HOW DOWE KNOW WHAT CHILDREN KNOW?: Problems and Advances in Establishing Scientific Methods for the Study of Language Acquistion and Linguistic Theory

Handbook of Child Language Acquisition

Volumn , Issue , 2023, Pages 427-456

  Lust, Barbara ^a   Flynn, Suzanne ^b   Foley, Claire ^c   Chien, Yu Chin ^d  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c MOREHEAD STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85199176773     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1163/9789004653023_016     Document Type: Chapter

References (95)

1. Austin, I., Blume, M., Nuflez del Prado, Z., Parkinson, D., Proman, R., & Lust, B. (1996). Current challenges to the parameter-setting paradigm: The pro-drop parameter. In C. Koster & F. Wijnen (Eds.), Proceedings of Groningen Assembly on Language Acquisition, 87-97.
2. Austin, J., Blume, M., Parkinson, D., Nuflez del Prado, Z., & Lust, B. (1997). The status of pro-drop in the initial state: Results from new analyses of Spanish. In A. PerezLeroux & w. Glass, (Eds.), Contemporary Perspectives on the Acquisition of Spanish, Vol. 1. Developing grammars (pp. 37-54). Boston: Cascadilla Press.
3. Barbier, I. (1995). Configuration and movement in Germanic: Studies of first Language acquisition of Dutch word-order. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Comell University, Ithaca, NY.
4. Berk, S. (1996). What does why what trigger? Unpublished honors thesis, Comell University, Ithaca, NY.
5. Blake, I., Quarto, G., Austin, W., & Vingiles, Z. (1984). Memory capacity and Language. complexity. Ms. Toronto, Canada: York University.
6. Bloom, L. (1970). Language development: Form and function in emerging grammars. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
7. Boser, K. (1989). Acquisition of German word order. Unpublished honors thesis, Comell University, Ithaca, NY.
8. Boser, K. (1996). Syntactic and pragmatic factors in the first Language acquisition of German word order. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Comell University, Ithaca, NY.
9. Boser, K., Lust, B., Santelmann, L., & Whitman, J. (1991). The theoretical significance of auxiliaries in early child Gennan grammar. Paper presented at the Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston.
10. Boser, K., Lust, B., Santelmann, L., & Whitman, J. (1992). The syntax of CP and V-2 in early German child grammar: The strong continuity hypothesis. Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Association, 22, 51-66.
11. Boser, K., Santelmann, L., Barbier, I., & Lust, B. (1995). Grammatical mapping from UG to Language specific grammars: Deriving variation in the acquisition of German, Dutch and Swedish. In D. McLaughlin & S. McEwen (Eds.), Proceedings of 1994 19th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston, 130-142.
12. Brainerd, C. J., & Kingman, J. (1985). On the independence of short-term memory and working memory in cognitive development. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 210-247.
13. Brown, R. (1973). A first Language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
14. Ceci, S. J., & Howe, M. J. A. (1978). Semantic knowledge as a determinant of developmental differences in recall. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 26, 230-245.
15. Chi, S. (1978). Knowledge structures and memory development. In R. Siegler (Ed.), Chitdren's thinking: What develops? (pp. 73-96). HiIlsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Chien, Y-C., & Lust, B. (1985). The concept of topic and subject in first Language acquisition of Mandarin Chinese. Child Development, 56, 1359-1375.
17. Chomsky, N. (1964). Experimental Approaches. In J. P. B. Alien & P. van Buren (Eds.), Chomsky: Selected readings (Rev. ed. 1971; 129-134). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
19. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of Language: Its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.
20. Chomsky, N. (1987). Language in a psychological setting. Sophia linguistica. Tokyo, Japan: Sophia University.
21. Chomsky, N. (1988). Language and problems of knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Clahsen, H. (1982). Spracher werb in der kindheit. Tuebingan: Narr.
23. Clark, R. (1983). Theory and method in child Language research: Are we assuming too much? In S. Kuczaj (Ed.), Language development: Vol. I. syntax and semantics. (pp. 1-36). Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum.
24. Cohen Sherman, J. (1983). The acquisition of control in complement sentences: The role of structural and lexical factors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Comell University, Ithaca, NY.
25. Cohen Sherman, J., & Lust, B. (1986). Syntactic and lexical constraints on the acquisition of control in complement sentences. In B. Lust (Ed.), Studies in the acquisition of anaphora: Vol. 1. Defining the constraints (pp. 279-310). Dordrecht: Reidel Press.
26. Cohen Sherman, J., & Lust, B. (1993) Children are in control. Cognition, 46, 1-51.
27. Cooper, W. E. (1977). The development of speech timing. In S. J. Segalowitz & F. A. Gruber (Eds.), Language development and neurological theory (pp. 357-373). New York: Academic Press.
28. Crain, S. (1991). Language acquisition in the absence of experience. In Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14. (Reprinted in Language Acquisition, P. Bloom, Ed., 1994, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
29. Crain, S., & McKee, C. (1986). Acquisition of structural restrictions on anaphora. In S. Bennan, I.-W. Choe, & I. McDonough (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual North Eastern Linguistic Society, 94-110.
30. Crain, S., & Thomton, R. (1991). Recharting the course of Language acquisition: Studies in elicited production. In N. Krasnegor, Duane Rumbaugh, R. Schiefelbusch, & Michael Studdert-Kennedy (Eds.), Biological and behavioral determinants of Language development HiIlsdale, NI: Erlbaum.
31. Demuth, K (1990). Subject, topic and Sesotho passive. Journal of Child Language, 17, 67-84.
32. Demuth, K (1994). On the underspecification of functional categories in early grammars. In B. Lust. M. Suiier. & J. Whitman (Eds.), Syntactic theory and first Language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives. In B. Lust (Ed.). Vol. I, Heads, projections and learnability, pp. 119-134. Hillsdale. NI: Erlbaum.
33. Deprez, V., & Pierce, A. (1993). Negation and functional projections in early grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 25-68.
34. Donaldson, M. (1978). Children: A minds. London, England: Fontana.
35. Eisele, J. (1988). Meaning and fonn in children: A judgments about Language. Unpublished master's thesis, Comell University, Ithaca, NY.
36. Eisele, I., & Lust, B. (1996). Children's knowledge about pronouns: A developmental study using a ''Truth Value Judgment Task." Child Development, 67, 3086-3100.
37. Ferreiro, E., Othenin-Girard, C., Chipman, H., & Sinclair H. (1976). How do children handle relative clauses? Archives de psychologie, SLlV, 229-233.
38. Flynn, S. & Martohardjono G. (1994). Mapping from the initial state to the final state: The separation of universal principles and Language-specific properties. In B. Lust, M. Suiier, & I. Whitman (Vol. Eds.), Syntactic theory and first Language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives: Vol. I. Heads, projections, and learnability (pp. 319-335). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Foley, C. (1996). Knowledge of the syntax of operators in the initial state: The acquisition of relative clauses in French and English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Comell University, Ithaca, NY.
40. Foley, C., Nuiiez del Prado, Z., Barbier, I., & Lust, B. (1992). LF representation of pronouns in VP ellipsis: An argument for UG in the initial state. Paper presented at the Boston University Conference in Language Development, Boston, MA.
41. Foley C., Nufiez del Prado Z., Barbier I. & Lust B. (1997). Operator variable binding in the initial state: An argument from VP ellipsis. In S. Somashekar, K Yamakoshi. M. Blume. & C. Foley (Eds.). Cornett Working Papers in Linguistics, 15, 1-19.
42. Fraser, C., Bellugi, U., & Brown R. (1963). Control of grammar in imitation, comprehension and production. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 121-135.
43. Gleitman L., Gleitman, H., & Shipley, E. (1972). The emergence of the child as grammarian Cognition, 1, 137-164.
44. Golinkoff R. H., Hirsh-Pasek K, Cauley K, & Gordon, L. (1987). The eyes have it: lexical and syntactic comprehension in a new paradigm. Journal of Child Language, 14, 23-45.
45. Goodluck, H., & Solan L. (Eds.). (1978). Papers in the structure and development of child Language, Occasional papers in Linguistics. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts.
46. Grimshaw, J., & Rosen, S. (1990). Knowledge and obedience. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 187-222.
47. Grodzinsky, Y., & Reinhart, T. (1993). The innateness of binding and coreference. Linguistic Inquiry, 24(1), 69-102.
48. Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. (1991). Language Comprehension: A new look at some old themes. In N. Krasnegor, D. Rumbaugh, R. Schiefelbusch, & M. StuddertKennedy, (Eds.), Biological and behavioral determinants of Language development (pp. 301-320). Hillsdale: NJ: Erlbaum.
49. Hirsh-Pasek, K., Nelson, D., Jusczyk, P., Cassidy, K., Druss, B., & Kennedy, L. (1987). Clauses are perceptual units for young infants. Cognition, 26, 269-286.
50. Joos, M. (1966). Description of Language design. Readings in linguistics (Vol. I, pp. 349-356). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51. Jusczyk, P., Hirsch-Pasek, K., Nelson, D., Kennedy, L., Woodward, A., & Piwoz, J. (1992). Perception of acoustic correlates of major phrasal units by young infants. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 252-293.
52. Kapur, S, Lust, B., Harbert, W., & Martohardjono, G. (1992). Universal grammar and learnability theory: The case of binding domains and the subset principle. In Reuland, E., & Abraham, W. (Eds.). Knowledge and Language: Vol. 3. Issues in representation and acquisition (pp. 185-216): Dordrecht: K1uwer.
53. Kapur, S., Lust B., Harbert, W., & Martohardjono, G. (in prep). On relating UG and learnability theory: Intensional and extensional principles in the representation and acquisition of binding domains. Unpublished manuscript.
54. Levelt, W. J. M. (1974). Formal grammars in linguistics and psycholinguistics: Vol. 3. Psycholinguistic applications. The Hague: Mouton.
55. Lasnik, H. (1989). Essays on anaphora. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
56. Lust, B. (1977). Conjunction reduction in child Language. Journal of Child Language, 42(2).257-297.
57. Lust, B. (1981). On coordinating studies of coordination: Problems of method and theory in first Language acquisition. A reply to Ardery. Journal of Child Language, 8(2) 459-470.
58. Lust, B. (1986). Studies in the acquisition of anaphora. Dordrecht: Foris.
59. Lust, B. (1994). Functional projection of CP and phrase structure parameterization: An argument for the strong continuity hypothesis. In B. Lust, J. Whitman, M. Sufler (Eds.), Cross linguistic perspectives: Vol. I. Heads, projections, and learnability (pp. 85-118). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
60. Lust, B. (1999). Universal grammar: The strong continuity hypothesis in first Language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of Child Language Acquisition San Diego: Academic Press.
61. Lust, B. (in prep). Universal Grammar and the Initial State: Cross-linguistic studies of directionality. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books/MIT Press.
62. Lust, B., Chien, Y.-C., Chiang, Chi-Pang, & Eisele, J. (1996). Chinese pronominals in Universal Grammar: A study of linear precedence and command in Chinese and English children's first Language acquisition. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 5, 1-47.
63. Lust, B., Chien, Y.-C., & F1ynn. S. (1987). What children know. In B. Lust (Ed.), Studies in the acquisition of anaphora: Vol. 2. Applying the Constraints (pp. 271-356). Dordrecht: Reidel Press.
64. Lust, B., & Eisele J. (1991). On the acquisition of syntax in Tamil: A comment on Garman. Journal of Child Language, 18, 215-226.
65. Lust, B., Flynn, S., & Foley, C. (1996). What children know about what they say: Elicited imitation as a research method. In D. McDaniel, C. McKee, & H. Cairns, (Eds.), Methods for Assessing Children s Syntax (pp. 55-76). Cambridge, MA: MlT Press.
66. Lust, B., Loveland, K., & Kornet, R. (1980). The development of anaphom in first Language: Syntactic and pmgmatic constraints. Unguistic Analysis, 6, 217-249.
67. Lust, B., Eisele, I., & Mazuka, R. (1992). The binding theory module: Evidence from first Language acquisition for Principle C. Language, 68(2), 333-358.
68. Lust, B., & Mervis, C. (1980). Coordination in the natural speech of young children. Journal of Child Language, 7(2), 279-304.
69. Lust, B., Herman, G., & Kornfilt, J.(Eds.). (1994a). Syntactic theory and first Language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 2. Binding, dependencies, and learnability HilIsdale, NJ: LEA.
70. Lust, B., Sufier, M., and Whitman, J.(Eds.). (1994b). Syntactic theory and first Language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 1. Heads, projections, and learnability Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
71. Lust, B., & Wakayama, T. (1981). Word order in Japanese first Language acquisition. In P. Dale & D. Ingram (Eds.), Child Language: An international perspective (pp. 73-90). Baltimore: University Park Press.
72. McDaniel, D., McKee, C., & Cairns, H.(Eds.). (1996). Methods for assessing childrens syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
73. Mandel, D. R., Nelson, D., & Jusczyk, P. (1995). Infants remember the order of words in a spoken sentence. Unpublished manuscript. University of Buffalo at Buffalo.
74. Maratsos, M. (1983). Some current issues in the study of the acquisition of grammar. In P. Mussen (Bd.), Handbook of Child Psychology, 3, 707-786.
75. Mazuka, R., & Lust, B. (1990). On parameter-setting and parsing: Predictions for acquisition. In L. Frazier & J. de ViIlers (Eds.), Language processing and acquisition (pp. 163-206). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
76. Naigles, L., & Gelman, S. (1995). Overextensions in comprehension and production revisited: Preferential-looking in a study oC"dog, " "cat, " and "cow." Journal of Child Language, 22. 19-46.
77. Neufeld, Arthur H. (1986). Reproducing Results. Science, 3(11).
78. Nufiez del Prado, Z., Foley, C., & Lust, B. (1993). The significance of CP to the pro-drop parameter: An experimental study of Spanish-English comparison. In E. Cl ark (Bd.), The Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Child Language Research Forum, 146-157.
79. Nufiez del Prado, Z., Foley, C., Proman, R., & Lust, B. (1994). Subordinate CP and prodrop: Evidence for degree-n leamability from an experimental study of Spanish and English acquisition. Proceedings of NELS 24 (Vol. 2), 443-460.
80. Piaget, I., Inhelder, B. (1973). Memory and intelligence. New York: Basic Books.
81. Pratt, C., Tunmer, W. E., & Bowey, J. A. (1984). Children's capacity to correct grammatical violations in sentences. Journal of Child Language, 11, 129-141.
82. Santelmann, L. (1995). The acquisition of verb second grammar in child Swedish: Continuity of universal grammar in wh-questions topicalization and verb raising. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
83. Santelmann, L., Berk, S., Austin, J., Somashekar, S., & Lust, B. (1996). Dissociating movement and inflection: A continuity account of subject-aux inversion. Paper presented at the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, CA.
84. Schiltze, C. T. (1996). The Empirical Base of Linguistics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
85. Sherman, Janet Cohen-See Cohen Sherman, Janet Sinclair, H., Berthoud-Papandropoulou, J., Bronckart, J. P., Chipman, H., Ferreiro, E., & Rappe DuCher, E. (1976). Recherches en psycholinguistique genetique. Archives de psychologie. 44, 157-175.
86. SincIair, H., Jarvella, R. J. & Levelt J. M. (Eds.). (1978). The child's conception of Language Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
87. Somashekar, S., Lust B., Gair, J., Bhatia T., Sharma V., & Khare I. (1995). Pronominals in Hindi "jab" clauses: Experimental test of children's comprehension. Paper presented at SALA. University of Texas, Austin, TX.
88. Spelke, L. (1979). Processing bimodally specified events in infancy. Developmental Psychology 15, 626-636.
89. Squire, L. R. (1986). Mechanisms of memory. Science, 232, 1612-1619.
90. Stromswald, K. (1990). Learnability and the acquisition of auxiliaries. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Cambridge, MA.
91. VaJian, V. (1991). Syntactic subjects in the early speech of American and Italian children. Cognition. 40. 21-81.
92. Valian V. (1992). Categories of first syntax. In J. Meisel (Ed.), The acquisition of verb placement: Functional categories and V2 phenomena in Language development. (pp. 401-422). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
93. Weissenborn J. (1994). Constraining the child's grammar: Local well-formedness in the development of verb movement in German and French. In B. Lust, M. Suiler.& J. Whitman (Eds.), Syntactic theory and first Language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives: Vol. I. Heads, projections and leamability. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
94. Whitman, J., Lee, K-O., & Lust, B. (1991). Continuity of the principles of Universal Grammar in first Language acquisition: The issue of functional categories. Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistics Society Annual Meeting. 21. Amherst: University of Massachusetts. 383-397.
95. Zurif, K. (1980). Language mechanisms: A neuropsychological perspective. American Scientist 68. 305-311.