Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T13:55:57.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Comprehension of Pronominal Reference in Children

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

David Ingram  and
Catherine Shaw
David Ingram
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
Catherine Shaw
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Years ago, Piaget (1926:121) reported the fact that children, in their spoken language, show little concern for identifying the appropriate antecedents of their pronouns. In the texts he presented, they would typically introduce one or more antecedents followed by a series of pronouns. Such examples show a simple rule of linear order whereby a pronoun needs to refer to an antecedent somewhere preceding it. Further, this rule appeared to characterize the productive language of older children in the years five to ten, when much of the structure of language has already been acquired.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 33 , Issue 4: Special Issue: Linguistic Theory and External Evidence , December 1988 , pp. 395 - 407
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1988

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

Carden, Guy 1980 Backwards Anaphora in Performance: A Speech-Writing Asymme try. Manuscript.Google Scholar
Carden, Guy 1986 Blocked Forwards Anaphora: Theoretical Implications of the Acquisition Data. In Studies in the Acquisition of Anaphora, vol. 1: Defining the Constraints. Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics. Lust, Barbara, ed. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Carol 1969 The Acquisition of Syntax in Children from 5 to 10. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1975 Reflections on Language. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Carden, Guy 1981 Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald 1969 On Pronominalization and the Chain of Command. Pp. 160–186 in Modern Studies in English. Reibel, David and Schane, Sanford, eds. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Lasnik, Howard 1976 Remarks on Coreference. Linguistic Analysis 2.1–2.2.Google Scholar
McNeill, David 1966 Developmental Psycholinguistics. Pp. 15–84 in The Genesis of Language. Smith, Frank and Miller, George, eds. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
O’Grady, William 1986 Principles of Grammar and Learning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Piaget, Jean 1926 The Language and Thought of the Child. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya 1976 The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya 1981 Definite N Anaphora and C-Command Domains. Linguistic Inquiry 12:605–636.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya 1983 Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ross, John 1969 On the Cyclic Nature of English Pronominalization. Pp. 187–200 in Modern Studies in English. Reibel, David and Schane, Sanford, eds. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar