Note of clarification on the coding of light verbs in 'Semantic generality, input frequency and the acquisition of syntax' (Journal of Child Language 31, 61-99).
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Child Language↗
Biomedical subjects
Julian M Pine
Publications and source records attributed to Julian M Pine.
Investigating the abstractness of children's early knowledge of argument structure.
In the current debate about the abstractness of children's early grammatical knowledge, Tomasello & Abbott-Smith (2002) have suggested that children might first develop 'weak' or 'partial' representations of abstract syntactic structures. This paper attempts to characterize these structures by comparing the development of constructions around verbs in Tomasello's (1992) case study of Travis, with those of 10 children (Stage I-II) in a year-length, longitudinal study. The results show some evidence that children's early knowledge of argument structure is verb-specific, but also some evidence that children can generalize knowledge about argument structure across verbs. One way to explain these findings is to argue that children are learning limited scope formulae around high frequency subjects and objects, which serve as building blocks for more abstract structures such as S+V and V+O. The implication is that children may have some verb-general knowledge of the transitive construction as early as Stage I, but that this knowledge is still far from being fully abstract knowledge.
Birth Order↗
Testing the agreement/tense omission model using an elicited imitation paradigm.
The present study used an elicited imitation paradigm to test the prediction of Schutze & Wexler's (1996) AGREEMENT/TENSE OMISSION MODEL (ATOM) that the rate of non-nominative subjects with agreement-marked verb forms will be sufficiently low that such errors can reasonably be disregarded as noise in the data. A screening procedure identified five children who produced non-nominative subject errors (all her for she) who were then asked to repeat 24 sentences with 3sg feminine pronoun subjects (she) and agreeing main verbs or auxiliaries. All five children produced at least one non-nominative subject (her) with an agreement-marked verb form, and for none of these five children was the non-NOM + AGR rate significantly different to the rate that would be expected by chance, given the independent frequencies of non-nominative subjects and agreement-marked verb forms in their data. The three children for whom this expected (by chance) error rate was significantly greater than 10% (representing an acceptable level of noise in the data) produced non-NOM+AGR errors at a rate significantly greater than 10%, counter to the prediction of the ATOM. These results replicate and extend the naturalistic-data findings of Pine et al. using a different method. They also provide support for the use of elicited imitation as a methodology for assessing children's early grammatical knowledge.
Child Language↗
Testing the agreement/tense omission model: why the data on children's use of non-nominative 3psg subjects count against the ATOM.
One of the most influential recent accounts of pronoun case-marking errors in young children's speech is Schütze & Wexler's (1996) Agreement/Tense Omission Model (ATOM). The ATOM predicts that the rate of agreeing verbs with non-nominative subjects will be so low that such errors can be reasonably disregarded as noise in the data. The present study tests this prediction on data from 12 children between the ages of 1; 8.22 and 3 ; 0.10. This is done, first, by identifying children who produced a reasonably large number of non-nominative 3psg subjects; second, by estimating the expected rate of agreeing verbs with masculine and feminine non-nominative subjects in these children's speech; and, third, by examining the actual rate at which agreeing verb forms occurred with non-nominative subjects in those areas of the data in which the expected error rate was significantly greater than 10%. The results show, first, that only three of the children produced enough non-nominative subjects to allow a reasonable test of the ATOM to be made; second, that for all three of these children, the only area of the data in which the expected frequency of agreeing verbs with non-nominative subjects was significantly greater than 10% was their use of feminine case-marked subjects; and third, that for all three of these children, the rate of agreeing verbs with nonnominative feminine subjects was over 30%. These results raise serious doubts about the claim that children's use of non-nominative subjects can be explained in terms of AGR optionality, and suggest the need for a model of pronoun case-marking error that can explain why some children produce agreeing verb forms with non-nominative subjects as often as they do.
Child↗
The incidence of error in young children's Wh-questions.
Many current generativist theorists suggest that young children possess the grammatical principles of inversion required for question formation but make errors because they find it difficult to learn language-specific rules about how inversion applies. The present study analyzed longitudinal spontaneous sampled data from twelve 2-3-year-old English speaking children and the intensive diary data of 1 child (age 2;7 [years;months] to 2;11) in order to test some of these theories. The results indicated significantly different rates of error use across different auxiliaries. In particular, error rates differed across 2 forms of the same auxiliary subtype (e.g., auxiliary is vs. are), and auxiliary DO and modal auxiliaries attracted significantly higher rates of errors of inversion than other auxiliaries. The authors concluded that current generativist theories might have problems explaining the patterning of errors seen in children's questions, which might be more consistent with a constructivist account of development. However, constructivists need to devise more precise predictions in order to fully explain the acquisition of questions.
Child Language↗
Do data from children with specific language impairment support the agreement/tense omission model?
One of the most influential recent accounts of pronoun case-marking errors in children's speech is C. T. Schütze and K. Wexler's (1996) agreement/tense omission model (ATOM). This model predicts that non-nominative subjects with agreeing verbs will be so rare that they can be reasonably disregarded as noise in the data. The present study tested this prediction on data from 4 children with specific language impairment (SLI) by comparing the frequency with which each child produced non-nominative subjects with agreeing verbs and the frequency with which they would be expected to produce such errors by chance given the number of nominative and non-nominative subjects and the number of agreeing and nonagreeing verb forms in the data. The results show (a) that although 3 of the 4 children used non-nominative subjects in their speech, only 2 of them (Nathan and Dan) produced non-nominative subjects with agreeing verbs significantly less often than one would expect by chance; (b) that to the extent that there was an asymmetry in Nathan's and Dan's use of nominative and non-nominative subjects with agreeing verbs, this asymmetry could be explained in terms of developmental changes in their ability to mark case and agreement correctly and the use of potentially unanalyzed contractions; and (c) that Nathan and Dan produced non-nominative subjects with noncontracted agreeing forms about as often as one would expect by chance. These findings are discussed in terms of their theoretical implications for the ATOM and their methodological implications for future work on patterns of pronoun case marking error in the speech of typically developing children and children with SLI.
Child, Preschool↗
Semantic generality, input frequency and the acquisition of syntax.
In many areas of language acquisition, researchers have suggested that semantic generality plays an important role in determining the order of acquisition of particular lexical forms. However, generality is typically confounded with the effects of input frequency and it is therefore unclear to what extent semantic generality or input frequency determines the early acquisition of particular lexical items. The present study evaluates the relative influence of semantic status and properties of the input on the acquisition of verbs and their argument structures in the early speech of 9 English-speaking children from 2;0 to 3;0. The children's early verb utterances are examined with respect to (1) the order of acquisition of particular verbs in three different constructions, (2) the syntactic diversity of use of individual verbs, (3) the relative proportional use of semantically general verbs as a function of total verb use, and (4) their grammatical accuracy. The data suggest that although measures of semantic generality correlate with various measures of early verb use, once the effects of verb use in the input are removed, semantic generality is not a significant predictor of early verb use. The implications of these results for semantic-based theories of verb argument structure acquisition are discussed.
Child Language↗
The development of inversion in wh-questions: a reply to Van Valin.
Van Valin (Journal of Child Language 29, 2002, 161-75) presents a critique of Rowland & Pine (Journal of Child Language 27, 2000, 157-81) and argues that the wh-question data from Adam (in Brown, A first language, Cambridge, MA, 1973) cannot be explained in terms of input frequencies as we suggest. Instead, he suggests that the data can be more successfully accounted for in terms of Role and Reference Grammar. In this note we re-examine the pattern of inversion and uninversion in Adam's wh-questions and argue that the RRG explanation cannot account for some of the developmental facts it was designed to explain.
Child Language↗
Determinants of acquisition order in wh-questions: re-evaluating the role of caregiver speech.
Accounts that specify semantic and/or syntactic complexity as the primary determinant of the order in which children acquire particular words or grammatical constructions have been highly influential in the literature on question acquisition. One explanation of wh-question acquisition in particular suggests that the order in which English speaking children acquire wh-questions is determined by two interlocking linguistic factors; the syntactic function of the wh-word that heads the question and the semantic generality (or 'lightness') of the main verb (Bloom, Merkin & Wootten, 1982; Bloom, 1991). Another more recent view, however, is that acquisition is influenced by the relative frequency with which children hear particular wh-words and verbs in their input (e.g. Rowland & Pine, 2000). In the present study over 300 hours of naturalistic data from twelve two- to three-year-old children and their mothers were analysed in order to assess the relative contribution of complexity and input frequency to wh-question acquisition. The analyses revealed, first, that the acquisition order of wh-questions could be predicted successfully from the frequency with which particular wh-words and verbs occurred in the children's input and, second, that syntactic and semantic complexity did not reliably predict acquisition once input frequency was taken into account. These results suggest that the relationship between acquisition and complexity may be a by-product of the high correlation between complexity and the frequency with which mothers use particular wh-words and verbs. We interpret the results in terms of a constructivist view of language acquisition.
Caregivers↗
Does error-free use of French negation constitute evidence for Very Early Parameter Setting?
Many recent generativist models attribute grammatical knowledge to young children on the basis that children's language patterns the same way as the target adult language. It has been proposed that the child acquires this knowledge early on in development by a process of parameter setting. Wexler (1996) presents the very early parameter setting hypothesis (VEPS), which suggests that basic language-specific parameters are set correctly at the earliest observable stages, that is, from the onset of multi-word speech. However, the patterns predicted by VEPS are necessarily a characteristic feature of the input language and could therefore be just as readily explained in more limited scope term. A good example of this is French negation where, in order to perform correctly, the child simply has to register that certain lexical forms precede the negative particle pas and certain other forms follow it. One implication of such a limited scope account is that there should be a strong relation between the lexical specificity of children's and mothers' use of verbs before and after pas. We present data for one subject, aged from 2;1 to 2;8, that are compatible with this hypothesis. While these data do not count directly against VEPS, they do suggest that the very low frequency of errors in children's use of French negation does not in and of itself constitute evidence for early syntactic knowledge.
Child, Preschool↗
There is no evidence for a 'no overt subject' stage in early child Spanish: a note on Grinstead (2000).
Grinstead (2000) argues that there is a stage in both Spanish and Catalan children's grammatical development when they are restricted to using verbs without overt subjects. However, the evidence for a 'no overt subjects' stage in early child Spanish is based on very thin data from a single child: Juan between the ages of 1;7 and 2;1. In the present note we reanalyse the data from Juan and compare it with data from another child María at 1;7 and 1;8. Our results show that Juan produces his first overt subject during the same session as his first non-imperative verb form, and that María produces a relatively high proportion of verbs with overt subjects in both of her first two transcripts. They thus provide no support for the claim that there is a 'no overt subject' stage in early child Spanish.
Child Language↗
Going, going, gone: the acquisition of the verb 'go'.
This study investigated different accounts of early argument structure acquisition and verb paradigm building through the detailed examination of the acquisition of the verb Go. Data from 11 children followed longitudinally between the ages of 2;0 and 3;0 were examined. Children's uses of the different forms of Go were compared with respect to syntactic structure and the semantics encoded. The data are compatible with the suggestion that the children were not operating with a single verb representation that differentiated between different forms of Go but rather that their knowledge of the relationship between the different forms of Go varied depending on the structure produced and the meaning encoded. However, a good predictor of the children's use of different forms of Go in particular structures and to express particular meanings was the frequency of use of those structures and meanings with particular forms of Go in the input. The implications of these findings for theories of syntactic category formation and abstract rule-based descriptions of grammar are discussed.
Child Language↗