Inflectional affixes used by Finnish-speaking children aged 1-3 years Jorma Toivainen (review)

228 LANGUAGE, VOLUME 62, NUMBER 1 (1986) shows, apart from the expected serious effect ofschool on discourse, that even young chüdren are able to help each other to sustain discourse —a very interesting finding, with impücations for language instruction in lower grades. Part III, 'The context of school', foUows a weU-trodden path—the effect of school on language development—but fortunately avoids, to a great extent, repetition of previous findings. Perhaps the most interesting paper of the four is that by R. Beach & L. Bridwell, 'Learning through writing: A rationale for writing across the curriculum'. This articulate synthesis oftheory and praxis shows not only the epistemológica ! impUcation of writing (beyond just 'basic sküls') but also the justification for writing instruction outside the EngUsh curriculum. FinaUy, Part IV, 'Social context and written language', contains four solid papers on writing and context, most prominent ofwhich is J. Collins , 'The development of writing abilities during the school years'. CoUins himself says it best: '... it might be better to reject the notion of stages [of writing development] entirely. We are aU capable of "egocentric" writing ... when the task gets difficult enough' (208). This is a curiously Vygotskyan statement, which rounds out nicely the argument which Pellegrini began. This is a useful book—a unified coUection of papers that one not only reads, but re-reads. [William Frawley, University ofDelaware.] Inflectional affixes used by Finnishspeaking children aged 1-3 years. By Jorma Toivainen. (Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran toimituksia, 359.) Helsinki, 1980. Pp. 305. A detailed description of the acquisition of inflectional affixes in 25 normal Finnish-speaking chüdren is presented here. EarUer work on language acquisition by Finnish children has usuaUy been limited to studies in which the speech of only one or two chüdren was represented ; moreover, these were typicaUy the chüdren ofacademic parents Uving in environments wherelanguagesotherthanFinnishwerespoken. The present study seeks to overcome such Umitations by focusing on a largergroup ofchüdren (? = 25) who were Uving in a purely Finnishspeaking environment (the town of OuIu); the parents of these chüdren differed widely with respect to social and educational class. Details concerning the background of the subjects and the methods ofresearch and analysis used in the study are given in an introductory chapter. The material typicaUy consisted of recorded interviews between the child and a member of his or her household. The next ten chapters focus on the acquisition of different types of inflectional affixes, beginning with those having clausal scope (i.e. imperative, negative, and conditional ); T then moves on to affixes ofperson and tense, case, and finaUy plural number. Each chapter begins with a brief but comprehensive overview of findings in the chüd-language Uterature concerning the acquisition ofthe affixes discussed. Ch. 1 1 deals with the order of appearance of the affixes. Here T describes and compares the 25 subjects with respect to acquisition. He then describes the affix system of the 'median chüd' of the population at various ages between 1.11 and 3.0. The volume ends with a bibüography and four appendices: the first consists of tables describing the backgrounds ofthe chüdren studied; the second contains transcriptions from recordings taken for each child in the age range 1.1-2.11; the third Usts the persons responsible for and assisting in the recordings of interviews: the fourth presents questionnaire forms used at the interviews. T concludes that the affix system is developed 'egocyclicaUy'. The first, unmarked, form ofthe verb used is the 3sg. present-tense form; the unmarked noun form is either the nominative or partitive in the singular, and the partitive in the plural. The first stage of differentiation separates the chüd's actions from aU others: thus the lsg. verb suffix is acquired, and the genitive of the chüd's own name is used as a possessive form. This stage also witnesses the use of the adverb form which refers to the chüd's own field of observation, and the use of a primitive past tense. The second stage evidences an awareness of others as sharing in the child's experience; it shows the use of the lpl. verb, the genitives of...