Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-21T04:40:14.962Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

L’acquisition des pronoms clitiques français par un enfant bilingue français-néerlandais

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Aafke Hulk
Aafke Hulk*
Affiliation:
Université d’Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, the acquisition of French subject and object pronouns by Anouk, a French-Dutch bilingual girl is studied and compared with the acquisition by monolingual French children. At first sight there are no major differences between Anouk and the children discussed in the literature. There are however some indications that the status of the pronouns in Anouk’s data is not the same as that in the monolingual data. In Anouk’s data, there are no utterances where a quantified nominal subject is doubled by a subject clitic. Consequently, it is impossible to argue that her subject pronouns have the status of agreement markers which they are claimed to have in the case of monolingual children. Moreover, Anouk acquires both subject and object pronouns at roughly the same moment—to what is found for the monolinguals. Finally, Anouk makes position errors with object pronouns which are similar to those found in French L2 acquisition data. It is proposed that this may be due to the (indirect) influence of Dutch, her other language.

Résumé

Résumé

Dans cet article, l’acquisition des pronoms sujets et objets chez Anouk, une petite fille bilingue français-néerlandais est étudiée et comparée à celle par des enfants français monolingues. À première vue, il n’y a pas de grandes différences entre Anouk et les enfants discutés dans la littérature, bien que le développement chez Anouk soit un peu plus lent. Il y a cependant des indications que le statut des pronoms n’est pas le même que celui dans les données monolingues. D’une part, les données d’Anouk ne contiennent pas d’énoncés comportant un sujet nominal quantifié doublé par un sujet clitique, ce qui aurait pu indiquer que le sujet clitique a le statut de «marqueur d’accord». D’autre part, il n’y a pas de décalage entre l’acquisition des pronoms sujets et des pronoms objets, contrairement à ce qui a été trouvé chez des enfants monolingues. En outre, Anouk fait des erreurs de position avec les pronoms objets qui rappellent celles faites par les apprenants du français L2. Il est proposé que ces erreurs s’expliquent par l’influence (indirecte) du néerlandais, sa deuxième langue.

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 45 , Issue 1-2 , June 2000 , pp. 97 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Références

Auger, Julie. 1993. More evidence for verbal agreement-marking in colloquial French. In Linguistics perspectives on Romance languages, sous la dir. Ashby, de William J., Mithun, Marianne, Perissinotto, Giorgio et Raposo, Eduardo, 177–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bautier-Castaing, Elisabeth. 1977. Acquisition comparée de la syntaxe du français par des enfants francophones et non-francophones. Études de linguistique appliquée 27:19–41.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1984. Parametric syntax: Case studies in Semitic and Romance languages. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bottari, Piero. 1992. Proto-syntactic device. Geneva Generative Papers 0(l/2):83–102.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna et Starke, Michal. 1995. Deficient pronouns: A view from Germanic. Geneva Generative Papers 3(l):22–50.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. 1986. The acquisition of Romance with special reference to French. In The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition 7, sous la dir. Slobin, de Dan I., 687–782. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Connors, Kathleen et Nuckle, Lucie. 1986. The morphosyntax of French personal pronouns and the acquisition/learning dichotomy. In Studies in Romance linguistics, sous la dir. Jaeggli, de Osvaldo et Silva-Corvalan, Carmen, 225–242. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costermans, Katrien. 1996. L’acquisition des clitiques, sujets et objets chez Philippe. Mémoire de maîtrise, Université d’Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Döpke, Susanne. 1997. Is simultaneous acquisition of two languages in early childhood equal to acquiring each of the two languages individually? In Proceedings of the 28th annual child research forum, sous la dir. Clark, de Eve, 95–112. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Ferdinand, Astrid. 1996. The development of functional categories. Thèse de doctorat, Université de Leyden.Google Scholar
Gawlitzek-Maiwald, Ira et Tracy, Rosemarie. 1996. Bilingual bootstrapping. Linguistics 34:901–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grondin, Nathalie et White, Lydia. 1996. Functional categories in child L2 acquisition of French. Language Acquisition 5:1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette K. et Tarane, Elaine E.. 1983. “Language transfer” and the acquisition of pronominal anaphora. In Language transfer in language learning, sous la dir. Gass, de Susan et Selinker, Larry, 281–296. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Hamann, Cornelia, Rizzi, Luigi et Frauenfelder, Uli. 1995. On the acquisition of the pronominal system in French. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 24:83–101.Google Scholar
Haverkort, Marco et Weissenborn, Jürgen. 1991. Clitic and affix interactions in early Romance. Ms., Max Planck Instituut, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Heinen, Kerstin Sabine et Kadow, Helga. 1990. The acquisition of French by monolingual children: A review of the literature. In Two first languages — early grammatical development in bilingual children, sous la dir. Meisel, de Jürgen M., 47–71. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Huang, C-T. James. 1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15:531–574.Google Scholar
Hulk, Aafke. 1986. Subject clitics and the pro-drop parameter. In Formal parameters of Generative Grammar II, sous la dir. Coopmans, de Peter, Bordelois, Ivonne et Dotson-Smith, Bill, 107–121. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Hulk, Aafke. 1996. The syntax of Wh-questions in child French. Amsterdam Series in Child Language Development 5:129–172.Google Scholar
Hulk, Aafke et van der Linden, Elisabeth. 1996. Language differentation in a French-Dutch bilingual child. Toegepaste Taalkunde in Artikelen 55,2. A selection of papers, Eurosla VI:89–103.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, Celia, Müller, Natascha, Kang, O. Kyung, Riemer, Beate et Rigaut, Catherine. 1996. On the acquisition of the pronominal system in French and German. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, sous la dir. Strinfellow, de Andy, Cahana-Amifay, Dalia, Hugues, Elizabeth et Zukowski, Andrea, 374–385. Sommerville: Cascadillo Press.Google Scholar
Kaiser, Georg A. 1994. More about INFL-ection: The acquisition of personal pronouns in French. In Bilingual first language acquisition: French and German grammatical development, sous la dir. Meisel, de Jürgen M., 131–159. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. 1975. French syntax: The transformational cycle. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Labelle, Marie et Valois, Daniel. 1996. The status of post-verbal subjects in French child language. Probus 3:53–80.Google Scholar
Liceras, Juana M. 1985. The value of clitics in non-native Spanish. Second Language Research 1:151–168.Google Scholar
Linden, Elisabeth van der. 1985. Toepassing van een regelsysteem: de grammatika van het Frans. Thèse de doctorat, Université d’Amsterdam.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian et Snow, Catherine. 1990. The child language data exchange system: An update. Journal of Child Language 17:457–472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meisel, Jürgen M., dir. 1990. Two first languages — early grammatical development in bilingual children. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen M., dir. 1992. The acquisition of verb placement: Functional categories and V2 phenomena in language acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen M., dir. 1994. Bilingual first language acquisition: French and German grammatical development. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen M. et Müller, Natascha. 1992. Finiteness and verb placement in early child grammars: Evidence from simultaneous acquisition of French and German bilinguals. In The acquisition of verb placement. Functional categories and V2 phenomena in language acquisition, sous la dir Meisel, de Jürgen M., 109–138. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Melle, Cathelijne van. 1996. Le sujet nul en langue enfantine. Mémoire de maîtrise, Université d’Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Miller, Philippe. 1992. Clitics and constituents in phrase structure grammar. New-York: Garland.Google Scholar
Müller, Natascha, Crysmann, Berthold et Kaiser, Georg A.. 1996. Interactions between the acquisition of French object drop and the development of the C-system. Language Acquisition 5:35–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, Amy. 1989. On the emergence of syntax: acrosslinguistic study. Thèse de doctorat. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1992. Early null subjects and root null subjects. Geneva Generative Papers 0(1/2): 102–114.Google Scholar
Roberge, Yves. 1986. The syntactic recoverability of null arguments. Thèse de doctorat, The University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Roeper, Tom et Weissenborn, Jürgen. 1990. How to make parameters work: Comments on Valian. In Language processing and language acquisition, sous la dir. Frazier, de Lyn et De Villiers, Jill, 147–162. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Bonnie D. 1996. Some Specs on Specs in L2 acquisition. Ms., University of Durham.Google Scholar
Sportiche, Dominique. 1996. Clitic constructions. In Phrase structure and the lexicon, sous la dir. Rooryck, de Johan et Zaring, Laurie, 213–276. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Weissenborn, Jürgen. 1992. Null subjects in early grammars: Implications for parameter-setting theories. In Theoretical issues in language acquisition: Continuity and change in development, sous la dir. Weissenborn, de Jürgen, Goodluck, Helen et Roeper, Tom, 269–300. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Weissenborn, Jürgen, Kail, Michèle et Friederici, Angela. 1990. Language-particular or language-independent factors in acquisition? Children’s comprehension of object pronouns in Dutch, French and German. First Language 2:141–166.Google Scholar
Weissenborn, Jürgen, Goodluck, Helen et Roeper, Tom, dir. 1992. Theoretical issues in language acquisition: Continuity and change in development. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Zobl, Helmut. 1980. The formal and developmental selectivity of LI influence on L2 acquisition. Language Learning 30:43–57.Google Scholar
Zribi-Hertz, Anne. 1994. The syntax of nominative clitics in standard and advanced French. In Paths towards Universal Grammar, sous la dir. Cinque, de Guglielmo, Koster, Jan, Pollock, Jean-Yves, Rizzi, Luigi et Zanuttini, Raffaella, 453–473. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar