7 research outputs found
Recommended from our members
Modelling the developmental patterning of finiteness marking in English, Dutch, German and Spanish using MOSAIC
In this paper we apply MOSAIC (Model of Syntax Acquisition in Children) to the simulation of the developmental patterning of children’s Optional Infinitive (OI) errors in four languages: English, Dutch, German and Spanish. MOSAIC, which has already simulated this phenomenon in Dutch and English, now implements a learning mechanism that better reflects the theoretical assumptions underlying it, as well as a chunking mechanism which results in frequent phrases being treated as one unit. Using one, identical model that learns from child-directed speech, we obtain a close quantitative fit to the data from all four languages, despite there being considerable cross-linguistic and developmental variation in the OI phenomenon. MOSAIC successfully simulates the difference between Spanish (a pro-drop language where OI errors are virtually absent), and Obligatory Subject languages that do display the OI phenomenon. It also highlights differences in the OI phenomenon across German and Dutch, two closely related languages whose grammar is virtually identical with respect to the relation between finiteness and verb placement. Taken together, these results suggest that (a) cross-linguistic differences in the rates at which children produce Optional Infinitives are graded, quantitative differences that closely reflect the statistical properties of the input they are exposed to and (b) theories of syntax acquisition need to consider more closely the role of input characteristics as determinants of quantitative differences in the cross-linguistic patterning of phenomena in language acquisition
Comparing different models of the development of verb inflection in early child Spanish
How children acquire knowledge of verb inflection is a long-standing question in language acquisition research. In the present study, we test the predictions of some current constructivist and generativist accounts of the development of verb inflection by focusing on data from two Spanish-speaking children between the ages of 2;0 and 2;6. The constructivist claim that children's early knowledge of verb inflection is only partially productive is tested by comparing the average number of different inflections per verb in matched samples of child and adult speech. The generativist claim that children's early use of verb inflection is essentially error-free is tested by investigating the rate at which the children made subjectverb agreement errors in different parts of the present tense paradigm. Our results show: 1) that, although even adults ' use of verb inflection in Spanish tends to look somewhat lexically restricted, both children's use of verb inflection was significantly less flexible than that of their caregivers, and 2) that, although the rate at which the two children produced subjectverb agreement errors in their speech was very low, this overall error rate hid a consistent pattern of error in which error rates were substantially higher in low frequency than in high frequency contexts, and substantially higher for low frequency than for high frequency verbs. These results undermine the claim that children's use of verb inflection is fully productive from the earliest observable stages, and are consistent with the constructivist claim that knowledge of verb inflection develops only gradually
The constructivist approach
In this article we outline the constructivist (or usage-based) approach to children's language development. We argue that linguistic abstractions emerge from the interaction between children's desire to communicate, their intention-reading skills and a distributional analysis of the input. We illustrate our approach by discussing: the development of constituency; inflectional marking; utterance level constructions; more complex syntax in the form of complement-clause structures and relative clauses. We also address explanations for some systematic errors made by English-speaking children that have been much discussed in the literature: optional infinitive errors, accusative for nominative errors and wh-inversion errors. We conclude with some outstanding issues for this approach