Chapter 11
Developing strategies for encoding additive and contrastive relations in French and German child narratives
Speakers of French and German differ in their preferred choice of information components for establishing contrastive and additive discourse relations. Whereas French speakers tend to relate and compare discourse entities to each other across utterances, German speakers prefer to relate and compare assertions. The current study explores at which age French and German children (ages 4, 7, and 10) acquire the preferred discourse organizational principles of their respective languages. In order to disentangle typical properties of children’s discourse at a certain age from features reflecting the acquisition of language-specific preferences, the same set of elicited production data is compared across languages and age groups. Results show that despite common developmental trends, the principles underlying additive and contrastive discourse relations in German are acquired earlier than those in French. Whereas the relatively uniform German pattern can be seen as a continuation of earlier stages of acquisition, the French pattern is slightly more complex: There is more variation in the input and the prototypical integration of the relevant devices requires certain morpho-syntactic structures to be mastered first. From age 7 onward, child learners of both languages hone in on their target language’s preferred discourse structure.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The acquisitional task for children learning French and German: Background and research questions
- 3.The development of additive and contrastive discourse relations: Methods
- 3.1The stimulus
- 3.2Participants
- 3.3Procedure
- 4.The development of additive and contrastive discourse relations: Results
- 4.1The target: Results from adult control groups
- 4.2Development across age groups: German
- 4.3Development across age groups: French
- 4.4Cross-linguistic comparison
- 5.Discussion and conclusions
-
Acknowledgements
-
Notes
-
References
References (41)
References
Amsili, Pascal & Beyssade, Claire. 2010. Obligatory presupposition in discourse. In Constraints in Discourse, Pragmatics and Beyond, Vol. 2 [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 194], Peter Kühnlein, Anton Benz & Candace L. Sidner (eds), 105–123. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Benazzo, Sandra, Dimroth, Christine, Perdue, Clive & Watorek, Marzena. 2004. Le rôle des particules additives dans la construction de la cohésion discursive en langue maternelle et en langue étrangère. Langages 155: 76–105.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Benazzo, Sandra & Dimroth, Christine. 2015. Additive particles in Romance and Germanic languages: Are they really similar? In Focus Particles in the Romance and Germanic Languages. Corpus-based and Experimental Approaches, Anna-Maria De Cesare & Cecelia Andorno (eds). Linguistik Online 71.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Benazzo, Sandra & Patin, Cédric 2017. French additive aussi: Does prosody matter? In Focus on additivity. Focus on Additivity. Adverbial modifiers in Romance, Germanic and Slavic languages, Anna Maria De Cesare & Cecilia Andorno (eds), 107–136. Amsterdam: Benjamins.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berman, Ruth A. & Slobin, Dan I. (eds). 1994. Different Ways of Relating Events in Narrative: A Cross-linguistic Developmental Study. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bosch, Peter, Rozario, Tom & Zhao, Tom. 2003.
Demonstrative Pronouns and Personal Pronouns. German der vs. er
. Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL), Budapest.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Carroll, Mary, von Stutterheim, Christiane & Nuese, Ralf. 2004. The language and thought debate: A psycholinguistic approach. In Approaches to Language Production, Christopher Habel & Thomas Pechmann (eds), 183–218. Berlin: Mouton.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Delais-Roussarie, Elisabeth, Doetjes, Jenny & Sleeman, Petra. 2004. Dislocation. In Handbook of French Semantics, Francis Corblin & Henriëtte de Swart (eds), 501–528. Stanford CA: CSLI.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dimroth, Christine. 2002. Topics, assertions and additive words: How L2 learners get from information structure to target language syntax. Linguistics 40: 891–923.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dimroth, Christine. 2004. Fokuspartikeln und Informationsgliederung im Deutschen. Tübingen: Stauffenberg.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dimroth, Christine. 2009. Stepping stones and stumbling blocks. Why negation accelerates and additive particles delay the acquisition of finiteness in German. In Functional Categories in Learner Language, Christine Dimroth & Peter Jordens (eds), 137–170. Berlin: De Gruyter.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dimroth, Christine. 2012. Videoclips zur Elizitation von Erzählungen: Methodische Überlegungen und einige Ergebnisse am Beispiel der „Finite Story“. In Einblicke in die Zweitspracherwerbsforschung und ihre methodischen Verfahren, Bernt Ahrenholz (eds), 77–98. Berlin: de Gruyter.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dimroth, Christine, Andorno, Cecilia, Benazzo, Sandra & Verhagen, Josje. 2010. Given claims about new topics. How Romance and Germanic speakers link changed and maintained information in narrative discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 3328–3344.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eckardt, Regine & Fränkel, Manuela. 2012. Particles, maximize presupposition and discourse management. Lingua 122(15): 1801–1818.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Féry, Caroline. 2012. Prosody and information structure of the German particles selbst, wieder and auch
. In Prosody Matters: Essays in Honor of Elisabeth O. Selkirk, Toni Borowsky, Shigeto Kawahara, Takahito Shinya & Mariko Sugahara (eds), 441–468. London: Equinox.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gayraud, Frédérique. 2004. Emergence et développement du placement des particules de portée. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Etrangère 20: 173–196.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Guimier, Claude. 2000. Non congruence et congruence: Alors que vs. tandis que. Syntaxe et Sémantique 1: 80–112.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hickmann, Maya. 2003. Children’s Discourse: Person, Time, and Space across Languages. Cambridge: CUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hickmann, Maya, Taranne, Pierre & Bonnet, Philippe. 2009. Motion in first language acquisition: Manner and path in French and in English. Journal of Child Language 36(4): 705–741.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hickmann, Maya & Hendriks, Henriëtte. 1999. Cohesion and anaphora in children’s narratives: A comparison of English, French, German and Chinese. Journal of Child Language 26: 419–52.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Höhle, Barbara, Berger, Frauke, Müller, Anja, Schmitz, Michaela & Weissenborn, Jürgen. 2009. Focus particles in children’s language. Production and comprehension of auch ‘also’ in German learners from 1 year to 4 years of age. Language Acquisition 16: 36–66.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Höhle, Tilman N. 1992. Über Verum-Fokus im Deutschen. In Informationsstruktur und Grammatik, Joachim Jacobs (eds), 112–141. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ji, Yinglin, Hendriks, Henriëtte & Hickmann, Maya. 2011. How children express caused motion events in Chinese and English: Universal and language-specific influences. Lingua 121: 1796–1819.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Klein, Wolfgang. 2006. On finiteness. In Semantics in Acquisition, Veerle van Geenhoven (eds), 245–272. Dordrecht: Springer.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Klein, Wolfgang. 2012. The information structure of French. In The Expression of Information Structure, Manfred Kriffka & Renate Musan (eds), 95–126. Berlin: De Gruyter.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krifka, Manfred. 1998. Additive particles under stress. In Proceedings of SALT 8, Devon Strolovitch & Aaron Lawson (eds), 111–128. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nederstigt, Ulrike. 2003. ‘Auch’ and ‘noch’in child and adult German. Berlin: De Gruyter.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Penner, Zvi, Tracy, Rosemarie & Wymann, Karin. 1999. Die Rolle der Fokuspartikel AUCH im frühen kindlichen Lexikon. In Das Lexikon im Spracherwerb, Jörg Maibauer & Monika Rothweiler (eds), 229–251. Tübingen: UTB Franke.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reis, Marga & Rosengren, Inger. 1997. A modular approach to the grammar of additive particles: The case of German auch
. Journal of Semantics 14: 237–309.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Riégel, Martin, Pellat, Jean-Christophe & Rioul, Rene. 1994. Grammaire méthodique du français. Paris: PUF.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sæbø, Kjell Johan. 2004. Conversationl contrast and conventional parallel: Topic implicatures and additive presuppositions. Journal of Semantics 21(2): 199–217.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schimke, Sarah, Colonna, Saveria & Hickmann, Maya. 2015. Reference in French and German: A developmental perspective. In Referential and Relational Discourse Coherence in Adults and Children, Natalia Gagarina, Nadja Kühn & Renate Musan (eds). Dordrecht: Springer.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Slobin, Dan I. 1996. From ‘thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking’. In Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, John Gumperz & Stephen Levinson (eds), 70–96. Cambridge: CUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
von Stutterheim, Christiane & Klein, Wolfgang. 2002. Quaestio und l-perspectivation. In Perspectivity and Perspectivation in Discourse [Human Cognitive Processing 9] Carl Friedrich Graumann & Werner Kallmeyer (eds), 59–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
von Stutterheim, Christiane, Halm, Ute & Carroll, Mary. 2012. Macrostructural principles and the development of narrative competence in L1 German: The role of grammar (8–14-year-olds). In Comparative Perspectives to Language Acquisition: Tribute to Clive Perdue, Marzena Watorek, Sandra Benazzo & Maya Hickmann (eds), 559–585. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sudhoff, Stefan. 2008. Focus particles in the German middlefield. In The Discourse Potential of Underspecified Structures: Event Structures and Information Structure, Anita Steube (eds), 439–459. Berlin: De Gruyter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Trévise, Anne. 1986. Topicalisation, is it transferable? In Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition, Michael Sharwood Smith & Eric Kellerman (eds), 186–206 Oxford: Pergamon Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Turco, Giusy, Dimroth, Christine & Braun, Bettina. 2012. Intonational means to mark verum focus in German and French. Language and Speech 56: 460–490.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Watorek, Marzena. 2004. Construction du discours par des enfants et des apprenants adultes. Langages 155.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Uth, Melanie & Marco García García
Benazzo, Sandra & Katia Paykin
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 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.