Chapter published in:Three Streams of Generative Language Acquisition Research: Selected papers from the 7th Meeting of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition – North America, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Edited by Tania Ionin and Matthew Rispoli
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 63] 2019
► pp. 85–105
Parsing, pragmatics, and representation
Children’s comprehension of two-clause questions
How do young children comprehend wh-questions from two-clause sentences? Is it via parsing heuristics like first resort, or different grammars, or the question-under-discussion? Fifty preschool children and twenty-three adults gave answers to nine adjunct wh-questions from sentences with false complements. The effects of verb and wh-question were tested on the type of answer children give: short distance, long distance, and reality answers, which link the wh only to the embedded verb. Neither children nor adults preferred to fill the first gap, but adults and children differed in the likelihood of a reality answer. This answer type was linked to children’s language skill assessed by another index. The disparities in various theoretical positions and research findings are then discussed. Differences in the form of the sentences used across the laboratories point to a new explanation for the disparity between the different results.
- 1.1Acquisition of Long Distance (LD) Wh-movement
- 1.2Weak islands
- 1.3.1Parsing results
- 1.4New study: False complements with adjunct questions
- 2.1Nine scenarios
- 5.1Experiment goals
- 5.2Parsing, pragmatics and grammars
- 5.3A second difference across studies
Published online: 15 April 2019
Bishop, D., Nation, K., & Patterson, K.
de Villiers, J. G.
(2010) On building up a sufficient representation for belief: Tense, Point of View and Wh-movement. In J. Costa, A. Castro, M. Lobo, & F. Pratas (Eds.), Language acquisition and development: Proceedings of Gala 2009 (pp.121–134). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
de Villiers, J. G., & de Villiers, P. A.
de Villiers, J. G., Kotfila, J. & Roeper, T.
de Villiers, J. G., & Pyers, J. E.
de Villiers, J. G., Roeper, T., Harrington, E., & Gadilauskas, E.
de Villiers, J. G., & Roeper, T.
de Villiers, J. G., Roeper, T., Bland-Stewart, L., & Pearson, B. Z.
de Villiers, J. G., Roeper, T., & Vainikka. A.
Diessel, H., & Tomasello. M.
Golinkoff., R., de Villiers, J. G., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Iglesias, A., & Wilson, M
Goodluck, H., Foley, M., & Sedivy, J.
Harrigan, K., Hacquard, V., & Lidz, J.
Lewis, S., Lidz, J., & Hacquard, V.
(2012) The semantics and pragmatics of belief reports in preschoolers. In A. Chereches (Ed.), Proceedings of SALT 22 (pp. 247 – 267). Linguistic Society of America. < https://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/SALT/issue/view/87>
McDaniel, D. Chiu, B., & Maxfield, T.
Oiry, M., & Demirdache, H.
Omaki, A., Davidson White, I., Goro, T., Lidz, J., & Phillips, C.
Philip, W., & de Villiers, J. G.
Phillips, C., & Ehrenhofer, L.
Roeper, T., & de Villiers, J. G.
Seymour, H. N., Roeper, T., & de Villiers, J. G.
Szabolsci, A., & Zwarts, F.
Cited by 2 other publications
de Villiers, Jill, Jessica Kotfila & Tom Roeper
Lutken, C. Jane, Géraldine Legendre & Akira Omaki
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 april 2022. 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.