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. 159–186

Differentiating universal quantification from completive aspect in child Cantonese

| The Chinese University of Hong Kong
| Tianjin Normal University | The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The present study examines Cantonese-speaking preschool children’s sensitivity to the distinction between universal quantification (marked by the quantifier verb suffix saai3 ‘all’) and completive aspect (marked by the aspectual verb jyun4 ‘finish’). Using the Truth Value Judgment task and the Picture Selection task, we tested 97 children and 105 adults in a between-subject design on either jyun4-sentences or the corresponding saai3-sentences, paired with a completion (“post-state”) reading and a non-completion (“in-state”) reading. Our findings demonstrate that children systematically distinguish universal quantification from completive aspect, though an incorrect aspectual reading is sometimes assigned to the quantifier affix.
Keywords: universal quantification, A-quantification, completive aspect, event termination, event completion, child Cantonese, semantic acquisition
Published online: 15 April 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.63.09lei
References

References

Brinton, L. J.
(1988) The development of English aspectual systems: Aspectualizers and post-verbal particles. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Cheng, L. L -S., & Sybesma, R.
(1999) Bare and not-so-bare nouns and the structure of NP. Linguistic Inquiry, 30(4), 509–542. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, H -N. S.
(1989) A study of the uses of cantonese classifiers. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Chinese Studies: Language and Script Section (Vol. 2). Taipei.Google Scholar
(2007) Studies on the grammar of Hong Kong Cantonese (extended and updated ed.). Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.Google Scholar
Crain, S., & Thornton, R.
(1998) Investigations in Universal Grammar: A guide to experiments on the acquisition of syntax and semantics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dowty, D.
(1991) Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67(3), 547–619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Freed, A. F.
(1979) The semantics of English aspectual complementation. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jeschull, L.
(2007) The pragmatics of telicity and what children make of it. In A. Belikova, L. Meroni, & M. Umeda, Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Krifka, M.
(1992) Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In I. Sag & A. Szabolcsi (Eds.), Lexical matters (pp.29–53). Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, T. H- T.
(1994) The logical properties of saai3 in Cantonese. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Yue Dialects. Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Lee, T. H -T.
(2001) The scope of postverbal quantifiers: Further remarks on 'saai3'. Paper presented at LSHK Workshop on Cantonese Verbal Complements, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, August 28.Google Scholar
(2010) Issues of continuity in early lexical and syntactic development: Completion report of General Research Fund (GRF) 2007–2009, Research Grants Council of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Lee, T. H -T., & Wong, C.
(1998) CANCORP – The Hong Kong Cantonese Child Language Corpus. Cahiers de Linguistique Asie Orientale, 27(2), 211–228. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lei, M. K -Y.
(2017) The acquisition of A-quantification in Cantonese (Unpublished PhD dissertation). The Chinese University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Lei, M. K -Y., & Lee, T. H -T.
(2017) Early knowledge of the interaction between aspect and quantification: Evidence from child Cantonese. In M. LaMendola, & J. Scott (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, MA.: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Leung, C -S.
(1980) A note on comparative grammar of Mandarin Chinese and Cantonese – definite determiner. Language Learning and Research, 1, 15–28.Google Scholar
Li, C. N., & Thompson, S.
(1981) Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Shen, J.
(1995) Boundedness and unboundedness. Studies of the Chinese Language, 5, 356–380.Google Scholar
Tai, J. H. -Y.
(1984) Verbs and times in Chinese: Vendler's four categories. In D. Testen, V. Mishra, & J. Drogo (Eds.), Papers from the Parasession on Lexical Semantics (pp.289–296). Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Tang, S -W.
(2015) Lectures on Cantonese grammar. Hong Kong: The Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Tang, S -W., & Lee, T. H -T.
(2000)  Focus as an anchoring condition. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Topic and Focus in Chinese, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.Google Scholar
van Hout, A.
(1999) On learning the role of direct objects for telicity in Dutch and English. In University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 22 (UMOP 22): New perspectives on language acquisition (pp.87–106). Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
(1998) On the role of direct objects and particles in learning telicity in Dutch and English. In A. Greenhill, M. Hughes, H. Littlefield, & H. Walsh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
(2008) Acquiring perfectivity and telicity in Dutch, Italian and Polish. Lingua, 118(11), 1740–1765. CrossrefGoogle Scholar