LOT Complex sentences

The acquisition of complex sentences: 

The acquisition of complex sentences Holger Diessel University of Jena holger.diessel@uni-jena.de http://www.holger-diessel.de/

Critique: 

The construction-based approach may be appropriate to characterize the early stages of language acquisition, but it is not adequate to account for the acquisition of more complex grammatical phenomena. Critique

Hypotheses: 

Hypotheses Construction grammar is appropriate to account for the development of complex sentences. Like children’s early simple sentences, (some of) their early complex sentences are item-specific. The acquisition of complex sentences is incremental: It originates from structures that are only little different from simple sentences. The acquisition process is driven by frequency and similarity.

Diessel, H. 2004. The Acquisition of Complex Sentences. Cambridge University Press: 

Diessel, H. 2004. The Acquisition of Complex Sentences. Cambridge University Press Diessel, H. and M. Tomasello. 2005. A new look at the acquisition of relative clauses. Language 81: 1-25.

Data: 

Data

Data: 

Data

The acquisition of complement clauses: 

The acquisition of complement clauses

Early complement clauses: 

I think it’s a cow. (Adam 2,3) See this is empty. (Peter 2,4) I know you are here. (Peter 2,5) I guess I’ve one. (Nina 2;6) Remember we played with toys. (Nina 2,11) Early complement clauses

Think-clauses: 

I think I'm go in here. 3;1 And I think... we need dishes. 3;2 Think some toys over here too. 3;3 I think I play jingle bells… with the record player. 3;5 I think he's gone. 3;5 Oh... I think it's a ball. 3;5 It's a crazy bone... I think. 3;5 I think it's in here. 3;5 I think it's in here… Mommy. 2;7 Think it's in there. 2;8 Think-clauses

Think-clauses: 

The subject is always I. The matrix verb appears always in present tense. There is no auxiliary, modal, or PP in the matrix clause. The complement clause is longer and more diverse. There is no that-complementizer. In some sentences I think follows the complement clause. Think-clauses

Think-clauses: 

Think-clauses Children early think-clauses are lexically-specific constructions organized around particular matrix verbs: I think ___. The matrix clauses can be seen as an epistemic marker. Children’s early think-clauses are simple sentences.

Think-clauses: 

3;0 3,6 4;0 4;6 I think__ Do you think__ I thought__ I’m thinking__ They think__ What do you think__ Think-clauses

Guess-clauses: 

I guess I better come…. 3;5 Guess I'll write some more white. 3;9 Guess I lay it down. 3;10 I guess saw me break them. 3;10 I guess I have one more. 4;4 That goes right here but it don't fit… I guess. 4;4 Now… I guess that goes right there… doesn't it? 4;4 Because it have both lines… I guess. 4;5 I guess this is a hill… like this. 4;9 I guess this is… 5;0 Guess-clauses

Wish-clauses: 

I wish I could play with dis [= a Christmas present]. 3;5 I wish I can keep it (pause) for writing on. 3;5 I wish I can keep dat so I can tick (pause) tick it. 3;5 I wish we can eat... 3;8 I wish we could eat that. 3;8 I wish I could have a tractor to drive in them. 3;8 I wish ... could ... make some more just like dat. 3;8 I wish you could color all dese. 3;9 I wish I could have a picnic. 3;11 Momma ... I wish I could come back here. 3;11 Wish-clauses

Know-clauses: 

I know this piece go. 2;6 I know ... soldier marching. 2;8 How do you know it going eat supper? 3;0 How do you know dat a duck?. 3;0 How do you know dat convertible? 3;0 How do you know ... I saw ducks 3;0 How do you know ... put my cup up? 3;0 How do you know ... doesn’t hurt me? 3;1 Mommy ... How do you know dat’s Harvard Square bus? 3;1 Do you know de lights went off? 3;1 Know-clauses

See-clauses: 

Got to make them bigger… see? 2;3 See this is empty. 2;3 Let’s see we fix them. 2;3 See these are stamps. 2;4 See Daddy’s on the grass. 2;5 See boat has sails on it. 2;5 See the peoples going. 2;6 Mommy write it… see? 2;6 See I’m writing 2;6 See you do it? 2;7 See-clauses

Remember-clauses: 

