////////B  BLACK /////A  WHITE GREY BROWN  7,  PURPLE  /7//7///// '/ / / / / 7//7/7777/A //  ORANGE PINK 0  10  20  30  40  orders than  indicate  colour B  terms as  are  2's  by  more  the  used  For  hand,  of  YELLOW  than  of  former  3.1.3  they  and  related  those  others  with  children  indicate  w i t h i n each  percentage-acquired  i s .  order  of  errors  BLUE,  thus  not  and  decreasing  of  known  accuracy, do  i n naming  age  order  t h a t YELLOW.is  The  which  on  know  understanding the  standing  were  Comparable  then  obtained  Studies  made b e t w e e n  the  f o r comparable  rank  tasks  and  orders  noted  ages  in  colours  at  studies.  Johnson s  order  1  ages  2;6  tion  with  There  orders  t h a t s u b j e c t s who  Correlations with  above  more  term.  Comparisons  to  was  4;5  the no  ages  3;0  present  of  (see  naming  page  io  Age  4's  present  correlation  Heider's  4  BLUE  make m o r e do  than  indicates  indicates  these,  i s known b y  accuracy  the  performance  either  at  example,  subjects than  the  the  more c o r r e c t l y  total  other  colour A  i s , while  a whole.  Age  whether  order  and  of  of  showed  significant  with  not  a  production that of  selection  4;0,did  comprehension  )  accuracy  accuracy  accuracy  Age  orders  correla-  order.  2.  accuracy,  correlate  ten  using  eight  significantly for either  Age  colours  with 2 or  the Age  groups. A  comparison  obtained  by  of  Bartlett  the  percentage-acquired  f o r ages  correlations  for total  correlations  were  found  2;6  to  performance with  the  of  4;0 Age  younger  orders  showed 4.  No  with  that  significant significant  age-group.  74 .  3.1.4  C o r r e l a t i o n s with E v o l u t i o n a r y Orders All  these rank orders were a l s o c o r r e l a t e d with  B e r l i n & Kay's e v o l u t i o n a r y orders to determine i f performance accuracy and order of a c q u i s i t i o n r e f l e c t the order i n which languages i n c o r p o r a t e colour-terms  i n t o t h e i r l e x i c o n . There  were very few s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s , as shown i n Appendix 2. For the f i r s t e v o l u t i o n a r y rank order, none of the orders of accuracy  i n e i t h e r age  showed any  Of the percentage-acquired  significant  correlation.  orders, only t h a t of Age  4 s 1  comprehension c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y and none of Age  2's  orders d i d . For the second e v o l u t i o n a r y order, which p r e d i c t e d the order i n which c o l o u r names are c o r r e c t l y used f o r c a t e g o r i e s , there were no c o r r e l a t i o n s with any of the rank orders, obtained. The more general p r e d i c t i o n that p r i m a r i e s and should precede the non-primaries e i t h e r type of rank order.  was  a l s o not supported i n  Some s l i g h t tendency towards  t h i s might be seen i n the accuracy orders f o r Age production and t o t a l performance, and the order f o r Age BLUE i n these.  2.  achromatics  4  percentage-acquired  Note, however, the low scores f o r WHITE and The v i a b i l i t y of these c o l o u r groups w i l l  come up i n l a t e r analyses as w e l l . 3.2  Performance V a r i a b l e s C o r r e l a t i o n s done between the v a r i o u s rank orders of  accuracy have already i n d i c a t e d the importance of age  and  task as performance v a r i a b l e s .  The experimental design  allowed f o r two more v a r i a b l e s : sex and c o l o u r .  That i s ,  does performance accuracy d i f f e r between boys and  girls,  and does i t depend on which c o l o u r i s being tested? A f i f t h v a r i a b l e of measure or s c o r i n g method also included.  T h i s has already been d i s c u s s e d i n an  s e c t i o n as a p r e - t e s t to determine more a c c u r a t e .  was earlier  which s c o r i n g method  was  None of the r e s u l t s i n v o l v i n g t h i s measure  w i l l be mentioned here. A repeated measures design a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e (ANOVAR) with v a r i a b l e s of age, (2x2x2x2x11),revealed orders of accuracy.  sex, task, measure and c o l o u r several highly s i g n i f i c a n t effects i n  The summary t a b l e i s shown i n Appendix 3  A l l v a r i a b l e s except sex showed a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t  and  several interaction e f f e c t s . 3.2.1  Age V a r i a b l e Four-year-olds performed  s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than  year-olds i n o v e r a l l performance. performance scores f o r each age. Table 6:  Table 6 shows the  the  and Task  Comp.  Prod.  Total  Age  2:  0.835  1.106  0.971  Age  4:  0.173  0.303  0.238  0.504  0.704  TOTAL:  average  R e c a l l that the lower  Average Performance Scores i n Each Age  two-  score,  the better  Age colour being This  also  showed  a significant  f o r two-year-olds  c a n be s e e n  average  scores  7:  by l o o k i n g  f o r each  colour  effect colour  7 which  gives the  Colour  a n d Age i n  Total average  Age 4 average  .951  .204  .558  GREEN  .953  .162  .537  RED  1.137  .094  .588  YELLOW  1.028  .144  .563  BLACK  1.188  . 089  .609  .907  .275  .574  GREY  1.313  .712  . 997  BROWN  1.024  .212  .597  PURPLE  .972  .350  .645  ORANGE  .551  .200  .366  PINK  .654  .175  .402  All  scores  f o r four-year-olds.  BLUE  3.2.2 T a s k  with  and age.  Average Scores f o r Each Total Performance  WHITE  Variable  ages  showed  comprehension  again  than  a t Table  Age 2 average  the  interaction  (age x c o l o u r ) , t h e d i f f e r e n c e between greater  Table  the performance.  shows  significantly  than  the average  did  not vary  the  supremacy  two-year-olds  i n the production scores  significantly o f one t a s k than  better  i n each  between over  performance i n tasks.  task.  Table  This,  the age-groups.  the other  f o r four-year-olds  6  however That i s  was n o t g r e a t e r  (age x  task).  fo  Task  d i d show  a significant  colour  (task x c o l o u r ) ,  scores  than  colour  and t a s k  Table  8:  interaction  production  comprehension. a r e shown  producing  The a v e r a g e d i n Table  Average Scores f o r Each f o r Combined Ages  effect  with  different  scores  f o r each  8.  Colour  and  Task  Comp. average  Prod. average  Total average  BLUE  .528  .588  .558  GREEN  .386  .688  .537  RED  .605  .571  .588  YELLOW  .579  .546  .563  BLACK  .414  .804  .609  WHITE  .468  . 680  .574  GREY  .849  BROWN  1.145  .997  .422  .771  .597  PURPLE  .447  .842  .645  ORANGE  .349  .384  .366  PINK  .304  .500  .402  3.2.3  Sex V a r i a b l e There  this  was  variable  no  significant  interact  main  effect  significantly  with  o f sex nor d i d any o f t h e  remaining  variables. 3.2.4  Colour Colour  have  already  cantly  Variable  showed been  several significant mentioned.  b e t t e r i n some  colours  Overall than  effects,  some  performance  i n others.  The  of which  was  signifi-  final  columns of Tables 7 and 8 both show the average scores of t o t a l performance  f o r each c o l o u r .  A Scheffe t e s t s e r i e s of orthogonal comparisons  was  a p p l i e d to determine which sets of c o l o u r s were c o n t r i b u t i n g to t h i s s i g n i f i c a n t c o l o u r e f f e c t .  The p r e d i c t e d  groupings  of p r i m a r i e s and achromatics being b e t t e r than non-primaries d i d not show a s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o n t r i b u t i o n to the v a r i a n c e . Nor d i d a comparison  o f p r i m a r i e s to achromatics+non-primaries,  or o f j u s t p r i m a r i e s to achromatics, o r o f achromatics to nonprimaries . Orthogonal comparisons  o f the v a r i o u s groupings o f  a c t u a l observed orders d i d r e v e a l at l e a s t some of the • causes of the o v e r a l l c o l o u r e f f e c t .  Performance  on ORANGE+  PINK as a group was s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r than the remaining c o l o u r s as a group.  When these two c o l o u r s were excluded  from the comparisons, b e t t e r performance  the p r i m a r i e s d i d show s i g n i f i c a n t l y  than the achromatics and remaining non-  p r i m a r i e s as a group.  A comparison  of GREY+PURPLE as a  group to BLACK+BROWN+WHITE as a group a l s o proved to be s i g n i f i c a n t , as d i d GREY+PURPLE as a group to a l l the remaining c o l o u r s . performance  In both cases, t h i s i n v o l v e d a  s i g n i f i c a n t l y poorer on these c o l o u r s than on  other c o l o u r s .  This was true r e g a r d l e s s of whether ORANGE+  PINK scores were i n c l u d e d . a significantly different  Moreover, GREY by i t s e l f showed (lower) performance  score than a l l  the other c o l o u r s combined. As noted above, the c o l o u r v a r i a b l e a l s o had s i g n i f i c a n t interaction  e f f e c t s with age and task v a r i a b l e s .  3.3  Colour Terms Acquired Table 9 i n d i c a t e s the average number of colour terms  acquired by each age-group w i t h i n each task and i n o v e r a l l performance.  Four-year-olds had acquired  significantly  more terms than two-year-olds i n a l l cases, and s i x fouryear-olds showed p e r f e c t performance f o r a l l eleven c o l o u r s . What were these terms and d i d any one term or group of terms show a c q u i s i t i o n by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high or s i g n i f i c a n t l y  low  p r o p o r t i o n of subjects? The percentage o f subjects who  have acquired  specific  terms i n both tasks has a l r e a d y been t a b u l a t e d i n Tables 4 and 5.  While c e r t a i n terms appear to be somewhat higher or  lower i n rank than might be expected as compared to the other terms, a Kolmogorov-Smirnoff a n a l y s i s must be done to determine whether  this difference i s i n fact  above that which might occur by chance alone.  significantly The  significant  proportions  ( at 0.05  s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l ) have been marked by  asterisks.  Chance would expect h a l f of the subjects to have  acquired each term. Table 9:  Average Number of Terms Acquired Comp.  Prod.  Total  Age 2:  3.9  2.0  1.6  Age 4:  9.1  8.0  7.5  80. 3.3.1  Terms Acquired by Two-Year-Olds In comprehension, there were no c o l o u r s known by a  s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n o f two-year-olds, was known by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  low p r o p o r t i o n .  while GREY  In production,  s i x c o l o u r terms: RED,BLUE,GREEN,BLACK,BROWN and GREY were known by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  low p r o p o r t i o n of s u b j e c t s .  These s i x c o l o u r terms were a l s o s i g n i f i c a n t l y low i n comparing t o t a l performance scores i n t h i s age. 3.3.2  Terms Acquired by Four-Year-Olds In comprehension by f o u r - y e a r - o l d s , a l l except YELLOW  and GREY were s i g n i f i c a n t l y high.  In production, a l l except  WHITE,BROWN,BLUE,PURPLE and GREY were known by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n of s u b j e c t s . and BLACK were ' s i g n i f i c a n t l y  For t o t a l performance GREEN, RED high.  Notice t h a t i n a l l o f the two-year-olds'  figures,  were no c o l o u r terms known by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  there  large proportion  of s u b j e c t s , while i n the f o u r - y e a r - o l d s there were none with s i g n i f i c a n t l y low p r o p o r t i o n s . 3.3.3 A c q u i s i t i o n o f Primary,  Achromatic and Non-Primary Colours  A f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s asked whether a s i g n i f i c a n t of  subjects had acquired terms f o r the primary  or non-primary c o l o u r s as separate groups.  proportion  or achromatic  Because  d e f i n i t i o n s o f these groups may vary, analyses were done with three p o s s i b l e achromatic  groups:  (i) black + white + grey,  ( i i ) black + white + grey + brown, and ( i i i ) black + white.  TABLE  10:  Number of Subjects, i n Each Age Having Acquired the Primary, Achromatic and Non-Primary Colours  primary AGE  2,  achromatic non-primary (i) ( i i ) ( i i i ] (i) ( i i ) ( i i i )  N=18  comprehension  2  3  1  2  1  production  0  0  0  0  0  comprehension  13  12  12  production  11  7  7  total performance  10  total performance  AGE 4, N= 2 0  * = significant  16 * 13 12  at .05  level  10  12  9  10 10  This  of  course  creates  primary  groups  as  and  have  pink  +  orange same  no  well,  overlap.  +  +  brown  the  For (iii)  cover  are:  + orange  +  The  by  group  Table  10  only  those  and  non-  a l l eleven  (i) purple pink,  and  primary  colours  + orange  +  ( i i i )purple  group  remains  Now  that  of  +  the  was  within  in  what 6  have  from  their  these  show t h e groups  showed  several  of  comprehension  showed no  a  are  frequency.  the  achromatic  significantly  within  a  zero  of  significantly  which  examined  low  each  high  proportions. age  significantly  used,  noted  that  two-year-olds respective whether  terms  the  and  high  the to  sub-groups,  by  of  number  task;  have  any  11  and  colour  colour the  next  group 12 term  to  accuracy.  of  The  certain  switches  four-year-olds,  were  each  show a  focus  regardless  Tables of  terms  sub-groups.  there  were.  frequency and  which  acquisition,  terms  already  determine  various  and  colour  varied  to  we  although  many  proportion  Used  accuracy  actual  was  Terms  high  frequencies  proportions  Colour  used  were  significantly  with  only  + white)  i n d i c a t e s the  3.4  It  proportion,  there  asterisked.  a  two-year-olds,  (black  been  level  showed  four-year-olds,  proportion,  and  then  grey.  groups  s i g n i f i c a n t l y low  as  +  to  possible  for a l l comparisons.  acquisition  the  These  ( i i ) purple  pink  different  i n order  brown,  None o f of  three  as  terms well  analysis  tendencies  and  Figure  within  proportion  of  5  the subjects  83.  TABLE  11:  F r e q u e n c i e s and P r o p o r t i o n s o f Colour Used by Two-Year-Olds  AGE  BLUE  2  AGE  2A prop.  AGE f  Terms  2B prop  f  prop.  f  13  . 7220  3  .4285  10  . 9000  GREEN  9  .5000  1  .1428  8  . 7270  RED  9  . 5000  2  . 2850  7  .6366  YELLOW  9  .5000  0  . 0000  9  .8180  BLACK  2  .1111  0  . 0000  2  .1822  WHITE  7  .3888  0  .0000  7  .6366  GREY  1  .0555  0  . 0000  1  .0911  BROWN  6  . 3333  0  . 0000  6  .5455  PURPLE  6  .3333  0  . 0000  6  .54 55  ORANGE  12  .6666  1  .1428  11  1.0000  8  .4466  2  .2855  6  .5455  PINK  *  =  significant  *  *  at  .05  level  TABLE  12:  F r e q u e n c i e s and P r o p o r t i o n s o f C o l o u r Used by F o u r - Y e a r - O l d s  AGE f  AGE  4 prop.  AGE  4A  f  prop.  f  Terms  4B prop  BLUE  17  .8500  *  3  . 5000  14  1.. 0000  GREEN  17  .8500  *  3  . 5000  14  1.. 0000  RED  17  .8500  *  3  . 5000  14  1.. 0000  YELLOW  18  . 9000 *  4  . 6666  14  1.. 0000  BLACK  18  . 9000 *  5  .8333  13  . 9285  WHITE  15  . 7500  3  . 5000  12  .8571  .4500  0  .0000  9  .6428  9  GREY BROWN  15  . 7500  2  . 3333  13  . 9285  PURPLE  13  . 6500  0  . 0000  13  . 9285  ORANGE  17  . 8500 *  4  . 6666  13  . 9285  PINK  17  .8500  *  3  .5000  14  1 . 0000  *  =  significant  at  .05  level  using each term r e g a r d l e s s of accuracy.  For example,  72% of the two-year-olds had the term BLUE i n t h e i r vocabulary. how  Note t h a t these f i g u r e s have no r e l a t i o n to  f r e q u e n t l y a p a r t i c u l a r subject used any  j u s t the number of subjects who  given term,  used i t at l e a s t once.  While there appear to be some d i s t i n c t d i f f e r e n c e s i n p r o p o r t i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y developmentally, Smirnoff  a n a l y s i s showed very few of these to be  In some cases, the age/sample group was any 3.4.1  a Kolmogorovsignificant.  too small to  reach  significance level. Terms Used by Two-Year-Gids Two-year-olds showed some l a r g e v a r i a b i l i t y between  p r o p o r t i o n s f o r the eleven c o l o u r terms.  Some f i v e terms  appeared i n at l e a s t h a l f o f the subjects and the range o f p r o p o r t i o n s was  anywhere from 72%  f o r BLUE to 5% f o r GREY.  Only BLACK and GREY were used by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  low  p r o p o r t i o n of two-year-olds and a l l other terms were nonsignificant. F i g u r e 6 shows t h a t i n Age  2A there was  that a l l or even h a l f of the subjects used.  no one  term  None of them  d i s p l a y e d any of the achromatic terms, nor the primary YELLOW nor the non-primaries p r o p o r t i o n of Age  BROWN or PURPLE. A s i g n i f i c a n t l y  high  2B subjects used ORANGE and BLUE, while  the p r o p o r t i o n using GREY was  significantly  low.  FIGURE  5  : Proportions, o f Subjects i n AGE 2 a n d AGE 4  AGE  Each  Term  AGE 4:  2 : Y7777M  .5 BLUE  Using  1.0  /•//////.  / / // /// /  GREEN  V//////,  RED  Y////////////. V//////////  / /  ///I  YELLOW BLACK  A//.  WHITE GREY BROWN PURPLE  V77777  ORANGE  '/AAAA/AAA//////////M  PINK  A/AAAAAAAAAAAA/. 1.0  FIGURE  Proportions o f Subjects i n A G E 2A a n d A G E 2B  AGE 2A: V//////  Using  AGE 2B:  1.0 BLUE GREEN RED YELLOW BLACK WHITE GREY BROWN PURPLE ORANGE PINK  •  A/AAA W//A/M 1.0  Each  Term  87.  3.4.2  Terms Used by Four-Year-Olds Four-year-olds  terms except The  showed f a i r l y high p r o p o r t i o n s f o r a l l  GREY, t h i s o c c u r r i n g i n only 45% o f the s u b j e c t s .  terms GREEN,YELLOW,BLACK,PINK,ORANGE,BLUE and RED were  used by a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n o f s u b j e c t s , the other terms being n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t s  In Age 4B, a l l terms  except GREY and WHITE showed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n of u s e r s . A comparison of two-year-olds to f o u r - y e a r - o l d s i n F i g u r e 5 revealed a lower o v e r a l l p r o p o r t i o n f o r a l l terms i n the younger age-group.  I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note a l s o  that i n n e i t h e r age i s there a term which a l l the subjects showed a use o f . 3.5  Measures of S t a b i l i t y Now t h a t we have examined which c o l o u r terms were used,  we must look a t the way i n which they were used.  In  p a r t i c u l a r , how many of these terms, and which of these terms, show an unstable status i n the s u b j e c t s ' l e x i c o n s ? For each term, how s t a b l e w i l l the connection of name to sample, o f l a b e l to r e f e r e n t , tend to be?  And are there  age d i f f e r e n c e s i n v o l v e d i n the answers to these  questions?  The c o l o u r terms were c l a s s i f i e d i n two ways.  First,  o v e r a l l performance scores were c l a s s i f i e d i n t o three b a s i c l e v e l s : STABLE, where use o f a p a r t i c u l a r term was c o r r e c t and never i n c o r r e c t i n both production and comprehension; UNKNOWN, where there was no production or comprehension a t  all;  and the intermediate UNSTABLE l e v e l .  This approach  should show the o v e r a l l s t a b i l i t y o f c e r t a i n terms, and perhaps suggest a supremacy of some terms over o t h e r s . Since the e a r l i e r analyses  showed that i n d i v i d u a l  c o l o u r performance v a r i e d with the task being performed, l o o k i n g only a t the o v e r a l l performance might not give an accurate p i c t u r e .  The second approach then was to look a t  performance i n production and comprehension tasks s e p a r a t e l y , again with the three s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s noted above. 3.5.1 3.5.1  O v e r a l l Levels of S t a b i l i t y (a)  Age D i f f e r e n c e s  Table 13 i n d i c a t e s the t o t a l number of terms i n each of the three s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s f o r each age-group.  The t o t a l  scores i n each age i s always number of subjects X number of c o l o u r terms  (11), thus 198 f o r two-year-olds and 220 f o r  four-year-olds. Table 13:  T o t a l Number of Terms i n S t a b i l i t y . Levels Age 2  Age 4  STABLE  31  155  UNSTABLE  95  53  UNKNOWN  72  12  TOTAL  198  220  A Kolmogorov-Smirnoff the  total  these for  levels  i n each  purely  were  were  words,  a significantly while  For found  significantly 3.5.1  examine  next  the individual  eleven  shows  colours  proportion UNSTABLE Smirnof f  o r UNKNOWN,  significant Individual None  STABLE,  were  STABLE.  levels,  a  l e v e l and  by each o f  groups.  Table  14  7,8 a n d 9 i n d i c a t e t h e  each  respectively.  while  level.  stability  colour  were  Levels  contributed  Figures  were  low proportions  i nStability  f o r which  will  terms  was i n t h e S T A B L E  each  In other  colour  Further  term  i s STABLE,  Kolmogorov-  i n d i c a t e whether  these a r e  proportions. Colour  Terms  o f thecolours  significant of  while  (KS)- analyses  T h e number o f  a n d t h e UNKNOWN  and by v a r i o u s  o f subjects  significantly  of colour  proportions  the frequencies,  a  l o w number  go t h r o u g h  that  proportion of  level.  significantly  Colours  analyses  i n each o f  4 indicates  while  number  proportion  (b) P r e d o m i n a n t The  the  high  t h e UNSTABLE  one t h i r d o f  was n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t .  a significantly  high  high  level,  level  four-year-olds,  i n both  Appendix  i n t h e STABLE  i n t h e UNKNOWN  expect  to occur  a significantly  scores  UNSTABLE  age-group  i n t h e UNSTABLE  proportion  would  by chance.  two-year-olds,  scores low  scores  test  proportion UNSTABLE,  by themselves  o f scores  o r UNKNOWN.  constituted a  i n any o f t h e three This  was t r u e  levels  f o r both  ages  TABLE  14 :  Colour  .BLU  .GRE  . RED  Criteria in  and  Frequencies  . Y E L . BLA .WHI  .GRY  . BRO  Each  Stability  • PUR .ORA  .PIN  Level f o r Both  Ages  . TOTAL . CRITERION  .  AGE 2 Stable Unstable Unknown  3  1  2  5  0  4  0  0  4  7  5  31  ^10/31  11  14  8  4  10  8  5  12  5  8  10  95  ^22/95  4  3  8  9  8  6  13  6  9  3  3  72  =^18/72  198  AGE 4 11  17  17  16  16  15  6  13  12  16  16  155  Unstable  8  2  3  4  4  3  10  7  7  3  2  53  Unknown  1  1  0  0  0  2  4  0  1  1  2  12  Stable  ^31/155 ^15/53 ^  6/12  220  VO O  91.  FIGURE  C o l o u r Term S t a b i l i t y by P r o p o r t i o n o f S u b j e c t s - STABLE Terms a t B o t h Ages  2:  AGE  AGE  4 :  W////M, '////////A I  0  I  I  I  1  I — I — I — I — I — 1  .5  .  1.0  FIGURE  8 : Colour Term S t a b i l i t y by P r o p o r t i o n of Subjects - UNSTABLE Terms a t Both Ages AGE 2  AGE 4  l'.O  Note: AGE 4 Proportions, f o r GREY,PURPLE are more : than AGE 2 P r o p o r t i o n s .  FIGURE  9 :  Colour Term S t a b i l i t y by P r o p o r t i o n of Subjects - UNKNOWN Terms a t Both Ages AGE 2.  AGE 4:  W 7 Z  That i s , i n each of the l e v e l s , there was no one c o l o u r which showed a p r o p o r t i o n s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than the expected 9.09% or one-eleventh. frequency  i s so low, none of the observed frequencies can  be considered actually Colour  Because t h i s expected  s i g n i f i c a n t l y low, even those which were  zero.  Groups  The c o l o u r s were then grouped i n t o the c a t e g o r i e s o f primary, non-primary and achromatic c o l o u r s which were used i n e a r l i e r analyses.  Appendices 5 and 6 i n d i c a t e the number  of scores o c c u r r i n g f o r each of these colour groups i n each s t a b i l i t y l e v e l , as w e l l as the expected p r o p o r t i o n and the frequency  r e q u i r e d to reach c r i t e r i o n .  