Language Information

Much contemporary L1 acquisition theory and empirical research are guided by the hypothesis that acquisition delays in children are often related to the integration of information across grammatical and other cognitive modules, such as syntax and discourse-pragmatics (see e.g., Grinstead, 2010). This special issue brings together cutting edge research from all relevant paradigms addressing interface issues in child language acquisition and provides a platform for the study of the interaction between different levels of linguistic knowledge. In this introduction, we present the reader with the tools needed to best understand the contributions of the individual studies and what they bring to bear on larger theoretical questions as a collective.

Studies of English and French show that children’s first articles are more likely to appear when they can be prosodified as part of a disyllabic foot (cf. Gerken, 1996; Demuth & Tremblay, 2008). However, preliminary studies of Spanish suggest that children’s first articles appear in larger prosodic structures, possibly due to the higher frequency of longer words. To assess this issue, this study examined longitudinal data from two Spanish 1- to 2-year-olds. As expected, both produced their early articles with monosyllabic and disyllabic nouns, rapidly expanding article use to trisyllabic nouns as well. The results suggest that the prosodic complexity of the lexicon plays an important role in the development of prosodic structure, providing the context for early prosodic licensing of grammatical morphemes.

In this study, the authors investigate the acquisition of the article system of English as a phenomenon at the interface between morphosyntax and semantics. L1 acquisition studies have found that children make mistakes in article use until they are at least four years old or possibly older. Also, adult L2 acquisition studies have reported that learners of English often have consistent difficulty in the use of articles until very late stages of acquisition. This study sought to understand whether child L2 learners would display acquisition patterns similar to child L1 for the English article system. The authors analyzed article use in L2 children from four L1 backgrounds: Mandarin/Cantonese Chinese, Hindi/Urdu/Punjabi, Arabic, and Spanish. The findings of the study indicate that the interface domain of the article system is indeed problematic for child L2 learners. The authors found that all L1 groups had difficulty acquiring the semantic aspect of the phenomenon. In the no-article L1 groups, the acquisition of the morphosyntactic aspect of article use showed the effect of L1 in the form of article omissions. Transfer of the mapping of the feature [–definite] onto indefinite article forms from L1s did not take place in the Arabic and Spanish L1 groups, indicating that L1 transfer in child L2 acquisition is limited. Comparing the findings with those of the previous studies of child L1 and adult L2 acquisition, the authors conclude that the predominant trends in children’s article acquisition were developmental rather than transfer-based. This finding in particular highlights the special status of L2 children as a unique learner population.

Children’s ability to interpret color adjective noun phrases (e.g., red butterfly) as contrastive was examined in an eyetracking study with 6-year-old Russian children. Pitch accent placement (on the adjective red, or on the noun butterfly) was compared within a visual context containing two red referents (a butterfly and a fox) when only one of them had a contrast member (a purple butterfly) or when both had a contrast member (a purple butterfly and a grey fox). Contrastiveness was enhanced by the Russian-specific ‘split constituent’ construction (e.g., Red put butterfly . . .) in which a contrastive interpretation of the color term requires pitch accent on the adjective, with the nonsplit sentences serving as control. Regardless of the experimental manipulations, children had to wait until hearing the noun (butterfly) to identify the referent, even in splits. This occurred even under conditions for which the prosody and the visual context allow adult listeners to infer the relevant contrast set and anticipate the referent prior to hearing the noun (accent on the adjective in 1-Contrast scenes). Pitch accent on the adjective did facilitate children’s referential processing, but only for the nonsplit constituents. Moreover, visual contexts that encouraged the correct contrast set (1-Contrast) only facilitated referential processing after hearing the noun, even in splits. Further analyses showed that children can anticipate the reference like adults but only when the contrast set is made salient by the preceding supportive discourse, that is, when the inference about the intended contrast set is provided by the preceding utterance.

The presence of non-adult patterns of omission/production of functional categories has occupied a central place in both monolingual and bilingual child language acquisition research. In bilingual acquisition a central learnability issue has been to determine whether interlinguistic influence would interact with those patterns. In this article, the authors analyse the omission/production of subject pronouns in the developing Spanish grammar and of copula be in the developing English grammar of two English–Spanish simultaneous bilingual children in order to address the issues of the locus and directionality of interlinguistic influence. The authors argue that the directionality of interlinguistic influence is determined by the need to implement core operations of the computational system and that the lexical–semantic interface is an area of the grammar where interlinguistic influence occurs.

