Since the seminal work of Jakobson (1941), phonological patterns observed in child language have been documented and analyzed from a number of perspectives. Throughout the relevant literature, an interesting paradox often manifests itself: while child language is generally characterized as a “simpler” version of the target language, many types of phonological patterns observed in acquisition data create challenges for theories developed to account for more “complex” adult systems. Phonologists within the generative framework have reacted to this problem in a number of ways, from tacitly or conspicuously ignoring acquisition data (e.g. Chomsky and Halle 1968: 331) to elaborating phonological models that account for phenomena observed in child phonology (e.g. Smith 1973; Bernhardt and Stemberger 1998) or, in some extreme cases, rejecting the validity of evidence from child production data for theoretical investigations of phonology (e.g. Hale and Reiss 1998). The disconnect between findings from child phonology and generalizations arising out of generative theories of grammar based on adult phonology has also been recruited in support of alternative, functionalist approaches to child phonology, including Stampe (1969) within Natural Phonology and, more recently, Vihman and Croft (2007) within Construction Grammar.