Download p - CLUL - Universidade de Lisboa

The acquisition of control in European Portuguese:
A study
t dy on comprehension
p h
i
C li Agostinho
Celina
A
ti h
Centro de Linguística da Universidade de Lisboa
Centre de Lingüística Teòrica,
Teòrica Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
cfm agostinho@gmail com
[email protected]
1 – Control in Complement
p
Clauses
• Obligatory control (OC) is the obligatory co-reference
co reference between a cc
commanding argument DP in the matrix clause and a null subject
i the
in
th infinitival
i fi iti l embedded
b dd d clause
l
((PRO))
(PRO).
• In
I non-obligatory
blig t y control
t l ((NOC),
(NOC)) arbitrary
bit y reference
f
off the
th infinitival
i fi iti l
null subject is allowed (PROarb).
(PROarb)
4 – Experimental
E p i
t l Results
R
lt
C diti
Condition
1
1a
Condition 1b
Subject control
Prometer “promise”
promise
OC vs.
vs NOC
(1) Johni decided [PROi/*j to vote twice] (Chomsky 1986 (139ii))
(2) It is illegal [PROarb to vote twice]
(Ibid: (139i))
2 – The
Th Acquisition
A
i iti
off Control
C t l
The acquisition of Control involves:
• Lexical knowledge: argument structure of each control verb (θ(θ
roles) – generally subject control verbs assign one internal θ
θ-role
role,
while
hil object
bjj t control
t l verbs
b assign
ig two
t
i t
internal
l θ-roles.
θ l
• Syntactic
Sy t ti knowledge:
k
l dg PRO-contexts,
PRO
t t , c-command,
d, etc.
t
• Condition 1a: With transitive subject control verbs, children as
young as 3 perform at adult level.
level Other interpretations are residual.
residual
 Children
Child
are able
bl to
t establish
t bli h the
th control
t l relation
l ti
i subject
in
bjj t control
t l
sentences i.e.,
sentences,
i e they have grammatical knowledge of control.
control
• Condition 1b: The performance of the oldest age group (5) is still
b ll
bellow
adult
d lt level.
l
l
 At age
5 children
hild
h
have
nott yet
bjj t control
t l with
ith prometer.
t
g 5,
y t acquired
q i d subject
p
Th acquisition
The
q i iti off Control
C t l – a view
i
ffrom comprehension:
p h
i
Condition 2a
C diti
Condition
2b
Object control (OD)
Object control (OI)
• Initial non
non-controlled
controlled readings of PRO in OC contexts.
contexts
 Coordination analysis of complement clauses; interpretation
off PRO is
i strategy
t t gy based
b
d ((McDaniel,
(M D i l, Cairns
C i
& Hsu
H 1990/1991).
1990/1991))
• Early knowledge of the subject/object control distinction,
distinction as well as
off syntactic
y
i p
properties
p i relevant
l
to the
h distribution
di ib i and
d interpretation
i
p
i
of PRO.
PRO Developmental effects are due to lexical acquisition.
acquisition
 No period in which the interpretation of PRO is free: it is
grammatically based at all stages (Sherman & Lust 1993).
1993)
The acquisition of Control – a view from production:
Santos,
S
t
G ç l
Gonçalves
& Hyams
Hy
(2014 in
((2014,
i p
prep.)
p ) – Single
Si gl Argument
Ag
t
Structure Hypothesis (SASH): Children initially assume that a
ditransitive control verb selects a single (propositional) argument.
teach [x y]
• Conditions 2a & 2b: The general tendency of the results is
convergent with adult grammar: in all age groups object control
supersedes
p
d subject
bjj t control.
t l However,
H
, there
th
are considerable
id bl rates
t off
subject control in all child groups.
groups
 Children seem to show some sensitivity to the different properties of
control
t l verbs,
b , but
b t they
th y are still
till acquiring
q i i g their
th i lexical
l i l properties.
p p ti
Condition 3
Condition
4
C diti
Subject complements
Pedir para “ask”
ask
*...ensinou
...ensinou [os gansos saltarem]. (4;5.12)
 Adult-like object control readings come for free.
free Their
availability is linked to the acquisition off argument structure.
3 – The Study
Research Questions:
Q estions
1 Do children show evidence of grammatically based interpretations
1.
of PRO at early stages?
• Free interpretation: subject,
subject object or third character choice.
choice
• Grammatically constrained interpretation: 1) Third character
readings
di g are constrained
t i d to
t NOC contexts;
t t 2)) SASH – object
bjj t
control comes for free; 3) Saliency of the higher subject
(Montalbetti 1984) – subject control in object control contexts.
Experimental Task - Reference Judgments:
• Elicited reference judgments (McDaniel & Cairns 1990a,
1990a 1990b).
1990b)
• Subjects: 20 3 year-olds
year olds (3;0.12-3;11.27,
(3;0 12 3;11 27 mean 3;6),
3;6) 21 4 year-olds
year olds
(4;1 01-4;11
(4;1.01
4;11.27,
27 mean 4;5),
4;5) 23 5 year
year-olds
olds (5;0.08
(5;0 08-5;11
5;11.27,
27 mean 5;4),
5;4)
and
d a control
t lg
group
p off 20 adults.
d lt
E p i
Experimental
t l Task
T k – Test
T t Conditions:
C diti
1a. Subject control transitive verbs (querer “want”,
want , conseguir
“
“manage
g to”)
t ”))
1b Subject control ditransitive verbs (prometer “promise”)
1b.
promise )
2a Object control verbs – Direct objects (ensinar a “teach”
2a.
teach , pôr a
“p to”,
“put
”, p
proibir
ibi de
d “forbid”)
“f bid”))
2b Obj
2b.
Object
j t control
t l verbs
b – Indirect
I di t objects
bjj t (dizer
((di
para “tell”)
p
“t ll”))
3 Subject complements (chatear “bother”
3.
bother , assustar “scare”)
scare )
4 Pragmatically determined interpretation (pedir para “ask”)
4.
ask )
24 test items,, 7 fillers and 4 training
g items.
• Condition 3: In all age groups,
groups choice of a sentence-external
sentence external referent
as the antecedent of PRO is much higher than in all other conditions.
 These results suggest
gg
that: 1)) Children are sensitive to varying
y g PROcontexts and have knowledge of syntactic and lexical properties that
constrain the interpretation
p
of PRO;; 2)) Children do not have an absolute
bias against a third character as the antecedent of PRO.
PRO
• Condition 4: At all stages,
stages object control supersedes subject control.
control
 The results in this condition suggest that children (alike adults) have a
preference for the object
p
j
as the antecedent of the null infinitival subject,
j ,
when the context is neutral.
neutral
5 – Conclusions
• Subject control is unproblematic only when the verb is transitive
((vs. p
prometer
t “prometer”).
“p
t ”))
• Children
C d e pe
Child
perform
fo
adult-like
adu
d lt like (a
( lthough at d
(although
diffe e t rates)
different
ates)) with
ith object
bj
control verbs.
verbs
• Child
Children’s
’ interpretation
i t p t ti
off PRO is
i sensitive
iti
t different
to
diff
t syntactic
y t ti
environments
environments.
 These results suggest that general syntactic knowledge of control is
continuous.
ti
D
Development
l
t may be
b due
d
t lexical
to
l i l acquisition,
i iti
i
i.e.,
acquisition of the argument structure of control verbs.
verbs
The present work was funded by Fundação para a
Tecnologia within the project Complement
Ciência e a Tecnologia,
Clauses in the Acquisition of Portuguese (PTDC/CLE(PTDC/CLE
LIN/120897/2010).
LIN/120897/2010)