The study by Tamburelli, Jones, Gobet, and Pine (2012; henceforth TJGP) is a very welcome addition to the body of work concerning nonword repetition in typical development. TJGP go beyond previous work in considering three syllabic positions--onset, nucleus, and coda--with the aim of investigating how the positional role of phonemes within the syllable affects their repetition by English-speaking 5- and 6-year-olds. Additionally, they simulate their dataset using a particular computational model, EPAM-VOC, but the author will not discuss this computer simulation, and will instead confine her comments to TJGP's interpretation of the child data. In this commentary, the author would like to make two main points. The first is that TJGP's conclusion that onsets are more prone to errors than codas is dependent upon how the nonwords are syllabified. The second is that TJGP's claim that "exactly the same effects are seen irrespective of how nonwords are syllabified" is incorrect. As the author will show, different methods of syllabification yield different results, and therefore TJGP's interpretation of the data is theory-dependent. (Contains 2 tables.)