Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:09:55.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Wh-questions in child bilingual acquisition of French: Derivational complexity and cross-linguistic influence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Nelleke Strik*
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University

Abstract

This study investigates the development of wh-questions in French in a group of bilingual French-Dutch children. Fifteen children (aged 4 to 8, mean age 6;03, first exposure to French under age 4 for most of the children) participated in an elicited production task. Their results were compared to those of 4-year-old and 6-year-old monolingual children from a previous study. In order to examine possible influence from Dutch, two main hypotheses with contrasting predictions are proposed: structural overlap and derivational complexity. The results show that the bilingual children exhibited the same developmental course for wh-questions as their monolingual peers. The majority of responses involved wh-fronting without inversion, whereas wh-fronting with inversion, the only possible structure in Dutch, was not frequent. Therefore, the results do not provide clear evidence for influence from Dutch. Instead, they confirm that derivational complexity constrains the development of wh-questions in French.

Résumé

Résumé

Cette étude porte sur les questions wh en français chez des enfants bilingues françaisnéerlandais. Quinze enfants (âgés de 4 à 8 ans, âge moyen 6;03, première exposition au français en dessous de 4 ans pour la majorité) ont participé à une tâche de production induite. Leurs résultats ont été comparés à ceux des enfants monolingues de 4 ans et de 6 ans d’une étude précédente. Pour examiner l’influence possible du néerlandais, deux hypothèses principales sont proposées : le chevauchement structural et la complexité dérivationnelle. Les résultats montrent un développement similaire à celui des enfants monolingues. Les questions à wh antéposé sans inversion sont les plus fréquentes, alors que les questions à wh antéposé avec inversion, la seule structure possible en néerlandais, sont plus rares. Par conséquent, les résultats ne contiennent pas de preuve évidente d’influence du néerlandais. En revanche, ils confirment que la complexité dérivationnelle contraint le développement des questions wh en français.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Belletti, Adriana and Hamann, Cornelia. 2004. On the L2/bilingual acquisition of French by two young children with different source languages. In The acquisition of French in different contexts, ed. Prévost, Philippe and Paradis, Johanne, 207–242. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Blom, Elma. 2003. From root infinitive to finite sentence. Doctoral dissertation, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Bonnesen, Matthias. 2005. Der erwerb der linken Satzperipherie bei Französisch/Deutsch bilingual aufwachsenden Kindern. Doctoral dissertation, University of Hamburg.Google Scholar
Bonnesen, Matthias and Kroffke, Solveig. 2007. The acquisition of questions in L2 German and French by children and adults. Hamburg: University of Hamburg.Google Scholar
Cheng, Lisa and Rooryck, Johan. 2000. Licensing wh-in-situ. Syntax 3:1–19.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2005. On Phases, Ms., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).Google Scholar
Coveney, Aidan. 2002. Variability in spoken French. A sociolinguistic study of interrogation and negation. Bristol: Elm Bank.Google Scholar
Crisma, Paola. 1992. On the acquisition of wh-questions in French. Geneva Generative Papers 1(2):115–121.Google Scholar
De Cat, Cecile and Plunkett, Bernadette. 2002. QU’ est ce qu’ i(1) dit, celui + Là ?: notes méthodologiques sur la transcription d’un corpus francophone. In Romanistische Korpuslinguistik: Korpora und gesprochene Sprache/Romance Corpus Linguistics: Corpora and Spoken Language, ed. Pusch, Claus and Raible, Wolfgang. Tubingen: Narr, CD-ROM.Google Scholar
De Houwer, Annick. 1990. The acquisition of two languages from birth: A case study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fache, Sonia. 2007. Production et compréhension des questions-wh chez des enfants présentant un trouble spécifique du langage. Master’s thesis, École d’orthophonie de Paris 6, Paris.Google Scholar
Foroodi-Nejad, Farzaneh and Paradis, Johanne. 2009. Crosslinguistic transfer in the acquisition of compound words in Farsi-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12:411–427.Google Scholar
Friedmann, Naama, Belletti, Adriana, and Rizzi, Luigi. 2009. Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua 119:67–88.Google Scholar
Gadet, Françoise. 1989. Le français ordinaire. Paris: Armand Colin/Masson.Google Scholar
Grondin, Nathalie and White, Lydia. 1996. Functional categories in child L2 acquisition of French. Language Acquisition 5:1–34.Google Scholar
Hamann, Cornelia. 2000. The acquisition of constituent questions and the requirements of interpretation. In The acquisition of syntax, ed. Friedemann, Marc-Ariel and Rizzi, Luigi, 170–201. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hamann, Cornelia. 2006. Speculations about early syntax: The production of wh-questions by normally developing French children and French children with SLI. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 5:143–189.Google Scholar
Hamann, Cornelia, Tuller, Laurie, Monjauze, Cecile, Delage, Hélène, and Henry, Celia. 2007. (Un)successful subordination in French-speaking children and adolescents with SLI. In Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD) 31 Proceedings, ed. Caunt-Nulton, Heather, Kulatilake, Samantha, and Woo, I-hao, 286–297. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Herschensohn, Julia. 2000. The second time around: Minimalism and L2 acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hulk, Aafke. 1996. The syntax of wh-questions in child French. Amsterdam Series in Child Language Development 5:129–172.Google Scholar
Hulk, Aafke and Mullen, Natascha 2000. Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3:227–244.Google Scholar
Hulk, Aafke and Zuckerman, Shalom. 2000. The interaction between input and economy: Acquiring optionality in French wh-questions. In Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD) 24 Proceedings, ed. Catherine, S. Howell, Fish, Sarah, and Keith-Lucas, Thea, 438–449. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, Celia. 2005. The language faculty: (Ab)Normal development and interface constraints. Paper presented at Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition (GALA) 2005, Siena, Italy.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, Celia. 2011. Measuring derivational complexity: New evidence from typically-developing and SLI learners of Ll-French. Lingua 121:339–351.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, Celia and Nash, Lea. 2001. Functional categories and syntactic operations in (Ab)normal language acquisition. Brain and Language 77:321–339.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, Celia and Strik, Nelleke. 2008. Scope-marking strategies in the acquisition of long distance wh-questions in French and Dutch. Language and Speech 51:101–132.Google Scholar
van Kampen, Jacqueline. 1997. First steps in wh-movement. Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 2000. The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk, 3rd ed.. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen. 1989. Early differentiation of languages in bilingual children. In Bilingualism Across the Life Span: Aspects of Acquisition, Maturity and Loss, ed. Hyltenstam, Kenneth and Obler, Loraine, 13–40. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen. 2008. Child second language acquisition or successive first language acquisition. In Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective, ed. Haznedar, Belma and Gavruseva, Elena, 55–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen. 2010. Age of onset in successive acquisition of bilingualism: Effects of grammatical development. In Language acquisition across linguistics and cognitive systems, ed. Kail, Michèle and Hickman, Maya, 1–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Morgenstern, Aliyah and Parisse, Christophe. 2007. Codage et interprétation du langage spontané d’enfants de 1 à 3 ans. In Corpus 6: Interprétation, contextes codage, ed. Pincemin, Bénédicte, 55–78.Google Scholar
Müller, Natascha, Crysmann, Berthold, and Kaiser, Georg. 1996. Interactions between the acquisition of French object drop and the development of the C-system. Language Acquisition 5:35–63.Google Scholar
Nicoladis, Elena. 2006. Cross-linguistic transfer in adjective-noun strings by preschool bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9:15–32.Google Scholar
Paradis, Johanne and Genesee, Fred. 1996. Syntactic acquisition in bilingual children: Autonomous or interdependent? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18:1–25.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, Ana Teresa. 2011. What I don’t understand about interfaces. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1:71–73.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David and Torrego, Esther. 2001. T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Kenstowicz, Michael, 355–426. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Plunkett, Bernadette. 1999. Targeting complex structure in French questions. In Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD) 23 Proceedings, ed. Greenhill, Annabel, Hughes, Mary, Littlefleld, Heather, and Tano, Cheryl, 764–775. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Prévost, Philippe, Tuller, Laurice, Scheidnes, Maureen, Ferré, Sandrine, and Haiden, Martin. 2010. Computational complexity effects in the acquisition of Wh-questions in child L2 French. In New directions in language acquisition: Romance languages in the generative perspective, ed. Guijarro, Pedro-Fuentes and Domínguez, Laura, 251–279. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Riegel, Martin, Pellat, Jean-Christophe, and Rioul, René. 1994. Grammaire méthodique du français. Paris: Presses universitaires de France (PUF).Google Scholar
Ruhland, Rick, Wijnen, Frank, and Geert, Paul Van. 1995. An exploration into the application of dynamic systems modeling to language acquisition. Amsterdam Series in Child Language Development 4:107–134.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Bonnie. 2004. On child L2 development of syntax and morphology. Lingue e Linguaggio 3:97–132.Google Scholar
Serratrice, Ludovica, Sorace, Antonella, and Paoli, Sandra. 2004. Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax-pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English-Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7:183–205.Google Scholar
Strik, Nelleke. 2007. L’acquisition des phrases interrogatives chez les enfants francophones. Psychologie française 52:27–39.Google Scholar
Strik, Nelleke. 2008. Syntaxe et acquisition des phrases interrogatives en français et en néerlandais: une étude contrastive. Doctoral dissertation, University Paris 8.Google Scholar
Strik, Nelleke and Pérez-Leroux, Ana Teresa. 2011. Jij doe wat girafe? wh-movement and inversion in Dutch-French bilingual children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1:175–205.Google Scholar
Suppes, Pat, Smith, Robert, and Leveillé, Madeleine. 1973. The French syntax of a child’s noun phrases. Archives de Psychologie 42:207–269.Google Scholar
Vinet, Marie-Thérèse. 2001. D’un français à un autre: la syntaxe de la microvariation. Saint-Laurent, Québec: Éditions Fides.Google Scholar
Yip, Virginia and Matthews, Stephen. 2009. Conditions on cross-linguistic influence in bilingual acquisition: the case of wh-interrogatives. Paper presented at the 7th International Symposium on Bilingualism. Utrecht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, Shalom. 2001. The acquisition of “optional” movement. Doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen.Google Scholar