• The ManyBabies Consortium (to appear). Quantifying sources of variability in infancy research using the infant-directed speech preference. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science.
  • Stoehr, A., Benders, T., van Hell, J.G. & P. Fikkert (2019), Bilingual preschoolers’ speech is associated with non-native maternal language input. Language Learning and Development. DOI: 10.1080/15475441.2018.1533473.
  • Laura Hahn, Titia Benders, Tineke M. Snijders, Paula Fikkert (2018). Infants’ sensitivity to rhyme in songs. Infant Behavior and Development 52: 130-139.
  • Mathilde Fort, Imme Lammertink, Sharon Peperkamp, Adriana Guevara-Rukoz, Paula Fikkert & Sho Tsuji (2018). SymBouki: a meta-analysis on the emergence of sound symbolism in early language acquisition. Developmental Science, 21 (5):e12659. doi: 10.1111/desc.12659
  • Stoehr, A, T. Benders, J. van Hell, P. Fikkert (2018). Heritage language exposure is associated with voice onset time of Dutch-German simultaneous bilingual preschoolers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. 21 (3), 598-617. doi: 10.1177/0267658317704261. Impact factor: 3.01
  • Ramachers, S., S. Brouwer, C. Gussenhoven, & P. Fikkert (2018). No perceptual reorganization for Limburgian tones? A cross-linguistic investigation with 6-to-12-month-old infants. Journal of Child Language, 45 (2), 290-318. doi: 10.1017/S0305000917000228. Impact factor: 1.642
  • Ramachers, S., S. Brouwer, P. Fikkert (2017). How Native Prosody affects Pitch Processing during Word Learning in Limburgian and Dutch Toddlers and Adults. Frontiers in Psychology (Language Sciences). Open Access. htpps:// Impact factor 2.323.
  • Tsuji, S., Fikkert, P., Minagawa, Y., Dupoux, E., Filippin, L., Versteegh, M., Hagoort, P., & Cristia, A. (2017). The more, the better? Behavioral and neural correlates of frequent and infrequent vowel exposure. Developmental Psychobiology 59(5):603-612. doi: 10.1002/dev.21534. Impact factor: 2.392
  • Stoehr, A., Benders, T., van Hell, J. G., & Fikkert, P. (2017). Second language attainment and first language attrition: The case of VOT in immersed Dutch-German late bilinguals. Second Language Research: 1–36. DOI: Impact factor: 1.405
  • Tsuji, S., Fikkert, P., Yamane, N., & Mazuka, R. (2017). ‘Language-general biases and language-specific experience contribute to phonological detail in toddlers' word representations’. Developmental Psychology, 52(3): 379-390. Impact Factor: 3.21.
  • Buckler, H. & Fikkert, P. (2016). ​Using distributional statistics to acquire morphophonological alternations: Evidence from production and perception. Frontiers in Psychology 7:540. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00540. Impact factor: 2.323
  • Buckler, H. & P. Fikkert (2016). ‘Dutch and German 3-year-olds’ representations of voicing alternations’. Language and Speech 59(2), 236-265. DOI: 10.1177/0023830915587038. Impact Factor: 1.04.
  • Van der Feest, S. V. H.  & P. Fikkert (2015). ‘Building phonological lexical representations’. Phonology 32: 207-239. doi:10.1017/S0952675715000135. Impact Factor: 1.69.
  • Bergmann, C., Bosch, L.T., Fikkert, P., Boves, L. (2015). ‘Modelling the noise-robustness of infant's word representations: The impact of previous experience’. PLoS ONE 07/2015; 10(7):e0132245. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0132245. Impact Factor: 3.23
  • Lammertink, I., Casillas, M., Benders, T., Post, B., Fikkert, P. (2015). ‘Dutch and English toddlers' use of linguistic cues in predicting upcoming turn transitions’. Frontiers in Psychology 04/2015; 6. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00495. Impact Factor: 2.80.
  • Tsuji, S., Mazuka, R., Cristia, A., & Fikkert, P. (2015). ‘Even at 4 months, a labial is a good enough coronal, but not vice versa’. Cognition 134: 252–256. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2014.10.009. Impact Factor: 3.63.
  • Altvater-Mackensen, N. & P. Fikkert (2015). ‘A cross-linguistic perspective on the acquisition of Manner of Articulation features’. Language Acquisition 22(1): 2–39. DOI: 10.1080/10489223.2014.892945. Impact Factor: 1.10.
  • Anderssen, M., Y. Rodina, R. Mykhaylyk & P. Fikkert (2014). ‘The acquisition  of the Dative Alternation in Norwegian’. Language Acquisition 21: 72–102.
  • 1.10 Impact Factor
  • Altvater-Mackensen, N., S. van der Feest & P. Fikkert (2014). ‘Asymmetries in early word recognition: the case of stops and fricatives’. Language Learning and Development 10(2): 149–178.
  • DOI: 10.1080/15475441.2013.808954.
  • Paulus, M. & P. Fikkert (2014). ‘Conflicting social cues: 14- and 24-month-old infants’ reliance on gaze and pointing cues in word learning’. Journal of Cognition and Development 15(1): 43–59.
  • Simon, E., M. J. Sjerps & P. Fikkert (2014), ‘Phonological representations in children’s native and non-native Lexicon’. Accepted in: Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(1): 3–21. DOI:
  • 1.71 Impact Factor
  • Bergmann, C., L. ten Bosch, P. Fikkert & L. Boves (2013). ‘Segmentation, recognition, generalisation: Investigating assumptions in the headturn preference procedure’. Frontiers in Language Sciences.
  • 2.80 Impact Factor
  • Fikkert, Paula & Nicole Altvater-Mackensen (2013). ‘Variation in Language Acquisition: insights into variation across children based on longitudinal Dutch data on phonological acquisition’. Studia Linguistica 67(1): 148–164.
  • Anderssen, M., P. Fikkert, R. Mykhaylyk & Y. Rodina (2012). ‘The Dative Alternation in Norwegian Child Language’. Nordlyd 39.1, special issue on ‘The Grammar of Objects’, eds. Kristine Bentzen and Antonio Fábregas, pp. 24–43. Tromsø.
  • Bergmann, C., M. Paulus & P. Fikkert (2012). ‘Preschoolers’ Comprehension of Pronouns and Reflexives: The Impact of the Task’. Journal of Child Language 39 (4): 777–803). DOI:
  • Zamuner, T. S., A. Kerkhoff & P. Fikkert (2012). ‘Phonotactics and morpho-phonology in early child language: Evidence from Dutch’. Applied Psycholinguistics 33 (3): 481–499. DOI:
  • Altvater-Mackensen, N. & P. Fikkert (2010). ‘The acquisition of the stop-fricative contrast in perception and production’. Lingua 120: 1898–1909.
  • Fikkert, P. (2010). ‘Developing representations and the emergence of phonology: evidence from perception and production’. In: C. Fougeron, B. Kühnert, M. d’Imperio, N. Vallée (Eds.), Laboratory Phonology 10: Variation, Phonetic Detail and Phonological Representation (Phonology & Phonetics 4-4). Pp. 227–258.
  • Fikkert, P. & H. de Hoop (2009). ‘Language learning in Optimality Theory’. Journal of Linguistics 47 (2): 311–358. DOI: 10.1515/LING.2009.012
  • Zamuner, T.S., P. Fikkert & B. Gick (2007). ‘Production facilitates lexical acquisition in young children’ (Abstract). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122: 3031.
  • Fikkert, P. & M.J. Freitas (2006). ‘Allophony and allomorphy cue phonological development: Evidence from the European Portuguese vowel system’. Journal of Catalan Linguistics 5: 83–108.
  • Fikkert, P. (2005). ‘From phonetic categories to phonological features specification: Acquiring the European Portuguese vowel system’. Lingue e Linguaggio 4(2): 263–280.
  • Schiller, N.O., P. Fikkert & C.C. Levelt (2004). ‘Stress priming in picture naming’. Brain and Language 90: 231–240.
  • Lahiri, A. & P. Fikkert (1999). ‘Trisyllabic shortening’. English Language and Linguistics 3: 229–267.
  • Fikkert, P., Z. Penner & K. Wymann (1998). ‘Das Comeback der Prosodie. Neue Wege in der Diagnose und Therapie von phonologischen Störungen’. LOGOS 2: 84–97.
  • Fikkert, P. (1995). ‘State of the article on acquisition of phonology’. Glot International 8. An extended and revised version of this appeared in L. Cheng & R. Sybesma (Eds.), The GLOT International State-of-the-Article Book 1. 221–250.
  • Fikkert, P, L. Liu & M. Ota (subm./accepted). ‘The acquisition of word prosody’. To appear in Chen, A. & C. Gussenhoven (Eds.), Handbook of prosody.
  • Fikkert, P. & R. S. Santos (2011). ‘The use of cues to word stress in word recognition by Brazilian Portuguese and Dutch children’. In: Ferreira-Gonçalves, Giovana, Brum-de-Paula, Mirian Rose & Keske-Soares, Márcia (Eds.), Estudos em Aquisição Fonológica. Universidade Federal de Pelotas. 107–132.
  • Fikkert, P. & C.C. Levelt (2008). ‘How does place fall into place? The lexicon and emergent constraints in the developing phonological grammar’. In: P. Avery, B. Elan Dresher & K. Rice (Eds.), Contrast in phonology: Perception and Acquisition. Berlin: Mouton. 219–256.
  • Fikkert, P. (2007). ‘Acquiring phonology’. In: P. de Lacy (Ed.), Handbook of phonological theory. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. 537–554.
  • Kager, R., S. van der Feest, P. Fikkert, A. Kerkhoff & T.S. Zamuner (2007). ‘Representations of [voice]: Evidence from Acquisition’. In E.J. van der Torre & J. van de Weijer (Eds.), Voicing in Dutch. Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Company. 41–80.
  • Fikkert, P., E. Dresher & A. Lahiri (2006). ‘Prosodic preferences in the history of English’. In: A. van Kemenade & B. Los (Eds.), Handbook of English historical linguistics. Blackwell. 125–150.
  • Fikkert, P. (2005). ‘Getting sounds structures in mind. Acquisition bridging linguistics and psychology?’ In: A.E. Cutler (Eds.), Twenty-First Century Psycholinguistics: Four Cornerstones. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 43–56.
  • Fikkert, P. (2003). ‘Het voetenwerk in taalverandering en taalverwerving. Over het optimaliseren van de prosodische structuur van woorden’. In: Schutter, G. De & S. Gillis (Eds.). Klankstructuren van (een) taal. Nederlandse fonologie aan het begin van de eeuw. Gent: KANTL. 165–197.
  • Fikkert, P. (2002). ‘The prosodic structure of prefixed words in the history of West Germanic’. In: Fikkert, P. & H. Jacobs (Eds.), Development in prosodic systems. Berlin: Mouton. 315–348.
  • Fikkert, P. (2001). ‘Compounds Triggering Prosodic Development’. In: J. Weissenborn & B. Hoehle (Eds.), Approaches to Bootstrapping. Phonological, Lexical, Syntactic and Neurophysiological Aspects of Early Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Volume II. 59–86.
  • Fikkert, P. (2000). ‘Prosodic Variation in ‘Lutgart’’. In A. Lahiri (Ed.), Analogy, Leveling, Markedness. Principles of Change in Phonology and Morphology. Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 127. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 301–332.
  • Fikkert, P. (2000). ‘Acquisition of Phonology’. In: L. Cheng & R. Sybesma (Eds.), The First Glot International State-of-the-Article Book. The Latest in Linguistics. Studies in Generative Grammar 48. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 221–250.
  • Fikkert, P. (1998). ‘The acquisition of Dutch phonology’. In S. Gillis & A. de Houwer (Eds.), The acquisition of Dutch. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 163–222.
  • Hahn, L., M. ten Buuren, M. de Nijs, T.S. Snijders & P. Fikkert (2019). ‘Acquiring novel words in a second language through mutual play with child songs – the Noplica Energy Center’. To appear in Proceedings of Musica.
  • Ramachers, S.T.M.R., Brouwer, S.M. & Fikkert, J.P.M. (2018). Perception and lexical encoding of tone in a restricted tone language. Developmental evidence from Limburgian. In Proceedings of TAL 2018, Sixth International Symposium on Tonal Aspects of Languages (pp. 108-113). Berlijn
  • Fikkert, P & I. Lammertink (2016). Speech perception in children with a cleft palate: preliminary finding. Proceedings of the 40th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Jennifer Scott and Deb Waughtal (eds.), 130-142 (complete pdf)
  • Van der Feest, S.V.H., P. Fikkert, & B. L. Davis (2016). Cross-linguistic differences in the perception of coronal and dorsal CV-combinations: Evidence from English and Dutch. Proceedings of the 40th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Jennifer Scott and Deb Waughtal (eds.), 417–428 (complete pdf)
  • Klatter-Folmer, H.A.K., Hout, R.W.N.M. van, Heuvel, H. van den, Fikkert, J.P.M., Baker, A., Jong, J. de, Wijnen, F., Sanders, E.P. & Trilsbeek, P.J.T.M. (2014). Vulnerability in Acquisition, Language Impairments in Dutch: Creating a VALID Data Archive. In Proceedings of LREC 2014 (pp. 357-364). Reykjavik: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
  • Heuvel, H. van den, Sanders, E.P., Klatter-Folmer, H.A.K., Hout, R.W.N.M. van, Fikkert, J.P.M., Wijnen, F. & Trilsbeek, P.J.T.M. (2014). Data curation for a VALID Archive of Dutch Language Impairment Data. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3 (2), 127–135. doi: 10.1075/dujal.3.2.02heu
  • Fikkert, P & A. Chen (2011). ‘The Role of Word-Stress and Intonation in Word Recognition in Dutch 14- and 24-Month-Olds’. In: Nick Danis, Kate Mesh, and Hyunsuk Sung (Eds.), Proceedings of the Boston University Conference on Child Development 35. 222–232.
  • Dijkstra, N. & P. Fikkert (2011). ‘Universal Constraints on the Discrimination of Place of Articulation? Asymmetries in the Discrimination of ‘paan’ and ‘taan’ by 6-month-old Dutch Infants’. In: Nick Danis, Kate Mesh, and Hyunsuk Sung (Eds.), Proceedings of the Boston University Conference on Child Development 35. 170–182.
  • Bergmann, C., M. Paulus & P. Fikkert (2010). ‘A closer look at pronoun comprehension: comparing different methods’. In: João Costa, Ana Castro, Maria Lobo and Fernanda Pratas (Eds.), Language Acquisition and Development: Proceedings of GALA 2009.
  • Bree, E. de, P. van Alphen, P. Fikkert & F. Wijnen (2008). ‘Metrical stress in comprehension and production of Dutch children at risk of dyslexia’. In: H. Chan, H. Jacob, and E. Kapia (Eds.), BUCLD 32: Proceedings of the 32nd annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. 60-71.
  • Santos, R. S. & P. Fikkert (2007). ‘The relationship between word prosodic structure and sentence prosody. (Non)evidence from Brazilian Portuguese’. In: S. Baauw, J. van Kampen & M. Pinto (Eds.), The Acquisition of Romance Languages. Selected Papers from The Romance Turn II. LOT (LOT Occasional Series 8): Utrecht. 165-179.
  • Chen. A. & P. Fikkert (2007). ‘Intonation of early two-word utterances in Dutch’. Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. 315–320.
  • Alphen, P. van, E. de Bree, P. Fikkert & F. Wijnen. (2007). ‘The role of metrical stress in comprehension and production in Dutch children at-risk of dyslexia’. Proceedings of Interspeech 2007. 2313–2316.
  • Zamuner, T.S., A. Kerkhoff & P. Fikkert (2006). ‘Acquisition of voicing neutralization and alternations in Dutch’. Proceedings of the 30th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Vol. 2. Cascadilla Press. 701–712.
  • Fikkert, P., M. Van Heugten, P. Offermans & T.S. Zamuner (2005). ‘Rhymes as a window into grammar’. In: A. Brugos, M.R. Clark-Cotton & S. Ha (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29 the annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Vol. 1. Sommerville, MA, Cascadilla Press. 204–215.
  • Feest, S. van der & P. Fikkert (2005). ‘Segmental detail in children's early lexical representations’. In: Proceedings of the ISCA Workshop on Plasticity in Speech Perception (PSP) on CD.
  • Levelt, C.C., Schiller, N.O. & P. Fikkert (2003). ‘Metrical priming in speech production’. In: Proceedings 15th ICPhS Barcelona. 2481–1484.
  • Fikkert, P. & Z. Penner (1999). ‘Stagnation in Prosodic Development of Language-Disordered Children’. In: M. Beers (ed.), Antwerp Papers in Linguistics 96: 1–16.
  • Fikkert, P. & Z. Penner (1998). ‘Stagnation in prosodic development of language-disordered children’. Proceedings of the Boston University Conference on Language Acquisition 1997. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. 201–212.
  • Fikkert, P. & M. J. Freitas (1997). ‘Acquisition of syllable structure constraints: Evidence from Dutch and Portuguese’. In: Language acquisition: Knowledge representation and processing. Proceedings of GALA '97. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 217–222.
  • Fikkert, P. (1996). ‘A parametric acquisition model for stress’. WECOL 1994 Proceedings.
  • Fikkert, P. (1995). ‘A prosodic account of truncation in child language’. In: W. U. Dressler, M. Prinzhorn & J. Rennison (Eds.), Phonologica, Proceedings of the 7th International Phonology Meeting 1992. Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier. 77–86.
  • Fikkert, P. (1995). ‘Models of acquisition: How to acquire stress’. In J. Beckman (Ed.), Proceedings of NELS 25, Vol. 2. Amherst: GLSA. 27–42.
  • Fikkert, P. (1995). ‘The role of negative evidence in the acquisition of phonology’. In: M. Verrips & F. Wijnen (Eds.), Parameters, Amsterdam Series in Child Language Development 4. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. 33–52. This also appeared in: I. Moen, H. G. Simonsen & H. Lødrup (Eds.), Proceedings from the XVth Scandinavian conference of linguistics. Oslo: Oslo University Press. 148–159.
  • Fikkert, P. (1993). ‘The Acquisition of Dutch stress’. In: M. Verrips & F. Wijnen (Eds.), The acquisition of Dutch, Amsterdam Series in Child Language Development 1. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. 21–35.
  • Fikkert, P. (1992). ‘Metathesis in kinderfonologie: een oplossing voor de kip/ei kwestie’. (Metathesis in child phonology: a solution for the chicken/egg problem). In: P. Jordens & A. Wijnands (Eds.), Fourth NET-symposium 1992 , VU, Amsterdam. 25–30.
  • Lammertink, I., M. Casillas, T. Benders, B. Post & P. Fikkert (2016). Turn-taking bij jonge kinderen : Zinsbouw, zinsmelodie en turn-taking bij jonge kinderen. In:  Nederlands Tijdschrift voor logopedie. Februari 2016: 6-11.
  • Usen, K. van, W. Haeseryn & P. Fikkert (2012). ‘Weet jij wanneer je op gaat splitsen? Onderzoek naar de voorkeur voor het bijeenhouden of splitsen van partikelwerkwoorden in de bijzin’. Taal en Tongval 64: 103–127.
  • Altvater-Mackensen, N. & P. Fikkert (2007). ‘On the acquisition of nasals in Dutch and German’. In: B. Los & M. van Koppen (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2007. John Benjamins. 14–24.
  • Santos, R.S. & P. Fikkert (2007). ‘The relationship between word prosodic structure and sentence prosody. (Non)evidence from Brazilian Portuguese’. In: S. Baauw, J. van Kampen & M. Pinto (Eds.), The Acquisition of Romance Languages. Selected Papers from The Romance Turn II. LOT (LOT Occasional Series 8): Utrecht. 165-179.
  • Fikkert, P. & M.J. Freitas (2004). ‘The role of language-specific phonotactics in the acquisition of onset clusters’. In L. Cornips & J. Doetjes (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2004. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 58–68.
  • Neijt, A., L. Krebbers & P. Fikkert (2002). ‘Rhythm and Semantics in the Selection of Linking Elements’. In: H. Broekhuis & P. Fikkert (Eds.), Linguistic in the Netherlands 2002. Amsterdam/Philadelpia: Benjamins. 117–127.
  • Fikkert, P. (1998). ‘Stress and foot structure in Middle Dutch: Evidence from Lutgart’. In: R. van Bezooijen & R. Kager (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1998. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics. 109–122.
  • Fikkert, P. (1996). ‘Kinderfonologie: de verwerving van klemtoon’. (Child phonology: the acquisition of stress). Nederlandse taalkunde 1: 2–12.
  • Fikkert, P. (1994). ‘On the acquisition of rhyme structure in Dutch’. In: R. Bok-Bennema & C. Cremers (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1994. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 37–48.


  • Fikkert, P. (in prep.). Child Phonology: Acquisition and Development. Text book series.
  • Fikkert, P. (2008). Kijk op Klank. Inaugural Lecture. Radboud University Nijmegen.
  • Fikkert, P. (1994). On the acquisition of prosodic structure. Ph.D. Dissertation, HIL dissertations 6, Leiden University. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.

Edited books

  • Fikkert, P. & H. Jacobs (Eds.) (2003), Development in prosodic structure. Berlin: Mouton.
  • Cornips, L. & P. Fikkert (Eds.) (2003), Linguistic in the Netherlands 2003. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Broekhuis, H. & P. Fikkert (Eds.) (2002), Linguistic in the Netherlands 2002. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Fikkert, P. (1995). ‘Summary of ‘On the acquisition of prosodic structure’. Glot International 4.
  • Fikkert, P. (1995). Review of ‘Language acquisition, metrical theory, and optimality. A study of Dutch word stress’, by D. Nouveau. Glot International

Department of Dutch Language and Culture,
Centre for Language Studies,
Radboud University of Nijmegen,
P.O. Box 9103,
6500 HD Nijmegen,
The Netherlands

Tel: (+31) 24–3612669