Early language acquisition: cracking the speech code

By Patricia K. Kuhl. 2004

2,145 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cultural Studies, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Natural Language Processing, Linguistics

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cultural Studies

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Natural Language Processing

In Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

Dialog-based Language Learning (2016, background): “the review paper [9], although the usefulness of feedback for learning grammar is disputed [13].”
Semi-Supervised Speech Recognition via Local Prior Matching (2020, background): “Instead, humans possess an inherent ability to learn from vast quantities of unlabeled speech (Chomsky, 1986; Kuhl, 2004; Glass, 2012; Dupoux, 2018).”
Emergent linguistic structure in artificial neural networks trained by self-supervision (2020, background): “H language communication is via sequences of words, canonically produced as a mainly continuous speech stream (1).”
Non-native speech perception in adverse conditions: A review (2010, background): “Kuhl (2000, 2004) offers a comprehensive account in which both neurological and input factors account for the age factor.”
Interactive Language Acquisition with One-shot Visual Concept Learning through a Conversational Game (2018, background): “First, humans act upon the world and learn from the consequences of their actions (Skinner, 1957; Kuhl, 2004; Petursdottir and Mellor, 2016).”
Brain Mechanisms in Early Language Acquisition (2010, background): “In barn owls (Brainard and Knudsen, 1998) and white-crowned sparrows (Baptista and Petrinovich, 1986), a richer social environment extends the duration of the sensitive period for learning.”
The effects of parent-implemented language interventions on child linguistic outcomes: A meta-analysis (2020, background): “Children learn language most efficiently when they actively engage with adults who support the language learning process (Kuhl, 2004; Schreibman et al., 2015; Yurovsky, Smith, & Yu, 2013).”
Unsupervised word discovery from speech using automatic segmentation into syllable-like units (2015, background): “, [2]), learning from acoustic input alone provides insights into what information a human learner can and cannot obtain from the acoustic signal, as well as a starting point for speech recognition in underdocumented languages.”
REEXAMINING EFFECTS OF FORM-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION ON L2 PRONUNCIATION DEVELOPMENT (2012, background): “At the initial stage of L2 speech learning, L2 learners pay primary attention to prosodic patterns of language and start recognizing words to derive meaning from ambient aural input (Cutler, Dahan, & van Donselaar, 1997 ; Kuhl, 2000 , 2004 ).”
Phase 2 of CATALISE: a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: Terminology (2017, neutral): “Different languages use different articulatory features to signal contrasts in meaning, and when learning language, the child has to learn which features to ignore and which to focus on (Kuhl, 2004).”
Converging toward a common speech code: imitative and perceptuo-motor recalibration processes in speech production (2013, positive): “In this framework, it is worthwhile noting that speech and vocal imitation is one of the basic mechanisms governing the acquisition of spoken language by children (Kuhl and Meltzoff, 1996; Kuhl et al., 1997; Kuhl, 2004).”
Auditory and motor rhythm awareness in adults with dyslexia (2006, background): “When initially forming phonological representations infants use prosodic cues and statistical patterns (Kuhl, 2004) to help them segment the continuous stream of speech they are exposed to.”
Is speech learning 'gated' by the social brain? (2007, background): “Based on these findings we argue that exposure to language commits the brain’s neural circuitry to the properties of native-language speech, and that neural commitment has bi-directional effects – it increases learning for more complex patterns (such as words) that are compatible with the learned ph”