Control and coreference in early child language

Abstract

This study investigated the relationship between control and coreference using an act-out task involving 81 children ranging in age from 3;1 to 8;0 and eight adults ranging in age from 30 to 55. The results replicated previous findings in revealing five developmental stages in children's interpretation of PRO, an empty pronominal element. A significant relationship was observed in the patterns of children's interpretation of forwards sentences containing PRO and those containing overt pronouns. However, there was no relationship in the development of restrictions on control and restrictions on coreference.

Binding Principles in the Grammars of Young Children

“…Apart from verifying the early obedience to this principle, our primary finding is that there were five children who acted out sentences (3) and (4) in violation of C and in contradiction to their judgments, which indicated knowledge of C. Like Hsu et al (1989), we had an adult pilot subject who also erred on acting out such sentences. We believe that sentences of this type present peculiar performance difficulties, possibly because these were the only sentences in which correct enactment would require manipulation of all three of the dolls in the array.…”

“…Hsu, Cairns, Eisenberg, and Schlisselberg (1989), in a study investigating Principle C using an act-out task, reported the highest proportion of violations among children under 5 in response to sentences such as (6).…”

Backward Versus Forward Anaphora: Reconstruction in Child Grammar

“…However, these results were critically examined in Carden (1986) and interpreted differently. In addition, Hsu et al (1989) presented data obtained in an act-out task suggesting that children have difficulty in handling ungrammatical cases of forward anaphora. Finally, using a question-answer test, Ingram and Snow (1981) found that children accept an anaphoric reading in (30a) as much as they do in (30b)-that is, in 78% of the cases.…”

“…Finally, using a question-answer test, Ingram and Snow (1981) found that children accept an anaphoric reading in (30a) as much as they do in (30b)-that is, in 78% of the cases. Carden (1986), and Hsu et al (1989) came to the conclusion that children perform better on ungrammatical cases of backward anaphora than on ungrammatical cases of forward anaphora, a claim that is disputed by Lust et al (1992) (see also references cited there). In summary, there is evidence that children conform to Principle C, at least in cases of backward anaphora.…”

“…Some studies have addressed the issue of whether children's comprehension of sentences like (2a) and (2b) is guided by a unique principle. However, on one hand, conflicting results were obtained, probably because of the experimental material employed (see Carden (1986), Hsu, Cairns, Eisenberg, and Schlisselberg (1989), Ingram and Snow (1981), Lust, Loveland, and Kornet (1980)). On the other hand, it was observed that, beyond Principle C, other factors appear to influence children's performance.…”