Usage-based vs. rule-based learning: the acquisition of word order inwh-questions in English and Norwegian

Abstract

A B S T R A C TThis paper discusses different approaches to language acquisition in relation to children's acquisition of word order in wh-questions in English and Norwegian. While generative models assert that children set major word order parameters and thus acquire a rule of subject-auxiliary inversion or generalized verb second (V2) at an early stage, some constructivist work argues that English-speaking children are simply reproducing frequent wh-word+auxiliary combinations in the input. The paper questions both approaches, re-evaluates some previous work, and provides some further data, concluding that the acquisition of wh-questions must be the result of a rule-based process. Based on variation in adult grammars, a cue-based model to language acquisition is presented, according to which children are sensitive to minor cues in the input, called micro-cues. V2 is not considered to be one major parameter, but several smaller-scale cues, which are responsible for children's lack of syntactic (over-)generalization in the acquisition process. I N T R O D U C T I O NChildren's acquisition of word order in non-subject wh-questions in English has been studied extensively, and in Ambridge, Rowland, Theakston & Tomasello (2006) this is described as a topic which 'represents an ideal '' test case'' for both movement-based generativist accounts and competing constructivist accounts of language acquisition' (p. 520). The present paper takes a fresh look at some child data on word order in wh-questions in English and a dialect of Norwegian, at the same time comparing a generative and a constructivist approach.

Frequency and economy in the acquisition of variable word order

“…An example of this the often noted lack of subject-auxiliary inversion in wh-questions in English child language, see e.g. Radford (1994), Rowland and Pine (2000), Westergaard (2009b). This is illustrated in (53) (Brown, 1973;MacWhinney, 2000).…”

Linguistic variation and micro-cues in first language acquisition

“…It has also been argued that some English-speaking children's lack of subject-auxiliary inversion is systematically related to certain whitems, typically distinguishing between what and where on the one hand, which trigger inversion early and almost consistently, and why on the other, which triggers inversion only at a much later stage (e.g. de Villiers 1991, Thornton 2008, Westergaard 2009c. A significant distinction has also been found between be and auxiliaries in English children's wh-questions (e.g.…”

Moving in small steps towards verb second: A case study

“…Whereas the movement operation itself is given by UG, children have to learn how to apply verb movement in the language they are exposed to. This learning process appears to be subject to economy principles, making children conservative learners of syntactic phenomena (Westergaard 2009a(Westergaard , 2009b. For example, children systematically use less verb movement and V2 than adults, but they hardly ever overuse verb movement and V2.…”