None of these  groups  showed any s i g n i f i c a n t l y high or low p r o p o r t i o n s i n f o u r year-olds and only one d i d i n two-year-olds, that of the non-primary group of purple, orange + pink g i v i n g a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n of the STABLE scores. 3.5.2  S t a b i l i t y Levels of Production and Comprehension An a l t e r n a t i v e s e t of s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s i s a d i v i s i o n  i n t o l e v e l s of production and l e v e l s of comprehension.  This  i n e f f e c t allows a f u r t h e r e x p l o r a t i o n of the UNSTABLE l e v e l used above. L e v e l s of production performance are CORRECT production (only used c o r r e c t l y ) , MIXED production i n c o r r e c t use), INCORRECT production  (both c o r r e c t and  (only i n c o r r e c t use) and  NONE production  (no use a t a l l ) .  Comprehension  levels  would be CORRECT comprehension and NONE comprehension. Table 15 shows the t o t a l number of terms i n each o f these l e v e l s the r e s u l t s  f o r each task, while Appendices 7 and 8 i n d i c a t e o f a KS-analysis t o determine which of these  proportions are s i g n i f i c a n t . Table 15:  T o t a l Number of Terms i n Task S t a b i l i t y Levels Age 2  PRODUCTION:  COMPREHENSION:  Age 4  CORRECT  38  160  MIXED  22  18  INCORRECT  19  5  NONE  119  37  TOTAL:  198  220  CORRECT  95  197  NONE  103  23  TOTAL:  198  220  3.5.2 (a) Production S t a b i l i t y Levels Two-year-olds showed a d i s t r i b u t i o n different  significantly  from chance f o r s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s of p r o d u c t i o n .  Further a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h i s to be due to a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n o f scores i n the NONE production l e v e l and also s i g n i f i c a n t l y  low p r o p o r t i o n s i n both the MIXED and  INCORRECT production l e v e l s . was n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t .  The p r o p o r t i o n o f CORRECT use  A significantly different for four-year-olds.  distribution  was a l s o found  T h i s i n v o l v e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y low pro-  p o r t i o n s of MIXED and INCORRECT production,  as with the two-  y e a r - o l d s , and a l s o a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n of CORRECT use.  In t h i s age-group, the p r o p o r t i o n of NONE use  was n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t . 3.5.2 (b) Comprehension  S t a b i l i t y Levels  Two-year-olds showed no 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 p r o p o r t i o n s o f CORRECT as opposed to NONE comprehension. Four-year-olds,  on the other hand, showed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  high p r o p o r t i o n i n the CORRECT comprehension category and a s i g n i f i c a n t l y low p r o p o r t i o n i n the NONE l e v e l . 3.5.2 (c) Predominant Colours  i n Task S t a b i l i t y Levels  Again we can determine i f any p a r t i c u l a r c o l o u r s o r c o l o u r groups c o n t r i b u t e d s i g n i f i c a n t proportions to each of the s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s of production and comprehension. Individual  Colours  No i n d i v i d u a l c o l o u r c o n t r i b u t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t  proportion  of scores' t o any o f the production l e v e l s o r t o the comprehension l e v e l s .  This was true f o r both ages, as  shown i n Tables 16 to 18. Colour  Groups  For production  s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s , two-year-olds showed  two s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n s , that o f the primary group c o n t r i b u t i n g a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n o f INCORRECT  TABLE  16:  Colour Frequencies i n S t a b i l i t y o f P r o d u c t i o n f o r AGE 2  Levels _ _ _ _  CORRECT  MIXED  INCORRECT  BLUE  3  6  4  5  GREEN  1  3  4  10  RED  3  3  3  9  YELLOW  5  1  2  10  BLACK  0  0  2  16  WHITE  5  1  1  11  GREY  1  0  0  17  BROWN  1  3  1  13  PURPLE  4  0  2  12  ORANGE  9  3  0  6  PINK  6  2  0  10  38  22  TOTAL  NONE  119  19  critical value of d at  .05  CRITERION  .2206 ^12  o r —  .2899 =^8 o r —  .3120 ^8  or —  .1247 =^25 o r  —  TABLE  17:  Colour Frequencies i n S t a b i l i t y o f P r o d u c t i o n f o r AGE 4  CORRECT  MIXED  INCORRECT  Levels  NONE  BLUE  11  7  0  2  GREEN  17  1  0  2  RED  17  1  2  0  YELLOW  17  2  0  1  BLACK  16  2  0  2  WHITE  15  0  1  4  8  0  1  11  BROWN  14  2  0  4  PURPLE  13  0  0  7  ORANGE  16  1  1  2  PINK  16  2  0  2  18  5  37  GREY  • 160  TOTAL  critical of  value  d a t .05  CRITERION  .  .1075  ^ 3 2 o r --  .3205  ^7  or —  .6080  -^3 o r —  .223  =>12 o  98  TABLE  18:  Colour Frequencies i n S t a b i l i t y Levels o f C o m p r e h e n s i o n f o r AGE 2 a n d A G E 4  AGE 4  AGE 2  CORRECT  NONE  CORRECT  NONE  8  10  18  2  12  6  18  2  Red  4  14  19  1  Yellow  6  12  18  2.  Black  8  10  20  0  White  9  9  18  2  Grey  4  14  13  7  Brown  9  9  19  1  Purple  9  9  18  2  Orange  12  6  18  2  Pink  14  4  18  2  TOTAL  95  103  197  23  Blue Green  critical value o f d a t . 05  CRITERION  .1395  ^22  or —  1340  ^23  o r --  0712  ^32  o r 44  . 2857  ^9 o r  —  scores, and  of the non-primary  significantly  ( i i i ) group showing a  low p r o p o r t i o n of the INCORRECT scores.  In  a d d i t i o n , the non-primary group of purple, orange +pink showed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n of the CORRECT production  scores.  significant  Four-year-olds  level  low p r o p o r t i o n of the NONE  scores.  In the comprehension s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s , c o l o u r groups showed a s i g n i f i c a n t age. 3.6  none of these  proportion i n either  Appendices 9 to 12 show a l l of these  results.  Types of Colour L a b e l l i n g The  previous  particular  analyses  have focused  on the uses of  c o l o u r terms, whether to question  a s p e c i f i c term was The  one  p r o p o r t i o n , t h a t of the primary c o l o u r group  contributing a significantly production  showed only  used or how  how  s t a b l e t h a t use  frequently was.  s e c t i o n s to f o l l o w a l s o d e a l with term-usage, asking,  f o r example, what kinds of e r r o r s were made with a particular  term.  T h i s might be a u s e f u l p o i n t to focus on the colour sample i t s e l f .  Are there c e r t a i n c o l o u r s which w i l l never I  be grouped with  some other c o l o u r ( s ) under one c o l o u r - l a b e l  Are there at the same time, c o l o u r s which never seem to recognized This may  as deserving  a separate  label  suggest which.colours emerge e a r l i e s t as  l e x i c a l / c o n c e p t u a l c a t e g o r i e s — separate one  label  from other  and  that label  be  colours separate  i n that they have  i s not used f o r other  colours.  100.  3.6.1  Label-Types To' d e t e r m i n e  the  production  elicited  was  also  been  subject  used  any  be  one  the  at  to  actually a  was  be  most  the one  case  identity in later  involves  "no  The colour  of  frequencies  i n each  form  to  give  that  each notes  age  The  that  response  could  have  First  the  label  the  other  second  the  the  itself; third  as  colours  case,  label  known  with  The  given  was  a  or  will  possible  the  colour  no  be  called  here  used  "shared"  accuracy  this  which  even  be label  name a t a l l , a  "non"  label.  Label-Types of  each given  some n o t i o n  which  for  i f that  that  of  well,  label  what w i l l  are  entails.  any  i s where  i s concerned  having  in  response i t  data  see  shown. to  as  sections.  the  the  to  label.  colour  response",  Frequencies  given  the  of  label-types  common,  of  of  shown  samples.  "separate"  other  rest  colours  not  a  Neither  discussed  the  tasks:  least  actual  3.6.2  which  colour  sample  terms  examined  possible  of  colour  in  The  then  for other  for  label.  and  was  given  each  examined  subject.  three  appears  i.e.  each  are  during  the  was  There  might  for  task  from  particular  label-types,  of  Table  these  label-types  i n Figures the  19  proportions  of  10  to  proportions  of  indicates again were  15  for in  graph  total  the  found, s i g n i f i c a n t  each  response  frequencies in a  KS-  analysis. For the  any  subjects  given to  "shared"-label,  colour,  give and  i t a the  chance would "hon"-label,  remaining  third  predict a a  third a  to  third give  of i t a  "separate"-label.  101 TABLE  19: F r e q u e n c i e s  label-type  AGE 2  of Label-Types  2A  f o r Each AGE 4  2B  Colour  4A  4B  blue  separate shared non  4 10 4  2 2 3  11 8 1  0 5* 1  11* 3 0  green  separate shared non  2 10 6  1 2 4  17* 2* 1*  3 2 1  14* 0* 0*  red  separate shared non  5 7 6  0 3 4  5 4 2  17* 3* 0*  3 3 0  14* 0* 0*  yellow  separate shared non  6 6 6  0 2 5*  6 4 1  18* 2* 0*  4 2 0  14* 0* 0*  black  separate shared non  0* 14* 4  0 3 4  0 11* 0  16* 4 0*  4 2 0  12* 2 0*  white  separate shared non  6 6 6  1 2 4  5 4 2  16* 3* 1*  3 2 1  13* 1 0*  grey  separate shared non  3 6 9  0 1  3 5 3  11 5 4  0 2 4  11* 3 0*  brown  separate shared non  2 10 6  0 2 5*  5 1*  2 3 1  12* 2 0*  purple  separate shared non  4 7 7  0 2 5*  4 5 2  14* 3* 3*  1 2 3  13* 1 0*  orange  separate shared non  9 4 5  0 2 5*  9* 2 0  16* 3* 1*  3 2 1  13* 1 0*  pink  separate shared non  8 7 3  1 3 3  7 4 0  17* 3* 0*  5* 1 0  12* 2 0*  CRITERION:high low Number  sig. sig.  ^12 ^ 0  of subjects  18  6*  ^5  .  ^8  1  4  *  M3 ^ 3  11  20  --  ^  0 14  & Age  102,  FIGURE  10  :  Frequencies  of  Label-Types  at  AGE 2  III! s e p a r a t e l a b e l s mm s h a r e d l a b e l s non N =  label  18  0  1  10  5 i  i  i  i  i  >  i  i  -  i  i  15 i  i  i  18 i  i  i  i'  blue  green  red  Yellow  W//////////////////M  black  white  rn///////////////,  grey  ]//// / /// / / | ^ > ^ X C ^ V C - ^  1  brown  purple  'V'////////////,  orange  mmy/////////////////////////////> I  I  I  ••. \ \  I  I  - N -  -  \  \  \  \  i  10  15  18  FIGURE  11.:  Frequencies  ^  -  of Label-Types  separate shared non  N  =  blue 7V—rTTTT\*  green  red  yellow  black  white  v'/l\  N  grey  brown  purple  orange  pink I  0  label  label  7  7  label  a t AGE  2A  104.  FIGURE  12  :  Frequencies I  of Label-Types  HI/Iy/j  |\\\\\\\  = separate = shared = non  N  =  a t AGE  labels  labels  label  11  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  11 i  blue  green  V//}  red  yellow  black.  white  grey  W77777 \///////A  brown  PZ^'A\\\\\\^S:^\ V\-  purple  K/'//jz  N  orange ^ \ W \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ V  pink  / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ V-  5  11  2B  Table  13 :  Frequencies  o f Label-Types  ]jl I Ilk  = separate =  shared  a t AGE 4  labels  labels  = non l a b e l s  N = 20  5  10  15  20  i i i t  mmmmmsM  blue  WiiiiiiLliiiiiiiiiiUliiiiiir  green  Viiiiiilliii-liiilliliiiiii >iri:iiini  red  iiiiiiiinuiiiniiiiiiiiiMii  ^  Vi ml HU iii HI Milan 'in > una v/vV/'uh/MML  ellow  black  white  muin/imM  i:  v mm a •mmiiiiih h w \\\\\ !  Ill Mi ii llllH. :lliimi,^ > > \ \ :  •'///////////////////////.•  1  •im I Ml Hili •:%'•///// i II III/III III ill! H III :  :'/'  grey  •'HUM UIIIIIIIHIIIHIHIIili!;  brown  'HUH-I!'11IIIllll. Will III III///l//l/n% / ; 1  iIf I  1 1  f <  1 I >  ' • '  1  1  ilium  purple  wnaaanMrMamu  orange  'Will MllllllMIMIMMIM is •• Willi.' IIIiiiiiiiiin  pink  au'.ii/ N\\\\\ 'WHIM!! MMIMIMIMMIMI! aiaa III. (  i  t  l  5  1  '  Mil Mi '/',  i  t  I  I  10  15  20  Table  14 :  Frequencies of Label-Types  a t AGE 4A  = separate l a b e l s  N =  |  | = shared  labels  !  I= non l a b e l s  6 0 1  i  i  i  •  i  6  i  blue green  IMS/MM.  red yellow  Wit 7MMI 777777/  black white  MIlMM.  grey brown purple  mmmm  orange pink  nil \nrnTTiwi VI1 li II III IIII iii i I  0  I  I  I  I  I  1  6  107  Table  15 :  Frequencies  o f Label-Types  mm -  separate  = shared  a t AGE 4B  labels  labels  = non l a b e l s N = 14  5  9 ,  (  (  10 |  I  f  I  I  14  1  1  1  1  {  'WllllIlllllllllh'HillHil  blue  huh in ///7/7//I/////I///II7'  green  i  ! Hi ii II!!'.'III!-:  red  HIMI Mill UHUH /•• IHiiillllllillh  yellow  illlllllllllllllll IlillllHIIIIIIIIIIIlll.  black  'iiiiiiiHiiii/iHiiiiiii/Hinn/imm.  white  iiiiHiiiiihiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiim  grey  yiHiiiMniiiiHHniiiHiiiimmm HUM -MllllllllllllllilMIHIi  brown purple  \\\ Vlllili-'IIIIIUIIilllllilHIIilH  orange  'IlllHllllllUlllllllllilllilli! :!illM  pink  viiiiiiiiiiiiiiitiiiiiiiim iiimm.  1  :  i  0  i  i  i  i  i  5  \  i  i  i  i  10  i  i  i  14  108 .  3.6.2  (a) In  which in  Label-Types  two-year-olds,  showed  black,  a  this  having  a  labels  labels.  Dividing this  2B  some m o r e  shows In  Age  distribution  d i f f e r e n c e from  significantly  significantly age-group  of  label-types  chance  was  low p r o p o r t i o n  high  into  proportion  found of  of  i t s sub-groups  shared  2A a n d  differences.  yellow,brown,purple,orange,  distributions  significantly  none  and a  2A,  significant  the only  significant  separate  other  i n Two-Year-Olds  high  of label-types,  proportion  proportions  f o r these  of the remaining  o f no  were  showed  any  showed  a l l having  labels.  colours  colours  and grey  a  None o f t h e  significant  and  significant  proportions. In high in  Age  2B,  proportions  Age  2A,  shared  the only  separate 3.6.2  (b)  while  labels.  significantly was  o f no  yellow,grey  proportions, of  none o f t h e c o l o u r s  high colour  labels.  and p u r p l e  brown  now  mentioned  h a v e no  has a s i g n i f i c a n t l y and b l a c k  proportion's  of this  significant high  also  proportion  showed  label-type.  a significantly  Label-Types  Orange  high  proportion  of  significant  of  i n Four-Year-Olds  showed  a large  differences.  The d i s t r i b u t i o n s ,  significantly  from  Of  the colours  Blue,green  with  significantly  labels.  Four-year-olds  grey.  Of  showed  these,  chance  blue  number  of label-types  f o r a l l colours  d i d show a  differed  except  significantly  blue  low  and  proportion  109.  of  s u b j e c t s g i v i n g i t no l a b e l ,  s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n s at significantly  b u t g r e y showed no  all.  Seven c o l o u r s  high proportions of  showed  separate l a b e l s ,  w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t l y low p r o p o r t i o n s of both shared of  no l a b e l p r o p o r t i o n s  pink).  together labels  (green,red,yellow,white,purple,orange,  The r e m a i n i n g c o l o u r s — b l a c k and b r o w n - - a l s o  high proportions of  separate labels  p r o p o r t i o n s o f no l a b e l s ,  and  showed  and s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o w  but t h a t of  shared  labels  was  non-significant. The s u b - g r o u p s showed g r e a t d i f f e r e n c e s to each o t h e r . different  when compared  Age 4A showed o n l y two s i g n i f i c a n t l y  d i s t r i b u t i o n s , a l t h o u g h a g a i n we c a n n o t  w h e t h e r any s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o w p r o p o r t i o n s e x i s t . showed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f p i n k showed a h i g h p r o p o r t i o n o f  shared  separate l a b e l s .  t h e o t h e r p r o p o r t i o n s were s i g n i f i c a n t .  determine Blue labels  while  None o f  Age 4B, h o w e v e r ,  showed a l l c o l o u r s t o have s i g n i f i c a n t d i s t r i b u t i o n s . A l l except  green,red  labels  w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t l y l o w p r o p o r t i o n s o f no l a b e l s ,  the p r o p o r t i o n of  and y e l l o w had h i g h p r o p o r t i o n s o f  shared  labels  r e d and y e l l o w gave t h e r e s u l t s significantly ficantly  while  was n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t .  Green,  one w o u l d e x p e c t  adults:  high proportions of  low p r o p o r t i o n s of  separate  separate labels  s h a r e d and no l a b e l  from  and s i g n i types.  110. We  have now  colour-naming  looked at s e v e r a l aspects of general  behavior, as determined  comprehension and production t a s k s .  by performance i n the We  might now  focus i n  p a r t i c u l a r on the e r r o r s made, hoping f o r some i n s i g h t s i n t o the l e x i c a l c a t e g o r i e s and/or s t r a t e g i e s used at these ages. For example, do the types of e r r o r s and the- d i s t r i b u t i o n of such e r r o r s vary between two-year-olds or between the tasks?  and f o u r - y e a r - o l d s ,  Further, are there c e r t a i n c o l o u r s or  c o l o u r terms which tend to produce e r r o r s more o f t e n than others?  A c l o s e look a t production e r r o r s or  overextensions  i s a l s o i n order, asking whether these r e v e a l any naming s t r a t e g i e s or p a t t e r n s of colour-naming  behavior.  Tables 20 to 23 i n d i c a t e Confusion Matrices f o r both ages and both tasks of comprehension and production.  These  w i l l be r e f e r r e d to i n the f o l l o w i n g analyses and allow a more complete p i c t u r e of the types of responses  made f o r  each c o l o u r stimulus, t h i s being a c o l o u r term i n the comprehension task and a c o l o u r sample i n the production. The columns and rows of t o t a l s of c e r t a i n types of  response  w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n the a p p r o p r i a t e s e c t i o n s . 3.7  Matching E r r o r s of D i s c r i m i n a t i o n Before beginning an a n a l y s i s of e r r o r s made, however,  it  i s necessary to ensure that these were not p e r c e p t u a l or  matching e r r o r s . catch any  The purpose of the matching task was  such problems i n d i s c r i m i n a t i o n between these  eleven stimulus c o l o u r s .  to  TABLE  20  :  Confusion Matrix  f o r P r o d u c t i o n a t AGE 2  stimulus  number t i m e s incorrectly  response  blu:gre:red:yel:bla:whi:gry:bro:pur:ora:pin: BLUE GREEN RED YELLOW BLACK WHITE GREY BROWN PURPLE ORANGE PINK total errors made number o f no r e s p o n s e s  3 2 1  1 1 1 1 1  3  10  1  7 4  8 2 4 0  1 1  1 1 12  11  chosen  6 3 2 2  TABLE  21  :  Confusion Matrix  f o r P r o d u c t i o n a t AGE 4  stimulus response  BLUE GREEN RED YELLOW BLACK WHITE GREY BROWN PURPLE ORANGE PINK total 'errors made number o f no r e s p o n s e s  number t i m e s incorrectly blu:gre:red:yel:bla:whi:gry:bro:pur:ora:pin: chosen 1  18 18  1  18 19  18 15 16 13 17 18  1  0  1  * other responses  1  2  1 0  2 0  3 0  *7 1  4  2 1  w e r e PEACH, GOLD, S I L V E R  3 4  2 1  (1 e a c h )  1 0  6 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 0 2 2  TABLE  22  :  Confusion Matrix  f o r Comprehension  a t AGE  2  stimulus response  blue green red yellow black white grey brown purple orange pink total errors made number o f no r e s p o n s e s  number t i m e s incorrectly chosen BLU : GRE:RED : Y E L :B L A r W H I : GRY :BRO: PUR :ORA : P I N : 8 2  3 2  1  12 2  2 4 4 1  3 1  2 2 1 6  3 1 1  1  12  11  1  3  4  1 9  9  2 1  1  14  1 5 8  1  1  1 1 1 1 1  10 12 7 4 6 7 7  2 1  1 8 1 2 2  1  1 4  1 2 1 9  2 1  1 12  1 1  2  TABLE  23 :  Confusion Matrix  f o r Comprehension  a t AGE 4  stimulus response  blue green red yellow black white grey brown purple orange pink total errors made number o f no r e s p o n s e s  number t i m e s incorrectly : BLU:GRE:RED:YEL:BLA:WHI:GRY:BRO:PUR:ORA:PIN: c h o s e n 1 1 0  18 18 19  2  18  1  20 18 13 1  19 1  18 18 18  4 0 3 0 3 3 1 2  115.  There matching  was a t o t a l  task,  two-year-olds  o f 22 m i s m a t c h e s  18 o f w h i c h  were  different.  made  any matching  of  t h e e r r o r s made b y t w o - y e a r - o l d s  at  matching  next  attempts  also the  t h e samples  the point  reflected  o f view  as an e r r o r  48 production  errors  the  a perceptual two c o l o u r s  We  each  cases.  This  one s u b j e c t  samples  and a l s o  seven  definitely of  other.  other  3.8  of Errors  The. p r e v i o u s i n both  right  responses  both  o f them  BLUE  e r r o r s were  problem.  simply  mismatched  samples  perceptual  responses  only  results  and t h e l a c k  a l l correct. errors  task,  have  five or  that  based  distin-  i n one o f and  these  purple  however, she  and these  errors.  i f this  be u s e d f o r  the black BLUE;  were  been  would  occurred  considered  were  production  o r wrong.  were  perceptually  as w e l l  not perceptually-based  the matching  Types  This  were  given, the  naming  label  attempt  instructions  expect,however,  t h e same  one e r r o r ;  the f i r s t  i n the matching  are not being  from  named  matches  o f which  would  guished  named  When  i n Age 2 m i g h t  problem, which  were  of the  e r r o r s . Many  demonstration  and t h e remaining  perceptually-based. is  together.  o r v a r i e d and another  From  Four  made no e r r o r s a n d t e n made o n l y  none o f t h e f o u r - y e a r - o l d s  repeated  i n a l l i nthe  were,  Therefore  none  representative of a  on a system  and comprehension  Wrong a n s w e r s  included  o f any r e s p o n s e  at all.  of scoring  tasks both  as incorrect  While  this  116.  was  adequate  comparison  f o r determining orders of accuracy, the  of these two types of e r r o r s might a l s o prove  e n l i g h t e n i n g . We have already found, f o r example, that  two-  year-olds produced more e r r o r s than f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . Does this s t i l l  apply when we d i v i d e these e r r o r s i n t o  responses and "no  "incorrect"  responses"?  Rank orders were obtained f o r the c o l o u r terms and c o l o u r samples which had the most i n c o r r e c t response and the most "no response" r e a c t i o n . 24 and 25 r e s p e c t i v e l y .  These are i n d i c a t e d i n Tables  In the rank orders of " i n c o r r e c t "  responses i n comprehension,  f o r example, RED was  the c o l o u r  term stimulus which most o f t e n r e s u l t e d i n an i n c o r r e c t sample being chosen by two-year-olds, while i n p r o d u c t i o n the black c o l o u r sample was incorrectly.  the one most o f t e n named  In the rank orders of "no response" grey  was  the c o l o u r sample which r e c e i v e d the most blank s t a r e s and head-shaking 3.8.1  i n both  age-groups.  Rank Order C o r r e l a t i o n s These rank orders were then c o r r e l a t e d with each other,  u s i n g the Kendall's tau c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t ; Appendix 13 i n d i c a t e s the tau values obtained. For orders of number of i n c o r r e c t response, no c o r r e l a t i o n e x i s t e d between the two ages i n e i t h e r task or between the two tasks i n e i t h e r age.  For orders of number  of "no response", no s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n was between the two groups.  found  A significant correlation existed  117.  TABLE  24:  Rank Orders of E r r o r s - I n c o r r e c t Responses and Frequencies of E r r o r s f o r Both Ages & Tasks  Comprehension: number of times i n c o r r e c t sample chosen Production: number of times sample named i n c o r r e c t l y Comprehension AGE 4  AGE 2 red yellow blue white brown purple black grey orange pink green  grey blue yellow purple orange green white brown pink red black  12 11 8 8 7 7 6 6 4 4 2  6 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0 0  Production AGE 4  AGE 2 black grey pink purple green brown blue red yellow white orange  11 6 5 5 5 4 4 3 2 2 1  grey purple white black red brown orange blue yellow pink green  7 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 0  118 .  TABLE  Both  25:  tasks:  R a n k O r d e r s o f "no r e s p o n s e s " a n d F r e q u e n c i e s f o r Each C o l o u r a t Both Ages and Tasks number  o f times  no  response  given  Comprehens i o n AGE grey black green blue red brown purple orange yellow white pink  2  AGE  4 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0  green red white grey pink blue black brown purple orange yellow  8 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 0  Production AGE grey purple green red yellow white brown blue orange black pink  AGE  2 9 7 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 3  grey purple blue green white brown orange red yellow black pink  4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0  119 .  in  the production task  looking are  a t the rank  dominant  would  weigh  however: t h i s  orders  i n both  themselves.  and t h e l a r g e  o u t any o t h e r  c a n be  possible  s e e n by-  Grey  number  and p u r p l e  of ties  differences  i n rank  between the  two o r d e r s . A to  further  comparison  n u m b e r 'of "no r e s p o n s e "  within This in  each  was  task  13.  That  an i n c o r r e c t  the  greatest  number  All  o t h e r o r d e r s were  response  orders within o n l y one  i n the four-year-olds'  Appendix  received  revealed  i n incorrect  group  significant  orders and  correlation.  p r o d u c t i o n o r d e r s , as  i s , the colour response  each  rank  was  sample  also  o f "no r e s p o n s e s " , significantly  which  t h e one i n this  different  shown  most  often  receiving case  from  grey. each  other. 3.8.2  Performance Table  of  26  errors,  responses with  as w e l l f o r both  variables  differences each' t y p e a  i n Error-Type  the average  number  a s t h e number  o f these  of correct  two  and  total  An a n a l y s i s  of variance  o f age and t a s k  (2x2) showed  significant  types,  o f response  than  two-year-olds  four-year-olds.  There  was  i n t h e number  o f "no  production task producing  significantly  more  Appendix  than 14.  the comprehension.  The  age  p r o d u c i n g more o f  task difference  responses  types  age g r o u p s .  i n both  significant  the  shows  Variables  summary  also  responses",  such  table  i sin  120.  Table 26:  Average Frequencies of C o r r e c t , and No Responses AGE Comp.  2  Incorrect  Prod.  AGE 4 Prod. Comp.  Correct  5 .34  3 .33  9.85  8 .95  Incorrect  4 .16  4.28  0.90  1.4 5  9.50  7.61  10.75  10.40  1.55  3.39  0.25  0.65  Total No response  D i s t r i b u t i o n of E r r o r s  3.8.3  Kolmogorov-Smirnoff  analyses were done to determine  i f the number of i n c o r r e c t responses are d i s t r i b u t e d randomly  amongst the eleven c o l o u r s and i f not, do some  c o l o u r s or c o l o u r terms tend to produce more, i n c o r r e c t responses than others? each c o l o u r  The expected number of e r r o r s f o r  (term) would- be one-eleventh of the t o t a l number  of i n c o r r e c t responses i n t h a t task, or a p r o p o r t i o n o f .091. In p r o d u c t i o n , two-year-olds produced a t o t a l o f 4 8 e r r o r s while f o u r - y e a r - o l d s showed 24, e r r o r s here being a sample named i n c o r r e c t l y . was  The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f these e r r o r s  s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from what chance would p r e d i c t  f o r two-year-olds, but not f o r f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . errors  Comprehension  (an i n c o r r e c t sample chosen) a l s o showed a s i g n i f i -  c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r the two-year-olds 75 e r r o r s , but not f o r the 18 e r r o r s produced by f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . To determine which c o l o u r s or colour terms  contributed  to these d i f f e r e n c e s i n two-year-olds, further. KS-analyses  1  were  done.  3.8.3  (a) The  the  Error first  uneven  made o n  a n a l y s e s used  error  the Are  than  would  one  more  Instead and  expect  of  group  with  made  by  going and  compared  colours  errors  through  comparing  each  large  or  very  small proportion  These  can  columns or  the  i n the  KS-analysis in  In the  number a  19  48  errors  colour of  evenly  it the  made,  But  differ  (term)  appeared  of  looking  errors at the  shown  i n the  of  of  f o r exampl<  each  errors  to  have  were  a  the  very  examined.  "Total  Errors  i n Tables  i n Table  top  for  to  24.  20  Made  to  The  rows marked  almost  twice  as  23,  actual  "top  rank"  almost  the  K S - a n a l y s i s found The  three times  remaining  eleven  much a s  and  errors  so  between  i t i s hard  by  Although  significantly  difference  three,  errors  the this  errors  the  of second  expected t o be  were  not  fairly  distributed.  distribution.  to  A,  production, black carried  proportion.  Comprehension even  of  20.  (grey),  errors.  significant  by  appear  and  for  number  colour  colour  which  Errors"  two-year-olds  total  ranking  colours  of  results  Appendices  total  C o n f u s i o n M a t r i c e s shown  "Rank O r d e r  cause  number  i t s proportion  those  determined  the  the  chance?  only  be  the  i n naming  remainder, a  Colours  in pinpointing  distribution  individual  errors.  task  Proportions for Individual  any  two-year-olds our  from two  earlier that  ranks  to determine  showed  analysis  expected was  which  never single  by  a  fairly  indicated chance,  more  than  colour  may  122 . have c o n t r i b u t e d t h i s d i f f e r e n c e .  A comparison  of the  top ranking c o l o u r RED versus the balance of e r r o r s confirmed RED to have no s i g n i f i c a n t number o f e r r o r s . Four-year-olds seemed t o show grey as having a s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e number o f e r r o r s i n both p r o d u c t i o n (7/24) and comprehension  (6/18).  But again  KS-analyses  found these p r o p o r t i o n s t o be n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t . 3.8.3  (b) E r r o r P r o p o r t i o n s f o r Colour Groups  Primary, Non-primary and Achromatic  Groups  The second a n a l y s i s compared the p r o p o r t i o n s of e r r o r s found i n v a r i o u s groups of c o l o u r s , f i r s t of primary, non-primary  f o c u s i n g on groups  and achromatic c o l o u r s .  Are s i g n i -  f i c a n t l y more e r r o r s made among, say, achromatics than i n the remaining c o l o u r samples or terms? Table 2 7 shows the v a r i o u s groups t h a t were examined; these are the same as those used i n the e a r l i e r S e c t i o n 3.3.3. Table 27: P o s s i b l e Colour Groups and Expected P r o p o r t i o n s .2727 Achromatic: ( i ) black,white,grey black,white,grey,brown .3636 (ii) .1818 ( i i i ) black,white .3636 Non-primary: (i) purple,orange,pink,brown purple,orange,pink .2121 (ii) ( i i i ) purple,orange,pink,brown,grey.4545 blue,green,red,yellow .3636 Primary: Table 27 a l s o i n d i c a t e s the p r o p o r t i o n o f e r r o r s that would be expected i n each of these c o l o u r groups on the b a s i s o f chance.  For example, i f e r r o r s are d i s t r i b u t e d  randomly among the eleven c o l o u r s , we expect  .3636 or  123.  four-elevenths say  the primary The  groups  to each  produced  others.  Each  of errors  other  errors. had  group  i n each  chosen  colours,  t o see which  t o any d i f f e r e n c e s  large  o r small  than the  t o t h e number  o f these three  groups  was  i n the distribution  15 t o 18 show t h a t  a significantly  errors  compared  found  first  i f any o f these  more o r f e w e r  c o l o u r - g r o u p was t h e n  Appendices  c o l o u r - g r o u p was  to determine  significantly  remaining errors  contributing  t o o c c u r on any f o u r  colours.  proportion  compared  of  o f them  none o f t h e s e  proportion  of  groups  of the total  errors. Other  Colour Colour  were  Groups groupings as i n d i c a t e d  then tested  on  groups  of  t h e rank  first  i n t h e same w a y .  orders,  increasing  non-significant ranks, this  four  colours.  errors  three (top  group:  appear  production  and  more  than  e t c . i n each u n t i l the  Because o f two,three o r  i n Appendices  showed  done  19 a n d 2 0 .  significant  proportions  ranks).  black+grey+pink+purple+green+brown+blue Comprehension  showed o n l y  RED+YELLOW+BLUE+WHITE+BROWN+PURPLE  Four-year-olds' at  size  orders  i n two g r o u p s : b l a c k + g r e y + p i n k + p u r p l e + g r e e n ( t o p  ranks) four  t h e group  included  The r e s u l t s  Two-year-old's  top four,  g r o u p i n g was r e a c h e d .  usually  rank  K S - a n a l y s e s were  o f t h e t o p two, t o p t h r e e ,  tied  of  by t h e a c t u a l  production  a l l , although t h e group  significance.  showed  i n this  significant  (topfour  ranks).  no s i g n i f i c a n t  grey+purple+white  Comprehension  one  groups  approached  age-group  d i d show a  124 .  significant (top  grouping o f GREY+BLUE+YELLOW+PURPLE+ORANGE  two r a n k s ) .  3.8.4  Distribution The  o f "No Responses"  same s e r i e s of analyses were then a p p l i e d to the  number o f "no responses", distribution  again to determine i f t h e i r  was random across the eleven c o l o u r s and i f  not, where the s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e o r small p r o p o r t i o n s occurred.  The expected  number of "no response"  c o l o u r or c o l o u r term would be one-eleventh number of "no responses"  distribution  o f two-year-olds,  o f the f o u r - y e a r - o l d s ' 13.  showed the opposite r e s u l t s , year-olds 28 d i f f e r i n g  o f the t o t a l  f o r that age-group and task.  The production task showed a random of the 61 "no responses"  f o r each  distribution but a non-random Comprehension  with d i s t r i b u t i o n  significantly  o f the two-  from chance, while  that o f the f o u r - y e a r - o l d s ' 5 d i d not. 3.8.4  (a) Proportions f o r I n d i v i d u a l Colours The h i g h e s t ranking c o l o u r  compared to the remaining of  "no responses"  (term) f o r each order was  c o l o u r s to see i f i t s p r o p o r t i o n  was s i g n i f i c a n t .  In two-year-olds'  production, grey produced nine of the t o t a l 61 such  responses.  Comprehension showed GREY a l s o as the highest ranking a t e i g h t out o f 28, t h i s being twice the amount shown by the next ranking c o l o u r term of the t o t a l  (BLACK+GREEN), and almost a t h i r d  (28) "no responses".  However, n e i t h e r o f these  p r o p o r t i o n s proved to be s i g n i f i c a n t  i n a KS-analysis,  shown  125.  in  Appendix For  four  24.  four-year-olds'  of  the  total  13  "no  remaining  number,  3.8.4  Proportions  (b)  Primary,  colours  achromatic, the or  small.  none o f The  A  other  analysis  these  to  are  Colour  each  as  Section  top  have  were  was  of  to  colours  three to  these  of  determine  i f  large  colour-groups  with  proportions.  Moreover,  the  colours  remaining  i n e i t h e r age  21  groups  significantly  to  or  an  found  either  task.  23.  further tested top  done w i t h  for  did, a  three  Analyzing production  each  significant  i n the  i n any  Comprehension  the  i n t o the  these  group  proportion.  Groups  primary  of  significant  the  two, the  top  i n terms  three,  of  the  etc.  ranks  of  errors  distribution  of  3.8.3.  proportions  in  divided  and  each  was  Production  to  a  to  Groups  significant  orders  found  order,  be  showed  Groups  rank  ranks)  then  i n Appendices  proportions  in  no  be  to  each  When c o m p a r e d  Achromatic  comparison  comparing  The  and  i n either of  showed  results  Other  proved  for Colour  were  grey+purple  responses'" .  non-primary  proportions  each  this  Non-Primary  The  production,  of  the  rank  however,  ranks top  no  no  significant  groupings  of  colours.  GREY+BLACK+GREEN  proportion,  longer  two  include  showed  show  significant  the  would  two-year-olds  ranks  a l l the  showed for "no  although such  a  (top the  two colours  significance.  four-year-olds' responses"  made,  since  126. there were only two ranks.  S i m i l a r l y with the comprehension  r e s u l t s f o r t h i s age-group, there are not enough scores or ranks to warrant an a n a l y s i s . 3.9  Overextensions - I n c o r r e c t Uses of Terms and Samples We have examined now two d i f f e r e n t kinds of e r r o r s — -  an i n c o r r e c t response and a lack o f response to a c o l o u r term o r sample.  The focus now switches to examine those  terms o r samples t h a t were used i n c o r r e c t l y . Table 28 i n d i c a t e s the rank orders i n production o f the terms most o f t e n used i n c o r r e c t l y and i n comprehension o f the samples i n d i c a t e d most o f t e n i n c o r r e c t l y .  Thus, f o r two-year-olds  BLUE was the term used most o f t e n to name a sample incorrectly.  These f i g u r e s can a l s o be seen by l o o k i n g  a t the "number times i n c o r r e c t l y chosen" columns i n the Confusion Matrices i n Tables 20 to 23. A rank order comparison using Kendall's t a u i n d i c a t e d t h a t none o f these orders c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with each other, e i t h e r when comparing the two tasks w i t h i n each age or when comparing the two ages w i t h i n each task. value a r e i n d i c a t e d i n Appendix 3.9.1  These  25.  D i s t r i b u t i o n of I n c o r r e c t Uses A Kolmogorov-Smirnoff a n a l y s i s found that the  d i s t r i b u t i o n of terms and c o l o u r s used i n c o r r e c t l y by twoy e a r - o l d s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from that expected by chance i n production, but not i n comprehension.  For four-  year-olds the reverse occurred; d i s t r i b u t i o n was random i n  TABLE  28:  Rank O r d e r s o f I n c o r r e c t i n Both Tasks '  Comprehension: Production:  number  number  o f times  o f times  Uses  sample  name u s e d  f o r Both .  indicated  incorrectly  incorrectly  Comprehension AGE green blue brown pink white grey red black orange yellow purple  2  AGE  4 4 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 0  yellow white brown purple pink orange blue green red black grey  12 10 8 8 7 7 7 6 5 4 1  Production AGE blue green red brown yellow white purple black orange pink grey  2  AGE 10 8 7 6 4 4 3 2 2 2 0  blue black yellow brown orange pink green red white grey purple  Ages  4 6 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0  128.  production  but d i f f e r e d  Several colours This  further  or colour  significantly  a n a l y s e s were  groups  in  done  contributed  i s t h e same a p p r o a c h  as used  comprehension.  to determine  to these  which  differences.  i n Sections  3.8.3  and  3.8.4. 3.9.1  (a) P r o p o r t i o n s The  ranking by  proportion colour  of incorrect  or colour  a s c a n be  shown  i n Appendices  3.9.1  (b) P r o p o r t i o n s  Primary, The were  groups  isolated  compared  t o 29 For  top  section  regardless were  used.  remaining tions not  compared  showed  significantly  27  o f Appendix  proportions The  o f which  groups  Comparing  and p r i m a r y  of incorrect  here,  and  as  Appendices  the d i s t r i b u t i o n  chance  expectation.  indicates,  this  of achromatic  the proportion  of incorrect  But t h a t  were  same e x p e c t e d p r o p o r t i o n s  uses  was  i n each  showed  i n the group  was  As t h e  true  and n o n - p r i m a r i e s age  that  i n any o f t h e a c h r o m a t i c and non-primary  significant.  uses  colours  of the KS-analyses.  from 26  calculations  Groups  are applicable  different  high  Groups  and A c h r o m a t i c  other.  contributed  31.  f o r Colour  the r e s u l t s  number  a  highest  to that  i n the "top rank"  two-year-olds' production,  significantly  i n the  o f achromatic, non-primary  i n Table show  and  and t h e i r  to each  indicated  seen  30  Non-Primary  None  Colours  uses  t e r m was  the remaining colours.  proportion,  26  for Individual  to the  the proporgroups  of primary  was  colours  129.  was  a significant  proportion  None o f t h e a n a l y s e s olds  production,  1  significant Other  Colour Further  then to  testing ranks,  are tabulated  the groups  year-olds ranks. not  i t only  Only  rank,  A l l of  30 a n d 3 1 . four  ranks),  such  significant  and those  t h e t o p two r a n k s  top ranking  ranks), f o rthe top (BLUE+GREEN)  B L U E d i d n o t show  even  the lowest  low p r o p o r t i o n  uses.  ranking  purple d i d  of incorrect  showed  two  (top three  ranks)  uses,  75.  significant  f o ryellow+white+brown+purple 18, a n d t h a t  i n two-  i n any o f t h e  c o n t r i b u t e d one o f t h e t o t a l  13 o f t h e t o t a l  +brown+purple+pink  and comprehension  proportions  i n four-year-olds  proportions—that  incorrect  four  no s i g n i f i c a n t  For the latter,  with  significant.  showed  i n four-year-olds  Comprehension  ranks)  were  o f BLUE+GREEN+RED ( t o p t h r e e (top  ranks,  proportions.  showed  though  o f t h e t o p two  a n d down t o t h e p e n u l t i m a t e  production  show a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  even  groups  groups  the afore-mentioned  Production  18  etc.  and t o p s i xranks.  significant  a g e s — s h o w e d any  colour.groups.  i n Appendices  BLUE+GREEN+RED+BROWN  and  i n these  examined  Two-year-olds'  five  i n both  sets--four-year-  Groups  see i f any o f these  groups:  f o rthe remaining  comprehension  proportions  top three  these  of the t o t a l .  ( t o p two  f o r yellow+white+  with  15 o f t h e t o t a l  130. 3.9.2  A C l o s e r Look a t Production Overextensions The previous a n a l y s i s determined whether any i n d i v i d u a l  c o l o u r s or c o l o u r groups showed a high or low tendency to be overextended i n use.  This was done with group scores and  thus only shows which terms were misused the most by each age-group  as a whole.  This hides the p o s s i b i l i t y that a  high rank may be due to e x c e s s i v e use by a very small number of  s u b j e c t s and i s t h e r e f o r e not t r u l y  representative.  Table 29 thus i n d i c a t e s the number o f s u b j e c t s who overextended a term a t l e a s t once ( f i r s t column i n each agegroup) .  A l s o shown i s the range o f c o l o u r samples  term was overextended t o .  In  that each  two-year-olds, f o r example,  BLUE was used f o r a l l the eleven c o l o u r samples, while GREY was overextended to none. 3.9.2  (a)  I n d i v i d u a l Colour Terms  The d i f f e r e n c e s between the number o f overextensions f o r each term i n the two-year-olds were not enough to c l a i m any one c o l o u r as producing s i g n i f i c a n t l y more or fewer than the others.  However, BLUE d i d have the l a r g e s t number of both  subjects who overextended i t and o f c o l o u r s extended t o , even i f n e i t h e r was  significant.  BLUE a l s o ranked h i g h e s t i n the f o u r - y e a r - o l d s , but t h i s was s i g n i f i c a n t o n l y i n the number of samples  i t was extended  to. 3.9.2  (b) Colour Groups Examining each of these columns i n terms of the c a t e g o r i e s  of primary, non-primary  and achromatic c o l o u r s , the group of  131.  TAB LE  2 9:  Frequencies f o r Overextended Terms  AGE 4  AGE 2  number o f subjects  number o f colours extended to  number o f subjects  number o f colours extended to  10  11  7  8  GREEN  7  7  1  1  RED  6  7  1  1  YELLOW  3  4  2  2  BLACK  2  2  2  2  WHITE  2  3  1  1  GREY  0  0  1  1  BROWN  4  4  2  1  PURPLE  2  3  0  0  ORANGE  3  4  2  2  PINK  2  2  1  1  BLUE  132.  primary c o l o u r s BLUE, GREEN and RED top of both i n the two-year-olds.  c e r t a i n l y ranked at the The achromatics WHITE,  BLACK and GREY, on the other hand, ranked at the bottom f o r both a s p e c t s . The f o u r - y e a r - o l d s showed none of these groups to be a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t o r to the ranking o r d e r s . 3.9.3  S t a b i l i t y Levels of Overextended Overextended  Terms  terms were f u r t h e r graded as to t h e i r  r e l a t i v e s t a b i l i t y , to determine,  f o r example, whether a  s u b j e c t w i l l tend to overextend a term that he a l s o does not understand c o r r e c t l y .  Such terms a u t o m a t i c a l l y f a l l  i n t o the UNSTABLE category used i n S e c t i o n 3.5. category i s now  f u r t h e r d i v i d e d i n t o four l e v e l s :  c o r r e c t use and c o r r e c t comprehension, use and no comprehension, comprehension,  and  This (l)some  (2) some c o r r e c t  (3) o n l y i n c o r r e c t use and c o r r e c t  (4) only i n c o r r e c t use and no  comprehension.  Table 30 i n d i c a t e s the number and p r o p o r t i o n s of overextended  terms i n each' of the UNSTABLE l e v e l s f o r the two  age-groups.  For example, of the 7.7 overextensions by  two-  y e a r - o l d s , 13 of them (16.8%) were produced by s u b j e c t s who showed c o r r e c t comprehension  and both c o r r e c t and  incorrect  usage of the terms i n q u e s t i o n . KS-analyses  ,  showed that f o r the two-year-olds, a  s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n of examples occurred i n the second l e v e l , then followed by the l a s t l e v e l ; these are those l e v e l s i n d i c a t i n g no comprehension.  The frequencies  133  TABLE  code:  30:  Stability  levels  of  Levels  o f Overextended  Terms  stability  (1) some c o r r e c t u s e , c o r r e c t comprehension (2) some c o r r e c t u s e , no c o m p r e h e n s i o n (3) o n l y i n c o r r e c t u s e , c o r r e c t comprehension (4) o n l y i n c o r r e c t u s e , n o c o m p r e h e n s i o n  AGE  AGE  2:  4:  N=  N=  77, c r i t i c a l  value  of d at  .05 = d  f  prop.  (1) :  13  .1688  -.0812  (2) :  35  .4545  .2045  (3) :  12  .1558  -.0942  (4) :  17  .2207  -.0293  26, c r i t i c a l  value  prop.  f  (1) :  20  (2) :  3  (3) :  1  (4) :  2  of d at  . 7699 .1155 .  .1549  .05 =  d  .5199 -.1345  .0388  -.2112  . 0777  -.1723  .2667  134.  o c c u r r i n g i n the f i r s t and t h i r d l e v e l s , where comprehension  i s c o r r e c t , were almost equal to each other  and lower than the 25% expected by chance, although not significantly. The f o u r - y e a r - o l d s showed a somewhat d i f f e r e n t distribution.  Here 77% of the overextended examples  appeared i n the f i r s t l e v e l — proportion. was  a significantly  large  The number of examples i n the remaining l e v e l s  f a r lower than that expected by chance, but not q u i t e  s i g n i f i c a n t l y so. 3.10  A p p l i c a t i o n of Overextensions Now  that we have examined overextended terms, we can  focus on the c o l o u r samples t h a t those terms were overextended t o .  E a r l i e r analyses determined which c o l o u r s or  c o l o u r groups, i f any, were named more o f t e n than o t h e r s (Section 3 . 8 . 3 ) . the  incorrectly  Are they so named because  subject does not have the c o r r e c t name i n h i s voca-  bulary? And i f so, are there c o n s i s t e n c i e s i n which name i s chosen f o r a p a r t i c u l a r colour?  This a n a l y s i s w i l l  also  e l a b o r a t e on the c h a r a c t e r of those c o l o u r s with SHARED l a b e l s noted i n the S e c t i o n 3.6. 3.10.1  E x i s t e n c e of C o r r e c t Terms i n Vocabulary  Two-year-olds  showed only 12 of the t o t a l 77 overextended  terms to have the c o r r e c t term a v a i l a b l e . 85%  For the remaining  the subject d i d not show any use o f the c o r r e c t term f o r  135.  t h a t sample.  When t h i s group was s p l i t i n t o the sub-groups  2A and 2B, the former showed only one case where the c o r r e c t term was known out of 23 overextensions, sub-group showed eleven out of 54 In the f o u r - y e a r - o l d s ,  only  while the l a t t e r  overextensions. 