Acquiring the meaning of free relative clauses and plural definite descriptions

Plural definite descriptions (e.g. the things on the plate) and free relative clauses (e.g. what is on the plate) have been argued to share the same semantic properties, despite their syntactic differences. Specifically, both have been argued to be nonquantificational expressions referring to the maximal element of a given set (e.g. the set of things on the contextually salient plate). We provide experimental support for this semantic analysis with the first reported simultaneous investigation of children’s interpretation of both constructions, highlighting how experimental methods can inform semantic theory. A Truth-Value Judgment task and an Act-Out task show that children know that the two constructions differ from quantificational nominals (e.g. all the things on the plate) very early on (4 years old). Children also acquire the adult interpretation of both constructions at the same time, around 6‐7 years old. This happens despite major differences in the frequency of these constructions, according to our corpus study of children’s linguistic input. We discuss possible causes for this late emergence. We also argue that our experimental findings contribute to the recent theoretical debate on the correct semantic analysis of free relatives.

[1]  Cristina Schmitt,et al.  Maximality and Plurality in Children’s Interpretation of Definites , 2006 .

[2]  Godehard Link The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice‐theoretical Approach , 2008 .

[3]  Fred Landman,et al.  Events And Plurality , 2000 .

[4]  D. Barner,et al.  Piecing together numerical language: children's use of default units in early counting and quantification. , 2011, Developmental science.

[5]  Ivano Caponigro,et al.  The Semantic Contributions of Wh-words and Type Shifts: Evidence from Free Relatives Crosslinguistically , 2004 .

[6]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Salience, Attention, and Attribution: Top of the Head Phenomena , 1978 .

[7]  Karin Stromswold,et al.  The Acquisition of Subject and Object Wh-Questions , 1995 .

[8]  Veneeta Dayal Number Marking and (in)Definiteness in Kind Terms , 2004 .

[9]  David Barner,et al.  Finding one’s meaning: A test of the relation between quantifiers and integers in language development , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[10]  P. Bloom Possible Individuals in Language and Cognition , 1996 .

[11]  Barbara A. Shepperson,et al.  Countable entities: Developmental changes , 1990, Cognition.

[12]  Lori Markson,et al.  Capacities underlying word learning , 1998, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[13]  Richard Sharvy A More General Theory of Definite Descriptions , 1980 .

[14]  Charles D. Yang Universal Grammar, statistics or both? , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  Hotze Rullmann,et al.  Maximality in the semantics of wh -constructions , 1995 .

[16]  Derrick J. Parkhurst,et al.  Modeling the role of salience in the allocation of overt visual attention , 2002, Vision Research.

[17]  Veneeta Dayal Locality in Wh quantification , 1996 .

[18]  Sebastian Löbner,et al.  Polarity in Natural Language: Predication, Quantification and Negation in Particular and Characterizing Sentences , 2000 .

[19]  Willard Van Orman Quine,et al.  Word and Object , 1960 .

[20]  Annette Karmiloff-Smith,et al.  A Functional Approach to Child Language: A Study of Determiners and Reference , 1979 .

[21]  Ellen M. Markman,et al.  Constraints Children Place on Word Meanings , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[22]  Giuseppe Longobardi,et al.  The Structure of DPs: Some Principles, Parameters, and Problems , 2008 .

[23]  Jaya Sarma The acquisition of Wh-questions in English , 1991 .

[24]  G. Chierchia,et al.  Reference to Kinds across Language , 1998 .

[25]  Units of counting: Developmental changes , 1998 .

[26]  S. Crain Investigations In Universal Grammar , 1998 .

[27]  Barbara H. Partee,et al.  Noun Phrase Interpretation and Type‐shifting Principles , 2008 .

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

[29]  Pauline Jacobson On the Quantificational Force of English Free Relatives , 1995 .

[30]  D. Barner,et al.  Cross-linguistic relations between quantifiers and numerals in language acquisition: evidence from Japanese. , 2009, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[31]  Paul Bloom,et al.  Syntactic cues in the acquisition of collective nouns , 1995, Cognition.

[32]  Nadezhda N Modyanova,et al.  Semantic and pragmatic language development in typical acquisition, autism spectrum disorders, and Williams syndrome with reference to developmental neurogenetics of the latter , 2009 .

[33]  Ivano Caponigro,et al.  Free Not to Ask: On the Semantics of Free Relatives and Wh-words Cross-linguistically , 2003 .

[34]  E. Spelke,et al.  Language and Conceptual Development series Core systems of number , 2004 .

[35]  Judy B. Bernstein The DP Hypothesis: Identifying Clausal Properties in the Nominal Domain , 2008 .

[36]  Laura Wagner,et al.  Individuation of objects and events: a developmental study , 2003, Cognition.

[37]  J. Gajewski Neg-raising : polarity and presupposition , 2005 .

[38]  Maximal Trouble in Free Relatives , 2008 .

[39]  Irene Heim,et al.  Semantics in generative grammar , 1998 .