Remember we played with Samantha? 3;0 Remember you reading de puzzle… 3;2 Remember I broke my window? 4;0 You have to put it in the barn… remember? 4;0 Remember it was Halloween and… 4;2 I remember the bee bite me in the belly…. 4;5 Remember I don’t had to go to the doctors? 4;5 Remember last year I knew how to make a two? 4;11 Hey ... remember that I hanged them on like that? 5;0 Remember-clauses

Say-clauses: 

The cowboy say (pause) “I'm angry at you”. 2;9 He sayed he has something to play with for me. 2;9 That means peoples say “put the kitty down”. 2;10 She gonna say I have a pretty dress on. 2;10 The kitty says he wants to come in. 2;10 He say the alligator's gonna bite him up. 2;10 You make a rabbit and a bear I said. 2;10 He said yes he will give you a cow. 2;11 She said she is gonna give me a pillow… 2;11 Dolly said “yes she (pause) she’s a witch. 2;11 Say-clauses

Tell-clauses: 

She telled me she for get the doll carriage for me. 2;10 He telled me… me don’t scream again. 3;0 Tell me… I would like to come to your house again. 3;0 I’m gonna tell him I wanna go to his house. 3;3 I tell her… “no… no… baby that’s my stuff”. 3;3 I told you I could make a carrot. 4;2 I told you you’re cuckoo. 4;6 I wanna tell the kids ‘do you heard of this kind of water?’4;9 Tell Daddy I’m sick. 4;10 I told you I need the (…) to do it. 4;11 Tell-clauses

Pretend-clauses: 

Pretend it’s Ernie. 2;3 We will pretend there’s play dough for something to eat.2;10 Just pretend you have a hurt. 3;10 I pretending fish were coming. 3;0 I pretending whales were coming. 3;0 Oh.. this… pretend this is a blanket. 3;0 I gonna pretend this is a sleeping bag. 3;0 But.. but just pretend that’s his name. 3;1 Let’s pretend that’s name. 3;1 Now you pretend this is Spencer’s Mommy. 3;1 Pretend-clauses

Slide21: 

I think __ See __ I guess __ __ think __ __ guess __ __ see __ __ say __ FIN-COMP COMP-clause IF/WH-COMP __ tell __

The acquisition of relative clauses: 

The acquisition of relative clauses

Relative clauses: 

Relative clauses (1) I noticed the man who was talking to Mary. DO-SU (2) The guy we met __ was my friend John. SU-DO (3) That’s the man whose dog bit me. PN-GEN

Hypotheses: 

Hypotheses Relative clauses constitute a network of related constructions. Children acquire this network in a piecemeal bottom-up fashion. The acquisition process is driven by frequency and similarity.

Data: 

Data

Experimental items (Tavakolian 1978): 

Experimental items (Tavakolian 1978) (1) The dog [that jumps over the pig] bumps into the lion. SS (2) The lion [that the horse bumps into] jumps over the giraffe. SO (3) The pig bumps into the horse [that jumps over the giraffe]. OS (4) The dog stands on the horse [that the giraffe jumps over]. OO

Children’s spontaneous relative clauses: 

Children’s spontaneous relative clauses (1) That’s the rabbit that fall off. [Nina 2;7] (2) Look at dat train Ursula bought. [Adam 2;10] (3) This is the sugar that goes in there. [Nina 3;0] (4) That’s a picture I made. [Adam 3;0] (5) Here’s a tiger that’s gonna scare him. [Nina 3;1] (6) It’s a song that we dance to. [Nina 3;2]

External syntax: 

External syntax

Coding: 

Coding (1) The man who we saw was reading a book. SUBJ (2) He noticed the man who was reading a book. OBJ (3) He went to the man who was reading a book. OBL (4) The man who was reading a book. NP (5) That’s the man who was reading a book. PN

External syntax (total): 

External syntax (total)

External syntax (earliest REL): 

External syntax (earliest REL)

External syntax (development): 

External syntax (development) PN OBJ NP OBL OBL PN OBJ NP OBL SUBJ

Input frequency: 

Input frequency

Semantic complexity: 

Semantic complexity (1) Here’s the tiger that’s gonna scare him. > The tiger is gonna scare him. (2) This is the sugar that goes in there. > The sugar goes in there. (3) It’s a song that we dance to. > We dance to a song.

Syntactic amalgams: 

Syntactic amalgams (1) That’s doggy turn around. [Nina 1;11] (2) That’s a turtle swim. [Nina 2;2] (3) Here’s a mouse go sleep. [Nina 2;3] (4) That’s the roof go on that home. [Nina 2;4] (5) That’s the rabbit fall off. [Nina 2;4]

Information structure: 

Information structure Children‘s early relative clauses tend to provide new information.

Pragmatic function: 

Pragmatic function Children‘s early relative clauses function to focus the hearer‘s attention on elements in the surrounding situation.

Conclusion: 

Conclusion The acquisition of relative clauses originates from structures that are only little different from simple sentences (incremental development). The acquisition process is determined by multiple factors: input frequency, complexity, information structure, pragmatic use.

Internal syntax: 

Internal syntax

Internal syntax: 

Internal syntax (1) The man who met the woman. subj (2) The man who the woman met. obj (3) The man who the woman went to. obl (4) The man who the girl gave the book to. io (5) The man whose dog bit the woman. gen

Internal syntax (total): 

Internal syntax (total)

Internal syntax (development): 

Internal syntax (development) obj subj obl

Diessel & Tomasello 2005: 

Subjects: 21 4-year-olds English-speaking 24 4-year-olds German-speaking Diessel & Tomasello 2005 Method: Sentence-repetition task

Diessel & Tomasello 2005: 

Diessel & Tomasello 2005

Diessel & Tomasello 2005: 

subj vs. do p =. 001 do vs. io p = .173 do vs. obl p = .169 subj vs. do p =. 001 do vs. io p = .061 io vs. obl p = .001 English German Diessel & Tomasello 2005

Subj-relatives: 

Subj-relatives English ITEM: This is the girl who the boy teased at school. CHILD: This is the girl that teased … the boy … at school. German ITEM: Da ist der Mann, den das Mädchen im Stall gesehen hat. CHILD: Da ist der Mann, der das Mädchen im Stall gesehen hat.

Subj-relatives: 

Subj-relatives English (1) This is the girl who bor/ Peter borrowed a football from. German (2) Da ist der Junge, der/ dem Paul … die Mütze weggenommen hat.

Questions: 

Questions Why are children inconsistent in their responses? What explains the frequent occurrence of repairs? What determines the ease of activation? -> The errors do not primarily reflect a competence problem -> Ease of activation

Frequency and ease of activation: 

Frequency and ease of activation The more frequently a grammatical construction occurs, the more deeply entrenched it is in mental grammar, and the easier it is to activate in language use.

Input frequency: 

Input frequency (Diessel 2004)

Order of thematic roles: 

Order of thematic roles (1) The boy kissed the girl. (2) This is the boy who kissed the girl. (3) This is the boy who the girl kissed.

Order of thematic roles: 

Order of thematic roles AGENT VERB PATIENT. Simple clause PRO is AGENT rel VERB PATIENT. Subj relative PRO is PATIENT rel AGENT VERB. Other relatives

NVN schema: 

NVN schema PATIENT AGENT VERB NOUN NOUN VERB Bever 1970

Question: 

Question Why did the English-speaking children basically produce the same amount of errors in response to do-, io-, and obl-relatives?

DO, IO, OBL-relatives: 

DO, IO, OBL-relatives (1) The boy who kissed the girl. SUBJ (2) The boy who the girl kissed. DO (3) The boy who the girl talked to. OBL (4) The boy who the girl gave the letter to. IO (5) The boy whose brother kissed the girl. GEN

Word order in English relative clauses: 

Word order in English relative clauses NP [V …] subj NP [NP V …] do NP [NP V …] io NP [NP V …] obl NP [[GEN N] V …] gen

REL pronouns in German REL clauses: 

REL pronouns in German REL clauses Der Mann, der … subj Der Mann, den … do Der Mann, dem … io Der Mann, mit/von dem … obl Der Mann, dessen N gen

Gen- and io-relatives: 

Gen- and io-relatives Why were genitive relatives almost always incorrect? Gen-relatives are infrequent in the input. But io-relatives are also infrequent. However, io-relatives are similar to other types of relative clauses, whereas gen-relatives are completely different.

