But do we need universal grammar? Comment on Lidz et al. (2003)

Cognition

Volumn 94, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 77-84

  Goldberg, Adele E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; CONCEPTION; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; NOTE; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; RELIABILITY; SEMANTICS;

CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; HUMANS; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; LINGUISTICS; SEMANTICS; VERBAL LEARNING;

EID: 4043119659     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.03.003     Document Type: Note

References (32)

1. Ameka, F. K (in press). He died old dying to be dead right: Transitivity and semantic shifts of die in Ewe. In M. Bowermann & P. Brown (Eds.), Crosslinguistic perspectives. On argument structure: Implications for learnability. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum, to appear.
2. Bates E., MacWhinney B. Competition, variation, and language learning. MacWhinney B. Mechanisms of language acquisition. 1987;157-193 Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ
3. Bowerman M. Argument structure and learnability: Is a solution in sight? Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. 22:1996;454-468
4. Chomsky N. Lectures on government and binding. 1981;Foris, Dordrecht
5. Croft W. Radical construction grammar. 2001;Oxford University Press, Oxford
6. Elman J.L., Bates E.A., Johnson M.H., Karmiloff-Smith A., Parisi D., Plunkett K. Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. 1996;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
7. Enfield, N. J (in press). Expression of three-participant events in Lao. In P. Austin et al (Eds.), Three-participant events.
8. Essegbey, J (1999). Inherent complement verbs revisited: Towards an understanding of argument structure in Ewe. PhD, Dissertation series, Max Planck Institute, Nijmegen.
9. Essegbey, J (in press). Intransitive verbs in Ewe and the unaccusative hypothesis. In M. Bowermann & P. Brown (Eds.), Crosslinguistic perspectives. On argument structure: Implications for learnability. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
10. Fisher C. From form to meaning: A role for structural alignment in the acquisition of language. Advances in Child Development and Behavior. 27:2000;1-53
11. Fisher C. Structural limits on verb mapping: The role of analogy in children's interpretations of sentences. Cognitive Psychology. 31:(1):1996;41-81
12. Gleitman L. The structural sources of verb meanings. Bloom P. Language acquisition: Core readings. 1994;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
13. Goldberg, A. E (in press). Constructions, lexical semantics and the correspondence principle: Accounting for generalizations and subregularities in the realization of arguments. In N. Erteschik-Shir & T. Rapoport (Eds.), The syntax of aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Goldberg A.E. The emergence of argument structure semantics. MacWhinney B. The emergence of language. 1999;Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ
15. Goldberg A.E., Casenhiser D., Sethuraman N. Learning argument structure generalizations. Cognitive Linguistics. 15:(3):2004;289-316
16. Grimshaw J. Argument structure. 1990;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
17. Hopper P.J., Thompson S.A. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language. 56:(2):1980;251-299
18. Kemmer, S., & Verhagen, A (2002). The grammar of causatives and the conceptual structure of events. In Mouton classics: From syntax to cognition, from phonology to text (pp. 451-491). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
19. Lakoff G. Women, fire and dangerous things. 1987;University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
20. Lidz J., Gleitman H., Gleitman L. Understanding how input matters: Verb learning and the footprint of universal grammar. Cognition. 87:2003;151-178
21. MacWhinney B. The emergence of language. 1999;Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ
22. Mithun M. The evolution of noun incorporation. Language. 60:1984;847-894
23. Morris W.C., Cottrell G.W. The empirical acquisition of grammatical relations. Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society Meeting. 1999
24. Mouner G., Koenig J.-P. Linguistic vs conceptual sources of implicit agents in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language. 43:2000;110-134
25. Naigles L., Gleitman H., Gleitman L. Children acquire word meaning components from syntactic evidence. Dromi E. Language and cognition: A developmental perspective. Vol. 5:1993;104-140 Ablex Publishing, New Jersey
26. Nunberg G., Sag I.A., Wasow T. Idioms. Language. 70:(3):1994;491-538
27. Pinker S. Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. 1989;MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
28. Sethuraman, N., Goldberg, A.E., & Goodman, J. (1997). Using the semantics associated with syntactic frames for interpretation without the aid of linguistic context. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Child Language Research Forum.
29. Tomasello M. First verbs: A case study of early grammatical development. 1992;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA
30. Tomasello, M. (1999). Primate Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31. Tomasello M. Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition. 74:2000;209-253
32. Tomasello M. Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. 2003;Harvard University Press, Cambridge