Cover not available
Part of
Complement Clauses in Portuguese: Syntax and acquisition
Edited by Ana Lúcia Santos and Anabela Gonçalves
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 17] 2018
► pp. 395–414

Comments on the acquisition of complementation in Portuguese

| UCLA
Article outline
  • 1.Universal biases: SASH and the CFC in European and Mozambican Portuguese
  • 2.What about frequency?
  • 3.SASH and a verb-centric parser
  • 4.Control in EP: Intervention vs. SASH
  • 5.The CFC hypothesis and raising
  • 6.Inflected infinitives in L2 acquisition
  • 7.Obviation effects in subjunctive complements
  • 8.The Interface Hypothesis: Evidence from Portuguese?
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 August 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.17.13hya
References (37)
References
Avrutin, S., & Wexler, K. (1999/2000). Children’s knowledge of subjunctive clauses: Obviation, binding and reference. Language Acquisition, 8(1), 69–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E., & Sorace, A. (2007). Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25, 657–689. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boland, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M. (1990). Evidence for the immediate use of verb control information in sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 413–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cairns, H., McDaniel, D., Hsu, J. R., & Rapp, M. (1994). A longitudinal study of principles of control and pronominal reference in child English. Language, 70(2), 60–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, A., & Starke, M. (1999). The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns. In H. van Riemsdijk (Ed.), Clitics in the languages of the Europe (pp. 145–233). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chien, Y-C., & Wexler, K. (1990). Children’s knowledge of locality conditions in binding as evidence for the modularity of syntax and pragmatics. Language Acquisition, 1(3), 225–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomksy, N. (1982). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Cohen-Sherman, J., & Lust, B. (1993). Children are in control. Cognition, 46, 1–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gleitman, L. (1990). The structural sources of verb meaning. Language Acquisition, 1(1), 3–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodluck, H., & Tavakolian, S. (1982). Competence and processing in children’s grammar of relative clauses. Cognition, 11, 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grodzinsky, Y., & Reinhart, T. (1993). The innateness of binding and coreference. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 41–54.Google Scholar
Hirsch, C., Orfitelli, R., & Wexler, K. (2007). When seem means think: The role of the experiencer-phrase in children’s comprehension of raising. In A. Belikova, L. Meroni, & M. Umeda (Eds.), Galana 2 – Proceedings of the conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America 2 (pp. 135–146). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Holmberg, A. (2005). Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, 533- 564. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hornstein, N. (1999). Movement and control. Linguistic Inquiry, 30, 69–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kirby, S. (2011). Move over, control freaks: Syntactic raising as a cognitive default. In N. Danis, K. Mesh, & H. Sung (Eds.), Boston University Conference on Language Development 35 – Online supplement.Google Scholar
McDaniel, D., Cairns, H., & Hsu, J. (1990/1991). Control principles in the grammars of young children. Language Acquisition, 1(4), 297–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McWhinney, B., & Snow, C. (1985). The child language data exchange system. Journal of Child Language, 12, 271–296.Google Scholar
Mateu, V. (2016). Intervention effects in the acquisition of raising and control: evidence from English and Spanish (Unpublished PhD dissertation). UCLA.
Orfitelli, R. (2012). ‘Experiencing’ a slight delay: Intervening arguments and the acquisition of subject-to-subject raising. In N. Danis, K. Mesh, & H. Sung (Eds.), Proceedings of the 36th Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 2, pp. 335–346). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Pires, A. (2006). The minimalist syntax of defective domains: Gerunds and infinitives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raposo, E. (1985). Some asymmetries in the binding theory in Romance. Linguistic Review, 5, 75–110.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. (2004). The processing cost of reference set computation: Acquisition of stress shift and focus. Language Acquisition, 12(2), 109–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J. (2009). Knowledge of A/A’ dependencies on subject extraction with two types of infinitives in non-native Portuguese adult bilingualism. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(1), 111–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J., & Iverson, M. (2007). To inflect or not to inflect is the question indeed: infinitives in non-native Portuguese. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 6(2), 5–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Santos, A. L., Gonçalves, A., & Hyams, N. (2016). Aspects of the acquisition of object control and ECM-type verbs in European Portuguese. Language Acquisition, 23(3), 199–233. [2015]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. (2003). Child L2 acquisition: Paving the way. In B. Beachley, A. Brown, & F. Conlin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 26–50). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive state and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12(1), 40–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Generative approaches and the poverty of the stimulus. In J. Hershensohn & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 137–158). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Solan, L., & Roeper, T. (1978). Children’s use of syntactic structure in interpreting relative clauses. In H. Goodluck & L. Solan (Eds.), Papers in the structure and development of child language (University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics Vol. 4, pp. 105–127). Amherst, MA: GSLA.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1(1), 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphor resolution in near native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22(3), 339–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tavakolian, S. (1981). The conjoined clause analysis of relative clauses. In S. Tavakolian (Ed.), Language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 167–87). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Trueswell, J., Sekerina, I., Hill, N. M., & Logrip, M. L. (1999). The kindergarten path effect: Studying on-line processing in young children. Cognition, 73, 89–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trueswell, J., & Gleitman, L. (2004). Children’s eye movements during listening: Developmental evidence for a constraint-based theory of sentence processing. In J. M. Henderson & F. Ferriera (Eds.), The interface of language, vision and action: Eye movements and the visual world (pp. 319–346). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Trueswell, J., Papafragou, A., & Choi, S. (2011). Sytnactic and referential processes: What develops? In E. Gibson & N. Pearlmutter (Eds), The processing and acquisition of reference (pp. 65–108). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, I., & Mastropavlou, M. (2007). Feature interpretability in L2 acquisition and SLI: Greek clitics and determiners. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The role of formal features in second language acquisition (pp. 143–183). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
White, L. (1996). Universal grammar and second language acquisition: Current trends and new directions. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition (pp. 85–120). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar