Cover not available
Part of
Finiteness Matters: On finiteness-related phenomena in natural languages
Edited by Kristin Melum Eide
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 231] 2016
► pp. 257–286

Word order and finiteness in acquisition

A study of Norwegian and English Wh-questions

ORCID logo | UiT – The Arctic University of Norway
Children acquiring languages such as English, German or Dutch typically go through a phase where they produce non-finite root clauses, often referred to as the Optional Infinitive (OI) stage. But there is a difference between English on the one hand and the other Germanic languages on the other with respect to the occurrence of non-finite wh-questions: while there is a high number of OIs in English in this context, non-finite wh-questions are virtually non-existent in child data of e.g. German or Swedish. This is often argued to be due to the early setting of the V2 parameter. Comparing Norwegian and English child data on wh-questions, this paper argues that there is no such parameter and that children instead are sensitive to fine syntactic distinctions in the input called micro-cues. On this view, both English and Norwegian have restricted V2 in wh-questions. The paper also shows that there is no causal correlation between finiteness morphology and word order in this context. Children’s non-finite root clauses are argued to generally be caused by a problem realizing auxiliaries, in both languages, and the difference between English and Norwegian is due to the type of verb required in wh-questions (auxiliaries vs. lexical verbs).
Keywords: auxiliaries, English, Norwegian, verb second, wh-questions
Published online: 25 August 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.231.09wes
References (72)
References
Anderssen, Merete. 2006. The Acquisition of Compositional Definiteness in Norwegian. PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.
Atkinson, Martin. 1998. Now, hang on a minute: Some reflections on emerging orthodoxies. In Clahsen (ed.), 451-499.Google Scholar
Behrens, Heike. 1993. Temporal Reference in German Child Language: Form and Function of Early Verb Use. PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
Bentzen, Kristine. 2003. V-to-I Movement in the absence of morphological cues: evidence from Northern Norwegian. In Proceedings from the 19th Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, Peter Svenonius, Anne Dahl & Marit R. Westergaard (eds). Nordlyd 31(3): 573-588.Google Scholar
. 2005. What’s the better move? On verb placement in Standard and Northern Norwegian. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 28(2): 153-188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. The degree of verb movement in embedded clauses in three varieties of Norwegian. In Scandinavian Dialect Syntax 2005, Kristine Bentzen & Øystein A. Vangsnes (eds). Nordlyd 34: 127-146.Google Scholar
Berk, Stephanie. 2003. Why ‘why’ is different? In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Barbara Beachley, Amanda Brown & Frances Conlin (eds),127-137. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Blom, Elma. 2007. Modality, infinitives, and finite bare verbs in Dutch and English child language. Language Acquisition 14(1): 75-113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2002. Realizing Germanic inflection: Why morphology does not drive syntax. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 6: 129-167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David & Thráinsson, Höskuldur. 1998. Two heads aren't always better than one. Syntax 1(1): 37-71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bohnacker, Ute. 1999. Icelandic plus English: Language Differentiation and Functional Categories in a Successively Bilingual Child. PhD dissertation, University of Durham.
Boser, Katharina, Lust, Barbara C., Santelmann, Lynn & Whitman, John. 1992. The syntax of V2 in early child German grammar: The Strong Continuity Hypothesis. Proceedings of the Northeastern Linguistic Society 22: 51-66.Google Scholar
Brown, Roger. 1973. A First Language: The Early Stages. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, Harald. 1986. Verb inflections in German child language: Acquisition of agreement markings and the functions they encode. Linguistics 24: 79-121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1988. Parameterized grammatical theory and language acquisition: A study of the acquisition of verb placement and inflection by children and adults. In Linguistic Theory in Second Language Acquisition, Suzanne Flynn & Wayne O’Neil (eds), 47-75. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, Harald & Muysken, Pieter. 1986. The availability of Universal Grammar to adult and child learners – A study of the acquisition of German word order. Second Language Research 2(2): 93-119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1989. The UG paradox in L2 acquisition. Second Language Research 5(1): 1-29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, Harald & Penke, Martina. 1992. The acquisition of agreement morphology and its syntactic consequences: New evidence on German child language from the Simone-corpus. In The Acquisition of Verb Placement: Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition, Jürgen M. Meisel (ed.), 181-223. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Haan, Germen. 1987. A theory-bound approach to the acquisition of verb placement in Dutch. In Germen de Haan & Wim Zonneveld (eds.), Formal Parameters of Generative Grammar, 15-30. Dordrecht: ICG.Google Scholar
Endresen, Rolf Theil & Simonsen, Hanne Gram. 2001. The Norwegian verb. In A Cognitive Approach to the Verb: Morphological and Constructional Perspectives, Hanne Gram Simonsen & Rolf Theil Endresen (eds), 73-94. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Eide, Kristin Melum. 2009. Finiteness: The haves and the have-nots. In Advances in Comparative Germanic Syntax [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 141], Artemis Alexiadou, Jorge Hankamer, Thomas McFadden, Justin Nuger & Florian Schäfer (eds), 357-390 Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guasti, Maria Teresa. 1996. Acquisition of Italian interrogatives. In Clahsen (ed.), 241-270.Google Scholar
. 2000. An excursion into interrogatives in Early English and Italian. In The Acquisition of Syntax: Studies in Comparative Developmental Linguistics, Marc-Ariel Friedemann & Luigi Rizzi (eds), 105-128, Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Guasti, Maria Teresa, Thornton, Rosalind & Wexler, Ken. 1995. Negation in children’s questions: The case of English. In BUCLD 19: Proceedings of the 19th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Dawn MacLaughlin & Susan McEwen (eds), 228-240. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Harris, Tony & Wexler, Ken. 1996. The optional-infinitive stage in child English: Evidence from negation. In Clahsen (ed.), 1-42.Google Scholar
Hoekstra, Teun & Hyams, Nina. 1998. Aspects of root infinitives. Lingua 106: 81-112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ingram, David & Thompson, William. 1996. Early syntactic acquisition in German: Evidence for the Modal Hypothesis. Language 72(1): 97-120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jordens, Peter. 1990. The acquisition of verb placement in Dutch and German. Linguistics28: 1407-1448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Josefsson, Gunlög. 1999. Non-finite root clauses in Swedish child language. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 63: 105-150.Google Scholar
. 2004. Input and output: Sentence patterns in child and adult Swedish. In The Acquisition of Swedish Grammar [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 33], Gunlög Josefsson, Christer Platzack & Gisela Håkansson (eds), 95–133. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klima, Edward S. & Bellugi[-Klima], Ursula. 1966. Syntactic regularities in the speech of children. In Psycholinguistic Papers, John Lyons & Roger J. Wales (eds), 183-208. Edinburgh: EUP. Also published in Lust, Barbara C. & Foley, Claire (eds). 2004. First Language Acquisition: The Essential Readings, 344-366. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William & Labov, Teresa. 1978. Learning the syntax of questions. In Recent Advances in the Psychology of Language: Formal and Experimental Approaches, Robin N. Campbell & Philip T. Smith (eds). New York NY: Plenum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, Donna. 2000. Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition. In Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory, John Archibald (ed.), 102-129. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lasser, Ingeborg. 1997. Finiteness in Adult and Child Language. PhD dissertation, City University of New York.
Lightfoot, David. 2002. Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen M. 1994. Getting FAT: Finiteness, agreement and tense in early grammars. In Bilingual First Language Acquisition: French and German Grammatical Development, [ Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 7], Jürgen M. Meisel (ed.), 89-129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 2000. The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk, Vol. 2: The Database, 3rd edn. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Phillips, Colin. 1995. Syntax at age two: Cross-linguistic differences. In Papers on Language Processing and Acquisition [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 26], Carson T. Schütze, Jennifer B. Ganger & Kevin Broihier (eds), 325-382. Cambridge MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Plunkett, Kim & Strömqvist, Sven. 1990. The Acquisition of Scandinavian Languages. Gothenburg Papers in Theoretical Linguistics 59.Google Scholar
Poeppel, David & Wexler, Ken. 1993. The Full Competence Hypothesis of clause structure in early German. Language 69: 1-33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20(3): 365–425.Google Scholar
Radford, Andrew. 1992. The acquisition of the morphosyntax of finite verbs in English. In The Acquisition of Verb Placement: Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition, Jürgen M. Meisel (ed.), 23-62. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1994. The syntax of questions in child English. Journal of Child Language 21: 211-236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1993/94. Some notes on linguistic theory and language development: The case of root infinitives. Language Acquisition 3(4): 371-393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1996. Residual verb second and the wh-criterion. In Parameters and Functional Heads, Adriana Belletti & Luigi Rizzi (eds), 63-90. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Remarks on early null subjects. In The Acquisition of Syntax: Studies in Comparative Developmental Linguistics, Marc-Ariel Friedemann & Luigi Rizzi (eds), 269-292. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Roeper, Tom. 1999. Universal Bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2(3), 169-186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rohrbacher, Bernhard Wolfgang. 1999. Morphology-Driven Syntax: A Theory of V to I Raising and Pro-drop [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 15]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rowland, Caroline F. & Pine, Julian M. 2000. Subject-auxiliary inversion errors and wh-question acquisition: ‘What children do know?’ Journal of Child Language 27: 157-181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. The development of inversion in wh-questions: A reply to Van Valin. Journal of Child Language 30: 197-212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Santelmann, Lynn. 1995. The Acquisition of Verb Second Grammar in Child Swedish: Continuity of Universal Grammar in WH-questions, Topicalizations and Verb Raising. PhD dissertation, Cornell University.
. 2004. The acquisition of Swedish wh-questions. In Gunlög Josefsson, Christer Platzack and Gisela Håkansson (eds.), The Acquisition of Swedish Grammar, 261-307. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snyder, William. 2007. Child Language: The Parametric Approach. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Stromswold, Karin. 1990. Learnability and the Acquisition of Auxiliaries. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Theakston, Anna L., Lieven, Elena V.M., Pine, Julian M. & Rowland, Caroline F. 2001. The role of performance limitations in the acquisition of verb-argument structure: An alternative account. Journal of Child Language 28: 127-152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thornton, Rosalind. 2008. Why continuity? Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26: 107-146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vangsnes, Øystein A. 2005. Microparameters for Norwegian wh-grammars. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 5: 187-226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. 2002. The development of subject-auxiliary inversion in English wh-questions: An alternative analysis. Journal of Child Language 29: 161-175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vikner, Sten. 1995. Verb Movement and Expletive Subjects in the Germanic Languages. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Verrips, Maaike & Weissenborn, Jürgen. 1992. Routes to verb placement in early German and French: The independence of finiteness and agreement. In The Acquisition of Verb Placement: Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition, Jürgen Meisel (ed.), 283-331. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waldmann, Christian. 2008. Input och output: Ordföljd i svenska barns huvudsatser och bisatser (Input and Output: Word Order in Swedish Children’s Main and Embedded Clauses). PhD dissertation, University of Lund.
Westergaard, Marit R. 2003. Word order in wh-questions in a North Norwegian dialect: Some evidence from an acquisition study. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 26(1): 81-109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, Marit. 2008. Acquisition and change: On the robustness of the triggering experience for word order cues. Lingua 118(12): 1841-1863. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009a. The Acquisition of Word Order: Micro-cues, Information Structure and Economy [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 145]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009b. Microvariation as diachrony: A view from acquisition. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 12(1): 49-79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009c. Usage-based vs. rule-based learning: The acquisition of word order in wh-questions in English and Norwegian. Journal of Child Language 36(5): 1023-1051. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, Marit & Bentzen, Kristine. 2010. Word order and finiteness in the acquisition of English and Norwegian wh-questions. In BUCLD 34: Proceedings of the 34th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Vol 2, Katie Franich, Kate M. Iserman & Lauren L. Keil (eds), 457-467. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Wexler, Kenneth. 1994. Optional infinitives, head movement and the economy of derivation. In Verb Movement, David Lightfoot & Norbert Hornstein (eds), 305-350. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage. In Language Acquisition: Knowledge Representation and Processing, Antonella Sorace, Caroline Heycock & Richard Shillock (eds). Special issue of Lingua , 23-79.Google Scholar
Wijnen, Frank, Kempen, Masja & Gillis, Steven. 2001. Root infinitives in Dutch early child language: An effect of input? Journal of Child Language 28(3): 629-660. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiklund, Anna-Lena, Hrafnbjargarson, Gunnar Hrafn, Bentzen, Kristine & Hróarsdóttir, Þorbjörg. 2007. Rethinking Scandinavian verb movement. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 10(3): 203-233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Poletto, Cecilia
2019. More than one way out. Linguistic Variation 19:1 ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo
Westergaard, Marit
2014. Linguistic variation and micro-cues in first language acquisition. Linguistic Variation 14:1 ► pp. 26 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.