Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:28:38.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Uncovering productive morphosyntax in French-learning toddlers: a multidimensional methodology perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2015

ISABELLE BARRIÈRE ,
LOUISE GOYET ,
SARAH KRESH ,
GÉRALDINE LEGENDRE  and
THIERRY NAZZI
ISABELLE BARRIÈRE*
Affiliation:
Department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, Long Island University, Brooklyn, NY, USAand Yeled v'Yalda Research Institute, Brooklyn, New York, USA
LOUISE GOYET
Affiliation:
Université Paris 8, Franceand Psychologie du Développement, Laboratoire Paragraphe EA 349, Equipe Compréhension, Raisonnement et Acquisition des Connaissances (CRAC)
SARAH KRESH
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Graduate Center, CUNY, New York, USAand Yeled v'Yalda Research Institute, Brooklyn, New York, USA
GÉRALDINE LEGENDRE
Affiliation:
Department of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
THIERRY NAZZI
Affiliation:
Université Paris Descartes, Paris, Franceand CNRS (Laboratoire Psychologie de la Perception), Paris, France
*
Address for correspondence: Isabelle Barrière, Department of Communication Sciences & Disorders, Long Island University, Brooklyn, NY 11201-8423, USA. tel: 718 780 6335 (cell); e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study applies a multidimensional methodological approach to the study of the acquisition of morphosyntax. It focuses on evaluating the degree of productivity of an infrequent subject–verb agreement pattern in the early acquisition of French and considers the explanatory role played by factors such as input frequency, semantic transparency of the agreement markers, and perceptual factors in accounting for comprehension of agreement in number (singular vs. plural) in an experimental setting. Results on a pointing task involving pseudo-verbs demonstrate significant comprehension of both singular and plural agreement in children aged 2;6. The experimental results are shown not to reflect input frequency, input marker reliability on its own, or lexically driven knowledge. We conclude that toddlers have knowledge of subject–verb agreement at age 2;6 which is abstract and productive despite its paucity in the input.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 43 , Issue 5 , September 2016 , pp. 1131 - 1157
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

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

REFERENCES

Abbot-Smith, K., Lieven, E. & Tomasello, M. (2008). Graded representations in the acquisition of English and German transitive constructions. Cognitive Development 23(1), 48–66.Google Scholar
Ambridge, B., Kidd, E., Rowland, C. F. & Theakston, A. L. (2015). The ubiquity of frequency effects in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language 42(2), 239–73.Google Scholar
Arias-Trejo, N., Cantrell, L. M., Smith, L. B. & Alva Canto, E. A. (2014). Early comprehension of the Spanish plural. Journal of Child Language 41(6), 1356–72.Google Scholar
Babineau, M. & Shi, R. (2011). Processing of French liaisons in toddlers. In Davis, Nick, Mesh, Kate & Sung, Hyunsuk (eds), BUCLD 35 Proceedings, 25–37. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Bassano, D. & Mendes-Maillochon, I. (1994). Early grammatical and prosodic marking of utterance modality in French: a longitudinal study. Journal of Child Language 21(3), 649–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, E. & MacWhinney, B. (1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar. In Wanner, E. & Gleitman, L. R. (eds), Language acquisition: the state of the art, 173–218. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Behrens, H. (2009). Usage-based and emergentist approaches to language acquisition. Linguistics 47(2), 383–411.Google Scholar
Berko, J. (1958). The child's learning of English morphology. Word 14, 150–77.Google Scholar
Bernal, S., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Millotte, S. & Christophe, A. (2010). Two-year-olds compute syntactic structure on-line. Developmental Science 13(1), 69–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bernal, S., Lidz, J., Millotte, S. & Christophe, A. (2007). Syntax constrains the acquisition of verb learning. Language Learning and Development 3, 325–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bescherelle, L. N. (1998). Bescherelle: l'art de conjuguer: dictionnaire de 12 000 verbes, Vol. 1. Montréal: Hurtubise HMH.Google Scholar
Bradlow, A. R., Kraus, N., Nicol, T. G., McGee, T. J., Cunningham, J., Zecker, S. G. & Carrell, T. D. (1999). Effects of lengthened formant transition duration on discrimination and neural representation of synthetic CV syllables by normal and learning-disabled children. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 106(4), 2086–96.Google Scholar
Brandt-Kobele, O. C. & Höhle, B. (2010). What asymmetries within comprehension reveal about asymmetries between comprehension and production: the case of verb inflection in language acquisition. Lingua 120, 1910–25.Google Scholar
Chevrot, J. P., Dugua, C., Harnois-Delpiano, M., Siccardi, A. & Spinelli, E. (2013). Liaison acquisition: debates, critical issues, future research. Language Sciences 39, 83–94.Google Scholar
Childers, J., Fernandez, A. M., Echols, C. & Tomasello, M. (2001). Experimental investigations of children's understanding and use of verb morphology: Spanish- and English-speaking 2½ and 3-year-old children. In Almgen, M., Bareña, A., Ezeizabarrena, M. J., Idiazabal, I. & MacWhinney, B. (eds), Research on language acquisition: proceedings of the International Association for the Study of Child Language, 104–27. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Dabrowska, E. & Szczerbinski, M. (2006). Polish children's productivity with case marking: the role of regularity, type frequency, and phonological diversity. Journal of Child Language 33(3), 559–597.Google Scholar
Demuth, K. & Tremblay, A. (2007). Prosodically-conditioned variability in children's production of French determiners. Journal of Child Language 34(1), 1–29.Google Scholar
Dittmar, M., Abbot-Smith, K., Lieven, E., & Tomasello, M. (2008). Young German children's early syntactic competence: a preferential looking study. Developmental Science 11(4), 575–582.Google Scholar
Durand, J. & Lyche, C. (2008). French liaison in the light of corpus data. Journal of French Language Studies 18, 33–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Gomez, N., Hsin, L., Culbertson, J., Barrière, I., Nazzi, T. & Legendre, G. (2014). Revealing early comprehension of subject–verb agreement in Spanish. In Orman, W. & Valleau, M. J. (eds), Boston University Language Development Conference 38 Proceedings, 158–70. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Gomez, N. & Nazzi, T. (2012). Acquisition of nonadjacent phonological dependencies in the native language in the first year of life. Infancy 17(5), 498–524.Google Scholar
Gxilishe, S., de Villiers, P. & de Villiers, J. (2007). The acquisition of subject agreement in Xhosa. In Belikova, A., Meroni, L., & Umeda, M. (eds), Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA), 114–23. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Hunkeler, A. (2005). Aspect of the evolution of the interactions mother–child: case study of two dizygotic twin children between 15 and 26 months. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Rouen, France.Google Scholar
Hyams, N. (2008). The acquisition of inflection: a parameter-setting approach. Language Acquisition 15, 192–209.Google Scholar
Johnson, V. A, de Villiers, J. G. & Seymour, H. N. (2005). Agreement without understanding? The case of third person singular /s/. First Language 25, 317–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kern, S. (2003). Le compte-rendu parental au service de l’évaluation de la production lexicale des enfants français entre 16 and 30 mois. Glossa 85, 48–62.Google Scholar
Legendre, G., Barrière, I., Goyet, L. & Nazzi, T. (2010a). Comprehension of infrequent subject–verb agreement forms: evidence from French-learning children. Child Development 81(6): 1859–75.Google Scholar
Legendre, G., Culbertson, J., Barrière, I., Nazzi, T. & Goyet, L. (2010b). Experimental and empirical evidence for the status and acquisition of subject clitics and agreement marking in adult and child Spoken French. In Torrens, V., Escobar, L., Gavarro, A. & Gutierrez, J. (eds), Movements and clitics: adult and child grammar, 333–60. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Legendre, G., Culbertson, J., Zaroukian, E., Hsin, L., Barriere, I., and Nazzi, T. (2014). Is children's comprehension of subject–verb agreement universally late? Comparative evidence from French, English, and Spanish. In Perez-Leroux, A. T. (ed.), Lingua, 114, 21–39.Google Scholar
Lieven, E. V. M., Pine, J. M. & Baldwin, G. (1997). Lexically based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of Child Language 24(1), 187–217.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: tools for analyzing talk, 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Morgan, J. & Demuth, K. (Eds.) (1996). Signal to syntax: bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Naigles, L. (1990). Children use syntax to learn verb meaning. Journal of Child Language 17(2), 357–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nazzi, T., Barrière, I., Goyet, L., Kresh, S. & Legendre, G. (2011). Tracking irregular morphophonological dependencies in natural language: evidence from the acquisition of subject–verb agreement in French. Cognition 120(1), 119–35.Google Scholar
Nazzi, T., Mersad, K., Sundara, M., Iakimova, G. & Polka, L. (2014). Early word segmentation in infants acquiring Parisian French: task-dependent and dialect-specific aspects. Journal of Child Language 41(3), 600–33.Google Scholar
Ortéga, É. & Lété, B. (2010). eManulex: Electronic version of Manulex and Manulex-infra databases. Online: <http://www.manulex.org>..>Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A.-T. (2005). Number problems in children. In Gurski, C. (ed.), Proceedings of the 2005 Canadian Linguistic Association Annual Conference (12 pp.). Online: <http://westernlinguistics.ca/Publications/CLA-ACL/Perez-Leroux.pdf>.Google Scholar
Pierce, A. (1992). Language acquisition and syntactic theory: a comparative analysis of French and English child grammars. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plunkett, B. (2002). Null subjects in child French interrogatives: a view from the York Corpus. In Push, C. & Raible, W. (eds), RomanitischeKorpuslinguistik: Korpora und gesprochene Sprache/Romance corpus linguistics: corpora and spoken language, 41–452. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
Soderstrom, M., White, K. S., Conwell, E., & Morgan, J. L. (2007). Receptive grammatical knowledge of familiar content words and inflection in 16 month olds. Infancy 12, 1–29.Google Scholar
Sokolov, J. L. (1988). Cue validity in sentence comprehension. Journal of Child Language 15(1), 129–55.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R. (2002). Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tincoff, R., Santelmann, L. & Jusczyk, P. (2000). Auxiliary verb learning and 18-month-olds’ acquisition of morphological relationships. In Howell, S. C., Fish, S. A. & Keith-Lucas, T. (eds), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Vol. 2, 726–37. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2001). First steps towards a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics 11(1/2), 61–82.Google Scholar
Wauquier, S. & Shoemaker, E. (2013). Convergence and divergence in the acquisition of French liaison by native and non-native speakers. Language, Interaction & Acquisition 4(2), 161–89.Google Scholar