[1] Furthermore, Saxton (1997) asserts that negative evidence supplies the " correct adult model" for novice speakers to avoid future grammatical mishaps.
Implicit negative evidence is a type of corrective feedback in which parental responses to a child's incorrect statements is indicative of the utterance's ungrammaticality.
[5] However, others have conducted studies that demonstrate that there is suitable implicit direct negative evidence present in parental responses to their children.
[9][8][10] There are a number of applications of implicit direct negative evidence which parents utilize in responses to ungrammatical - not necessarily incorrect or unintelligible - utterances.
Recasts are one such kind of evidence, in which a parent "expands, deletes, permutes, or otherwise changes [a child's utterance] while maintaining significant overlap in meaning.
[3] Experiments have been conducted which have demonstrated that children improve in grammatical forms when parents provide them with any type of immediate implicit direct negative evidence, including recasts, which supports some scholars' claims that direct negative evidence does have an assocaible presence in learner's grammar.
[16] Some linguists, such as Gary Marcus, argue that the implicit negative evidence in the input is insufficient for children to learn the correct grammar of their language.
[5] To the contrary, Marcus states that the more positive evidence for irregular forms a child is exposed to the less likely they are to overgeneralize grammatical concepts.
Finally, Marcus argues that a child can easily acquire grammatical rules, but cannot receive direct feedback from a parent in every case to determine where irregularities occur, thus making implicit negative evidence practically useless for a language learner.