Summary: 

Summary Important is the similarity between constructions: Subj-relatives caused few problems because they are similar to simple sentences. English do-, io-, and obl-relatives caused basically the same amount of errors because they have the same word order. Io-relatives caused relatively few problems because they are similar to other types of relative clauses. Gen-relatives and German obl-relatives caused great problems because they are most distinct from other types of relative clauses.

Summary: 

Summary similarity frequency The development of relative clauses is determined by two general factors:

Why does similarity matter?: 

Why does similarity matter? Relative clauses are constructions (i.e. form-function pairings) that are related to each other in a network like lexical expressions. Children acquire this network in a piecemeal, bottom-up fashion by relating new relative clause constructions to constructions they already know.

A network of relative constructions: 

A network of relative constructions Simple Sentences That is N [subj-relative] …-relatives …-relatives …-relatives … [gen-relative]

The acquisition of adverbial clauses: 

The acquisition of adverbial clauses

And-clauses: 

(1) CHILD: Nina has dolly sleeping. ADULT: The doll is sleeping too? CHILD: And the man's sleeping on the big bed. (2) ADULT: That's yours? ADULT: Ok. CHILD: And this is mine. (3) CHILD: Piggy went to market. ADULT: Yes. CHILD: And piggy had none. (4) ADULT: Flipper's on TV yeah. CHILD: And Shaggy's not on TV. And-clauses

And-clauses: 

And-clause generally follows the semantically associated clause. And-clause is intonationally separated from the semantically associated clause. And-clause is often linked to a clause across speaker turns. And-clauses

But-clauses: 

(1) ADULT: It is called the skin of the peanut. CHILD: But this isn’t the skin. (2) ADULT: No, it’s not raining today Pete. CHILD: But … it’s raining here. (3) ADULT: I think it’s time to put your dolly to bed. CHILD: But the Snoopy is asleep. (4) ADULT: David doesn’t shave yet. CHILD: Uhuh. But I shave. But-clauses

Because-clauses: 

(1) ADULT: Did you run over my blocks? CHILD: Mmhm. ADULT: Why? CHILD: Because it’s a fire engine. (2) CHILD: No you can’t get a napkin. ADULT: Hmhm. CHILD: No! ADULT: Why? CHILD: Cause it’s Mommy’s, … Mommy’s cleaning. (3) CHILD: No, don’t touch this camera. ADULT: Why? CHILD: Cause it’s broken. Because-clauses

Because-clauses: 

Because-clauses (4) CHILD: Over here right over here, … don’t put it there. ADULT: Why not? CHILD: Cause it’s my horse. (5) CHILD: You can’t have this! ADULT: Why? CHILD: Cause … I’m using it.

Later conjoined clauses: 

(1) ADULT: Did you sleep in the same room with Elizabeth? CHILD: Yes. CHILD: And we both sleep on the floor when we take naps. (2) CHILD: I put all the dollies in, see? CHILD: It’s getting crowded after I put all the dollies in. (3) CHILD: It’s got a flat tire. ADULT: Yeah. CHILD: When it’s got a flat tire… it’s need to go to the… to the station. (4) ADULT: He can take some. CHILD: If he takes all of them I’m gonna beat him up. Later conjoined clauses

Bound and unbound conjoined clauses: 

Bound and unbound conjoined clauses

Initial and final when-clauses: 

Initial and final when-clauses

Later conjoined clauses: 

Intonationally bound Preposed Pragmatically presupposed or backgrounded Later conjoined clauses

Conclusion: 

There are thus two separate pathways to complex sentences: Complex sentences including complement and relative clauses evolve from simple sentences that are gradually expanded to multiple clause constructions; and complex sentences including adverbial clauses develop from simple sentences that are integrated into a specific biclausal unit. Conclusion

The usage-based model: 

The usage-based model Grammar consists of constructions that are related to each other in an associative network. Children acquire this network in a piecemeal bottoum-up fashion. The acquisition process is determined by multiple factors: input frequency, similarity, pragmatic function, conceptual complexity, processing. Language learning involves some very general learning mechanisms: imitation, entrenchment, automatization, analogy (which is driven by the interaction between frequency and similarity).