On the role of frequency and similarity in the acquisition of subject and non-subject relative clauses

Frequency and similarity are important determinants for the acquisition of children’s early item-based constructions. This paper argues that frequency and similarity are equally important for the development of more complex and intricate grammatical phenomena such as relative clauses. Specifically, the paper shows that the acquisition of relative clauses is crucially determined by the similarity between particular types of relative clauses and simple SVO constructions. Two specific hypotheses are proposed: First, since subject relatives have the same word order as ordinary SVO clauses, they usually cause fewer difficulties in comprehension studies than non-subject relatives. Second, while non-subject relatives are structurally distinct from SVO clauses, semantically they are expressed by prototypical transitive constructions, which arguably helps the child to learn this type of relative clause.

[1]  K. Hakuta,et al.  Children's comprehension of relative clauses , 1979, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[2]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  The Influence of Animacy on Relative Clause Processing , 2002 .

[3]  Barbara A. Fox,et al.  Relative Clauses in English conversation Relativizers , frequency , and the notion of construction * , 2005 .

[4]  D. Gentner,et al.  Similarity and the development of rules , 1998, Cognition.

[5]  Y. J. Kim,et al.  Theoretical implications of complement structure acquisition in Korean , 1989, Journal of Child Language.

[6]  Evan Kidd,et al.  English-Speaking Children's Comprehension of Relative Clauses: Evidence for General-Cognitive and Language-Specific Constraints on Development , 2002, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[7]  M. Tomasello,et al.  A New Look at the Acquisition of Relative Clauses , 2005 .

[8]  Holger Diessel,et al.  The Acquisition of Complex Sentences , 2004 .

[9]  Edward Gibson,et al.  Effects of NP type in reading cleft sentences in English , 2005 .

[10]  T. Givón,et al.  Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction , 1982 .

[11]  A. Goldberg Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language , 2006 .

[12]  D. Gentner Structure‐Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy* , 1983 .

[13]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure , 2001 .

[14]  T. Givón Chapter 8. The ontogeny of relative clauses: How children learn to negotiate complex reference , 2009 .

[15]  H E Wanner,et al.  An ATN approach to comprehension , 1978 .

[16]  Franklin Chang,et al.  The role of the input in a connectionist model of the accessibility hierarchy in development , 2008 .

[17]  Tomasello,et al.  The development of relative clauses in spontaneous child speech , 2001 .

[18]  P. Suppes The Semantics of Children's Language , 1974 .

[19]  M. Tomasello Do young children have adult syntactic competence? , 2000, Cognition.

[20]  Mira Ariel Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents , 1990 .

[21]  Susan M. Garnsey,et al.  Semantic Influences On Parsing: Use of Thematic Role Information in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution , 1994 .

[22]  E. Gibson Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies , 1998, Cognition.

[23]  Thomas Givon,et al.  Syntax: A functional-typological introduction. Volume I , 1984 .

[24]  Yasuhiro Shirai,et al.  Semantic bias in the acquisition of relative clauses in Japanese* , 2009, Journal of Child Language.

[25]  H. Goodluck,et al.  Competence and processing in children's grammar of relative clauses , 1982, Cognition.

[26]  Sandra A. Thompson,et al.  A Discourse Explanation of the Grammar of Relative Clauses in English Conversation. , 1990 .

[27]  Holger Diessel,et al.  A Construction-Based Analysis of the Acquisition of East Asian Relative Clauses , 2007, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[28]  C. Hudelot Qu'est-ce que la complexité syntaxique? L'exemple de la relative , 1980 .

[29]  Knud Lambrecht,et al.  There Was a Farmer Had a Dog: Syntactic Amalgams Revisited , 1988 .

[30]  M. Tomasello Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition , 2003 .

[31]  Chris Brew The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language , 2003 .

[32]  Robin K. Morris,et al.  Working memory, animacy, and verb class in the processing of relative clauses , 2005 .

[33]  Michael Tomasello,et al.  Object relatives made easy: A cross-linguistic comparison of the constraints influencing young children's processing of relative clauses , 2007 .

[34]  M. Tomasello,et al.  The acquisition of German relative clauses: A case study* , 2008, Journal of Child Language.

[35]  Patricia M. Clancy,et al.  Processing strategies in the acquisition of relative clauses: Universal principles and language-specific realizations , 1986, Cognition.

[36]  B. MacWhinney The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk , 1992 .

[37]  H. Diessel Frequency effects in language acquisition, language use, and diachronic change , 2007 .

[38]  Jeffrey L. Elman,et al.  Finding Structure in Time , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[39]  Robin K. Morris,et al.  Processing Subject and Object Relative Clauses: Evidence from Eye Movements , 2002 .

[40]  Michael D. Smith,et al.  Relative Clause Formation Between 29-36 Months: A Preliminary Report. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, No. 8. , 1974 .

[41]  P. Gordon,et al.  Effects of noun phrase type on sentence complexity , 2004 .

[42]  Letícia Maria Sicuro Corrêa,et al.  An alternative assessment of children's comprehension of relative clauses , 1995 .

[43]  Douglas Roland,et al.  Frequency of Basic English Grammatical Structures: A Corpus Analysis. , 2007, Journal of memory and language.

[44]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Early syntactic creativity: a usage-based approach. , 2003, Journal of child language.

[45]  A. Goldberg Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure , 1995 .

[46]  P. Gordon,et al.  Memory interference during language processing. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[47]  T. Givon Topic Continuity in Discourse , 1983 .

[48]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  From Usage to Grammar: The Mind's Response to Repetition , 2007 .

[49]  A. Sheldon The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English , 1973 .

[50]  R. Brown A First Language , 1973 .

[51]  Susan L. Tavakolian Structural principles in the acquisition of complex sentences , 1977 .

[52]  Silvia P. Gennari,et al.  Semantic indeterminacy in object relative clauses. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[53]  Joan L. Bybee,et al.  Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense , 1982 .

[54]  Tessa C. Warren,et al.  The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity , 2002, Cognition.

[55]  Luk Pui Ki Children's Comprehension of Relative Clauses , 2007 .

[56]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Processing of relative clauses is made easier by frequency of occurrence , 2007 .

[57]  Herbert Schriefers,et al.  Animacy in processing relative clauses: The hikers that rocks crush , 2006 .

[58]  John A. Hawkins,et al.  A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency , 1995 .

[59]  J. Hawkins,et al.  Implicational universals as predictors of language acquisition , 1987 .

[60]  A. Andrews,et al.  Relative Clauses , 2019, The Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek.