Verb Production at Different Stages of First Language Acquisition: Focus on Serbian

Abstract

This paper examines the production of verbs with different argument structure (unergative, unaccusative, anti-causative, transitive and ditransitive verbs) at different stages of first language acquisition, with the aim of contributing to the ongoing nature-nurture debate. Twenty verbs were tested (four verbs of each type). A total of eighteen subjects belonging to six age groups (18-21, 23-25, 31-33, 35-38, 39-43 and 48-52 months -three participants each) took part in this pilot research. Visual stimuli were used in a verb elicitation task. Though the sample was small, significant among-group differences were noted. The results show that children at a lower stage of language development have more difficulty producing verbs with a complex argument structure. The acquisition of verbs starts with transitive and unergative verbs, followed by unaccusative verbs. The production of ditransitive and anti-causative verbs is delayed.

Reflexive and Anti-Causative Verb Production Revisited

“…The purpose of the follow-up experiment was to reexamine the production of true reflexive, lexical reflexive and anti-causative se-verbs of the same participants at a later stage of language acquisition. The results of the first experiment (Ilić, 2019) suggest the following order of acquisition: lexical reflexive > true reflexive > anti-causative verbs and support the Continuity Hypothesis. They confirmed the initial hypothesis that anti-causative verbs are acquired after reflexive verbs because they are syntactically and semantically more complex.…”

“…Although the production of anticausative verbs was less successful, many of the children's non-target answers for anti-causative verbs were verbs of the same syntactic complexity, which could not be coded as target because they were semantically inappropriate. Therefore, Ilić (2019) concludes that the lower production of anti-causatives should not be attributed to the problem with A-chains (as would be assumed under the Maturation Hypothesis), but rather to the process of detransitivisation and deletion of +Cause theta role.…”

“…Three GLMER analyses conducted in the first experiment (Ilić 2019) showed the following: lexical reflexive and true reflexive verbs were produced significantly better than anti-causative verbs in the groups of three-year-olds and four-year-olds; lexical reflexive verbs were produced significantly better than anticausative verbs in the group of five-year-olds as well, but the contrast between true reflexive and anticausative verbs was no longer found. Since the children produced reflexive verb forms correctly from the earliest tested age, the results speak in favour of the Continuity Hypothesis.…”

“…

The aim of the present research was to reexamine the production of reflexive and anti-causative se-verbs in Serbian at different stages of language acquisition after a nine-month period from the first experiment (Ilić, 2019). The results of the first experiment suggest the following order of acquisition: lexical reflexive > true reflexive > anticausative verbs.

…”

“…For the sake of comparability with the results of the first experiment, the children will be referred to as three-yearolds, four-year-olds, and five-year-olds, although their mean ages almost reached the age of four (M=46.75, SD=2.88), five (M=59.65, SD=2.99), and six (M=70.55, SD=4.19) at the time of the follow-up experiment. Gender was not controlled for in the research (for more detailed information about the participants see Ilić, 2019).…”