In the ongoing philosophical debate over the origins and nature of lexical concepts stemming from the work of Fodor (1970, 1998, 2000, 2008), the potential of first language acquisition studies as a source of evidence has been somewhat overlooked. At the lexical interface with syntax, a restricted set of lexical conceptual elements can be shown to play a pivotal role in the generation of syntactic representations, and patterns of syntactic development can elucidate the nature of such elements. An experiment is described which reveals mature knowledge of interface principles in this domain in early syntactic production. It is argued that first language research of this type can provide much-needed observable evidence for lexical semantic decomposition and against radical concept nativism.

Partitive contexts are those in which a set of similar individuals has been introduced, and the speaker needs to refer to one of them. If that referent has not yet been individualized in the context, the only adult-like option is to refer to it with an indefinite. But in such contexts, children have been shown to often produce (illicit) definites. In comprehension, if children are made to identify a referent in a partitive context, they do not always interpret correctly the definiteness clues in the input, and tend to interpret definites as if they were indefinite. This article reviews production and comprehension studies in light of new experimental data, and argues that children’s errors in this type of context are due to processing limitations.

Data from two bilingual Basque–Spanish children are analysed with respect to the grammatical domain of clitic drop, involving the interface between pragmatics and syntax. Basque Spanish allows for clitic drop in referential contexts, an option that does not exist in standard Spanish. The data suggest that the early high rate of clitic drop is most probably due to two factors: first, cross-linguistic influence from Basque because Basque lacks clitics – and hence the complement position is either occupied by a DP or pro – and both children studied in the present article drop more clitics in Spanish than the monolinguals reported in the literature (Fujino & Sano, 2002); and second, because children seem to have a notion of topic that equals information recoverability.

This article investigates the acquisition of pronominal resolution as a process instantiated at the syntax–discourse interface. Based on current psycholinguistic proposals concerning the gradual development from a more context-driven towards a linguistically constrained representation of discourse referents, we conducted an experimental study investigating the impact of the antecedent properties animacy and syntactic role on the resolution of personal and demonstrative pronouns. Participants were 3- and 5-year-old monolingual German- and Bulgarian-speaking children. Results suggest that the 3-year-olds establish one pronoun type as a default in their early anaphoric system. Five-year-olds resolve personal pronouns to the maximally salient antecedent which they determine by a joint consideration of the subject and animacy status of available referents. The resolution of demonstratives shows initial language-specific constraints.

This article investigates subject realizations and omissions in bilingual German–Italian, German–French and Italian–French children. The German–Italian children realize too many subjects in Italian, unlike the French–Italian child. The authors modify the criteria for cross-linguistic influence: this occurs if the vulnerable grammatical phenomenon is an interface property and if the surface strings of the two languages are analysable with the syntactic derivation of one language. All children produce target-deviant subject omissions in French and German. Odd omissions of subjects in French and German and odd realizations in Italian are all syntactically 3rd person. The authors argue for one explanation for all observations, namely the misinterpretation of the deictic nature of 1st and 2nd person as the anaphoric 3rd person. Odd realized and omitted subject pronouns are of the NP-type, independent from licensing via agreement and realized as default 3rd person.

During the Root Infinitive (RI) stage children produce both stative and eventive finite verbs, but their non-finite verbs are restricted to eventive predicates (Hoekstra & Hyams, 1998; Wijnen, 1997). This Eventivity Constraint (EC) holds cross-linguistically – for RIs in Dutch, German, French, and Russian, ‘bare perfectives’ in Greek, bare participles (participles without an auxiliary) in Italian, French, and German – but not for English bare verbs. Hyams (2007) proposes the ‘aspectual anchoring hypothesis’ (AAH), which requires that non-finite root clauses be temporally anchored via the aspectual system. This article demonstrates that without any additional stipulations the AAH also accounts for the EC and the lack of such an effect in English bare verbs.

This commentary highlights the advantages of examining the interactions between domains of language, the language environment, and the individual. The findings of these articles address questions of current interest in both linguistics and cognitive science but may find a broader audience if the value of innateness, modularity, and assumptions about the role of frequency and the input are more carefully questioned. The strengths of working at the interface between linguistic subsystems include precise specification of the problem space, consideration of task effects, and extra-linguistic factors that might influence the results observed. The relative contribution of the input according to the different authors is considered and measures for incorporating input into studies are discussed. Implicit definitions of innateness and modularity assumed by the articles are highlighted.

This commentary on this special issue underscores the importance of experimental design, suggesting that less than optimal methodology can lead to errors on the part of children (and adults) that are sometimes interpreted as stemming from other sources, including processing limitations or problems with an ‘interface.’ Methodological remarks aside, the syntax–discourse interface stands out as problematic and the source of much debate about transfer between languages, yet to be resolved. Many of the articles in this issue make clear, however, that children’s hypotheses about language frequently fail to reflect the input and can be seen as reflecting options made available by Universal Grammar.