Commentary published in:
Epistemological issue with keynote article “Different speakers, different grammars: Individual differences in native language attainment” by Ewa Dabrowska
[Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 2:3] 2012
► pp. 298–303

[ p. 298 ]Why and how individual differences matter for linguistic theory and experimental research but not for UG

| Goethe-University Frankfurt
Published online: 07 September 2012
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.2.3.11sch
References

References

Bayer, J.
(1984) COMP in Bavarian syntax. The Linguistic Review, 3, 209–274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1995) The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2000) Minimalist inquiries. In R. Martin, D. Michaels, & J. Uriagereka (Eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of howard Lasnik (pp. 89–155). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2001) Derivation by phase. In M. J. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp. 1–52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Crain, S.
(1991) Language acquisition in the absence of experience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 597–612. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Villiers. J.G., & de Villiers. P.A.
(1973) Development of the use of word order in comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2(4), 331–341. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drozd, K.
(2004) Learnability and linguistic performance. Journal of Child Language, 31, 431–457. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Genesee, F.
(1989) Early bilingual development: One language or two? Journal of Child Language, 16, 161–179. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kepser, S., & Reis, M.
(2005) Evidence in linguistics. In S. Kepser & M. Reis (Eds.), Linguistic evidence: Empirircal, theoretical, and computational perspectives (pp. 1–6). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Koch, C., Schulz, P., & Katsos, N.
(2010) Do children compute some or most scalar implicatures? — Evidence from German. In A. Castro, J. Costa, M. Lobo, & F. Pratas (Eds.), Language acquisition and development. Proceedings of GALA 2009. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar
Musolino, J.
(2009) The logical syntax of number words: Theory, acquisition and processing. Cognition, 111, 24–45.[ p. 303 ] CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J.
(2011) Individual differences in child English second language acquisition: Comparing child-internal and child-external factors. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism. 1(3), 213–237. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Penner, Z., & Weissenborn, J.
(1998) Strong continuity, parameter setting, and the trigger hierarchy: on the acquisition of the DP in Bernese Swiss German and High German. In H. Clahsen (Ed.), Generative perspectives on language acquisition (pp. 161–200). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Schütze, C.T.
(2005) Thinking about what we are asking speakers to do. In S. Kepser & M. Reis (Eds.), Linguistic evidence: Empirircal, theoretical, and computational perspectives (pp. 457–484). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, P., & Kieburg, A.
(2007, September). What does every child know about all the universal quantifiers? Evidence from German. Poster presented at Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition (GALA), Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
Schulz, P., & Penner, Z.
(2002) How you can eat the apple and have it too: Evidence from the acquisition of telicity in German. In J. Costa & M. J. Freitas (Eds.), Proceedings of the GALA’ 2001 Conference on Language Acquisition, 239–246.Google Scholar
Schulz, P., & Roeper, T.
(2011) Acquisition of exhaustivity in wh-questions: A semantic dimension of SLI? Lingua, 121(3), 383–407. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, P., & Tracy, R.
(2011) Linguistische Sprachstandserhebung — Deutsch als Zweitsprache (LiSe-DaZ). Göttingen: Hogrefe Verlag.Google Scholar
Stromswold, K.
(2006) Why Children Understand and Misunderstand Sentences: An Eyetracking Study of Passive Sentences. Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report.Google Scholar
Stromswold, K., Pinker, S., & Kaplan, R.
(1985) Cues for understanding the passive voice. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 24, 123–130.
Tracy, R., & Gawlitzek-Maiwald, I.
(2000) Bilingualismus in der frühen Kindheit. In H. Grimm (Hrsg.), Sprachentwicklung. Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, CIII, Band 3 (S. 495–535). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
van der Lely. H.K.J.
(1996) Specifically language impaired and normally developing children: Verbal passive vs. adjectival passive sentence interpretation. Lingua, 98, 243–272. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weiß, H.
(1998) Syntax des Bairischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2005) The double competence hypothesis. On diachronic evidence. In S. Kepser & M. Reis (Eds.), Linguistic evidence: Empirical, theoretical and computational perspectives (pp. 557–575). Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Schulz, Petra & Angela Grimm
2019. The Age Factor Revisited: Timing in Acquisition Interacts With Age of Onset in Bilingual Acquisition. Frontiers in Psychology 9 Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 april 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.