7% o r two of the 27 cases  showed the existence of the c o r r e c t term i n t h e i r vocabulary. 3.10.2 A n a l y s i s of E r r o r P a i r s to Determine L e x i c a l  Categories  In l o o k i n g f o r c o n s i s t e n c i e s i n which c o l o u r terms are ( i n c o r r e c t l y ) a p p l i e d to c e r t a i n colour samples, we are hoping a l s o f o r an i n d i c a t i o n of what s t r a t e g y , i f any, i s being used i n t h i s naming process.  Does a c h i l d , f o r example,  pick a term which i s p h o n o l o g i c a l l y , p e r c e p t u a l l y or c o n t e x t u a l l y c l o s e to the target? An a n a l y s i s of e r r o r s would a l s o r e v e a l the l e x i c a l and p o s s i b l y the conceptual c a t e g o r i e s he i s working with a t t h i s stage i n colour-term development; are these the same as an adult's? There are s e v e r a l p o s s i b l e ways of examining t h i s and only one i s attempted here. as  This i n v o l v e s t r e a t i n g e r r o r s  " p a i r s " , then c l a s s i f y i n g them i n terms of perceptual  s i m i l a r i t i e s to see i f the c a t e g o r i e s of s a t u r a t i o n , hue (adjacency) and brightness lexical  are v i a b l e i n the c h i l d ' s  system.  3.10.2 (a) A n a l y s i s of Label/Sample P a i r s B a r t l e t t ' s approach to a n a l y z i n g e r r o r s was to consider  the i n c o r r e c t l a b e l and the sample as a grouping o r  a pair.  Naming the red sample BLUE, f o r example, c o n s t i t u t e s  136.  a  red+blue  samples  pair;  shows  using  the pairs  With  eleven colour  such  different  BLUE  and naming  examples The  added  possible  perceptual  This for  t h e y were  from  Table  colour  Note  that  i s interpreted  i n each  i n Table  blue+grey.  terms,  55  naming r e d  here  o f these  31.  as  two  by B a r t l e t t  felt  to demonstrate  t h e number  perceptual  Several  used  similarities  increased  and  red+blue.  pairs  a r e shown  r e d and grey  blue+red  and p o s s i b l e  are possible.  b l u e RED  to the l i s t  because or  pairs  t o name g r e e n ,  blue+green,  samples  of the pair  categories  BLUE  (above  pairs  the dotted  t h e same  in this'particular of pairs  which  have  could  been line)  physical colour be  array.  accounted  20 t o 2 6 .  31:  Possible  Error  Saturation white+grey white+black grey+black white+brown grey+brown black+brown  Pairs  i n Perceptual  Adj acency  Categories  Brightness  pink+red pink+orange pink+purple red+orange red+purple • orange+yellow yellow+green green+blue blue+purple  yellow+pink yellow+white white+pink purple+brown purple+black brown+black pink+grey purple+grey pink+brown  orange+brown yellow+brown pink+grey grey+blue  The  present study  year-olds,  this  Four-year-olds  found  including showed  48  seven  21 e r r o r  such  error  i n Age pairs.  pairs  i n two-  2A a n d 41  i n Age  Data  subjects  from  2B.  137.  showing  a preference  discussed • of  i n Section  The p a i r s were  adjacency,  guide.  always  found  equal  be  1.0  given  This  involved none  the  bottom  occurred subject 3.10.2  more  (b) A n a l y s i s  An  alternative  demonstrated  by  green there  three  i n Age  data,  19 p a i r s ,  analyzed 48  that  Age  as Table  were  as a  two  31  found  colours  separate  The  f i g u r e s a r e shown found  i s , which  t o be  more  than  which one  significant  at the  only  showed  group  demonstrates  only  either.  groupings  the actual  or pair.  at  significant.  for pairs  were  i s to look  of this  group.  p a i r s i n two-year-olds  approach  a r e 55 p o s s i b l e  with  not  Labels  35  and  black+brown  e r r o r s where  None o f t h e s e  a n d r e d BLUE  2A a n d  will  of Error Pairs Excluding  part  Two-year-olds  31 a s a  categories i n  t h e naming p r a c t i c e s , w h i l e  not considered  Table  performance  32,-none w e r e  once,  demonstrated.  similarities  groups,  indicates proportions  than  analysis.  KS-analyses.  of the four-year-olds.  35  as  o f these  or total  36 o f t h e t o t a l  o f Appendix  this  using  such  different  t h e same name w e r e  Appendix  Again  two  using  (as  Proportions  some p a i r s  under  term  indicate the frequencies  group.  the production  were  naming  t o 34  comprehension  Within  is  32  because  significant  and  from  as t o having  None o f t h e p r o p o r t i o n s  production, to  omitted  classified  i n each  be c l a s s i f i e d  shows.  4.5.2) was  colour  saturation or brightness,  Appendices  proportions  can  for a particular  Thus a  the pair  label subject  green+red.  pairs.  a total  i n Age  2B.  o f 38  such  pairs,  Four-year-olds  4A c o n t r i b u t i n g t e n a n d A g e  4B  with  showed nine  only  pairs.  138.  Appendix was  36  shows  the class of  that  the only  "other",  significant  which  had  proportion  i n four-year-olds.  adjacency,  saturation or brightness  proportions Those entirely were  showed  groupings Age  two  only  pair  as w e l l  very  high  in  significantly  low  None o f t h e c l a s s e s showed  any  of  significant  i n e i t h e r age.  from  only  proportion  which  2B  occurred  i n two-year-olds  i n four-year-olds.  one  more  critical  level  t h e c l a s s e s were  even  came  and  there  In the l a t t e r ,  These  4B  Age  showed  4A  this  same  low f i g u r e s c r e a t e  and hence close  once  (n=10),  pair—brown+black—and  as blue+grey.  than  none  of the  a  proportions  to significance,  as  Appendix  37 i n d i c a t e s . 3.10.2  (c) E r r o r  In  a f u r t h e r attempt  analyses  were  subjects  showing  This 38 57,  carried  t o 123, w i t h  a marked  and  i n 2B less  been  error  an  from  omitted  total  However, proportions  to reach  Individual  Tendencies  significance,  t h e same  i n c l u d i n g e r r o r s made  preference  by  for a particular  of error pairs  term.  i n two-year-olds  from  increase  i n 2A o f t h r e e  error p a i r s to  35  error  pairs.  Four-year-olds  only  subject's  t o 66  o f "a d i f f e r e n c e s i n c e  pairs while  year-old  Including  o u t when  r a i s e d t h e number  showed had  Analysis  earlier. 4B  Age  remained  changed  from  KS-analyses  one  4A m o v e d t h e same;  19  again  t o 34 found  i n any o f t h e a d j a c e n c y ,  from  25  the overall  error no  ten to  scores  four-  pairs.  significant  brightness  or  saturation  classes, o r even figures  the "other"  f o r proportions  indicates  those  class.  of error  for errors  Appendix  pairs,  made m o r e  while  than  38  shows  Appendix  once.  140.  4.0  Discussion of  The  first  experimental in  the  Performance  major  stage,  finding and  was  various analyses.  variation  later  of  and  i n type  was  also  found  by  Bartlett,  little  risky  to  group  a  respons'e  make c l a i m s a b o u t a  group.  the  This  4.1  obtained sample  were  and  size  comparisons to  she  results  as  she  and  may  even  be  of  accuracy  error.  This  i t is  performances  thus  to  f o u r - y e a r - o l d s as  used  expected  in  suggested,  individual  the  individual  tasks, both  and  the  confirmed  large  i n type  these  of  those and  Rank O r d e r s  several found  between  then,  tested  would  The be  lack  to  explain  findings  and  easily  Such  t o be with  the  between  many  of  the  the  number most  of  rank  orders  Differences  validity can  number with  Studies  the  studies.  factors  correlation  largest  Comparable  q u e s t i o n the  increasing  iis the  seem  of  i n previous  studies.  the  with  correlations  c o n d i t i o n s may  Correlations  cannot  the  as  in itself  some e x t e n t b y  value,  Since  4.2  fact  indirectly  well  two-year-olds  Correlations  most  both  during  results.  There  out  as  d i s c r e p a n c i e s between  actual  became o b v i o u s  T h i s was  i n performance of  Results  of  be  any  balanced  subjects.  Johnson's  subjects  of  data.  (669),  her  reliable.  E v o l u t i o n a r y Order  correlations, with  the  evolutionary order  explained.  one  would  While  expect  Of  some  in  141.  exceptions  to  this  p r e d i c t e d norm,  group  not  of  the  subjects  showed  even  the  accuracy  order  single  Kay's  order  one or  primaries  before  4.2.1  R e l a t i o n to  In Of  the  the  previous  was  make t r u e  comparisons  that  contributed fore  be  rank  orders  the  used  any  obtained  the  in  no  two  the  to  with  within  each  orders  case,  results  these  a  of  use  of  say,  &  achromatics  +  of  of  those  the  Johnson  the  not  statistic are  and  f o r comparing  study's  So  have  for either  using tau) both  the  naming  different  analyses.  used,  statistic a  again  used  correlation  results  evolutionary order  using  age-group.  confirmed her  any  Kay.  evolutionary order,  data  there-  production  correctly  to  the  I t might  &  to  correlation  This  present  appears  which  of  Rho  compared  subjects  (Kendall's  two  with  Berlin  the  with  i t is difficult  subjects.  but  orders  stated  Spearman's  being  that  with  Johnson's  using  a  correlations  to  alone  age-group,  comparison  study  rank  comprehension  proportion of  in relation by  of  But  Berlin  compared  results  orders  evolutionary order.  confirmed  either  also questionable.  with  ( Table i )  present  a  sequence.  specifically  same g r o u p o f  significant  the  basis  rank  compare,  re-analysis of the  this  of  same a n a l y s i s t h a t  found A  the  order  colour  On  one  i s , however,  by  a  of  Studies  only  Johnson's  obtained  In  each  used.  study.  assumes  of  Previous  s t u d i e s which  statistic  coefficient  such  half  non-primaries.  evolutionary order,  present  show  least  moderately-sized a  should  at  have  and  our  been  142.  4.2.2  D i f f e r e n c e s i n Data Another explanation f o r t h i s lack of c o r r e l a t i o n  might be i n the type of data we Orders of Accuracy to B e r l i n  are using.  & Kay's e v o l u t i o n a r y  we are assuming that performance accuracy of a c q u i s i t i o n .  In comparing  reflects  Only l o n g i t u d i n a l s t u d i e s can  level  really  determine a c t u a l order of a c q u i s i t i o n , and then we still  order,  are  faced with the question of what c r i t e r i a to use  determine whether a term has been acquired or not. c r i t e r i o n used here was  to  The  very s t r i c t ; only those terms  with p e r f e c t performance were considered acquired.  We  should note here, however, that orders obtained using  an  e a r l i e r , l e s s - s t r i n g e n t s c o r i n g method, where i n c o r r e c t uses o f terms were ignored, a l s o d i d not c o r r e l a t e with the e v o l u t i o n a r y order. While the p a r t i c u l a r order proposed by B e r l i n & Kay was  not found i n our data, that of the p r i m a r i e s ,  non-  p r i m a r i e s and achromatics showing a p a r t i c u l a r order of accuracy  and a c q u i s i t i o n as separate  supported.  groups was  partly  This w i l l be d i s c u s s e d below i n the s e c t i o n  headed " V a l i d i t y of Proposed Colour Groups" (Section 4 .11) . 4.3 4.3.1  Performance V a r i a b l e s i n Colour-Naming Age  Differences  As expected, f o u r - y e a r - o l d s performed much b e t t e r i n o v e r a l l performance and two-year-olds.  i n each separate  task than d i d the  The a n a l y s i s o f variance r e s u l t s  supported  143 .  the  lack  o f c o r r e l a t i o n s between  performance a  of either  distinctly  of  the  different  (age x c o l o u r )  greater  variance  discuss  later,  responses 4.3.2  As  than  Task The  made  response 4.3.3  interaction  ages  terms.  also  d i d the older  subjects.  The  supported  subjects.  A s we  made m o r e  than  total  showed significance this will  incorrect  suggests  that  i n comprehension, production  also  more a s was  errors  were  predicted.  showed more  lack of  task.  Differences v a r i a b l e showed  that  with  t o have  than  later,  colour  terms  of task  d i d the comprehension  Colour  suggest  the  use o f c o l o u r  also  note  These  PINK  of the  i s , t h e two  two-year-olds  effect  than  The  orders  Differences  main  will  That  i n the younger  i n production  we  age.  rank  more  others.  colours,  former,  showed  results  will  overall  significant  e r r o r s w e r e made w i t h Further  significantly  remaining  several  analyses  better  while  be d i s c u s s e d  showed  performance  GREY a n d P U R P L E ,  low p e r f o r m a n c e s .  some  effects. colour  ORANGE a n d  scores  than  especially  These  the  particular  further i n Section  4.4  Colour  Terms  task  the performance  Acquired. The with  interaction  a particular  with  term  of  error with  that  is  considered  acquired  acquired in  Tables  term  i n production. 4 and  depends  suggests  on t h e t a s k ,  o r sample.  That  i n comprehension Comparing  5 confirms  that  this.  as does  i s , a term  the  type  which  i s not necessarily  the ranks  f o r any  colour  144 .  4.3.4  In  Relation  These by  the  of  task  also  be  between tasks that  rank  1  the  since  of  and  rank  age-group  that  orders  i n the  (age  Appendix  1  showed  of  similar  significant  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the  i n both  suggests  that  (Age  were making  However, determined this  subjects  the  might  If  so,  which  terms  misused,  itself  subject's  still  most In  proved a  not  i s the  can  are  We  ages  This we  interaction  are  difference  f o r the  may  are  orders  might  significant  two  reflect  looking  looking  any to  valid  of  a  at  at  again orders,  frequencies.  rank  be  than  terms  to  realistic  general or  i n that  measure,  This  terms  terms  Age  the  they  2B. was  only  tasks  and  indication. to  most  likely by  about to  be  vocabulary  i t showed although  What  respond.  statements  sub-grouping  valuable  grouping  the  willingness  occur  the  colour  i n vocabulary on  were  obtained.  four  performance  the  total  there  children of  subject's  case,  orders  errors with  truly  likely  four-year-olds In  individually,  fewer  make  and  differences.  different  the  we  i s not  with  number  etc.  still  tasks  the  reflect  then  rank  colour)  two  B).  more a d v a n c e d  i s undoubtedly  it  size  by  a  two-year-olds  and  were  x  supported  Variables  performance  knew t h a n  was  a n a l y s i s - o f - v a r i a n c e we  sub-groups  a l l  various  task  correlations  further division  2A)  the  i n the Row  were  performance. x  there  colours  order  Sub-Group A  and  significant,  i n the  4.3.5  Results  c o r r e l a t i o n s between  expected  (Table  while  into  of  performance  have  Correlation  analysis-of-variance results  lack  would  to  that  i t was  age the  145.  the  most  4.4  convenient  Colour We  Terms  have  one a t t h e time.  Acquired  already noted  the high  performance  for  t h e c o l o u r terms  ORANGE  the  poor  f o r GREY i n b o t h  performance  expect  these  results  colour  terms  have  subjects,  since  performance  at,  been  the lowest  ORANGE  ranking  the three  even  high  accuracy;  have  been  more  so  be  referred g o t from  this  noted  by  GREY  i n the remaining  order.  never  by J o h n s o n  i n the subjects'  their  parents  d i d n o t show ORANGE  high  i n rank i n  constituted  GREY d i d g e n e r a l l y expected.  as having  a  appear  this  ( a limited  term  because  i n t h e low ranks  these  i n frequency,  o f i n p u t a n d how  A similar  o f PINK  may  and u n r e l i a b l e  t o be n o t a b l y h i g h  ranks  unexpect-  a t the input  a question of the quality  the high  an  vocabularies  Looking  relevance i thas t o the c h i l d .  be  here  looked  lowest  to the f r u i t .  made t o e x p l a i n  would  fewest  o f t h e s i xo r d e r s  h e r s u g g e s t i o n was t h a t  fixed  i t may b e m o r e  much  which  high proportion.  edly  source)  or  judged  consistently  though  ORANGE was a l s o  children  would  In p a r t i c u l a r ,  i n five  a n d PINK w e r e  significantly  also  We  i n examining  i s being  4 and 5 confirm t h i s .  two-year-olds,  it  also  ages.  a c q u i r e d by t h e most  acquisition  a n d was among  Also,  t o appear  i n t w o - y e a r - o l d s , and  accuracy.  Tables showed  a n d PINK  accuracy  argument  could  i n the two-year-olds. o f input,  as  146.  It  i s important  for  significance  the  low  were in  in  fact  the  of  no  i n each  a  examples As  other  performance Based no  claims  to  have  have  have  of on  not  acquired  hazard BLACK 4.5  terms  a  of  the  also  year-olds, different As  at  11  partly  no  of  why  there  proportions  colour  term  in total  colour  terms  which  performance  of  and one  on  is a  higher  Table  order  of  terms  in  we  a  can  he  terms.  From  will  not  almost  almost most  make  two-year-old  BROWN, a n d  and  total  overall  chance  will  The  colour.  5,  expect  great  BLACK,  remaining  GREY  i n .each  can  known  four-year-olds.  the  age-group  was  certainly  should  have  t h i s , , we  might  acquisition—GREEN,RED acquired  and  and  GREY b e i n g  last.  Used interested  i n determining  frequently  regardless  Table  because  either  Four-year-olds  the  most  picture  criterion  large  acquired  again  there  earliest  We  used  the  having  GREEN,RED, a n d  Terms  are  was  proportion  terms  But  GREY.  Colour are  30%  which  suggestion  being  explains  RED,BLUE,GREEN,BLACK o r  some k n o w l e d g e  the  cases  significantly  analyses  acquired.  acquired  This  none o f  older  these  these  acquired,  reflects  this  in  that  task.  was  This  about  certainly  had  small  proportion  performance.  of  also  i t i s , there  hand,  significantly  lowest  high  subjects.  individual  the  remember  very  two-year-olds  On by  was  two-year-olds.  all or  number  to  of  by  accuracy  which  colour  two-year-olds  and  of  Here  this  use.  foura  emerges. showed,  the  colour  terms most  likely  to  147.  appear i n the vocabulary o f two-year-olds seemed to be the p r i m a r i e s , e s p e c i a l l y BLUE, and the non-primary ORANGE.  term  Those l e a s t l i k e l y were the achromatics BLACK  and GREY.  None o f the Age 2A s u b j e c t s showed any achromatic  terms or BROWN o r PURPLE o r YELLOW, and again BLUE would seem the most l i k e l y term to appear i n those s u b j e c t s with fewer than four c o l o u r terms.  Table 11 a l s o showed that a  c h i l d ' s f i r s t c o l o u r term can be o f the non-primaries, as B a r t l e t t also  found.  So many c o l o u r s were used c o r r e c t l y by f o u r - y e a r - o l d s that we can only p r e d i c t which terms are most l i k e l y to be used i n c o r r e c t l y a t t h i s stage.  These would appear to be  WHITE and. GREY e s p e c i a l l y , and then BROWN and PURPLE. These r e s u l t s seem to support the c l a i m that c o l o u r terms w i l l emerge i n the order o f p r i m a r i e s f i r s t , followed by the other c o l o u r groups.  Here the achromatics c e r t a i n l y  appear to be among the l a s t to appear, but the non-primaries appeared did  a t v a r i o u s p o i n t s amongst these other c o l o u r s and  not emerge as a group. I t i s a l s o i n t e r e s t i n g to note here t h a t no s u b j e c t s i n  e i t h e r age-group ever responded with a p h r a s a l  colour-name,  such as 0RANGY-RED , o r used q u a l i f i e r s as i n LIGHT RED o r BRIGHT GREEN.  Only three subjects r e p l i e d with a c o l o u r -  name other than one o f the eleven t a r g e t terms; these were all  f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . This s t r o n g l y supports the a p p r o p r i a t e -  ness o f the samples used and suggests support f o r the l e x i c a l primacy o f these eleven terms over other colour-terms.  148 .  4.5.1  Colour None o f  terms.  This and  the  sample  only  names o f  colours,  Bartlett  vocabulary our  that  reflects  but  even  as  such  4.5.2  Individual Several  a  and  a  were  child old,  terms  each. favoured  preference since  her  thing  BLUE  Tables  11  in  the  experiment  12  also  and  than  term  than  to  and  children, BLUE.  claimed  Rice  colour  which  some i d e a  are of  whether  domain would  exclude  the  rather and  to  f o r more  four  and  determine  game.  Nelson,  limited  not.  the  this  require  also  more  task.  show a was  preference quite  f o r e r r o r s made o n  GREEN, ORANGE  mother  had  This  two-year-olds  But  a  a  Preferences  terms.  adjusted  p a r t i c u l a r term The  To  colour  "smelling"  obviously  terms  then,  seemed  analyses  six  colour  after  made by  c h i l d r e n with  Naming  cases  there  claims  than  rather creatively  quite  sorting-by-colour  certain colour  were  who  other  fruits  was  conceptual  using  colours  the  are  children  the  this  colour.  a working  anything  subject  subjects,  of  tests,  were  appropriate  know w h i c h  domain  Domain  one  supports  youngest  lexical  Lexical  responses  was  certainly  Even  a  the  There  provided the  as  that  GREEN  these one  as  RED  were  be  indicate that  In a l l ,  samples  used  named. by  the  four-year-  one  child  included  tasks  who  favoured  the  home t h e  some  these p a r t i c u l a r  the  including  the  in  four-year-old  Moreover,  at  marked  subjects.  half of  could  for  B L U E was  GREEN  in this  group,  called  every-  child had  with  one  indicated. the  term  used  149.  most o f t e n by two-year-olds and second most o f t e n by f o u r - y e a r - o l d s , and t h i s i s excluding data from the above subjects. Results from the q u e s t i o n n a i r e a l s o i n d i c a t e that BLUE was the f a v o u r i t e c o l o u r term f o r s i x of the t h i r t e e n two-year-olds; the next ranking term was subjects.  RED  f o r only  two  BLUE was also the term that mothers most o f t e n  l i s t e d as the f i r s t c o l o u r term used by t h e i r  child.  What could be the reason f o r t h i s apparent primacy of the c o l o u r term BLUE i n two-year-olds? are  provided below  4.5.2  Some p o s s i b l e explanations  ( a to e ) .  (a) Primacy of Use F i r s t , the suggestion i s t h a t terms used most o f t e n ,  c o r r e c t l y and/or i n c o r r e c t l y , are those c o l o u r terms which were learned f i r s t , or a t l e a s t used f i r s t . to  The data seems  support t h i s ; only one of the subjects with BLUE p r e f e r e n c e  l a b e l l e d the a c t u a l blue sample i n c o r r e c t l y although t h i s might have been a t t r i b u t a b l e to chance.  But how can we  prove that t h i s was a c t u a l l y the f i r s t term used? Why  do  only some c h i l d r e n show a preference, and why do those c h i l d r e n who  used some other term X f i r s t not show a  preference f o r term X i n the tasks? 4.5.2  (b) Term Exposure The second p o s s i b i l i t y i s that the subject has been  exposed to t h i s term more than to o t h e r s . the of  q u e s t i o n n a i r e seems to support t h i s .  Information from The three mothers  BLUE p r e f e r e n c e s showed BLUE to be among the top three  150.  i n both t h e i r frequency  and extent-of-use.  i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the f o u r - y e a r - o l d was  Questionnaire  not a v a i l a b l e .  Mothers  of the other term preferences, however, d i d not show those terms to be very high i n t h e i r frequency or orders.  Again,  extent-of-use  i n f o r m a t i o n from t h i s source i s not  especially  reliable. 4.5.2  (c)  Learning Stage  Another p o s s i b i l i t y i s that the subject i s j u s t l e a r n i n g t h i s name and thus overextends is d i f f i c u l t  i t to many other c o l o u r s . This  i f not impossible to determine on the b a s i s of  the task r e s u l t s alone.  Although  the three  two-year-olds  with BLUE preference d i d show c o r r e c t a p p l i c a t i o n of BLUE, t h i s might j u s t have been due  to chance.  i m p l i e s that a c h i l d only l e a r n s one  T h i s , moreover,  term at a time and t h a t  the task caught some subjects a t the p o i n t where they were l e a r n i n g BLUE, others at ORANGE, RED  or GREEN.  Having these  terms as the f i r s t ones used, as the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n d i c a t e , does not mean t h a t they might not be j u s t being learned at t h i s l a t e r stage, but t h i s questions the whole concept when l e a r n i n g does begin and f i n i s h .  Perhaps these  are at a d i f f e r e n t stage than those who  of  children  showed no preference,  or employ a d i f f e r e n t l e a r n i n g s t r a t e g y , where they p i c k one name a t a time and experiment with i t u n t i l they get i t r i g h t . Miller  & Johnson-Laird  o l d s tended  note that Istomina  found that two-year-  to p i c k a c e r t a i n term out of t h e i r  (in her case RED)  vocabulary  and use i t to answer a l l task q u e s t i o n s .  5 0  151.  4.5.2  (d) L i m i t e d  Vocabulary  A f o u r t h p o s s i b i l i t y i s t h a t t h i s i s the only c o l o u r term i n the c h i l d ' s r e p e r t o i r e and colour.  t h e r e f o r e i s used f o r any  This can be q u i c k l y repudiated.  A l l of the  i n v o l v e d used other colour terms as w e l l , although and  seldom c o r r e c t l y .  Still,  very l a r g e colour-term  not many  none of these c h i l d r e n have a  vocabulary;  they are a l l i n sub-group 2A.  subjects  with three o£ four terms,  BLUE may  be the most f i r m l y  e s t a b l i s h e d of these, as w e l l as being more frequent c h i l d ' s input than the other terms they used  i n each  (these were  RED,  ORANGE,GREEN,PINK,YELLOW). 4.5.2  (e) Phonological  Preference  I t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e t h a t these subjects simply p r e f e r a p a r t i c u l a r c o l o u r name, f o c u s i n g on the c h a r a c t e r of t h a t word i t s e l f as opposed to what c o l o u r i t r e p r e s e n t s . could be a preference  f o r the a c t u a l sound of the name or a  pleasant a s s o c i a t i o n t h a t the term beings t h a t BLUE was  This  to mind.  the f a v o u r i t e c o l o u r term f o r two  subjects with t h i s preference  supports  The  fact  of the four  t h i s explanation.  of the s u b j e c t s ' mothers i n f a c t noted that her c h i l d pronouncing the word BLUE and used i t o f t e n because  One  liked  she  enjoyed saying i t . Furthermore, t h i s might r e f l e c t the r e l a t i v e s i m p l i c i t y of c o l o u r terms. still  phonological  C h i l d r e n at the age of two  are  a c q u i r i n g the E n g l i s h p h o n o l o g i c a l system and might  j u s t f i n d BLUE e a s i e r to pronounce than other terms such as, say, ORANGE or PURPLE.  I t might a l s o be that the  child's  152.  pronunciation than get  his  of  this  pronunciation,of  term,  more  frequently.  lexical than  one  regardless  field  A  a  which  order and  or  as  4.6  terms (see  have of  have  will  the  not  ) and  p a g e s 146-7  ).  attempt  to  bring  Finding  the  of  The  well  by  a l l by  any  as  perceptual been  he  of  uses  correct  response the  adult.  character  the  previous  acquisition  valid  and/or  may  uses i t  i n the  positive  at  he  when  phonological  be  for  predictions  environmental  discussed.  examination  for  "acquired"  and at  have  been  which  acquired  terms  analyses  these  of  some t e n d e n c i e s  two-year-olds  stability  the  and  a  So  therefore  least  get  or  names.  factor i n colour-term  suggested  will  vocabularies  UNSTABLE  to  adult-form  Stability  p a g e s 145-6  c l o s e r look  i s at  the  adults  and  mentioned  already  now  or  from  phonetic  I t may  as  to  colour  understood  not  accuracy.  Levels We  be  a possible  that  that  likely  the  was  explanations  factors  a  other  accuracy,  term  cannot  colour-term  studies  of  i s more  Incidentally,  the  is closer  much m o r e p o s i t i v e r e s p o n s e  this  of  term  two  of  colour  of  terms  "STABLE"  are  non-acquired  UNKNOWN  levels,  can  and  of  each  by  3.5  terms which  colour  certain  expect  to  find  were  done  age in  (see in  an  information  .together.  term  duplicates  acquired, the  a  which  four-year-olds  Section  pieces  levels  we  of  same. by  partly since But  breaking  i n turn  our  definitions  i t allows them  brings  in  down  also into  information  153.  d e r i v e d from examining i n c o r r e c t responses and "no responses" i n each task Further,  (Sections 3.8.3 and 3.8.4).  i t allows a breakdown i n t o the two s k i l l s o f  comprehension and production which we know from the e a r l i e r a n a l y s i s o f variance to vary from one c o l o u r to another. 4.6.1  Age D i f f e r e n c e s i n O v e r a l l S t a b i l i t y  Levels  As expected, there were d e f i n i t e age d i f f e r e n c e s i n the p r o p o r t i o n s o f c e r t a i n s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s .  Two-year-olds  showed a low o v e r a l l p r o p o r t i o n o f STABLE terms compared to a high p r o p o r t i o n i n f o u r - y e a r - o l d s .  Terms which were  UNKNOWN were o f a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n i n two-year-olds while  those UNSTABLE c o n s t i t u t e d the l a r g e s t number o f terms.  Both o f these l e v e l s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y low i n the o l d e r agegroup.  This supports the f i n d i n g t h a t the o l d e r c h i l d r e n  showed a more s t a b l e knowledge and use o f these terms. Examining the proportions o f these s t a b i l i t y  levels  f o r each c o l o u r term i n d i v i d u a l l y a l s o shows t h i s age difference.  Looking a t Figures 7 to 9, f o u r - y e a r - o l d s  always showed a higher number o f subjects f o r which a term was STABLE  (Figure 7) and a lower number f o r UNKNOWN  9) than two-year-olds.  (Figure  Only f o r GREY and PURPLE d i d f o u r -  year-olds  show more subjects with UNSTABLE l a b e l s than two-  year-olds  (Figure 8).  4.6.2  Predominant Colours  i n Overall S t a b i l i t y  Levels  No i n d i v i d u a l c o l o u r c o n t r i b u t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n to any o f these s t a b i l i t y l e v e l s .  This  again  154 .  indicates with  the large  individual  any p a r t i c u l a r  ments  term.  UNSTABLE,  i n performance  We c a n t h e r e f o r e make no s t a t e -  o r p r e d i c t i o n s about  STABLE,  variation  which  o r UNKNOWN  terms  a r eexpected  f o r two-year-olds  t o be  or four-  year-olds . There  were  contributed In  of  significantly  (see Table  primary,  relevance  few c a s e s  t o t h e group  1, f o r e x a m p l e ) .  group  o f STABLE  terms.  This  o f ORANGE a n d  None o f t h e o t h e r  o f STABLE,  levels.  o f purple+orange+pink  accuracy  o r non-primary  to thelevels  a colour  t o any o f these  group  due t o t h e h i g h  achromatic  where  proportion  t h e non-primary  probably'' m a i n l y  PINK  very  a significant  two-year-olds,  contributed is  also  colours  groups  showed a n y  U N S T A B L E o r UNKNOWN i n  e i t h e r age. 4.6.3 4.6.3  Levels  distributions  comprehension expected  While  i nlevels  showed  significantly  age-group  showed  stability  levels,  showed  Two-year-  o f MIXED a n d o f  o f NONE p r o d u c t i o n .  proportion  low o r n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t proportions two-year-olds  as t h e  a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t CORRECT  proportion a high  simply  accuracy.  low proportions  levels,  and a high  o f production and  c a n be e x p l a i n e d  age d i f f e r e n c e i n performance  proportion  with  found  performance  INCORRECT p r o d u c t i o n  older  and Comprehension  (a) A g e D i f f e r e n c e s The  olds  o f Production  o f CORRECT o f theother  The production, levels.  no d i f f e r e n c e s i n c o m p r e h e n s i o n  four-year-olds  showed  a high  proportion of  155.  CORRECT a n d a l o w p r o p o r t i o n 4.6.3  (b) P r e d o m i n a n t Again,  to  production  colours  contributed  levels,  b u t some c o l o u r  groups d i d  by t w o - y e a r - o l d s .  The non-primary  group o f  stability  PURPLE+ORANGE+PINK+BROWN+GREY proportion  high  the frequent  high  accuracy  production  in  incorrect  high  t h e most  likely  they  arejust  as l i k e l y  for  the small  reaching  about  which  reach  limiting likely  that  significance.  individual  thec r i t e r i o n claims  about  t o show c e r t a i n  scores  low p r o p o r t i o n s ,  cases,  are not  as  correctly.  i n these strict  stability  criteria  impossible to preventing  any claims  t o be STABLE o r  theproportion  significance  colours  stability  production  4.5 s h o w e d , b u t  a r en o t l i k e l y  f o r high which  o f NONE  involved  high  i n two-year-  incorrectly  I t was o f t e n  In other  explain the  a significantly  produced very  colours  off-  t o CORRECT  as Section  terms  size  also  t h e primary terms  t o be used  sample  significantly  Here t h e  o f PURPLE+PINK+ORANGE.  showed  t o be used,  U N S T A B L E o r UNKNOWN. to  group  low p r o p o r t i o n  examining theactual  determine  would  contributed  group  I t seems  only  scores.  o f P U R P L E a n d BROWN.. T h e  o f t h e INCORRECT p r o d u c t i o n  four-year-olds.  levels,  a s i g n i f i c a n t l y low  terms  proportion  and a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  In  uses  colour  primary colour  significantly  o f ORANGE a n d PINK may h a v e  by t h e non-primary  proportion olds,  scores  o f these  significantly  The  gave  o f t h e INCORRECT p r o d u c t i o n  unexpectedly set  comprehension.  Colours  no i n d i v i d u a l  any o f these  for  o f NONE  or colour  levels.  was v e r y  needed high,  groups a r e  156.  4.7  Labelling Strategies At t h i s p o i n t , a s e r i e s of analyses were done with the  emphasis on the c o l o u r sample i t s e l f , as opposed to the term. This was  to determine  i f there were any trends or tendencies  i n which c o l o u r s w i l l be grouped with other c o l o u r s under a s i n g l e l a b e l or which c o l o u r s w i l l always be given a l a b e l d i s t i n c t from the o t h e r s . Can we p r e d i c t from these r e s u l t s found i n S e c t i o n 3.6  an order i n which c o l o u r s are recognized  as separate l e x i c a l / c o n c e p t u a l c a t e g o r i e s ? 4.7.1  Age D i f f e r e n c e s Results of the a n a l y s i s of l a b e l - t y p e s do seem to  support the hypothesis t h a t p r o p o r t i o n s of separate, shared and n o - l a b e l types w i l l , vary with age or  (in t h i s case)  with  the s i z e o f colour-term vocabulary. I t i s a l i t t l e r i s k y to c l a i m t h a t these show a p r o g r e s s i v e change i n status f o r each c o l o u r , s i n c e the small sample s i z e of some of the subgroups prevented us from determining s i g n i f i c a n t l y proportions.  low  Moreover, these are d i f f e r e n t subjects and  we cannot c l a i m any developmental  trends.  so  Nonetheless,  Table 19 does i n d i c a t e t h a t f o r any given c o l o u r , l a b e l s seemed to progress from predominantly  "no l a b e l " to random  use of the three l a b e l types to a high use of shared and f i n a l l y to predominantly 4.7.2  separate l a b e l s .  Order of A c q u i r i n g Separate  Labels  Can we p r e d i c t an order of emergence of these labels for colours?  labels,  separate  Looking at the s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n s  i n each of these l a b e l - t y p e s f o r each sub-group may  do so.  157.  Age 2A showed no c o l o u r s having a s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n of  separate l a b e l s ; i f anything they appeared  s i g n i f i c a n t l y low p r o p o r t i o n s .  to be c l o s e to  The next sub-group showed  only orange to have reached t h i s s t a t u s , a b i g jump from the 2A group where t h i s c o l o u r showed a s i g n i f i c a n t l y high p r o p o r t i o n o f no l a b e l s . By age f o u r , a l l except blue and grey showed a s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n o f subjects g i v i n g them separate l a b e l s . brown appeared  Black and  to be a t an intermediate stage, s i n c e t h e i r  p r o p o r t i o n s of shared l a b e l s were a t the n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t l e v e l , not yet a t the s i g n i f i c a n t l y low l e v e l of the other colours.  Blue then followed with a s i g n i f i c a n t l y low propor-  t i o n o f no l a b e l s while i t had not yet reached a s i g n i f i c a n t high i n separate l a b e l s or l o s t i t s n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n of  shared l a b e l s .  Grey was s t i l l  f a r behind with none of i t s  p r o p o r t i o n s being what we would expect from a d u l t use. A c l o s e r look a t the sub-groups o f f o u r - y e a r - o l d s i n d i c a t e d that pink was the only c o l o u r with a high p r o p o r t i o n of  separate l a b e l s i n 4A.  tions.  Orange had no s i g n i f i c a n t  propor-  But AGE 2B and 4A o v e r l a p i n the number of c o l o u r  terms shown so i t i s p o s s i b l e to combine these sub-groups. This would l e a d us to conclude that pink and/or orange are the f i r s t c o l o u r s to emerge with separate l a b e l s .  This i s  supported by the rank orders of accuracy i n Table 1, and the rank orders of subjects having acquired each term i n Table 5 f o r two-year-olds.  In other words, not only are  ORANGE and PINK the f i r s t terms to be used  consistently  158 .  c o r r e c t l y , but the c o l o u r s orange and pink are a l s o the f i r s t to be d i s t i n g u i s h e d as c a t e g o r i e s separate from other c o l o u r s . This leads us to propose an order o f emergence of separate l a b e l s f o r c o l o u r s , i n d i c a t e d i n F i g u r e 16.  F i g u r e 16:  pink orange r  3  Proposed Order o f Emergence o f Separate  green red ,. yellow  purple i_ • 1 whxte  black brown  blue  3  Labels  grey  2  We are beginning to see some trends appearing i n l e x i c a l / c o n c e p t u a l groupings, emergence o f ORANGE and PINK.  i n p a r t i c u l a r the e a r l y For a f u r t h e r examination  i n t o the p o s s i b l e c a t e g o r i z a t i o n s t r a t e g i e s and l e x i c a l groupings  t h a t c h i l d r e n a t these ages might be using, the  types o f e r r o r s were analyzed. asked  Sections 3.8 to 3.10  s e v e r a l q u e s t i o n s : are there age and task d i f f e r e n c e s  i n the types of e r r o r s and the d i s t r i b u t i o n of such e r r o r s among the eleven c o l o u r terms, are c e r t a i n terms or'samples more prone to e r r o r or misuse than others, what are these e r r o r s based on?  159.  4.8 4.8.1  Performance V a r i a b l e s f o r Error-Types Order C o r r e l a t i o n s / A n a l y s i s of Variance Results There were some d i s c r e p a n c i e s between r e s u l t s  found  by the rank order c o r r e l a t i o n s and those found by the a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e .  The l a c k of c o r r e l a t i o n between  the v a r i o u s orders of e r r o r s shown i n Tables 24 and  25  suggests a task d i f f e r e n c e , as w e l l as the expected  age  difference.  The only task d i f f e r e n c e shown by the a n a l y s i s  of v a r i a n c e , however, was  i n the number of "no  responses",  the production task producing more such responses comprehension.  than the  Do these r e s u l t s r e a l l y c o n t r a d i c t each  other or are they answers to two d i f f e r e n t  questions?  The discrepancy i s explained by noting t h a t rank order c o r r e l a t i o n s depend on the order of terms, and only the r e l a t i v e frequencies are important.  The a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e ,  on the other hand, compares the a c t u a l frequencies of each term i n one  rank order to the other.  The c o r r e l a t i o n of the production orders of "no f o r the two  response"  ages i m p l i e s there i s no age d i f f e r e n c e , c o n t r a r y  to the a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e .  But again t h i s i s because the  orders are very s i m i l a r , while the a c t u a l frequencies are not. Grey, f o r example, i s at the top of both l i s t s but scores 9 f o r two-year-olds  and only 4 f o r f o u r - y e a r - o l d s .  Table  25  shows the vast d i f f e r e n c e s i n frequencies between the two These r e s u l t s again support the claims that with i n c r e a s i n g age there are fewer e r r o r s and t h a t more e r r o r s are made i n production than i n comprehension.  The  greater  ages.  160.  number of "no  responses" i n production  suggests that  c h i l d r e n are more h e s i t a n t to name a colour than to p o i n t to a p a r t i c u l a r sample. 4.8.2  Task D i f f e r e n c e s This l a s t comment deserves f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n , since  i t may  e x p l a i n why  the two  performance accuracy  tasks of production  d i f f e r e d between  and comprehension.  Why,  for  example, were there no cases of subjects showing a marked preference  f o r a p a r t i c u l a r c o l o u r sample? Overextensions  i n comprehension were p o s s i b l e , since s e v e r a l c h i l d r e n were given the chance to i n d i c a t e more than one given name, but they d i d not The  sample f o r a  occur.  r e s u l t s of the comprehension task seem to i n d i c a t e  that most of the c h i l d r e n knew t h a t there was c o l o u r f o r any  c o l o u r term asked f o r .  only  one  When the subject  made a choice f o r a p a r t i c u l a r c o l o u r name, he seldom f o r another sample when prompted, even i f the f i r s t was  had  looked  choice  incorrect. The  f a c t o r i n v o l v e d here may  experimental  be the d i f f e r e n c e i n the  set-up f o r each task, and  i n d i r e c t l y i n the  demands each task makes on the subject's memory. Huttenlocher  As  noted, production makes more demands on  the  c h i l d ; he must r e c a l l and produce a word r a t h e r than the non-verbal colour image r e q u i r e d by the comprehension Moreover, the l a t t e r provides  a whole array of c o l o u r s  the c h i l d can remember which samples he has already to and can compare the c o l o u r s to each other. l  n  task. so  pointed  production  161. only one c o l o u r i s provided  a t a time and the c h i l d must  remember a l l the v e r b a l responses he has already he doesn't want to repeat  himself.  given i f  I t i s a question of  whether i t i s e a s i e r to remember something you s a i d (production  response) or something you d i d (comprehension  response).  The r e s u l t s seem to support the l a t t e r  being  e a s i e r f o r two-year-olds. 4.9 4.9.1  D i s t r i b u t i o n of Error-Types Individual  Colours  Tables 24 and 25 i n d i c a t e d that c e r t a i n c o l o u r s appeared to be more prone to e r r o r than others while some appeared to be more o f t e n c o r r e c t than others. of the analyses  showed these to be s i g n i f i c a n t .  Yet none Although  we d i d f i n d the d i s t r i b u t i o n to be 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 a t expected by chance, we could not p i n p o i n t where these d i f f e r e n c e s were. 4.9.2  Colour Groups There were, however, some colour groups which showed  significant contributions.  These were not the p r e d i c t e d  primary, achromatic or non-primary groups, r a t h e r they were groups based on t h e i r ranking  i n the a c t u a l  orders.  For i n c o r r e c t responses by two-year-olds, f o r example, the top three and top four ranks o f production  and the top  four ranks of comprehension were s i g n i f i c a n t groups of colours.  These, however, i n v o l v e d some f i v e , s i x and seven  c o l o u r s r e s p e c t i v e l y and i t i s q u i t e l i k e l y that any random  162.  group  of  such  size  would  contribute  significantly.  Similarly,in  f o u r - y e a r - o l d s ' comprehension  ranks  a  proved  significant  group,  this  the  top  including  two  five  colours. The which of  only  cannot  significant be  grey+purple  order,  are  in four-jear-olds'  "no  response"  high  year-olds'  "no  response"  to  justify  these  i n terms  groups.  The  only  bright  such  not  by  were  do  they or  of  or  large  size.  the  lexical  other  cannot  be  common  both  groups  This analysis or  difficult  saturation  grey+purple  the  two-  achromatic  show  brightness or  31);  i n the  They  non-primary  i s with  production  error-types are  consistently  of  scores  being  can  has  levels. non-  only  be  therefore  conceptual categories that  expected.  4.10  Overextensions:  4.10.1  Predominant  Slightly found  when  incorrect colours low  primary,  (see T a b l e  r e v e a l e d any  of  high  ranks  order.  common p r o p e r t i e s .  hue  their  the  grey+black+green  comprehension  similarity  colours  explained  of  of  groupings  of of  Nor  characteristics  rank  rank  explained, i n terms colour  decreasing  way  the  of  of  explained i n this  and  All  c o l o u r groups  ones.  uses  But  Colours  different  similar  with  Incorrect  of  and  each  group  of  Colour  term.  There  primary  and  Samples  Groups  done w i t h were  contributions, of  Terms  more e n c o u r a g i n g  a n a l y s e s were  significant the  and  Uses  results  the  again not  colours  data no  even showed  were on  individual significantly  s i g n i f i c a n t l y more i n c o r r e c t uses by two-year-olds i n production than any of the remaining c o l o u r s .  This f i n d i n g  showed up e a r l i e r i n the s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n of t h i s group to the INCORRECT production l e v e l of s t a b i l i t y . Table 29 a l s o shows the primary c o l o u r s to rank high i n both number o f subjects who overextended them and the number of d i f f e r e n t c o l o u r samples they were overextended t o . The other c o l o u r groups with s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n s of the i n c o r r e c t uses, shown i n Table 28, again i n v o l v e d groups of l a r g e numbers, from four to f i v e terms i n four-year-olds': comprehension, f o r example.  Moreover, these c o l o u r groups  could not be explained i n terms o f common p r o p e r t i e s , again suggesting t h a t any random group of t h i s s i z e would have proved 4.10.2  significant. S t a b i l i t y Levels of Overextended Terms  Comparisons with s t a b i l i t y  l e v e l s gave f u r t h e r informa-  t i o n about which terms would be used i n c o r r e c t l y .  I t seemed  t h a t f o r two-year-olds, terms which were overextended were those f o r which the subjects d i d not yet have a s t a b l e referent.  Where comprehension was  i n t a c t , there was much  l e s s of a tendency f o r the term to be used i n c o r r e c t l y . Four-year-olds, on the other hand,' apparently overextended those terms which were f a i r l y s t a b l e i n t h e i r r e l a t i o n to a p a r t i c u l a r c o l o u r sample, terms which they apparently had no problems i n comprehending or using correctly.  The r e s u l t s t h e r e f o r e seem to support both proposals made as to the status of overextended  terms.  Carey  suggested that those terms not yet s t a b l y mapped onto a r e f e r e n t would be those overextended; o l d s support t h i s .  r e s u l t s from  two-year-  The opposite proposal by Thomson & Chapman,  that the more s t a b l e terms would be those most overextended, i s supported by r e s u l t s from f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . One would expect the o p p o s i t e age correspondences, however.  The  subjects i n the l a t t e r study, as w e l l as i n Fremgen & Fay's which supported t h e i r c l a i m , were of the same age range as our two-year-olds, while s u b j e c t s i n Carey's study were c l o s e r to the age l e v e l of our f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . Perhaps  the  types of terms used as overextensions are as much based on the i n d i v i d u a l as are the number of overextensions, as i s the whole i s s u e of whether a s u b j e c t would r a t h e r guess or not respond at a l l . The two ages do seem to show d i f f e r e n t naming s t r a t e g i e s . Four-year-olds seemed to be c o n s c i o u s l y using the c o l o u r terms they knew to get feedback f o r the c o l o u r samples they d i d n ' t yet know the name of, or couldn't r e c a l l the name o f , as Carey suggested.  On the other hand, two-year-olds used terms  much more randomly.  Overextensions by t h i s age were more  d i f f i c u l t to r e l a t e to p e r c e p t u a l s i m i l a r i t i e s or to termstability levels. year-olds was year-olds .  The s i g n i f i c a n c e that was  found f o r two-  not n e a r l y as w e l l - d e f i n e d as that f o r f o u r -  165.  4.10.3  Existence  This  for  analysis  of  for.  both  also  was  almost (16%) to  the  the  low  7%  sample  predict  some u s e  exact  hypothesis a  a  of  a  which  terms  child he  In  were low  by  subjects.  has  Thomson  not  of  correct  in  &  the used  subjects sample  this  was  Chapman  decreased  rapidly  confirms  to  in  incorrectly  for that  This  tend  the  reflected  number  term  proportion  will  perhaps  two-year-olds,  found  The  older  f o r which  i s also  correct  named.  same a g e .  that  these  the  Vocabulary  s t r a t e g i e s , or  response,  proportion  i n the  in  significantly  incorrectly  at  a  a  colours  ages,  Terms  i n naming  giving  what  showed  which  Correct  difference  motivation  In  of  name  our  incorrectly  label.  Can  we  also  c o l o u r / i n c o r r e c t - l a b e l correspondences  will  occur? 4.10.4  Lexical/Conceptual  The  errors  relations hue,  to  made d i d  the  brightness  for  colours  for  comparing  or  the  same  colour  in  the  proportions  discuss  such  present trends  incidentally, tions  did  although  subjects  of  of  the  to  While  with  check  seem  present  to  This  to  study  based  true  of  three  and as  differences  parameters,  significant  enough  to  Bartlett,  significant. not  on  both  label)  age  s i g n i f i c a n c e of  do  consistent  was  found  these  confidence.  be  any  Errors  i t s incorrect label  were  the  by  similarities  Bartlett  due  any  have  (regardless  with  proportions  not  most  label  errors  Revealed  levels.  sample  Bartlett's analysis.  the  appear  saturation  in  none o f  not  physical/perceptual  given a  Categories  appear  her  Thus to  be  proporthe using  166.  these p r o p e r t i e s as a b a s i s f o r t h e i r l e x i c a l  groupings.  Other p o s s i b l e major bases o f overextensions f u n c t i o n a l s i m i l a r i t i e s and o f a s s o c i a t i o n . study d i d not examine overextensions  While the  of c o l o u r terms i n t o  other l e x i c a l f i e l d s , one mother volunteered which suggests that overextensions occurred.  some i n f o r m a t i o n  of f u n c t i o n could have  This s u b j e c t f r e q u e n t l y used a c o l o u r term to  d i s t i n g u i s h l i n e d paper from u n l i n e d paper. recognized  were o f  She i n e f f e c t  that c o l o u r words can f u n c t i o n to d i s t i n g u i s h  o b j e c t s from each other.  I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t more o f the  e r r o r s we found could be explained i n t h i s way. Many o f the e r r o r s may be through a s s o c i a t i o n s with other o b j e c t s and experiences,  as Vygotsky and Inhelder &  Piaget suggested f o r t h i s very age group.  These, of course,  could only be determined through a very thorough a n a l y s i s . I suspect,  however, that many o f the present e r r o r s were  j u s t random, e s p e c i a l l y i n the two-year-olds, and cannot be expected to r e f l e c t the l e x i c a l and/or  conceptual  c a t e g o r i e s of a c h i l d a t these ages. 4.11  The V a l i d i t y o f Proposed Colour  Groups  One i s s u e that has surfaced i n s e v e r a l of the analyses i s the relevance of the c a t e g o r i e s o f primary, achromatic and non-primary c o l o u r s to c o l o u r l e a r n i n g .  Several attempts were  made to see i f these groups are the conceptual  and/or l e x i c a l  c a t e g o r i e s being used by two-year-olds and f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . The  r e s u l t s have been mentioned throughout Sections 3.0 and  167. 4.0 but are summarized again i n (a) to ( f ) . (a) Order o f Accuracy The rank orders obtained f o r accuracy o f performance d i d not r e f l e c t any precedence of one of these groups being more or l e s s accurate than another.  Nor were these found  to c o n t r i b u t e s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n s t o t h e . o v e r a l l main e f f e c t o f c o l o u r found i n the a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e .  However,  when ORANGE and PINK were omitted, the primary c o l o u r s d i d show s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r performance as a group than d i d the remaining groups of achromatics and non-primaries. (b) Order o f A c q u i s i t i o n The s e c t i o n on Colour Terms Acquired (3.3 and 4.4) determined how many subjects had acquired a l l the members of each o f these groups.  Two-year-olds  showed no s i g n i -  f i c a n t l y l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n s o f subjects having acquired a l l of e i t h e r the p r i m a r i e s or o f the various achromatic and non-primary groups.  There were s i g n i f i c a n t l y small pro-  p o r t i o n s , but no more i n one c o l o u r group than i n the other. Four-year-olds showed one s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e prop o r t i o n , that o f the achromatic group black+white.  This  appears to c o n t r a d i c t the rank orders f o r f o u r - y e a r - o l d s i n Table 5; b l a c k ranks near the top but white c e r t a i n l y does not.  The apparent disagreement i s because here we are  combining scores o f the members of each o f these groups. In any case, t h i s r e s u l t only p a r t i a l l y supports the proposed precedence o f the achromatic c o l o u r s as a group.  168. (c)  Q'olour -Terms U s e d The  to  primary  occur  primaries  vocabulary  were  also  individual (d)  16  shows  age.  As  with  does  not  the  achromatic green,  very  late  closely  be  those  two-year-olds,  likely. early  show  terms  such  a  and  most  likely  while  However,  the  the  clear-cut  the  again  emerging  of  group  several  group.  the  non-  majority of distribution.  random group contribution.  of of  the this  label-types in  the  (a)  in  and  appear  a  last.  And  each  this  non-primary  p r i m a r i e s have rank  of  above,  primary,  scattered  (iii)  stability  however,  significance.  five  are  emergence  been  blue  of  little as  split a  more  in  the  throughout,  orange  first.  the  These,  the  emerging  non-primaries of  of  achromatics  again  of  the  secondary  non-primaries  The  includes  Rather,  The  grey  Levels  approached  grouping  yellow of  Stability  primary  analyses of  strict  and  order  o r d e r s mentioned  emergence.  to  suggested  colours.  red  order,  cantly  on  rank a  together,  pink  the  based  reflect  into  (e)  d i d not  of  to  Label-Types  labels  and  least  o c c u r r e d as  separate  rank  the  cases  Figure  and  colours d i d tend  i n the  achromatics  :  levels,  were  Moreover,  contributed  the this  e l e v e n c o l o u r s and size  would  as  did  signifithe  o n l y ones  which  non-primary i t may  h a v e made a  be  group  that  significant  any  169.  (f)  E r r o r s Made These c o l o u r groups d i d n o t c o n t r i b u t e  significantly  to any of the orders found f o r number of e r r o r s made or number o f "no responses".  However, the primary  group  d e f i n i t e l y showed more i n c o r r e c t uses, i . e . overextensions, than d i d the other c o l o u r s .  That i s , the primary terms were  used more o f t e n i n c o r r e c t l y than were the other terms. These r e s u l t s a l l suggest that the o n l y group o f any relevance i n d i s c u s s i n g the c h i l d r e n ' s use o f c o l o u r terms i s the primary group..  Some argument might be made f o r the  achromatics white+black+grey,  but too few o f the analyses  showed t h i s group to be v a l i d as a grouping. standing o f the non-primary  groups  The low  i s probably due to the  c o n s i s t e n t l y high scores of two of i t s members—orange and pink. Why t h i s apparent use of the primary group and not of the others?  The primary c o l o u r s are those which provide the  most b a s i c n e u r a l responses, so p h y s i o l o g i c a l l y we would expect them to be important.  They a l s o cover a l a r g e range  of a l l p o s s i b l e c o l o u r s ; i t could be argued that with these terms alone we can name any c o l o u r we can p e r c e i v e . arguments can be made f o r black and white though,  Similar  so why do  these not appear as a s i g n i f i c a n t grouping more often?  Nor  does t h i s argument e x p l a i n the high accuracy o f ORANGE and PINK i n two-year-olds. The proven l e x i c a l and n e u r o p h y s i o l o g i c a l aspects of  170.  colour terms are o b v i o u s l y not enough to e x p l a i n  either  order o f a c q u i s i t i o n or any o f the aspects o f performance. Some element o f choice i s i n v o l v e d ; a c h i l d w i l l l e a r n those terms which are both most r e l e v a n t to him and which are most i n t e r e s t i n g t o him. This w i l l p a r t l y i n v o l v e the frequency and  the type o f input r e c e i v e d f o r each p a r t i c u l a r term, as  w e l l as the type o f exposure to that term r e l a t i v e t o o t h e r s . But a c h i l d has to want to take i n that input; he must think i t r e l e v a n t and v a l u a b l e to h i s own circumstances.  BLACK  and WHITE are understandably l e s s i n t e r e s t i n g and p o s s i b l y l e s s r e l e v a n t i n the c h i l d ' s experience  than ORANGE and PINK.  This b r i n g s again a very i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c character to the a c q u i s i t i o n and use of c o l o u r terms, since d i f f e r e n t c h i l d r e n w i l l undoubtedly f i n d d i f f e r e n t c o l o u r s to be valuable a t d i f f e r e n t  times.  /  171.  5.0  Summary  This  of  study  R e s u l t s and  examined  several  behavior  i n two-year-olds  out  some  serious  and  c h a l l e n g e d some o f  previous lexical At  1.  this  relating  point, listed  in light  of  Hypothesis olds and  were  we  both  colour-naming  experimental  assumptions to  of  four-year-olds.  and  I t has  and  pointed  theoretical,  c l a i m s made  c o l o u r development  uses  our  and  in  general  error.s  consistently  their  were  again  confirmed  (pages  better  "no  to  explain  two-year-olds.  might  expect,  two-year-olds'  terms  was  as  performance  order  over  &  proposal.  primary  group  responses" and  and  discuss  d i d not  non-primaries,  was  At  by  somehow  incorrect  of  than  that, use  terms.  and  8)  of  as  we  colour  i n the f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . the  expected & Kay.  achromatic  Nor and  weaker  version  c o u l d say  that  lower  of  larger  and  tasks  showing  uses  suggests  Berlin  the  m o s t we  i n both  and  correct  knowledge  reflect  proposed  Four-year-  (see H y p o t h e s i s This  show a p r e c e d e n c e  colours Kay's  50)  a l l doubt.  w e l l - o r g a n i z e d as  accuracy  evolutionary  to  c o l o u r - t e r m v o c a b u l a r y was  made b y  of  48  operational  two-year-olds,  responses  those  Orders  the  at performance  than  responses,  easier  not  at  beyond  performance  more c o r r e c t  Further,  look  results.  1 was  incorrect and  can  i n S e c t i o n 1.7  in overall  fewer  2.  the  and  aspects  development.  hypotheses them  problems,  studies  Conclusion  i n status  primary of  the  than  did  the  Berlin nonother  172. ~_ -:• two  3.  groups  i n that  appeared  i n t e r s p e r s e d among  function  as  Section  by  a  4.11  primary,  claims  non-primary  group  hypothesis The  confirmed  few  of  the  explained This  partially  in  or  The  could  of  these  Section  2.5.2).  suggesting of  hue,  Accuracy  was  for  two-year-olds However, was  not  the No  be  this  made,  so  s a t u r a t i o n and was  brightnot  error-pairs in results  colour  incorrectly  a  relation  parental  could  greater  used  terms  could  and used  be  parameters.  difficulties  tasks  to  of  confirmed.  analysis of  responded  measures  hypothesis.  not  some c a s e s .  of  of  two  way  groupings  because  the  in this  were  Only  significant  environment)  both  behavior.  negative  hypothesis  (i.e.  colours  generally  using  mance and  did  groupings  showed  incorrectly  and  lexical/conceptual categories  3.10.2  the  terms  whether  achromatic  d i f f e r e n c e s i n age  either.  Sections  5.  and  appeared  i s only  being  other  in detail  a l t e r n a t i v e hypothesis  ness  generally  group. discussed  about  terms  the  c h i l d r e n i n colour-naming  primary  4.  non-primary  not  input  be  i n comprehension  the  and  the  than  four-year-olds,  f o r the  practice  confirmed data  in  (see  production  confirming  d i f f e r e n c e between  greater  perfor-  child  tested or  in collecting  and  between  younger  accuracy  our in  age-group.  173.  6.  The a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e performance,  7.  Although the  i t was  proportions  that  there  type. go  a s we  were  showed  expected.  difficult  three  finally  then  with  l a b e l - t y p e s , i t d i d appear  colour,  no l a b e l  to a high  to a separate  emerging  significance of  age d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e amounts  predominantly  types,  to determine  of specific  F o r any p a r t i c u l a r  from  no s e x d i f f e r e n c e s i n  l a b e l s would  tend  to  t o a random u s e o f a l l  use o f shared  label.  separate  o f each  An o r d e r  l a b e l s was  l a b e l s and  of  colours  proposed  i n Figure  16  ( p a g e 158 ) . However, reflect nor 8.  the proportions the parameters  the categories  o f these  of primary,  i n which  name c e r t a i n c o l o u r s . explained hue, be  as being  occurring  i n each  9.  this  This for  than  hypothesis  that  samples  were that  they  to  incorrectly  could  n o t be  similarities  Nor d i d t h e r e  appear to  i n the proportions  o f these  parameters,  errors  could  be  of  of although  explained  the two-year-olds. was p a r t i a l l y  two-year-olds  those and  way  achromatic.  d i d n o t r e v e a l any  on p e r c e p t u a l  changes  brightness  and  be u s e d  Specifically,  more o f t h e f o u r - y e a r - o l d s ' in  3.10.2  saturation or brightness.  errors  non-primary  names w o u l d  based  any d e v e l o p m e n t a l  d i dnot  o f hue, s a t u r a t i o n and  The e r r o r a n a l y s i s o f S e c t i o n consistencies  label-types  that  least were  terms stable  confirmed. that  were  I t was  overextended  i n the child's  overextended  true  t o were  were  vocabulary, those f o r  174 .  which the c h i l d d i d not have the c o r r e c t term i n h i s vocabulary. opposite  Four-year-olds,  however, showed the  r e s u l t s , suggesting, that these d i f f e r e n t ages  are using d i f f e r e n t s t r a t e g i e s i n responding  and  p o s s i b l y i n l e a r n i n g colour-names.  One  major c o n c l u s i o n  i s that performance cannot be  p r e d i c t e d i n terms of such a d u l t c a t e g o r i e s as the groups of primary, non-primary and apparently  achromatic c o l o u r s ,  i n terms of the p e r c e p t u a l / p h y s i c a l  of s a t u r a t i o n , hue  and  brightness.  The  nor categories  f a c t t h a t these do  e x i s t as such i n the a d u l t l e x i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of c o l o u r s , and  that they do represent  d e f i n i t e physical differences,  does not mean that the c h i l d w i l l i n c o r p o r a t e them as h i s own  l e x i c a l groupings.  The  r e s u l t s have e f f e c t i v e l y  c o n t r a d i c t e d the p r e d i c t i o n that these are acquired p a r t i c u l a r order,  and  could not show any  between these c a t e g o r i e s and  consistent relations  the q u a l i t y of performance.  This brings up the f i r s t p o i n t made i n the and  in a  s t r e s s e d by B a r t l e t t i n her  discussion  study: that i s the  i n d i v i d u a l v a r i a t i o n i n performance.  large  I t i s suggested that  t h i s i s because a major determinant i n colour-naming behavior ( at l e a s t ) i s what the c h i l d himself brings to the his  experiences,  ness—things  his feelings, his interests, his  that w i l l be very hard to t e s t .  terms does t u r n out to be more complicated seems, or at l e a s t more complicated explain i t .  task—  responsive-  Learning  than i t at  colour first  to the a d u l t t r y i n g to  175.  FOOTNOTES  1.  Haber,R.N. and Hershenson,M. The P s y c h o l o g y o f V i s u a l P e r c e p t i o n (New Y o r k : H o l t , R i n e h a r t & W i n s t o n , I n c . 1 9 7 3 ) pg.67-69, and F i l l e n b a u m , S . and Rapoport,A. S t r u c t u r e s i n t h e S u b j e c t i v e L e x i c o n (New Y o r k : A c a d e m i c P r e s s 19 71) C h a p t e r 3.  2.  M i l l e r , G . A . and J o h n s o n - L a i r d , P . N . Language and P e r c e p t i o n (Cambridge:The Belknap P r e s s o f H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s 1976) p g . 338, and C a r e y , S . "The c h i l d a s w o r d l e a r n e r " i n M . H a l l e , J . B r e s n a n & G . A . M i l l e r (Eds) L i n g u i s t i c T h e o r y and P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e a l i t y ( C a m b r i d g e : T h e MIT P r e s s 1 9 7 8 ) pg.269.  3.  Chase  4.  J o h n s o n , E . "The d e v e l o p m e n t o f c o l o r k n o w l e d g e i n p r e s c h o o l c h i l d r e n " i n C h i l d D e v e l o p m e n t , V o l . 4 8 No.1 (1977) p g . 3 1 1 .  5.  D o u g h e r t y , J . W . D . "On t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f a s e q u e n c e i n t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f b a s i c c o l o u r terms" i n R.Campbell & P.Smith (Eds) R e c e n t A d v a n c e s i n t h e P s y c h o l o g y o f Language (New Y o r k r P l e n u m P r e s s 1 9 7 8 ) p g . 1 3 4 - 1 3 5 .  6.  R o s c h , E . H . "On t h e i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e o f p e r c e p t u a l a n d s e m a n t i c c a t e g o r i e s " i n T . E . M o o r e (Ed) C o g n i t i v e D e v e l o p ment and t h e A c q u i s i t i o n o f Language (New Y o r k : A c a d e m i c P r e s s 1 9 7 3 ) p g . 114 + 1 4 3 .  7.  Haber  8.  M i l l e r & J o h n s o n - L a i r d , pg.354, and K a r p f , R . , G o s s , A . , and Small,M. " N a m i n g , s e l e c t i o n and o r d e r i n g o f c o l o r ("hue") b y y o u n g c h i l d r e n " i n J o u r n a l G e n e r a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 9 0 (1974) pg.297.  9.  1937  in Miller  & Hershenson,  & Johnson-Laird,  pg.351.  pg.70-80.  of  K a y , P . a n d M c D a n i e l , C . K . "The l i n g u i s t i c s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the meanings o f b a s i c c o l o r terms" i n Language, Vol.54 No.3 (1978) p g . 6 1 6 .  10.  Brown,R. " R e f e r e n c e : i n m e m o r i a l t r i b u t e i n C o g n i t i o n , V o l . 4 (1976) pg.151.  11.  B e r l i n , B . and of C a l i f o r n i a  Kay,P. B a s i c C o l o r P r e s s 1969) p g . 1 0 5  to Eric  Lenneberg"  Terms (Berkeley:University + 107.  176 .  12. Heider,E.R. " U n i v e r s a l s i n c o l o r naming and memory" i n Journal of Experimental Psychology, Vol.9 2 No.1 (19/2) pg.10-20, and M e r v i s , C . B . , C a t l i n , J . and Rosch,E. "Development of the s t r u c t u r e of c o l o r c a t e g o r i e s " i n Developmental Psychology, Vol.11 No.l (1975) pg.54-60. 13. M i l l e r  & Johnson-Laird,  pg.340.  14. B a r t l e t t , E . J . "The a c q u i s i t i o n of the meaning of c o l o u r terms: a study of l e x i c a l development" i n R.Campbell & P. Smith (Eds) Recent Advances i n the Psychology o f Language (New York:Plenum Press 1978) pg.90. 15. Rice,M. C o g n i t i o n to Language: Categories, Word Meanings and T r a i n i n g ( B a l t i m o r e : U n i v e r s i t y Park Press 1980)pg.41. 16. Haber & Hershenson, pg.73. 17. Brown (1976), pg.125. 18. M i l l e r & Johnson-Laird, pg.341. 19. A n g l i n , J . Word, Object and Conceptual Development (New York:W.W.Norton & Co.Inc.,1977) pg.127. 20. Rice, pg.46. 21. Carey,  Pg.276-285.  22. C l a r k , E . "What's i n a word? On the c h i l d ' s a c q u i s i t i o n o f semantics i n h i s f i r s t language" i n T.E.Moore (Ed) C o g n i t i v e Development and the A c q u i s i t i o n of Language (New York:Academic Press 1973) pg.104. 23. Huttenlocher,J. "The o r i g i n s o f language comprehension" i n R.Solso (Ed) Theories i n C o g n i t i v e Psychology (Potomac:Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.1974) pg.358-360. 24. Rice, pg.46 + 105. 25. Reich,P. "The e a r l y a c q u i s i t i o n of word meaning" i n J o u r n a l o f C h i l d Language, Vol.3 No.l (1976) pg.117-123. 26. Rice,  pg.36.  27. Gruendel,J.M. " R e f e r e n t i a l extension i n e a r l y language development" i n C h i l d Development,Vol.48 (1977)pg.1567. 28. Lyons 1968 quoted i n Rice,  pg.346.  177.  29.  R o s e n , E . H . "On t h e i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e o f p e r c e p t u a l a n d s e m a n t i c c a t e g o r i e s " i n T . E . M o o r e (Ed) C o g n i t i v e D e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e A c q u i s i t i o n o f L a n g u a g e (New Y o r k : A c a d e m i c P r e s s 19 73) p g . 1 1 3 .  30.  H e i d e r , E . R . " F o c a l c o l o r a r e a s and t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f c o l o r n a m e s " i n D e v e l o p m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 4 No.3 (1971) p g . 4 5 3 - 4 5 4 .  31. M i l l e r  & J o h n s o n - L a i r d , -pg.352.  32. C l a r k , E . " F i r s t l a n g u a g e a c q u i s i t i o n " i n J . M o r t o n & J . M a r s h a l l ( E d s ) P s y c h o i i n g u i s t i e s (New Y o r k : C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s 1977) p g . 2 1 . 33.  Gruendel,  34.  Rice,  pg.29.  35.  Clark  (1977),  36.  Rice,  pg.104.  37.  Carey,  38.  Rice,  39.  Carey,  40. M i l l e r  pg.1567.  pg.23.  p g . 2 7 0. pg.22. pg.276-285. & Johnson-Laird, in Miller  pg-. 3 5 3 .  41.  L y o n s 1968  42.  B a r r e t t , M . D . " L e x i c a l development and o v e r e x t e n s i o n i n c h i l d language" i n Journal o f C h i l d Language,Vol.5 No.l (1978) p g . 2 0 9 .  43.  Bartlett,pg.  44.  Rice,  45.  Huttenlocher,  46.  Rice,  47.  Blank,M. " C o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n s o f language i n the school years" i n Developmental Psychology,Vol.10 (1974) p g . 2 4 1 .  Rice,  50. M i l l e r  pg.346.  97-101.  pg.113. pg.365-366.  pg.94-95.  48. H u t t e n l o c h e r , 49.  & Johnson-Laird,  pg.335  +  366.  pg.115. & Johnson-Laird,  pg.353-354.  preNo.2  178 . Bibliography  A b r a m s , K. , C h i a r e l l o , C , Cress, K.,Green,S.,and E l l e t , N . , "The r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n m o t h e r t o c h i l d s p e e c h a n d w o r d o r d e r c o m p r e h e n s i o n s t r a t e g i e s i n c h i l d r e n " i n R. Campbell & P. S m i t h ( E d s ) R e c e n t A d v a n c e s i n t h e P s y c h o l o g y o f L a n g u a g e , V o l . 1 New Y o r k : P l e n u m P r e s s 19 78. Anglin, W.W. A  J . Word, O b j e c t a n d C o n c e p t u a l D e v e l o p m e n t , N o r t o n & C o . I n c . , 1977.  nyan,W. and children"  New  York:  Q u i l l i a n , W. "The n a m i n g o f p r i m a r y c o l o r s b y i n C h i l d Development,Vol.42 (1971) p g . 1 6 2 9 - 1 6 3 2 .  B a r r e t t , M . D . " L e x i c a l development and o v e r e x t e n s i o n i n c h i l d - l a n g u a g e " i n J o u r n a l o f C h i l d L a n g u a g e , V o l . 5 No.1 (1978) pg.205-219. B a r t l e t t , E . J . "The a c q u i s i t i o n o f t h e m e a n i n g o f c o l o u r t e r m s : a study o f l e x i c a l development" i n R.Campbell & P. S m i t h (Eds) R e c e n t Advances i n t h e P s y c h o l o g y o f Language, V o l . 1 New Y o r k : P l e n u m P r e s s 1 9 7 8 . Beare,A.C. "Color-name American Journal of pg.248-256.  as a f u n c t i o n o f w a v e - l e n g t h " i n P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c s , Vol.LXXVI (196 2)  Benedict,H. " E a r l y l e x i c a l development: comprehension and p r o d u c t i o n " i n J o u r n a l o f C h i l d L a n g u a g e , V o l . 6 No.2 (1979) pg.183-200. B e r l i n , B . and California  Kay,P. B a s i c P r e s s 1969.  Color  Terms,  Berkeley:University  Blank,M. "Cognitive f u n c t i o n s of language i n the preschool y e a r s " i n D e v e l o p m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 1 0 No.2 (1974) pg.229-245. Block,E.M. and K e s s e l , F . S . " D e t e r m i n a n t s o f t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o r d e r o f g r a m m a t i c a l morphemes:a r e - a n a l y s i s and r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n " i n J o u r n a l o f C h i l d Language, Vol.7 No.1 (1980) p g . 1 8 1 - 1 9 6 . B r o w n , R . W o r d s a n d T h i n g s : An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o New Y o r k : T h e F r e e P r e s s 1958 ,pg.221-223. Brown,R. A Harvard  F i r s t Language: the E a r l y U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s 197 3.  Stages,  Language,  Cambridge,Mass:  Brown,R. " R e f e r e n c e : i n m e m o r i a l t r i b u t e t o E r i c i n C o g n i t i o n , V o l . 4 (1976) p g . 1 2 5 - 1 5 3 .  Lenneberg"  of  179. C a r e y , S . "The c h i l d a s w o r d l e a r n e r " i n M ; H a l l e , J . B r e s n a n G . A . M i l l e r (Eds) L i n g u i s t i c T h e o r y and P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e a l i t y , C a m b r i d g e , M a s s : T h e MIT P r e s s 19 78, C h a p t e r 8 pg.264-293. C a r r o l l , J . B . , D a v i e s , P . and Richman,B. The Word F r e q u e n c y B o o k , New Y o r k : A m e r i c a n Co.Inc., 1971. Cazden,C. C h i l d Language & Winston 1972.  and  &  American H e r i t a g e Heritage Publishing  E d u c a t i o n , New  York:  Hoit,Rinehart  C l a r k , E . "What's i n a w o r d ? On t h e c h i l d ' s a c q u i s i t i o n o f s e m a n t i c s i n h i s f i r s t l a n g u a g e " i n T . E . M o o r e (Ed) C o g n i t i v e Development and t h e A c q u i s i t i o n o f Language, New Y o r k : A c a d e m i c P r e s s 19 73. Clark,E. " F i r s t language a c q u i s i t i o n " (Eds) P s y c h o l i n g u i s t i c s , New Y o r k : 1977..  i n J.Morton & J . M a r s h a l l Cornell "University Press  C r u i s e , D . "A n o t e o n t h e l e a r n i n g o f c o l o u r o f C h i l d L a n g u a g e , V o l . 4 No.2 (1977).  names"  in  Journal  Dale,P. "Color naming,matching and r e c o g n i t i o n by p r e s c h o o l e r s " i n C h i l d Development, V o l . 4 0 No.3 (1969) p g . 1 1 3 5 - 1 1 4 4 . D o u g h e r t y , J . W . D . "On t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f a s e q u e n c e i n t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f b a s i c c o l o u r terms" i n R.Campbell & P.Smith (Eds) Recent Advances i n the P s y c h o l o g y o f Language, V o l . 1 , New Y o r k : P l e n u m P r e s s 1 9 7 8 . Ferguson,G.A. Statistical New Y o r k : M c G r a w - H i l l  Analysis 1976.  i n Psychology  and E d u c a t i o n ,  F i l l e n b a u m , S . and Rapoport,A. S t r u c t u r e s i n t h e S u b j e c t i v e L e x i c o n , New Y o r k : A c a d e m i c P r e s s 1 9 7 1 , C h a p t e r 3. Fremgen,A. and Fay,D. " O v e r e x t e n s i o n s i n p r o d u c t i o n and comprehension: a methodological c l a r i f i c a t i o n " i n Journal o f C h i l d L a n g u a g e , V o l . 7 N o . l (1980) p g . 2 0 5 - 2 1 1 . Gruendel,J.M. " R e f e r e n t i a l extension i n e a r l y language development" i n C h i l d Development, Vol.48 (1977) pg.1567-1576. Haber,R.N. and Perception, H e i d e r , E . Rosch c o l o r names" pg.447-455.  H e r s h e n s o n , M . The P s y c h o l o g y o f V i s u a l New Y o r k : H o l t , R i n e h a r t & W i n s t o n , I n c .  1973.  " F o c a l c o l o r a r e a s and t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f i n D e v e l o p m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 4 No.3 (1971)  180.  H e i d e r , E . Rosch " U n i v e r s a l s i n c o l o r n a m i n g a n d memory" i n J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 9 2 No.1 (1972) pg.10-20. H u t t e n l o c h e r , J . "The o r i g i n s o f l a n g u a g e c o m p r e h e n s i o n " i n R. S o l s o (Ed) T h e o r i e s i n C o g n i t i v e P s y c h o l o g y : T h e L o y o l a Symposium , P o t o m a c , M a r y l a n d : Lawrence E r l b a u m A s s o c i a t e s , Publishers 1974. J o h n s o n , E . "The d e v e l o p m e n t o f c o l o r k n o w l e d g e c h i l d r e n " i n C h i l d D e v e l o p m e n t , V o l . 4 8 No.1 pg.308-311.  i n preschool (1977)  Karpf,R., Goss,A. and S m a l l , M . "Naming, s e l e c t i o n o f c o l o r ("hue") b y y o u n g c h i l d r e n " i n J o u r n a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 9 0 (1974) pg.297-314.  and o r d e r i n g of General  Kay,P. a n d M c D a n i e l , C . K . "The l i n g u i s t i c significance meanings o f b a s i c c o l o r terms" i n Language, Vol.54 (1978) p g . 610-646.  of the No.3  Kimball,M.,and Dale,P.,"The r e l a t i o n s h i p between c o l o r and color recognition a b i l i t i e s of preschoolers" i n D e v e l o p m e n t , V o l . 4 3 (1972) p g . 972-980.  naming Child  Lamwers,L.,Small,M., and Goss,A. " R e l a t i o n a l D i s c r i m i n a t i o n o f hue by y o u n g c h i l d r e n " i n J o u r n a l o f G e n e r a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 9 6 (1977) pg.247-254. L a n t z , D . and L e n n e b e r g , E . " V e r b a l communication and c o l o r memory i n t h e d e a f a n d h e a r i n g " i n C h i l d D e v e l o p m e n t , V o l . 3 7 (1966) pg.765-779. Lenneberg,E.H. " C o l o r naming, c o l o r r e c o g n i t i o n , c o l o r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n : a r e a p p r a i s a l " i n P e r c e p t u a l and Motor S k i l l s , V o l . 1 2 (1961) pg.375-382. L e n n e b e r g , E . H . "Language and c o g n i t i o n " i n D . S t e i n b e r g & L . A . J a k o b o v i t s (Eds) S e m a n t i c s , C a m b r i d g e : U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s 1971. M e r v i s , C . B . , C a t l i n , J . , and Rosch,E. "Development o f t h e s t r u c t u r e of c o l o r c a t e g o r i e s " i n Developmental Psychology, V o l . 1 1 No.1 (1975) pg.54-60. M i l l e r , C . A . and J o h n s o n - L a i r d , P . N . Language and P e r c e p t i o n , Cambridge: The B e l k n a p P r e s s o f H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s 1976.  181.  Moefk,E.L. " R e l a t i o n s h i p s between p a r e n t a l i n p u t f r e q u e n c i e s and c h i l d r e n language a c q u i s i t i o n : r e a n a l y s i s o f Brown's d a t a " i n J o u r n a l o f C h i l d Vol.7 No.l (1980) p g . 1 0 5 - 1 1 8 . 1  a Language,  N e l s o n , K . " F e a t u r e s , c o n t r a s t s a n d t h e FCH: some c o m m e n t s o n B a r r e t t ' s l e x i c a l development hypothesis" i n J o u r n a l of C h i l d Language, Vol.6 No.l (1979) p g . 1 3 9 - 1 4 6 . R e i c h , P . "The e a r l y a c q u i s i t i o n o f w o r d m e a n i n g " i n J o u r n a l o f C h i l d Language, V o l . 3 No.l (1976) p g . 1 1 7 - 1 2 3 . R i c e , M . C o g n i t i o n t o L a n g u a g e : C a t e g o r i e s , Word M e a n i n g s T r a i n i n g , Baltimore: U n i v e r s i t y Park Press 1980. R i n s l a n d , H .D. A B a s i c V o c a b u l a r y New Y o r k : T h e M a c m i l l a n Co.  of Elementary 1945.  School  and  Children,  R o s c h , E . H . "On t h e i n t e r n a l s t r u c t u r e o f p e r c e p t u a l and s e m a n t i c c a t e g o r i e s " i n T . E . M o o r e (Ed) C o g n i t i v e D e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e A c q u i s i t i o n o f L a n g u a g e , New York: Academic Press 1973 . T h o m s o n , a n d Chapman,R. "Who i s daddy r e v i s i t e d : t h e s t a t u s o f 2 y e a r o l d s o v e r - e x t e n d e d words i n use and comprehension" i n J o u r n a l o f C h i l d L a n g u a g e , V o l . 4 - No. 3 ( 1 9 7 7 ) .  A P P E N D I X 1:  Tau V a l u e s f o r Betweenand W i t h i n - G r o u p Comparisons o f Performance  AGE COMPREHENSION vs. PRODUCTION  2A  .588*  AGE  AGE  .236  COMPREHENSION  AGE 2 vs. AGE 4  2B  2  .273  PRODUCTION  AGE 4 .289  TOTAL  PERFORMANCE  058  .127  -.164  AGE 2 vs. AGE 2 A  611*  .324  .440  AGE 2 vs. AGE 2B  673*  .927*  .782*  AGE :2A vs . AGE 2B  278  .231  .220  * = significant  rank  order  correlation  a t .05  significance  183 .  APPENDIX  Rank  2:  Orders  Tau Values f o r Comparisons o f Performance with the E v o l u t i o n a r y Orders  of  Accuracy: TOTAL  PERFORMANCE AGE  2  COMPREHENSION  AGE 4  AGE  2  AGE 4  PRODUCTION AGE  2  AGE 4  B  & K #1  -.255  .413  -.295  .375  .137  .334  B  & K  -.046  .000  .000  .343  -.277  -.046  .482 *  -.146  .326  -.384  -.049  #2  Percentage-Acquired  Orders:  B  & K #1  -.124  .387  -.271  B  & K  -.318  .097  -.121  .379  correlation  a t .05  *=  #2  significant  rank o r d e r  .  significance  A P P E N D I X 3: Between Within  subject subject  Summary factors factors  Table  f o r Analysis of Variance  # 1  4-year-olds are: A - 2-year-olds; B - Sex f e m a l e ; s e x m a l e a r e : C - Tasks comprehension; p r o d u c t i o n P " Measures 1 and 2 E - C o l o u r s 1 t o 11 Mean Squares  F Ratio  Source  Sum o f Squares  Degrees o f Freedom  A B AB S-within  220.220 0.665 0.224 161.312  1. 1. 1. 34 .  220.220 0.665 0.224 4 . 744  46.416 0.140 0.047  0.001* 0. 710 0.829  C AC BC ABC CS-within  16.195 1.876 0.074 0. 731 33.364  1. 1. 1. 1. 34 .  16.195 1.876 0.074 0.731 0.981  16.504 1. 912 0.076 0.745  0.001* 0.176 0.785 0. 394  D AD BD ABD DS-within  84 . 293 30.348 0.117 0.008 20.544  1. 1. 1. 1. 34 .  84 .293 30.348 0.117 0.008 0.604  139.503 50.225 0.193 0.014  0.001* 0.001* 0.663 0.908  1.895 0.230 0.056 0.128 5. 556  1. 1. I. 1. 34 .  1.895 0.230 0.056 0.128 0.163  11.596 1.406 0.345 0.785  0.002* 0.244 0.561 0.382  CD ACD BCD ABCD CDS-within  cont.  Probability  APPENDIX 3:  Source  cont.  Sum o f Squares  Degrees o f Freedom  Mean Squares  F Ratio  Probability  E AE BE ABE ES-within  39.964 18.476 6.738 7 .080 194.098  10. 10. 10. 10 . 340.  3.996 1.848 0.674 0.708 0. 571  7.000 3.236 1.180 1.240  0.001* 0.001* 0.303 0.264  CE ACE BCE ABCE CES-within  10.924 6.905 3.642 4.750 154.078  10. 10. 10. 10. 340.  1.092 0.690 0.364 0.475 0.453  2.410 1. 524 0. 804 1. 048  0.009* 0 .129 0.625 0.402  DE ADE BDE ABDE DES-within  3.962 2.419 0.933 0.731 27.158  10. 10 . 10 . 10. 340.  0.396 0.242 0.093 0.073 0.080  960 029 168 0.915  0 . 001* 0 . 001* 0.311 0 . 519  CDE ACDE BCDE ABCDE CDES-within  1.173 0.587 0.505 0.456 21.383  10 . 10. 10. 10. 340.  0.117 0.059 0. 050 0.046 0.063  1.866 0.934 0.803 0.725  0.049* 0.502 0.626 0.701  186.  Proportions o f Stable/Unstable/Unknown Levels of Stability "  APPENDIX 4  AGE 2 N=19 8 prop. Stable Unstable Unknown  31 95 72  .1565 .4798 .3636  .1768* . 0303 0  Stable other  31 167  .1565 .8435  .1768*  Unstable other  95 103  .4798 .5202  .1465*  Unknown other  72 126  .3636 .63 64  .0303  c r i t i c a l value of d at .05 = .0966  AGE 4 N=220 prop. Stable Unstable Unknown  155 53 12  . 7045 . 2409 .0545  .3712* . 2788* 0  Stable other  155 65  . 7045 .2955  .3712*  Unstable other  53 167  . 2409 . 7591  -.0924*  Unknown other  12 208  .0545 . 9455  -.2788*  c r i t i c a l value of d at .05 = .0917  APPENDIX  5:  Colour  f  Group F r e q u e n c i e s  STABLE criterion  & Criterion  f  i n Each  UNSTABLE criterion  Stability  f  Level  4 4 4  ^16 o r =£19 o r ^13 o r  61 £4 --  23 35 18  ^39 o r ^48 o r -^30 o r  412 £21 £4  27 33 14  ^31 =^38 ^25  or or or  £8 £14 £2  Non-primary (i) (ii) (iii)  16 16 16  ^19 o r ^16 o r ^21 o r  £4 61 66  35 23 40  *M8  or or or  £21 £12 £30  21 15 34  ^38 ^31 >44  or or or  £14 £8 £21  11  Stl9 o r  -4  37  ^48 o r  £21  24  ^38  or  £14  Primary  TOTAL critical value o f d a t .05 =  ^39 ^56  72  95  31  .2440  2  UNKNOWN criterion  (i) (ii) (iii)  Achromatic  - AGE  .1395  .1603  CO  APPENDIX  6:  Colour  Group  f  Frequencies  STABLE criterion  & Criterion  f  UNSTABLE criterion  (i) (ii) (iii)  37 50 31  ^59 or ^73 o r ^45 or  £25 £39 £11  17 24 7  ^24 ^29 ^19  or or or  Non-primary ( i ) (ii) (iii)  57 44 63  ^73 o r ^59 or ^87 o r  £39 £25 £53  19 12 29  ^29 ^24 ^34  or or or  61  ^73 o r  £39  17  ^29  or  Achromatic  Primary TOTAL c r i t i c a l value o f d a t .05 =  .109  Stability  f  Level  4  UNKNOWN criterion  6 6 2  ^8 ^9 >1  £4 £14  4 4 8  <^9 o r ^8 or ^ 1 0 o r £-1  £9  2  ^9  £4 £9  - AGE  or or or  or  12  53  155  i n Each  .1868  .3926  CO CO  APPENDIX  7: P r o p o r t i o n s i n S t a b i l i t y L e v e l s o f P r o d u c t i o n f o r AGE 2 a n d AGE 4  AGE 2 N=19 8  critical  value f  of d at  .05 =  .0966 d  prop.  Correct Mixed Incorrect None  38 22 19 119  .1919 .1111 . 0959 .6010  -.0581 -.1970* -.3511* 0  Correct other  38 160  .1919 .8081  -.0581  Mixed other  22 176  .1111 .8889  -.1389*  Incorrect Other  19 179  . 0959 .9041  -.1541*  None other  119 79  .6010' .3990  AGE 4 N=220  critical  value  f  of d at  prop.  .05 =  .3 5 1 1 *  .0917  d  Correct Mixed Incorrect None  160 18 5 37  . 7273 . 0818 .0227 .1682  .4773* .3091* .0818 0  Correct other  160 60  . 7273 .2727  .4773*  Mixed other  18 202  . 0818 .9182  -.1682*  Incorrect other  5 215  .0227 .9773  -.2273*  None other  37 183  .1682 .8318  -.0818  APPENDIX  AGE 2 N=19 8  AGE 4 N=220  ' 8:  Proportions i n S t a b i l i t y Levels o f C o m p r e h e n s i o n f o r AGE.2 a n d AGE 4  critical  value  o f d a t .05 =  .0966  f  prop.  d  Correct  95  .4798  0202  None  103  5202  0202  critical  value f  o f d a t .05 = .0917 prop.  Correct  197  8954  None  23  1046  d .3954*. -.3954*  APPENDIX  9:  Colour  Group F r e q u e n c i e s  Achromatic ( i ) (ii) (iii) Non-primary  6 7 5  ( i ) 20 ( i i ) 19* ( i i i . ) 21  Primary  TOTAL critical value o f d a t .05  12  criterion  f  criterion  Levels of Production  f  AGE 2  NONE  INCORRECT  MIXED  CORRECT f  in Stability  criterion  f  criterion  •>18 o r ^2 ^22 o r ^ 5 ^15 or  1 4 1  ^12 o r 0 ^ 1 4 o r ^2 a i o or  3 4 3  <>11 o r ^13 o r ^1 or ^9  44 57 27  ^ 4 7 o r ^18 ^ 58 o r ^28 =5:36 o r ^ 7  ^ 2 2 o r ^5 ^ 1 8 o r 4,2 >25 o r ^•9  8 5 8  >14 o r ^12 or 0 ^ 1 6 o r ^4  3 2 3*  ^13 or ^11 or ^13 or  =>3  41 28 58  ^ 5 8 o r ^28 ^ 47 o r £ 18 > 69 o r 4* 39  ^22 o r =»5  13  <>14 o r ^2  ^13 or £1  34  ^ 5 8 o r ^28  2206  119  19  22  38  13  2899  3120  1247  APPENDIX  10:  Colour  Group F r e q u e n c i e s  A c h r o m a t i c ( i ) 39 ( i i ) 53 ( i i i ) 31 N o n - p r i m a r y ( i ) 59 ( i i ) 45 ( i i i ) 67 Primary  TOTAL c r i t i c a l value o f d a t .05  62  criterion >61 >75 ^46  or £26 o r £=41 or £ 1 2  f  Levels of Production  criterion  f  criterion  2 2 1  ^•4 o r >5 o r > 4 or  17 21 6  =^18 o r ^ 22 o r ^ 1 5 or  £2 £5 --  15 11 26  ^ 22 o r ^ 1 8 or > 25 o r  £5 £2 £8  5  > 22 o r  £5  5 3 5  >12 ^10 =>14  or £1 or or £2  1 1 2  ^5 or •^4 o r  ^75  £41  11  ^12  or £1  2  £5  or  37  5  18  .1075  criterion  ^10 o r --> 1 2 o r 41 >9 o r  £41 £26 £55  160  f  2 4 2  >75 o r ^61 or ^90 or or  AGE 4  NONE  INCORRECT  MIXED  CORRECT f  in Stability  . 3205  . 6080  . 2236  r-  1  <X>  APPENDIX 11:  C o l o u r Group F r e q u e n c i e s o f C o m p r e h e n s i o n f o r AGE  NONE  CORRECT f Achromatic (i) (ii) (iii) Non-primary  (i) (ii) (iii)  Primary  TOTAL c r i t i c a l value o f d a t .05  in Stability 2  criterion  f  criterion  21 30 17  ^39 ^48 ^30  o r ^12 or £21 or £4  33 42 19  ^42 ^51 ^32  or £14 o r £.24 or £ 5  44 35 48  ^48 ^39 ^56  or £21 or £12 or £30  28 19 52  ^51 ^42 ^60  or or or  £24 £14 £33  30  ^48  o r £-21  42  >51  or  £24  95  103  .1395  .1340  Levels  APPENDIX  12:  C o l o u r Group F r e q u e n c i e s i n S t a b i l i t y o f C o m p r e h e n s i o n f o r AGE .4  NONE  CORRECT f Achromatic (i) (ii) (iii) Non-primary  (i) (ii) (iii)  Primary  TOTAL c r i t i c a l value o f d a t .05  criterion  f  criterion  51 70 38  >68 ^85 ^50  or or or  £40 ^57 £22  9 10 2  ^13 o r ^15 o r £ 2 ^10 o r  73 54 86  ^85 ^68 M.03  or or or  £57 £4 0 £75  7 6 14  ±15 ^13 ^17  or or or  £2  73  >85  or  £57  7  £15  or  £2  23  197  .0712  .2857  £4  Levels  APPENDIX  13:  K e n d a l l ' s Tau Values f o r Comparisons o f Rank O r d e r s o f E r r o r T y p e s  incorrect response Comprehension versus Production  AGE  2  2  -.3 56  .30 6  AGE  4  .184  -.029  -.04 3  .000  .04 2  .551  Production  comprehension  incorrect versus "no r e s p o n s e "  *=  response"  AGE  Comprehension  versus AGE 4  "no  production  AGE  2  -.298  .131  AGE  4  -.225  .459  significant  p r o p o r t i o n a t .05  significance  APPENDIX  14:  Summary  Table  Between s u b j e c t f a c t o r s a r e : Within subject factors are : Sum o f Squares  Source (1)  No.  of correct  A S-within B AB BS-within (2)  No.  for Analysis of Variance  #2  4-year-olds A - 2-year-olds; B - Production task; comprehension  Degrees o f Freedom  Mean Squares  F Ratio  task  Probability  responses  491.748 372.742  1. 36.  491.748 10.354  47.494  0.001  *  38.325 5.167 68.371  1. 1. 36.  38.325 5.167 1.899  20.180 2.721  0.001 0.108  *  175.937 6 . 292  27.964  0.001  *  of incorrect  1  responses  A S-within  175.937 226 .498  1. 36.  B AB BS-within  2.070 0.912 118.364  1. 1. 36.  2. 070 0.912 3.288  0.630 0.278  0.433 0.602  12.056  0.001  6.769 2.788  0.013 0.104  (3)  No.  o f "no  response'  A S-within  77.483 231.372  1. 36.  77.483 6.427  B AB BS-within  23.626 9.732 125.650  1. 1. 36.  23.626 9.732" 3.490  *  197.  APPENDIX'  15:  Proportions o f i n c o r r e c t responses (errors) i n Groups o f Primary, Non-primary and A c h r o m a t i c C o l o u r s f o r P r o d u c t i o n AGE 2  f  prop..  d  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  19 15 14  . 3958 .3125 .2917  .1231 .072 0  achromatic ( i i ) non-primary.(ii) primary  23 11 14  .4792 .2292 .2916  .1156 .0721 0  achromatic ( i i i ) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  13 21 14  .2708 .4375 .2917  .089 .072 0  achromatic (i) other  19 29  .3958 . 6042  .1231  achromatic ( i i ) other  23 25  .4792 .5208  .1156  achromatic ( i i i ) other  13 35  .2708 .7292  .089  non-primary (i) other  15 33  .3125 .6875  -.0511  non-primary ( i i ) other  11 37  .2292 .7708  -.0435  non-primary ( i i i ) other  21 27  .4375 .5625  -.017  primary other  14 34  .2917 . 7083  -.0719  AGE 2: N= 4 8 c r i t i c a l value o f d a t .05= .1963  198 .  APPENDIX  16:  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Responses (errors) i n Groups o f P r i m a r y , Non-primary and A c h r o m a t i c C o l o u r s f o r C o m p r e h e n s i o n AGE 2  prop. achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  20 22 33  . 2667 .2933 .4400  006 0763 0  achromatic (ii) non-primary ( i i ) primary  27 15 33  .3600 .2000 .4400  ,0036 0763 0  14 28 33  .1867 .3733 .4400  , 0049 ,0763 0  achromatic (iii) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  of  AGE 2: N= 75 c r i t i c a l value d a t .05= .1570  achromatic (i) other  20 55  2667 7333  0060  achromatic ( i i ) other  27 48  3600 6400  0036  (iii) other  14 61  1867 8133  0049  non-primary (i) other  22 53  2933 7067  0703  non-primary ( i i ) other  15 60  2000 8000  0727  (iii) other  28 47  3733 6267  0812  prxmary other  33 42  4400 5600  0764  achromatic  non-prxmary  199.  APPENDIX-  17:  Proportions of i n c o r r e c t responses (errors) i n Groups o f Primary, Non-primary and A c h r o m a t i c C o l o u r s f o r P r o d u c t i o n AGE 4  d  f  prop.  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  12 8 4  .5000 . 3333 .1667  .2273 .197 0  achromatic ( i i ) non-primary ( i i ) primary  14 6 4  .5833 .2500 .1667  . 2197 .197 0  achromatic ( i i i ) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  5 15 4  .2083 .6250 .1667  .0265 .197 0 AGE 4: N= 24 c r i t i c a l value o f d a t .05= .2776  achromatic (i) other  12 12  .5000 .5000  . 2273  achromatic ( i i ) other  14 10  .5833 .4167  .2197  achromatic ( i i i ) other  5 19  . 2083 . 7917  . 0265  non-primary (i) other  8 16  .3333 . 6666  -.0303  non-primary ( i i ) other  6 18  . 2500 .7500  -.0227  non-primary ( i i i ) other  15 9  . 6250 .3750  .1705  4 20  .1667 .8333  -.1969  primary . other  200. APPENDIX  18:  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Responses (errors) i n Groups o f Primary, Non-primary and A c h r o m a t i c C o l o u r s f o r C o m p r e h e n s i o n AGE 4  f  prop.  d  achromatic (i) non-primary ( i ) primary  7 6 5  .3889 .3333 .2778  .1162 .0859 0  achromatic ( i i ) non-primary ( i i ) primary  8 5 5  .4444 .2778 .2778  .0808 .0859 0  achromatic ( i i i ) non-primary (iii) primary  1 12 5  .0556 .6666 .2778  -.1262 .0859 0  of  AGE 4: N= 18 c r i t i c a l value d a t .05= .321  achromatic (i) other  7 11  .3889 .6111  .1162  achromatic ( i i ) other  8 10  .4444 .5556  . 0808  achromatic ( i i i ) other  1 17  .0556 .9444  -.1262  non-primary (i) other  6 12  .3333 .6666  -.0303  non-primary ( i i ) other  5 13  .2778 .7222  . 0051  non-primary ( i i i ) other  12 6  .6666 .3333  .2121  primary other  5 13  .2778 .7222  -.0858  201  APPENDIX  19: P r o p o r t i o n s f o r AGE 2  Production:  N=48, c r i t i c a l  top  rank:  top  2 ranks:  top  value  e  e  5:  (as above  Comprehension:  Ranks  o f d a t .05 = .1963 prop.  d  black other  11 37  .229 .771  .138  grey+black other  17 31  .354 .646  .172  32 16  .666 .334  .211 *  40 8  .833 .167  .196  43 5  .8958 .1042  .1678  n  o  top  i n Decreasing  f  pink 3 ranks: purple+grey+black • 9 other , pink 4: P f f w n + p u r p l e + g r e y + b l a c k green r  top  of Errors  t o p 4)  t  h  e  r  +red other  N=75, c r i t i c a l  value  o f d a t .05= .1570  f  prop.  d  red other  12 63  .190 .810  .099  top  rank:  top  2 ranks:  yellow+red other  23 52  .3066 .6134  .1246  top  3 ranks:  ^£| +yellow+red other  39 36  .520 .480  .156  top  4:  pS?pie Shite yeH° red other +  53 22  .7066 .2934  .1606  top ^  5:  (as above  65  .8666  .1386  10  .1334  e  +  w +  t o p 4) + b l a c k * ' grey other  *  APPENDIX  20:  Production:  top  rank:  top  2  N=  Proportions f o r AGE 4  of Errors  24, c r i t i c a l  value  of d at  grey other  ranks other  top  3  black . ranks : o r a n g e + p u r p l e g y red white other Brown  Comprehension:  +  N=  top rank: ^  top  2 ranks:  r e  18, c r i t i c a l  r e  Purple  +  g  r  e  y  other  1  .05 =  Ranks  .2776 d  f  prop.  7 17  .2917 . 7083  . 2007  13 11  .5416 .4584  . 2686  21 3  .875 .125  .238  value  9 Y other blue yellow  i n Decreasing  of d at  .05 =  f  prop.  d  * 12  .333 .667  .2423  .  6  2  8  8  8  .112  .321  .433*  APPENDIX 21:  P r o p o r t i o n s o f "No R e s p o n s e s " i n G r o u p s o f Primary, Non-primary and Achromatic C o l o u r s f o r P r o d u c t i o n AGE 2  d  f  prop.  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  19 20 22  .3115 . 3279 .3600  .0388 .0031 0  achromatic ( i i ) non-primary ( i i ) primary  25 14 22  .4098 .2295 .3600  . 0462 .0030 0  achromatic ( i i i ) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  10 29 22  .1639 .4754 . 3600  . 0179 . 0030 0  of  AGE 2: N= 61 c r i t i c a l value d a t .05= .174  achromatic (i) other  19 42  . 3115 .6885  . 0388  achromatic ( i i ) other  25 36  .4098 . 5902  .0462  achromatic ( i i i ) other  10 51  .1639 .8361  .0179  non-primary (i) other  20 41  .3279 . 6721  . 0357  non-primary ( i i ) other  14 47  . 2295 . 7705  . 0432  non-primary ( i i i ) other  29 32  .4754 .5246  . 0209  primary other  22 39  .3606 . 6393  . 0036  APPENDIX. 2 2 : P r o p o r t i o n s o f "No R e s p o n s e s " i n G r o u p s o f P r i m a r y ,Non-primary and A c h r o m a t i c Colours f o r Comprehension AGE 2  f  prop.  d  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  13 6 9  .4643 .2143 .3214  .1916 . 0423 0  achromatic ( i i ) non-primary ( i i ) primary  15 4 9  . 5357 .1429 . 3214  .1721 .0423 0  5 14 . 9  .1786 .5000 . 3214  . 0032 .0423 0  achromatic ( i i i ) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  of  AGE 2: N= 28 c r i t i c a l value d a t .05= .257  13 15  .4643 .5357  .1916  (ii) other  15 13  .5357 .4643  .1721  (iii) other  5 23  .1786 .8214  .0032  6 22  .2143 .7857  .1493  (ii) other  4 24  .1429 .8571  .1298  (iii) other  14 14  .5000 .5000  .0455  primary other  9 19  .3 214 .6786  . 0422  achromatic (i) other achromatic achromatic  non-primary (i) other non-primary non-primary  APPENDIX  2 3 : P r o p o r t i o n s o f "No R e s p o n s e s " i n G r o u p s o f Primary, Non-primary and Achromatic C o l o u r s f o r P r o d u c t i o n AGE 4  f  prop.  d  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  5 6 2  .3846 .4 615 .1538  .1119 .2098 0  achromatic ( i i ) non-primary ( i i ) primary  6 5 2  .4615 .3846 .1538  .0979 .2098 0  1 10 2  .0769 .7692 .1538  .1049 .2098 0  achromatic (iii) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  .  of achromatic (i) other achromatic achromatic  (ii) other (iii) other  non-primary (i) other non-primary non-primary  (ii) other  AGE 4: N= 13 c r i t i c a l value d a t .05= .377  5 8  .3846 .6154  .1119  6 7  .4615 .5385  . 0979  1 12  .0769 ' .9231  .1049  6 7  .4615 .5385  .0979  5 8  .3846 .6154  .1119  .7692 .2308  .3147  .1538 .8462  .20 98  (iii). other  10 3  primary other  2 11  •  APPENDIX  24:  Proportions of "No Responses" i n Decreasing Ranks f o r Both Ages  Age 2 Production: N=61, c r i t i c a l value of d a t .05=.174  top rank: top 2 ranks: top 3 ranks:  9 Y other purple+grey other r e  red yellow+purple+grey . green other white brown  f  prop.  d  9 52  .1475 .8525  . 0565  16 45  .262 .738  .080  46 15  . 754 .246  .117  value o f d at . 0.  top  rank:  top  2 ranks:  grey other black, green 9 rey  top  3 ranks:  other brown pirple+grleS g y orange red. other +  d  f  prop.  8 20  . 2857 .7143  .1947  16 12  .5714 .4286  .2984  26  .9285  .2005  2  .0714  r e  ilue of d a t .05=.  top rank:  purple. other  f  prop.  d  8  . 615  .433  5  . 385  APPENDIX  AGE  25:  2 versus  K e n d a l l ' s Tau V a l u e s f o r Comparisons o f Rank O r d e r s o f I n c o r r e c t U s e s  AGE  4:  comprehension  -.186  production  Comprehension  versus  Production:  .04 3  AGE  2  .37 2  AGE  4  -.067  APPENDIX  26:  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Uses i n Groups o f Primary, Non-primary and A c h r o m a t i c C o l o u r s f o r P r o d u c t i o n AGE  d  f  prop.  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  6 13 29  .1250 .2708 .6042  .14 77 .2405 * 0  achromatic (ii) non-primary ( i i ) primary  12 7 29  .2500 .1458 .604 2  .1136 .2405 * 0  6 13 29  .1250 .2708 .604 2  .1477 .2405 * 0  achromatic ( i i i ) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  of  AGE 2: N= 4 8 c r i t i c a l value d a t .05=.1963  6 42  .1250 .8750  .1477  (ii) other  12 36  .2500 .7500  .1136  (iii) other  6 42  .1250 .8750  .1477  13 35  .2708 .7292  . 0928  (ii) other  7 41  .14 58 .8542  .1269  (iii) other  13 35  .2708 .7292  . 0928  primary other  29 19  .604 2 .3958  .2406  achromatic (i) other achromatic achromatic  non-primary (i) other non-primary non-primary  2  *  209.  APPENDIX  2.7: P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t U s e s i n Groups o f P r i m a r y , Non-primary and • A c h r o m a t i c C o l o u r s f o r C o m p r e h e n s i o n AGE  2  d  f  prop.  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  20 22 33  .2667 .2933 .4400  -.0060 -.0763 0  achromatic ( i i ) non-primary ( i i ) primary  28 14 33  .3733 .1866 .4400  . 0097 -.0764 0  achromatic ( i i i ) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  13 29 33  .1733 .3866 .4400  -.0085 -.0764 0  of  AGE 2 : N « 7 5 c r i t i c a l value d a t .05=.1570  -.0060  achromatic (i) other  20 55  .2667 . 7333  achromatic ( i i ) other  28 47  . 3733 .6267  achromatic ( i i i ) other  13 62  .1733 .8267  -.0085  non-primary (i) other  22 53  . 2933 . 7067  - .0703  non-primary ( i i ) other  14 61  .1866 .8134  - . 0861  non-primary ( i i i ) other  29 46  .3866 . 6134  -.0679  primary other  33 42  .4400 .5600  .0764  . 0097  APPENDIX  28:  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Uses i n Groups o f P r i m a r y , Non-primary and • A c h r o m a t i c C o l o u r s f o r P r o d u c t i o n AGE  f  prop.  d  5 6 10  .2381 .2857 .4 762  . 0346 .1125 0  achromatic ( i i ) 7 non-primary ( i i ) 4 primary 10  .3333 .1905 .4762  . 0303 .1125 0  .1905 .3333 .4 762  . 0087 .1125 0  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  achromatic (iii) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  4 7 10  of  AGE 4: N= 21. c r i t i c a l value d a t .05=.2967  5 16  .2381 .7619  .0346  (ii) other  7 14  .3333 .6666  .0202  (iii) other  4 17  .1905 .8095  .0087  6 15  .2857 .7143  .0779  (ii) other  4 17  .1905 .8095  . 0822  (iii) other  7 14  .3333 .6666  .1212  primary other  10 11  .4 762 .5238  .1126  achromatic (i) other achromatic achromatic  non-primary (i) other non-primary non-primary  4  APPENDIX  29:  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Uses i n Groups o f P r i m a r y , Non-primary and Achromatic Colours f o r Comprehension  f  prop.  d  achromatic (i) non-primary (i) primary  3 9 6  .1667 .5000 .3 333  .1060 .0304 0  achromatic (ii) non-primary ( i i ) primary  6 6 6  .3333 .3333 .3333  . 0303 .0303 0  3 9 6  .1667 .5000 .33 33  .0151 . 0304 0  achromatic (iii) non-primary ( i i i ) primary  of  achromatic achromatic  .1667 .8333  .1060  (ii) 6 other 12  .3333 .6666  .0303  (iii) other  3 15  .1667 .8333  .0151  9 9  .50 00 .5000  .1364  (ii) 6 other 12  .3333 .6666  . 0603  (iii) other  9 9  .5000 .5000  .0455  6 12  .3333 .6666  .0303  non-primary (i) other non-primary non-primary  primary other  4  AGE 4: N= 18 c r i t i c a l value d a t .05=.3205  3 15  achromatic (i) other  AGE  APPENDIX  Age  30:.  P r o p o r t i o n s o f I n c o r r e c t Uses i n D e c r e a s i n g Ranks o f P r o d u c t i o n  2: N=48, c r i t i c a l  value  of d at  prop.  blue other  10 38  . 2083 .7917  1173  18 30  .3750 .6250  ,1930  25 . 23  .5208 .4712  ,2478  31 17  .6458 .3542  , 2818  uhite  39  .8125  other  9  .1875  +purple other  42 6  .8750 .12 50  top  2 ranks:  green+blue other  top  3 ranks:  red+green+blue other  top  4.  top  5:  brown+red+green+blue other ( a s a b o v e t o p 4)  6:(as  Age  4:  a b o v e t o p 5)  N=21,  critical  rank: top  2  ranks:  3  ranks:  brown yellow orange pink  .1963  f rank:  top  .05 =  +Y  value  of d at  .05 =  d  .2665  . 2380  .2967 d  f  prop.  blue other  6 15  .2857 . 7143  ,1947  black+blue other  9 12  .4286 .5714  ,2466  +black+blue other  17 4  .8095 .1905  .2635  APPENDIX  31:  Proportions o f I n c o r r e c t Uses i n Decreasing Ranks o f Comprehension .05 = .1570  top rank:  green other blue+green other  top 2 ranks:  brown pink +blue+green other  top 3 ranks:  grey u,^.,.-. white+5[°£ +blue+green other bottom rank: ( a l l except purple) purple top 4:  n  r  e  d  f  prop.  12 63  .1600 .8400 " .29 33 .2933 .7067  22 53 38 38 37 ~~ 59 59 16 " 74 1  n  .0690  n n  .1113  .5067 .5067 .4933  .1427  . 7867 .7867 .2133  .1497-  . 9867 .9867 . 0133  .0777  Age 4: N=18, c r i t i c a l value of d a t .05 = .3205  top rank: top 2 ranks:  top 3 ranks:  .f  prop.  yellow other purpfe+yellow brown other  4 "14 13 _ 5  .2222 . 7778  .1313  .7222 . 7222 .,-,_„ i->-»o .2778  .3582  white pink+purple+yellow brown ., other  15 15 3  .8333 .8333 .1667  .3783  c  d  214 . APPENDIX  32:  AGE 2A n= 7  AGE 2B n= 41  Proportions of Error Pairs i n Production (including labels, excluding individual trends)  f  prop.  saturation  0  .0000  -.1091  brightness  0  . 0000  - .1818  adjacency  3  .4285  .1922  other  4  .5715  .0988  saturation  8  .1950  .0859  brightness  12  . 2930  .1112  .1950  -.0413  17  .4146  -.0581  saturation  8  .1666  .0750  brightness  12  .2500  .0864  adjacency  11  .2970  . 0610  other  21  .4375  -.0534  saturation  6  .2857  .1767  brightness  7  .3333  .1697  10  .4760  .2400  8.  adjacency other  AGE 2 n= 4 8  AGE 4 n= 21  adjacency  5  other  Production  AGE 2 n= 36  d  Errors  Using  . 2380  a Common  d  c r i t i c a l value a t .05 = .2124  of  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .1960  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = . 2968  d  -.2529  Label:  f  prop.  d  saturation  7  .1944  .0846  brightness  8  .2222  .0586  adj acency  7  .1944  -.0419  17  .4722  -.0187  other  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .5140  c r i t i c a l value of d a t .05 = .2260  215.  APPENDIX  AGE 2A n= 38  AGE  n=  2B 37  AGE 2 n= 75  AGE 4 n= 18  33: P r o p o r t i o n s o f E r r o r P a i r s (including labels, excluding  i n Comprehension i n d i v i d u a l trends)  d  f •  prop.  saturation  3  . 0789  brightness  8  .2105  .0287  -.0302  adjacency  11  . 2894  .0531  other  18  .4736  .0009  saturation  7  .1892  .0801  brightness  5  .1351  -.0467  adjacency  7  .1892  -.04 71  other  22  .5946  .1219  saturation  10  .1333  .0240  brightness  12  .1600  -.0036  adjacency  17  . 2267  -.0093  other  48  . 6400  .1500  saturation  4  . 2222  .1130  brightness  5  .2778  .1142  adjacency  5  . 2778  . 0418  other  4  .2222  - .2689  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .2207  c r i t i c a l . value a t .05 = .2235  of  c r i t i c a l value a t .05 = .1570  of  c r i t i c a l value a t .05 = .3207  of  APPENDIX  AGE 2 n= 123  AGE 4 n= 39  34: • T o t a l P r o p o r t i o n s o f E r r o r (including labels, excluding  f  prop.  d  saturation  18  .1463  .0372  brightness  25  .2033  .0215  adjacency  28  .2276  -.0087  other  52  .4227  -.0500  saturation  10  .2564  .1473  brightness  13  .3333  .1515  adjacency  15  .3846  .1483  5  .1282  -.3445  other  Pairs individual  trends)  c r i t i c a l value a t .05 = .1226  c r i t i c a l value a t .05 = .2176  *  APPENDIX  35:  E r r o r - P a i r s Made M o r e T h a n O n c e (including labels, excluding individual  f  prop.  d  saturation  1  .1250  .0160  brightness  2  .2500  .1864  adjacency  2  .2500  .0140  other  4  .5000  .0100  saturation  2  .6666  .5575  brightness  2  .6666  .4848  adjacency  0  . 0000  .2363  other  1  .3333  f  prop.  d  saturation  3  .1428  .0338  brightness  3  .1428  .0208  adjacency  7  .3333  .0970  other  9  .4285  . 0624  saturation  1  . 3333  .2242  brightness  1  . 3333  .1515  adjacency  1  .3333  .0970  other  0  . 0000  Production:  AGE 2 n= 8  AGE 4 n= 3  Comprehension:  AGE 2 n= 21  AGE 4 n= 3  trends)  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .4809  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .7852  -.1394  -.4727  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .2968  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .7852  218 .  APPENDIX  AGE 2A n= 3  AGE 2B n= 35  36:  Proportions of Error Pairs (excluding labels, excluding  f  prop.  saturation  0  . 0000  - .1091  brightness  0  . 0000  -.1818  adjacency  1  .3333  . 0970  other  2  .6666  .1939  saturation  7  .2000  .0909  brightness  8  .2285  .04 67  adj acency  6  .1714  -.0649  17 •  .4857  .0130  saturation  7  .1842  .0751  brightness  8  .2105  .0287  adjacency  7  .1842  -.0521  19  .5000  . 0273  saturation  2  .2000  .0909  brightness  3  . 3000  .1182  adjacency  6  .6000  .3637  other  1  .1000  -.3727  saturation  4  .4444  .3309  brightness  3  .3333  .1482  adjacency  3  . 3333  . 0937  other  1  .1111  saturation  6  .3157  . 2066  brightness  6  .3157  .1339  adjacency  9  .4736  .2373  other  2  .1053  -.3674  other  AGE 2 n= 38  other  AGE 4 A n= 10  A G E 4B n= 9  AGE 4 n= 19  i n Production individual trends)  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .7852  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .2298  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .2207  d  c r i t i c a l . value of a t .05 = .4303  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .4533  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = . 3120  d  -.3627  *  219 .  APPENDIX  37:  E r r o r - P a i r s Made M o r e T h a n (excluding labels, excluding  f  AGE 2A n= 0  AGE 2B n= 10  prop.  d  saturation  0  brightness  0  adjacency-  0  other •  0  saturation  2  .2000  .0909  brightness  3  .3000  .1182  adjacency  2  .2000  -.0363  other  4  .4000  -.0727  AGE  2 = AGE  2B  AGE  4A=  error:  one  AGE 4 n= 2  trends)  c r i t i c a l value of d a t .05 = .4304  Saturation 1 Brightness  AGE 4B n= 2  Once individual  1  d  f  prop.  saturation  1  . 5000  .3909  brightness  1  .5000  . 3182  adjacency  1  . 5000  .2637  other  0  . 0000  -.4727  saturation  1  .5000  . 3909  brightness  1  . 5000  .3182  adjacency  1  . 5000  .2637  other  0  . 0000  -.4727  c r i t i c a l value a t .05 = .9618  c r i t i c a l value a t .05 = .9618  220 .  APPENDIX  AGE 2A n= 57  AGE 2B n= 66  AGE 2 n= 12 3  AGE 4 A n= 25  AGE n—  n—  4B O,  ?  AGE 4 n= 34  38:  Proportions of Error Pairs (excluding labels, including  f  prop.  d  saturation  7  .1228  .0137  brightness  9  .1578  -.0240  adjacency  12  .2105  -.0258  other  30  .5263  .0536  saturation  10  .1515  .0424  brightness  10  .1515  -.0303  adjacency  11  .1666  -.0697  other  38  .5757  .1030  saturation  17  .1382  .0291  brightness  19  .1545  -.0273  adjacency  23  .1869  -.0494  other  68  .5528  .0801  saturation  5  . 2000  .0909  brightness  6  .2400  .0582  adjacency  9  .3600  .1237  other  8  .3200  -.1527  saturation  4  .4444  .3309  brightness  3  .3333  .1482  adjacency  3  .3333  . 0937  other  1  .1111  -.3627  saturation  9  .2600  .1509  brightness  9  .2600  .0782  12  .3500  .1137  9  .2600  -.2127  adjacency other  i n Production individual trends)  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .1801  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .1675  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .1226  d  c r i t i c a l value of • a t .05 = .2720  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = .4533  d  c r i t i c a l value of a t .05 = . 2332  d  221. APPENDIX 39: E r r o r - P a i r s Made More Than Once (excluding l a b e l s , i n c l u d i n g i n d i v i d u a l trends)  AGE 2A n= 9  AGE 2B n= 20  f  prop.  d  saturation  1  .1111  .0020  brightness  1  .1111  -.0707  adjacency  2  .2222  -.0141  other  5  .5555  . 0828  saturation  3  .1500  .0409  brightness  4  .2000  . 0182  adjacency  4  .2000  . 0363  10  . 5000  .0273  saturation  5  .1389  .0298  brightness  4  .1111  -.0707  adjacency  6  .1666  -. 0697:  22  .6111  .1384  saturation  1  .3333  .2242  brightness  1  .3333  .1515  adjacency  2  .6666  .4303  other  0  . 0000  -.4727  saturation  1  . 5000  .3909  brightness  1  .5000  .3182  adjacency  1  .5000  .2637  other  0  . 0000  -.4727  saturation  2  .4000  .2909  brightness  2  .4000  .2182  adjacency  2  .4000  .1637  other  0  .0000  -.4727  other  AGE 2 n= 36  other  AGE 4 A n= 3  AGE 4B n= 2  AGE 4 n= 5  c r i t i c a l value of d at .05 = .4533  c r i t i c a l value of d at .05 = .3042  c r i t i c a l value of d . a t .05 = .2266  c r i t i c a l value of d at .05 = .7850  c r i t i c a l value of d at .05 = . 9618  c r i t i c a l value of d at .05 = .6080  APPENDIX 40: '  Measurements of Colour Samples Used by Methuen Notation Proposed F o c a l Colour Sample  Actual Sample Used  blue  21A8  21A8  green  2 7A8  2 7D8  . 10A8  11B8  yellow  2A8  4A7  purple  16A8  18B6  orange  6A8  7A8  pink  11A4  9A3  grey  Dl  Dl  red  Methuen n o t a t i o n : hue l e v e l s :  hue/brightness/saturation 1 to 30  brightness l e v e l s :  A to F  saturation levels:  1 to 8  223. APPENDIX 41:  Questionnaire  (Page 1 of 3)  A. In your o p i n i o n , how good i s your c h i l d ' s knowledge of c o l o u r s f o r h i s / h e r age l e v e l ? exceptional;  good ;  average;  below average.  B. Have you a c t i v e l y taught him/her any c o l o u r s ? I f so, please i n d i c a t e which c o l o u r s , roughly how long ago t r a i n i n g began or occurred, how much success you had, e t c .  C. What was the f i r s t c o l o u r term your c h i l d used ( c o r r e c t l y O r i n c o r r e c t l y ) ? Was t h i s use widespread, or r e s t r i c t e d to one p a r t i c u l a r item/object?  D. Does your c h i l d appear to have any f a v o u r i t e c o l o u r s ? Does he/she have any f a v o u r i t e c o l o u r terms, r e g a r d l e s s of whether use i s c o r r e c t or not? Please i n d i c a t e . .  E. Is there any c o l o u r term to which your c h i l d has more than usual exposure than other c o l o u r terms? Please e x p l a i n , (for example, your c a t ' s name i s GREY, or c h i l d ' s f a v o u r i t e cup i s BLUE).  F. Does your c h i l d show any preference the l e f t hand? NO  YES :  f o r using the r i g h t or  r i g h t hand  left  hand  APPENDIX  41:  cont.  Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Page  2 of 3  224 .  G. A m o u n t o f U s e : P l e a s e l i s t t h e f o l l o w i n g c o l o u r s f r o m t h o s e used most f r e q u e n t l y t o t h o s e used l e a s t frequently. Do s e p a r a t e l y f o r y o u r own u s e a n d f o r y o u r c h i l d ' s u s e . In c a s e s where 2 o r more t e r m s a p p e a r t o be u s e d w i t h e q u a l f r e q u e n c y , i n d i c a t e by c i r c l i n g t h e g u i l t y parties. eg yellow white red black etc. The  colour  terms  t o be l i s t e d a r e :  BLACK,BLUE,RED,PURPLE,BROWN,WHITE,GREY,PINK,GREEN,YELLOW,ORANGE. Your  own  use  Child's correctly most  least  use incorrectly  frequent •  frequent  F o r t h o s e c o l o u r terms u s e d i n c o r r e c t l y by t h e c h i l d , p l e a s e i n d i c a t e below what c o l o u r s t h e y were c o n f u s e d w i t h , ( f o r e x a m p l e , GREEN u s e d t o r e f e r t o a l l y e l l o w a n d g r e e n objects.)  APPENDIX  41:  cont.  Questionnaire  Page  3 of 3  225.  H. E x t e n t o f U s e : I n d i c a t e a p p r o x i m a t e l y how many d i f f e r e n t o b j e c t s each c o l o u r term i s used f o r by y o u and by your child. (for e x a m p l e , t h e name P U R P L E may b e u s e d o n l y t o r e f e r t o your socks o r t h e c h i l d ' s cup, thus: 2 i t e m s : s o c k s , h e r cup. Any t e r m s u s e d simply as: 5 Your  use:  f o r m o r e t h a n 5 o b j e c t s may b e i n d i c a t e d i t e m s , a n d no l i s t i n g o f o b j e c t s i s n e c e s s a r y .  ( i nspeech  t o your  child)  PINK:  items:  PURPLE  items:  GREEN  items:  GREY  items:  BLACK  items:  BLUE  items:  WHITE  items:  RED  items:  BROWN  items:  YELLOW  items:  items:  ORANGE  C h i l d ' s Use  Correctly  Incorrectly  BLACK  items;  items:  BLUE  items:  items:  RED  items:  items:  items:  items:  BROWN  items:_  items:  WHITE  items:_  items:  GREY  items:_  items:  PINK  items:_  items:  GREEN  items:_  items:  YELLOW  items:_  items:  items:  items:  PURPLE  ORANGE:  /  226 .  APPENDIX  42:  Rank O r d e r s o f O v e r a l l F r e q u e n c y a n d Extent-of-Use, w i t h Tau V a l u e s f o r C o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h Performance and E v o l u t i o n a r y O r d e r s  Child Frequency  blue red green yellow orange pink brown black white purple grey  Evolutionary Order:  blue red yellow green orange brown pink white black purple grey  Child Extent  red blue green yellow brown pink orange white black purple grey  Mother Extent  blue red orange pink green yellow brown black white purple grey  .216  .019  .295  .200  .236  .330  .091  Comprehension:-.018  -.054  .146  -.054  .091  .257  .018  Orders  of  .177  Mother Frequency  Accuracy:  Production:  Total Performance:  .127  APPENDIX code:  43: K e n d a l l ' s T a u V a l u e s f o r C o m p a r i s o n s o f I n d i v i d u a l w i t h P a r e n t a l Input and C h i l d P r a c t i c e Measures  S - subject  C D E F  number  A - child frequency B - mother frequency  1  A .68*  B .68*  A  B  C  D  .49*  .34  .36  .36  .35  . 31  —  —  —  .45*  B .45*  -.27  .18  -.32  .06 - . 28  .09  .69*  .59*  .18  - .39  —  .29  —  -.19  - .19  -.36  4  -.37  -.25  - .27 -.39  -.23  .14  —  -.37  .18 -.15  —  . 5 8 * .25 - .44  6  .44 -.08  —  7  .35 - . 5 7 *  .46 - . 0 5  .39  .13 -.06  - .18  - .12 -.17  .14  .13  .25  .08  -.12  - .08  .41  . 26  .26  .25  .34  - .08 -.30  - .16  -.33  - .28 - .02  .57*  .18  - .14  .43 - .35  9  .02  .12  .30  .30  .37  12  -.04  -.28  .03  .00  -.37  13  -.32  - . 4 7 * - .17  .00  .30  .28  .38  .00  .10  14  .31  .06  .29  .15  .69*  .15  .69*  .20  .47*  15  .05  .23  .35  .06  -.35 -.53  —  —  —  .05  .19  -.08  .48*  .17  .61*  .18  .27  .11  1.00*  .23  - .19  18  .67*  - .23 - .41  -.06  —  .30  -.23  -.06  16  .49*  .24  3 .  - . 2 3 -.18  F  .59*  .16  8  E  .16  .07  -.18  D  .07  -.22  .04 - .17  C  - .22  -.25  _ _ _ . 37  —  A  Performance  -.25  2  5  Total  D  C  2 Performance _  child extent-of-use mother e x t e n t - o f - u s e c o r r e l a t i o n o f c h i l d e x t e n t t o mother e x t e n t c o r r e l a t i o n o f c h i l d t o mother frequency  Production  Comprehension  s  -  AGE  —  .38  .36 - . 21  -.05  1.00*  .42  -.16  - .05 - .07  .82*  .90*  .31  1.00*  .87*  - .25 - . 20  .69*  .54*  . 31  .25  . 00  .00  .89*  .09  .51*  .13  . 53*  .43  .05  . 23  .35  .06  .58*  .78*  —  —  —  .78*  —  —  -.35  - . 53  .61*  -.09  .15  .07  .22  - .05  . 1 6  .28  APPENDIX  code:  44:  F r e q u e n c i e s and P r o p o r t i o n s o f S t a b i l i t y L e v e l s Corresponding w i t h L e v e l s o f Frequency and E x t e n t - o f - U s e  B - levels  o f frequency  child frequency B  pro  f  high mid low none total  8 9 4 1 22  UNSTABLE  high mid low none total  22 28 21 12 83  .26 .34 . 25 .14  UNKNOWN  high mid low none total  6 13 13 64  .09 .20* . 20*  STABLE  .  .36 .41 .18 .04  and e x t e n t - o f - u s e  mother frequency f 9 9 4 0 22  pro .41 .41* .18 .00  f - frequency pro - p r o p o r t i o n  child extent  mother extent  f  f  pro  7 0 11 1 19  .37 .00 .58 . 05  44 33 24 0 101  .43* . 33* .24* .00  21 8 33 27 89  . 24 . 09* .37 . 30  14 23 27 64  .22 .36 .42*  4 4 16 53  . 07 .07* .30*  pro  7 3 9 3 22  . 32 .14 .41 .14  41 15 32 13 101  .41* .15 .32 .13  16 4 19 54  . 29 .07 . 35  •  

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:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095066/manifest

Comment

Related Items