Advertisement

Routes to Verb Placement in Early German and French: The Independence of Finiteness and Agreement

  • Maaike Verrips
  • Jürgen Weissenborn
Part of the Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics book series (SITP, volume 16)

Abstract

What is innate and what is learned is one of the questions underlying most current work in first language acquisition. The challenge in this field is to develop a theory that accounts for the learnability problems involved in the domain at hand, that makes correct empirical predictions, and leaves room for variation between children exactly in the domains where variation occurs.

Keywords

Embed Clause Main Clause Null Subject Main Verb French Child 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baker, M.: 1985, ‘The Mirror Principle and morphosyntactic explanation’, Linguistic Inquiry 16, 373–415.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, M.: 1988, Incorporation. A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  3. Bayer, J.: 1990, ‘What Bavarian negative concord reveals about the syntactic structure of German’, in J. Mascaró and M. Nespor (eds.), Grammar in Progress. Glow Essays for Henk van Riemsdijk, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  4. Belletti, A.: 1990, Generalized Verb Movement. Aspects of Verb Syntax, Rosenberg and Sellier, Torino.Google Scholar
  5. den Besten, H.: 1989, Studies in West Germanic Syntax, Rodopi, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  6. Borer, H. and K. Wexler: 1987, ‘The maturation of syntax’, in T. Roeper and E. Williams (eds.), Parameter Setting, Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  7. Boser, K., B. Lust, L. Santelmann, and J. Whitman: 1991, ‘The theoretical significance of auxiliaries in early child German’, paper given at the 16th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston.Google Scholar
  8. Bowerman, M.: 1990, ‘Mapping thematic roles onto syntactic functions: Are children helped by innate linking rules?’, Linguistics 28,1253–1289.Google Scholar
  9. Boysson-Bardies, B.: 1976, Négation et peiformance linguistique, Mouton, Paris-La Haye.Google Scholar
  10. Bresnan, J. and J. Kanerva: 1989, ‘Locative inversion in Chichewa: A case study of factorization in grammar’, Linguistic Inquiry 20, 1–50.Google Scholar
  11. Bybee, J.: 1984, Morphology. A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form, Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  12. Cardinaletti, A.: 1990, ‘Es, pro and sentential arguments in German’, Linguistische Berichte 126, 135–164.Google Scholar
  13. Choi, S.: 1988, ‘The semantic development of negation: A cross-linguistic longitudinal study’, Journal of Child Language 15, 517–531.Google Scholar
  14. Chomsky, N.: 1989, ’some notes on econonmy of derivation and representation’, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 43–74.Google Scholar
  15. Clahsen, H.: 1990, ‘Constraints on parameter setting. A grammatical analysis of some acquisition stages in German child language’, Language Acquisition 1, 361–391.Google Scholar
  16. Couquaux, D.: 1986, ‘Les pronorns faibles sujets comme groupes nominaux’, in M. Ronat and D. Couquaux (eds.), La grammaire modulaire, Les:Éditions de Minuit, Paris.Google Scholar
  17. Diesing, M: 1990, ‘Verb movement and the subject position in Yiddish’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8,41–79.Google Scholar
  18. Emonds, J.: 1978, ‘The verbal complex V’-V in French’, Linguistic Inquiry 9,151–175.Google Scholar
  19. Emonds, J.: 1985, A Unified Theory of Syntactic Categories, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  20. Grewendorf, G.: 1990, ‘Verbbewegung und Negation im Deutschen’, Groninger Arbeiten zur Gennanistischen Linguistik 30,57–125.Google Scholar
  21. de Haan, G.: 1986, ‘De rol van morfologie en syntaxis in de ontwikkeling van het werkwoord’, GLOT 9,28–41.Google Scholar
  22. de Haan, G.J. and K. Tuijnman: 1988, ‘Missing subjects and objects in child grammar’, in P. Jordens and J. Lalleman (eds.), Language Development, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  23. Haegeman, L. and Zanuttini, R.: 1990, ‘Negative concord in West Flemish’, ms., University of Geneva.Google Scholar
  24. Haider, H. and M. Prinzhorn (eds.): 1986, Verb Second Phenomena in Germanic languages, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  25. Haverkort, M. and J. Weissenborn: 1991, ‘Clitic and affix interaction in early Romance’, paper given at the 16th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston Tilburg University and Max Planck Institute für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  26. Hoekstra, T. and R. Mulder: 1990, ‘Unergatives as copular verbs; locational and existential predication’, The Linguistic Review 7, 1–79.Google Scholar
  27. Huang, J.: 1984, ‘On the distribution and reference of empty pronouos’, Linguistic Inquiry 15, 531–574.Google Scholar
  28. Jordens, P.: 1990, ‘The acquisition of verb placement in Dutch and German’, Linguistics 28, 1407–1448.Google Scholar
  29. Kaiser, G. and J. Meisel: 1991,’ subjekte und Null-Subjekte im Französischen’, in S. Olsen and G. Fanselow (eds.), DET, COMP und INFL. Zur Syntax funktionaler Kategorien und grammatischer Funktionen, Niemeyer, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  30. Lebeaux, D.: 1988, ‘Language acquisition and the form of the grammar’, Pb. D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  31. Levelt, W.: 1989, Speaking. From Intention to Articulation, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  32. Meisel, J.: 1990, ‘Verbal functional categories in early grammatical development’, ms., University of Hamburg.Google Scholar
  33. Mills, A.: 1985, ‘The acquisition of German’, in D. Siobin (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition. Vol. 1: The Data, Erlbaum. Hillsdale.Google Scholar
  34. Ouhalla, J.: 1991. Functional Categories and Parametric Variation, Routledge, London-New York.Google Scholar
  35. Pesetsky, D.: 1989, ‘Language-particular processes and the Earliness Principle’, ms., MIT.Google Scholar
  36. Pierce, A.: 1989, ‘On the emergence of syntax: A crosslinguistic study’, Pb.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  37. Pinker, S.: 1987, ‘The bootstrapping problem in language acquisition’, in B. MacWhinney (ed.), Mechanisms of Langauge Acquisition. Erlbaum, Hillsdale.Google Scholar
  38. Platzack, C. and A. Holmberg: 1989, ‘The role of AGR and finiteness’, Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 43, 51–76.Google Scholar
  39. Poeppel, D. and K. Wexler: 1991, ‘Finiteness and V2 effects implicate the existence of functional categories and head movement in early German grammar’, paper given at the 16th Annual Boston university Conference on Language Development, Boston.Google Scholar
  40. Pollock, J.-Y.: 1989, ‘Verb Movement, UG and the structure of IP’, Linguistic Inquiry 20, 365–425.Google Scholar
  41. Reis, M.: 1985,’ satzeinleitende Strukturen im Deutschen. Über COMP, Haupt-und Nebensätze, W-Bewegung und die Doppelkopfanalyse’, in W. Abraham (ed.), Erklärende Syntax des Deutschen, Narr, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  42. Rizzi, L.: 1986, ‘Null objects and the theory of pro’, Linguistic Inquiry 17, 501–557.Google Scholar
  43. Rizzi, L.: 1990, ’speculations on verb second’, in J. Mascaró and M. Nespor (eds.), Grammar in Progress. Glow Essaysfor Henk van Riemsdijk, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  44. Rizzi, L. and Roberts, I.: 1989, ‘Complex inversion in French’, Probus 1, 1–30.Google Scholar
  45. Roberge, Y.: 1986, ’subject doubling, free inversion, and null argument languages’, Canadian Journal of Linguistics 31, 55–79.Google Scholar
  46. Roeper, T.: 1973, ‘Approaches to a theory of language acquisition with examples from German children’, Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  47. Roeper, T.: 1991, ‘Acquisition architecture: From triggers to trees in the realization of IP and CP’, ms., University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
  48. Rothweiler, M.: 1989, ‘Nebensatzerwerb im Deutschen’, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tübingen.Google Scholar
  49. Safir, K.: 1986, ’subject clitics and the NOM-DROP Parameter’, in H. Borer (ed.), The Syntax of Pronominal Clitics, Syntax und Semantics, Vol. 19, Academic Press, Orlando.Google Scholar
  50. Schwartz, B. and S. Vikner: 1989, ‘All verb second clauses are CPs’, Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 43,27–49.Google Scholar
  51. Speas, M.: 1990, Phrase Structure in Natural Language, Kluwer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  52. Speas, M.: 1991, ‘Projecting agreement’, paper given at the University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
  53. Travis, L.: 1984, ‘Parameters and effects of word order variation’, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  54. Verrips, M.: 1990, ‘Models of development’, in M. Rothweiler (ed.), Spracherwerb und Grammatik. linguistische Untersuchungen zum Erwerb von Syntax und Morphologie, Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft 3, Westdeutscher Verlagm, Göttingen.Google Scholar
  55. Webelhuth, G. and H. den Besten: 1987, ‘Remnant topicalization and the constituent structure of VP in the Germanic SOV languages’, paper presented at the Glow-Colloquium, Venice.Google Scholar
  56. Weissenborn, J.: 1988a, ‘The acquisition of clitic object pronouns and word order in French: Syntax or morphology?’, ms., Max-Planck-Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  57. Weissenborn, J.: 1988b, ‘Null subjects in early grammars: Implications for parameter setting theories’, paper presented at the 13th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development.Google Scholar
  58. Weissenborn, J.: 1990, ‘Functional categories and verb movement in early German: The acquisition of German syntax reconsidered’, in M. Rothweiler (ed.), Spracherwerb und Grammatik. linguistische Untersuchungen zum Erwerb von Syntax und Morphologie. Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft 3, Westdeutscher Verlag, Göttingen.Google Scholar
  59. Weissenborn, J.: 1992, ‘Null subjects in early grammars: Implications for parameter setting theories’ (Revised version of Weissenborn 1988b), in J. Weissenborn, H. Goodluck and T. Roeper (eds.), Theoretical Issues in Language Acquisition. Continuity and Change in Development, Erlbaum, Hillsdale.Google Scholar
  60. Weissenborn, J., H. Goodluck, and T. Roeper: 1992, ‘Introduction: Old and new problems in the study of language acquisition’, in J. Weissenborn, H. Goodluck and T. Roeper (eds.), Theoretical Issues in Language Acquisition. Continuity anti Change in Development, Erlbaum, Hillsdale.Google Scholar
  61. Weissenborn, J., M. Verrips and R. Berman: 1989, ‘Negation as a window to the structure of early child language’, ms., Max-Planck-Institut für Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
  62. Weissenborn, J., T. Roeper, and J. de Villiers: 1991. ‘The acquisition of wh-movement in German and French’, in T. Maxfield and B. Plunkett (eds.), Papers in the Acquisition of Wh, University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 43–74.Google Scholar
  63. Wevering, M.: 1990, ‘What’s missing in Dutch?’, PRCLD 29, 125–132.Google Scholar
  64. Zanuttini, M.-L.: 1991, ’syntactic properties of sentential negation. A comparative study of Romance languages’, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maaike Verrips
  • Jürgen Weissenborn

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations