Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-02T14:23:43.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A cross-linguistic investigation of the acquisition of the pragmatics of indefinite and definite reference in two-year-olds*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2008

MARGOT ISABELLA ROZENDAAL  and
ANNE EDITH BAKER
MARGOT ISABELLA ROZENDAAL*
Affiliation:
Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
ANNE EDITH BAKER
Affiliation:
Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
*
Address for correspondence: Margot Rozendaal, Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication, Spuistraat 210, 1012 VT Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Fax: +31 (0)20-525 3021; e-mail: m.i.rozendaal@uva.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The acquisition of reference involves both morphosyntax and pragmatics. This study investigates whether Dutch, English and French two- to three-year-old children differentiate in their use of determiners between non-specific/specific reference, newness/givenness in discourse and mutual/no mutual knowledge between interlocutors. A brief analysis of the input shows a clear association between form and function, although there are some language differences in this respect. As soon as determiner use can be statistically analyzed, the children show a relatively adult-like pattern of association for the distinctions of non-specific/specific and newness/givenness. The distinction between mutual/no mutual knowledge appears later. Reference involving no mutual knowledge is scarcely evidenced in the input and barely used by the children at this age. The development of associations is clearly related to the rate of determiner development, the French being quickest, then the English, then the Dutch.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 35 , Issue 4 , November 2008 , pp. 773 - 807
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

[*]

We would like to thank Maya Hickmann and Elisabeth van der Linden for their advice on the data coding of French, and Cécile de Cat, Marie-Thérèse Le Normand, Marianne Kilani-Schoch and Marlies van der Velde for sharing information on MLU development in French. Furthermore, we are greatly indebted to Rob Schoonen for his advice on the statistical analyses in this article. Finally, we would also like to thank the participants at the IASCL conference (Berlin, July 2005) and at the conference of Emergence of Linguistic Abilities (Lyon, December 2005) as well as Elma Blom, Marian Erkelens, Henriette Hendriks, Elena Lieven, Danielle Matthews and Daniela Polisénska, and two anonymous reviewers, for their insightful comments on earlier versions of this paper.

References

REFERENCES

Abu-Akel, A. & Bailey, A. L. (2000). Acquisition and use of ‘a’ and ‘the’ in English by young children. In Howell, S. C., Fish, S. A. & Keith-Lucas, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 24th annual Boston University conference on language development, 45–57. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Agresti, A. (1996). An introduction to categorical data analysis. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bassano, D., Maillochon, I. & Mottet, S. (2005). Noun grammaticization in French: prosodic and lexical factors on determiner use in children's speech. Paper presented at the Emergence of Linguistic Abilities conference, Lyon, December.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiercha, G., Guasti, M. T. & Gualmini, A. (2001). Nouns and articles in child grammar and the syntax/semantics map. Unpublished manuscript, University of Milan/University of Siena/University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. M. (1997). Discourse motivations for referential choice in Korean acquisition. In Sohn, H.-M. & Haig, J. (eds) Japanese/Korean linguistics, 639–59. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. & Marshall, C. R. (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In Joshi, A. K., Sag, I. A. & Webber, B. L. (eds) Elements in discourse understanding, 10–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
De Cat, C. (2002). French dislocation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of York.Google Scholar
De Cat, C. (2004). A fresh look at how young children encode new referents. International review of Applied Linguistics 42, 111–27.Google Scholar
Gerken, L. (1994). A metrical template account of children's weak syllable omissions from multisyllabic words. Journal of Child Language 21, 565–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Givón, T. (1995). Coherence in text vs. coherence in mind. In Gernsbacher, M. A. & Givón, T. (eds) Coherence in spontaneous texts, 00–00. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Guerriero, A. M. S., Oshima-Takane, Y. & Kuriyama, Y. (2006). The development of referential choice in English and Japanese: A discourse-pragmatic perspective. Journal of Child Language 33, 823–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hickmann, M. (2003). Children's discourse: Person, space and time across languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hoff, E. & Tian, C. (2005). Socioeconomic status and cultural influences on language. Journal of Communication Disorders 38, 271–78.Google Scholar
Kail, M. & Hickmann, M. (1992). French children's ability to introduce referents in narratives as a function of mutual knowledge. First Language 12, 73–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilani-Schoch, M. (2003). Early verb inflection in French: An investigation of two corpora. In Bittner, D., Dressler, W. U. & Kilani-Schoch, M. (eds) Development of verb inflection in first language acquisition, 269–96. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kupisch, T. (2004). On the relation between input frequency and acquisition patterns from a cross-linguistic perspective. In van Kampen, J. & Baauw, S. (eds) Proceedings of GALA, 281–92. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Kupisch, T. (2005). Acceleration in bilingual first language acquisition. In Gaerts, T. & Jacobs, H. (eds) Romance languages and linguistic theory 2003: selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ 2003, 143–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, C. (1999). Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pannemann, M. (2006). More variability in French L1: Consequences for theories of DP-acquisition. In Vliegen, M. (ed.) Linguistik International 16. Variation in Sprachtheorie und Spracherwerb, 223–32. Amsterdam: Lang.Google Scholar
Pine, J. M. & Lieven, E. V. M. (1997). Slot and frame patterns and the development of the determiner category. Applied Psycholinguistics 18, 123–38.Google Scholar
Roder, B. J., Bushnell, E. W. & Sasseville, A. M. (2000). Infants' preferences for familiarity and novelty during the course of visual processing. Infancy 1, 491–507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roelofs, M. (1998). Hoe bedoel je? De verwerving van pragmatische vaardigheden. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Ruffman, T. & Perner, J. (2005). Do infants really understand false belief? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9, 462–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaeffer, J. & Matthewson, L. (2005). Grammar and pragmatics in the acquisition of article systems. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 23, 53–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, R. J. & de Villiers, J. G. (2000). Imagining articles: What a and the can tell us about the emergence of DP. In Howell, S. C., Fish, S. A. & Keith-Lucas, T. (eds) Proceedings of the 24th annual Boston University conference on language development, 609–20. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L. (2005). The role of discourse pragmatics in the acquisition of subjects in Italian. Applied Psycholinguistics 3, 437–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., Conti-Ramsden, G. & Ewert, B. (1990). Young children's conversations with their mothers and fathers: differences in breakdown and repair. Journal of Child Language 17, 115–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, M. & Haberl, K. (2003). Understanding attention: 12- and 18-month-olds know what is new for other persons. Developmental Psychology 39, 906–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van der Velde, M. (2003). Déterminants et pronoms en néerlandais et en français: syntaxe et acquisition. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Université Paris 8.Google Scholar
Van der Velde, M., Jakubowicz, C. & Rigaut, C. (2002). The acquisition of determiners and pronominal clitics by three French-speaking children. In Lasser, I. (ed.) The process of language acquisition, 115–32. Frankfurt/Berlin: Peter Lang Verlag.Google Scholar
Veneziano, E. & Sinclair, H. (2000). The changing status of ‘filler syllables’ on the way to grammatical morphemes. Journal of Child Language 27, 461–500.Google Scholar
Wigglesworth, G. (1990). Children's narrative acquisition: A study of some aspects of reference and anaphora. First Language 10, 105–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar