[Mova](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/lingbulk-2018-fadlon-acquisition-hebrew-idioms-stages-internal/)

[home](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [docs](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/) / [papers](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/) / [Modern Hebrew](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/he/) / The acquisition of Hebrew idioms: Stages, internal composition, and implications for storage

# The acquisition of Hebrew idioms: Stages, internal composition, and implications for storage

**Authors:** Julie Fadlon; Julia Horvath; [Tal Siloni](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/authors/tal-siloni/); Kenneth Wexler · **Year:** 2018 · **Venue:** Glossa: a journal of general linguistics **Link:** [glossa-journal.org/article/id/5067](https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/id/5067/) · library `lingbulk-2018-fadlon-acquisition-hebrew-idioms-stages-internal` · **Licence:** [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

[**1** citations](https://openalex.org/works?filter=cites:W2890100502) openalex-snapshot · 2026-10-14[Glossa: a journal of general linguistics](https://openalex.org/S4210226983)[licence](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

- [Publisher's page](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.542)
- [PDF](https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/5067/galley/12213/download)
- [DOI 10.5334/gjgl.542](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.542)
- [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W2890100502)

**Authors (4)**

1. [Julie Fadlon](https://openalex.org/A5089605330) [Semantic Scholar](https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/7917871) · h 5 · 100 citations · 18 works
2. [Julia Horvath](https://openalex.org/A5025995349) [ORCID](https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5648-4847) · [Semantic Scholar](https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/145913714) · h 20 · 1838 citations · 47 works
3. [Tal Siloni](https://openalex.org/A5083488140) [ORCID](https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1709-8468) · [Semantic Scholar](https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/65819357) · h 22 · 2221 citations · 54 works
4. [Kenneth Wexler](https://openalex.org/A5111995596) [Semantic Scholar](https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/67066544) · h 33 · 7874 citations · 106 works

Citations and author metrics from openalex-snapshot (2026-10-14); authors with the same name are not always told apart.

## What it is about

The study tests 90 Hebrew-speaking children in each of grades 1 to 3 (30 per grade for each experiment) on 20 Hebrew verb-phrase idioms. The idioms cross two factors: whether the idiom has an open slot (an obligatory, non-idiomatic constituent) or is fully fixed, and whether it is decomposable (each part maps onto a part of a literal paraphrase) or not. In comprehension, a three-choice task in short stories, only age mattered: grade means were 47.5%, 70% and 90.6%, against a chance level of one third. In production, a completion task that omits one content word, the non-decomposable idioms did better than the decomposable ones in every grade (first grade 15.6% against 1.6%; second grade 25% against 3.3%; third grade 50.3% against 31%). The open slot interacted with the factor: it helped non-decomposable idioms in grades two and three, and in grade three it hurt decomposable ones (38% for full idioms against 26% for open-slot ones). The authors propose that children store non-decomposable idioms as independent units, while adults store all idioms as subentries of their head verb. Children, they argue, retrieve whole units more easily than they compose phrases.

## Ideas

- I1. Two storage modes for the idiom base: non-decomposable idioms as whole-phrase entries matched on the surface sequence, and decomposable ones as subentries of the verb, matched by composing the parts. A matcher could try the whole-phrase match first. Test: the 20 items of the paper, in both conditions, must return the idiom under the right mode.
- I2. Open-slot entries as patterns with a dependency slot: "show X the door" is a verb with an object slot that any filler can occupy, not a fixed string. The pattern must match with a filler, and must not match when the slot is missing.
- I3. Measure recognition and completion separately. Given the phrase, which meaning? Given the meaning, which word is missing? The completion design, with one content word left out and a story giving the meaning, is a ready test for the idiom matcher in the other direction.

## For Mova

I1 and I2 belong to the idiom base in `prag` (the expressions and domains work), with the Hebrew entries noted in [8. Lexicon and register](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/he/08-lexicon-register/). I3 is a test protocol for `prag`, using the paper's 20 items as a seed.

## Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. [DOI 10.5334/gjgl.542](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.542)

```
@article{fadlon2018acquisition,
  title = {{The acquisition of Hebrew idioms: Stages, internal composition, and implications for storage}},
  author = {Fadlon, Julie and Horvath, Julia and Siloni, Tal and Wexler, Kenneth},
  journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics},
  year = {2018},
  doi = {10.5334/gjgl.542},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.542}
}
```

- [← previous Reflexive verbs in Hebrew: Deep unaccusativity meets lexical semantics](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/lingbulk-2017-kastner-reflexive-verbs-hebrew-deep-unaccusativity/)
- [next → Exponence, allomorphy and haplology in the number and State morphology of Modern Hebrew](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/lingbulk-2018-faust-exponence-allomorphy-haplology-number-state/)
- [↑ back to Modern Hebrew](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/he/)

## References

41 references, 1 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Ackerman, Brian P. 1982. On comprehending idioms: Do children get the picture? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 33(3). 439–454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(82)90058-3 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(82)90058-3)
2. Arnon, Inbal. 2010. Starting big – The role of multi-word phrases in language learning and use. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Arnon%2C+Inbal%2E+2010%2E+Starting+big+%E2%80%93+The+role+of+multi%2Dword+phrases+in+language+learning+and+use%2E+Stanford%2C+CA%3A+Stanford+University+dissertation%2E)
3. Arnon, Inbal. 2011. Units of learning in language acquisition. In Inbal Arnon & Eve V. Clark (eds.), Experience, variation and generalization: Learning a first language (Trends in Language Acquisition Research Series), 167–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.7.10arn [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.7.10arn)
4. Baker, Mark, Kyle Johnson & Ian Roberts. 1989. Passive arguments raised. Linguistic Inquiry 20(2). 219–251. [↗](https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315310572-16)
5. Bannard, Colin & Danielle Matthews. 2008. Stored word sequences in language learning: The effect of familiarity on children’s repetition of four-word combinations. Psychological Science 19(3). 241–248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02075.x [↗](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02075.x)
6. Bargmann, Sascha & Manfred Sailer. 2015. The syntactic flexibility of non-decomposable idioms. In Posters presented at the PARSEME 4th general meeting, 19–20. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bargmann%2C+Sascha+%26+Manfred+Sailer%2E+2015%2E+The+syntactic+flexibility+of+non%2Ddecomposable+idioms%2E+In+Posters+presented+at+the+PARSEME+4th+general+meeting%2C+19%E2%80%9320%2E)
7. Bonin, Patrick, Alain Méot & Aurelia Bugaiska. 2013. Norms and comprehension times for 305 French idiomatic expressions. Behavior Research Methods 45(4). 1259–1271. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0331-4 [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0331-4)
8. Brysbaert, Marc & Michael J. Cortese. 2010. Do the effects of subjective frequency and age of acquisition survive better word frequency norms? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 64(3). 545–559. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.503374 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.503374)
9. Cacciari, Cristina & Maria C. Levorato. 1989. How children understand idioms in discourse. Journal of Child Language 16(2). 387–405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0305000900010473 Caillies, Stéphanie & Sandrine Le Sourn-Bissaoui. 2006. Idiom comprehension in French children: A cock-and-bull story. European Journal of Developmental Psychology 3(2). 189–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620500412325 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620500412325)
10. Cain, Kate, Andrea S. Towse & Rachael S. Knight. 2008. The development of idiom comprehension: An investigation of semantic and contextual processing skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 102(3). 280–298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jecp.2008.08.001 Clark, Eve V. & Barbara F. Hecht. 1983. Comprehension, production, and language acquisition. Annual Review of Psychology 34(1). 325–349. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev.ps.34.020183.001545 Collins, Chris. 2005. A smuggling approach to the passive in English. Syntax 8(2). 81–120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2005.00076.x [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j)
11. Dubinsky, Stanley & Silvester R. Simango. 1996. Passive and stative in Chichewa: Evidence for modular distinctions in grammar. Language 72(4). 749–781. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.2307/416101 [↗](https://doi.org/10.2307/416101)
12. Everaert, Martin. 2010. The lexical encoding of idioms. In Malka Rappaport-Hovav, Edit Doron & Ivy Sichel (eds.), Lexical semantics, syntax, and event structure, 76–98. Oxford: OUP. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199544325.003.0005 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199544325.003.0005)
