Learning word-order constraints under conditions of object ellipsis

Demuth, Katherine; Machobane, Malillo; Moloi, Francina

doi:10.1515/ling.38.3.545

Cited by 6 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…JOG is a test where the subject had to choose which of a pair of sentences was grammatically correct. JOG implemented the procedure of Demuth et al (2000) in a computerized form. The test was run on a laptop computer fitted with a touchscreen, as with ROST.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As ROST is employed with EAL children in this study, a test was also included to assess syntactic development in such subjects. The test used is an automated form of Demuth et al ’s (2000) judgement of grammaticality (JOG) test, which is probably less familiar to readers than MLU and OCDI. Grammatical judgement is a procedure for testing the level of syntactic skills a child has attained (McDaniel and Cairns, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such procedures are not suitable for testing young children because it is difficult to explain to them what is meant by ‘grammatical’. The JOG grammaticality judgement test developed by Demuth et al (2000) is suitable for young children (it has been tested on participants aged between three and 58 years). In the test, stimulus pairs were recorded and played that related to the animation of two hand puppets (a panda and a sheep).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Syntactic development in ‘ uent children, children who stutter, and children who have English as an additional language

Howell¹,

Davis²,

Au‐Yeung

2003

Child Language Teaching and Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children aged between two and 10 years were assessed on a new reception of syntax test (ROST). Validations of the test are reported for monolingual fluent control children under five (by examining the relationship with mean length of utterance and the Oxford Communication Development Inventory) and for over fives (relationship with a new judgement of grammaticality test using syntactic categories common to the two tests). Performance of these children was compared with performance of children who stutter and children with English as an additional language. In this study, the test was divided into under-five and over-five forms. Any young child progressing to the over-five syntactic categories, or any older child doing the under-five syntactic categories was dropped from the analysis. ROST scores prepared according to this scheme led to no differences between the control and either of the subject groups tested. However, compared to controls, the children with English as an additional language (but not children who stutter) had a significantly higher proportion of children above five who did the under-five categories (and were, therefore, excluded from the analyses). The higher proportion of children who did the under-five syntactic categories in the English as an additional language group indicates that group scores would have been lower if their syntax results had been included in the analysis. Further analyses provided some evidence that two groups with English as an additional language (Turkish and Cantonese speakers) did not perform any better on selected syntactic categories in their native language compared with their performance in English.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Syntactic development in ‘ uent children, children who stutter, and children who have English as an additional language

Howell¹,

Davis²,

Au‐Yeung

2003

Child Language Teaching and Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Demuth et al, 2000). The repairs reveal much about children's underlying knowledge of double object applicative constructions.…”

Section: Analysis Of Repairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rules and construction effects in learning the argument structure of verbs

2003

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TTheorists of language acquisition have long debated the means by which children learn the argument structure of verbs (e.g. Bowerman, 1974Bowerman, , 1990Pinker, 1984Pinker, , 1989Tomasello, 1992). Central to this controversy has been the possible role of verb semantics, especially in learning which verbs undergo dative-shift alternation in languages like English. The learning problem is somewhat simplified in Bantu double object constructions, where all applicative verbs show the same order of postverbal objects. However, Bantu languages differ as to what that order is, some placing the benefactive argument first, and others placing the animate argument first. Learning the language-specific word-order restrictions on Bantu double object applicative constructions is therefore more akin

show abstract

“…In some Bantu languages, such as Sesotho, a mixed typology is evident with an animacy hierarchy affecting how the objects are realized(Morolong and Hyman, 1977;Demuth et al, 2000). We do not explore object properties in this paper, an extensive area beyond the scope of this paper.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%