Children’s comprehension of NP embedding

IF 0.9 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics Pub Date : 2022-04-06 DOI:10.16995/glossa.5816
Erin Hall, A-T. Pérez-Leroux
{"title":"Children’s comprehension of NP embedding","authors":"Erin Hall, A-T. Pérez-Leroux","doi":"10.16995/glossa.5816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How do children learn to interpret structurally complex noun phrases? NPs embedded inside other NPs are not accessible to predication, so that in a sentence with a subject NP containing a PP modifier such as The cup on the table is green or The dog with the bone is blue, the adjectival predicate has scope over the highest but not the embedded nominal referent (Arsenijevic & Hinzen 2012). We used a coloring task to examine children’s comprehension of sentences containing these complex NPs, comparing PP modifiers (locative and comitatives) to coordinated NPs (The cup and the table are green), where both referents are accessible. Three- to five-year-old children were highly accurate with control and coordinate sentences, and performed well with locative PPs, but were not different from chance level for comitative sentences, which many children treated as coordinates. That children differentiate between coordinate and locative sentences provides evidence that children have early access to the syntax-semantics of complex nominals. The contrast between locatives and comitatives suggests that comprehension is not merely guided by subject agreement (since the agreement patterns are the same for both types of PP-modified subjects), and that children still need to learn the lexical semantics of prepositions. Diachronically, languages with comitative modifiers evolve into language with comitative coordination (Haspelmath 2007). Thus, we propose that these error patterns for comitative prepositions can be explained by the assumption that children’s errors align with the direction of systematic language change.","PeriodicalId":46319,"journal":{"name":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Glossa-A Journal of General Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5816","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How do children learn to interpret structurally complex noun phrases? NPs embedded inside other NPs are not accessible to predication, so that in a sentence with a subject NP containing a PP modifier such as The cup on the table is green or The dog with the bone is blue, the adjectival predicate has scope over the highest but not the embedded nominal referent (Arsenijevic & Hinzen 2012). We used a coloring task to examine children’s comprehension of sentences containing these complex NPs, comparing PP modifiers (locative and comitatives) to coordinated NPs (The cup and the table are green), where both referents are accessible. Three- to five-year-old children were highly accurate with control and coordinate sentences, and performed well with locative PPs, but were not different from chance level for comitative sentences, which many children treated as coordinates. That children differentiate between coordinate and locative sentences provides evidence that children have early access to the syntax-semantics of complex nominals. The contrast between locatives and comitatives suggests that comprehension is not merely guided by subject agreement (since the agreement patterns are the same for both types of PP-modified subjects), and that children still need to learn the lexical semantics of prepositions. Diachronically, languages with comitative modifiers evolve into language with comitative coordination (Haspelmath 2007). Thus, we propose that these error patterns for comitative prepositions can be explained by the assumption that children’s errors align with the direction of systematic language change.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
儿童对NP嵌入的理解
儿童如何学习解释结构复杂的名词短语?嵌入在其他NP中的NP无法被预测访问,因此,在主语NP包含PP修饰语(如桌子上的杯子是绿色的或带骨头的狗是蓝色的)的句子中,形容词谓词的作用范围超过最高,但不超过嵌入的标称指涉物(Arsenijevic & Hinzen 2012)。我们使用着色任务来检查儿童对包含这些复杂NPs的句子的理解,将PP修饰语(位置和形容词)与协调NPs(杯子和桌子是绿色的)进行比较,其中两个指涉物都是可访问的。3 ~ 5岁儿童对控制句和坐标句的判断准确度较高,对位置句的判断准确度较高,但对拟态句的判断准确度与对拟态句的判断准确度无显著差异,许多儿童将拟态句视为坐标句。儿童区分坐标句和位置句提供了证据,表明儿童较早接触到复杂名词的句法语义。位置和形容词之间的对比表明,理解不仅仅是由主语一致引导的(因为两种类型的pp修饰主语的一致模式是相同的),儿童仍然需要学习介词的词汇语义。从历时上看,具有拟态修饰语的语言演变为具有拟态协调的语言(Haspelmath 2007)。因此,我们提出,这些模仿介词的错误模式可以通过假设儿童的错误与系统语言变化的方向一致来解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
62 weeks
期刊最新文献
Title Pending 10160 Title Pending 8932 Title Pending 8653 Title Pending 10229 Title Pending 9904
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1