13. Fadlon, Julie, Julia Horvath & Tal Siloni. 2014. Decomposability and idiom retrieval: An experimental study. Ms. Tel Aviv University. Fadlon, Julie, Julia Horvath, Tal Siloni & Kenneth Wexler. To appear. Idiom storage and the verbal passive: No unique phrasal idioms. Language Science Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Fadlon%2C+Julie%2C+Julia+Horvath+%26+Tal+Siloni%2E+2014%2E+Decomposability+and+idiom+retrieval%3A+An+experimental+study%2E+Ms%2E+Tel+Aviv+University%2E+Fadlon%2C+Julie%2C+Julia+Horvath%2C+Tal+Siloni+%26+Kenneth+Wexler%2E+To+appe)
14. Gibbs, Raymond W. 1987. Linguistic factors in children’s understanding of idioms. Journal of Child Language 14(3). 569–586. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900010291 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900010291)
15. Gibbs, Raymond W. 1991. Semantic analyzability in children’s understanding of idioms. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 34(3). 613–620. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3403.613 Gibbs, Raymond W., Nandini P. Nayak & Cooper Cutting. 1989. How to kick the bucket and not decompose: Analyzability and idiom processing. Journal of Memory and L anguage 28(5). 576–593. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90014-4 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3403.613)
16. Horvath, Julia & Tal Siloni. 2008. Active lexicon: Adjectival and verbal passives. In Sharon Armon-Lotem, Gabi Danon & Susan D. Rothstein (eds.), Current issues in generative hebrew linguistics, 105–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Horvath%2C+Julia+%26+Tal+Siloni%2E+2008%2E+Active+lexicon%3A+Adjectival+and+verbal+passives%2E+In+Sharon+Armon%2DLotem%2C+Gabi+Danon+%26+Susan+D%2E+Rothstein+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Current+issues+in+generative+hebrew+linguistics%2C+105%E2%80%931)
17. Horvath, Julia & Tal Siloni. 2009. Hebrew idioms: The organization of the lexical component. Brill’s Journal of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 1(1). 283–310. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1163/187666309X12491131130666 Horvath, Julia & Tal Siloni. 2016. Idioms: The type-sensitive storage model. Submitted. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1163/187666309x12491131130666)
18. Laval, Virginie. 2003. Idiom comprehension and metapragmatic knowledge in French children. Journal of Pragmatics 35(5). 723–739. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00137-6 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(02)00137-6)
19. Levorato, Maria C., Barbara Nesi & Cristina Cacciari. 2004. Reading comprehension and understanding idiomatic expressions: A developmental study. Brain and Language 91(3). 303–314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.04.002 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2004.04.002)
20. Levorato, Maria C. & Cristina Cacciari. 1992. Children’s comprehension and production of idioms: The role of context and familiarity. Journal of Child Language 19(2). 415–433. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900011478 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900011478)
21. Levorato, Maria C. & Cristina Cacciari. 1995. The effects of different tasks on the comprehension and production of idioms in children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 60(2). 261–283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1995.1041 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1995.1041)
22. Levorato, Maria C. & Cristina Cacciari. 1999. Idiom comprehension in children: Are the effects of semantic analysability and context separable? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 11(1). 51–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/713752299 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1080/713752299)
23. Libben, Maya R. & Debra A. Titone. 2008. The multidetermined nature of idiom processing. Memory & Cognition 36. 1103–1121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.6.1103 [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/mc.36.6.1103)
24. Marantz, Alec. 1997. No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4(2). 14–25. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Marantz%2C+Alec%2E+1997%2E+No+escape+from+syntax%3A+Don%E2%80%99t+try+morphological+analysis+in+the+privacy+of+your+own+lexicon%2E+University+of+Pennsylvania+Working+Papers+in+Linguistics+4%282%29%2E+14%E2%80%9325%2E)
25. Meltzer-Asscher, Aya. 2012. Verbal passives in English and Hebrew: A comparative study. In Martin Everaert, Marijana Marelj & Tal Siloni (eds.), The Theta System: Argument structure at the interface, 279–307. Oxford: OUP. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof: oso/9780199602513.003.0011 Mishani-Uval, Yael & Tal Siloni. 2016. Ditransitive Idioms in Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 35(3). 715–749. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-016-9354-8 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof)
26. Nippold, Marilyn A. & Catherine L. Taylor. 1995. Idiom understanding in youth: Further examination of familiarity and transparency. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 38(2). 426–433. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3802.426 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3802.426)
27. Nippold, Marilyn A. & Catherine L. Taylor. 2002. Judgments of idiom familiarity and transparency: A comparison of children and adolescents. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 45(2). 384–391. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2002/030) [↗](https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2002/030))
28. Nippold, Marilyn A. & Mishelle Rudzinski. 1993. Familiarity and transparency in idiom explanation: A developmental study of children and adolescents. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 36(4). 728–737. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/ jshr.3604.728 Nippold, Marilyn A. & Stephanie T. Martin. 1989. Idiom interpretation in isolation versus context: A developmental study with adolescents. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 32(1). 59–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3201.59 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3201.59)
29. Nordmann, Emily & Antonia A. Jambazova. 2017. Normative data for idiomatic expressions. Behavior Research Methods 49(1). 198–215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/ s13428-016-0705-5 Nunberg, Geoffrey, Ivan A. Sag & Thomas Wasow. 1994. Idioms. Language. 491–538. [↗](https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0705-5)
30. Riehemann, Susanne Z. A. 2001. A constructional approach to idioms and word formation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Riehemann%2C+Susanne+Z%2E+A%2E+2001%2E+A+constructional+approach+to+idioms+and+word+formation%2E+Stanford%2C+CA%3A+Stanford+University+dissertation%2E)
31. Ruwet, Nicolas. 1991. Syntax and human experience. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ruwet%2C+Nicolas%2E+1991%2E+Syntax+and+human+experience%2E+Chicago%2C+IL%3A+University+of+Chicago+Press%2E)
32. Schenk, Andre. 1995. The syntactic behavior of idioms. In Martin Everaert, Erik-Jan van der Linden, Andre Schenk & Rob Schreuder (eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives, 253–272. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Schenk%2C+Andre%2E+1995%2E+The+syntactic+behavior+of+idioms%2E+In+Martin+Everaert%2C+Erik%2DJan+van+der+Linden%2C+Andre+Schenk+%26+Rob+Schreuder+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Idioms%3A+Structural+and+psychological+perspectives%2C+253%E2%80%93272%2E+Hil)
33. Titone, Debra A. & Cynthia M. Connine. 1994. Comprehension of idiomatic expressions: Effects of predictability and literality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20(5). 1126–1138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.5.1126 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.5.1126)
34. Tomasello, Michael. 2003. Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. van de Voort, Marlies E. & Wietske Vonk. 1994. You don’t die immediately when you kick an empty bucket: A processing view on semantic and syntactic characteristics of idioms. In Martin Everaert, Erik-Jan van der Linden, Andre Schenk & Rob Schreuder (eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives, 283–300. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Tomasello%2C+Michael%2E+2003%2E+Constructing+a+language%3A+A+usage%2Dbased+theory+of+language+acquisition%2E+Cambridge%2C+MA%3A+Harvard+University+Press%2E+van+de+Voort%2C+Marlies+E%2E+%26+Wietske+Vonk%2E+1994%2E+You+don%E2%80%99t+die+i)
35. Vosniadou, Stella. 1987. Children and metaphors. Child Development 58(3). 870–885. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1130223 [↗](https://doi.org/10.2307/1130223)
36. Webelhuth, Gert & Farrell Ackerman. 1999. A lexical-functional analysis of predicate topicalization in German. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 11(1). 1–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1040820700002456 Winner, Ellen. 1988. The point of words: Children’s understanding of metaphor and irony. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/s1040820700002456)
37. Wulff, Stefanie. 2010. Marrying cognitive-linguistic theory and corpus-based methods: On the compositionality of English V NP-idioms. In Dylan Glynn & Kerstin Fischer (eds.), Quantitative methods in cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven approaches, 223–238. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110226423.221)
38. How to cite this article: Fadlon, Julie, Julia Horvath, Tal Siloni and Kenneth Wexler. 2018. The acquisition of Hebrew idioms: Stages, internal composition, and implications for storage. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3(1): 99. 1–25, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.542 [↗](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.542) [our card](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/lingbulk-2018-fadlon-acquisition-hebrew-idioms-stages-internal/)
39. Submitted: 08 October 2017 [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Submitted%3A+08+October+2017)
40. Published: 11 September 2018 [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Published%3A+11+September+2018)
41. Copyright: © 2018 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Glossa: a journal of general linguistics is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by Ubiquity Press. OPEN ACCESS [↗](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)