Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Tense over time: testing the Agreement/Tense Omission Model as an account of the pattern of tense-marking provision in early child English*

  • JULIAN M. PINE (a1), GINA CONTI-RAMSDEN (a2), KATE L. JOSEPH (a2), ELENA V. M. LIEVEN (a3) and LUDOVICA SERRATRICE (a2)...

Abstract

The Agreement/Tense Omission Model (ATOM) predicts that English-speaking children will show similar patterns of provision across different tense-marking morphemes (Rice, Wexler & Hershberger, 1998). The aim of the present study was to test this prediction by examining provision rates for third person singular present tense and first and third person singular forms of copula BE and auxiliary BE in longitudinal data from eleven English-speaking children between the ages of 1 ; 10 and 3 ; 0. The results show, first, that there were systematic differences in the provision rates of the different morphemes; second, that there were systematic differences in the rate at which all of the three morphemes were provided with pronominal and lexical subjects; and, third, that there were systematic differences in the rate at which copula BE and auxiliary BE were provided with the third person singular pronominal subjects It and He and the first person singular subject pronoun I. These results replicate those of Wilson (2003), while controlling for some possible objections to Wilson's analysis. They thus provide further evidence against the generativist view that children's rates of provision of different tense-marking morphemes are determined by a single underlying factor, and are consistent with the constructivist view that children's rates of provision reflect the gradual accumulation of knowledge about tense marking, with much of children's early knowledge being embedded in lexically specific constructions.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: Julian M. Pine, School of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Bedford Street South, Liverpool L69 7ZA, UK. Tel: +44 (0)151 794 1113. e-mail: Julian.Pine@Liverpool.ac.uk

References

Hide All
Bedore, L. M. & Leonard, L. (2001). Grammatical morphology deficits in Spanish-speaking children with Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 44, 905–24.
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: the early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cazden, C. (1968). The acquisition of noun and verb inflections. Child Development 39, 433–48.
Cleave, P. L. & Rice, M. L. (1997). An examination of the morpheme BE in children with Specific Language Impairment: the role of contractibility and grammatical form class. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 40, 480–92.
Hadley, P. A. & Rice, M. L. (1996). Emergent use of BE and DO: evidence from children with Specific Language Impairment. Language Acquisition 5, 209–43.
Johnston, J. & Schery, T. (1976). The use of grammatical morphemes by children with communicative disorders. In Morehead, D. & Morehead, A. (eds) Normal and deficient child language, 239–58. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Leonard, L. B. (1998). Children with Specific Language Impairment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
MacWhinney, B.. (2000). The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk, 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Peters, A. M. (1997). Language typology, prosody and the acquisition of grammatical morphemes. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.) The cross-linguistic study of language acquisition, Volume 5: Expanding the contexts, 135–97. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pine, J. M., Lieven, E. V. M. & Rowland, C. F. (1998). Comparing different models of the development of the English verb category. Linguistics 36, 807–30.
Pine, J. M., Rowland, C. F., Lieven, E. V. M. & Theakston, A. L. (2005). Testing the Agreement/Tense Omission Model: why the data on children's use of non-nominative 3psg subjects count against the ATOM. Journal of Child Language 32, 269–89.
Rice, M. L., Wexler, K. & Cleave, P. L. (1995). Specific Language Impairment as a Period of Extended Optional Infinitive. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 38, 850–63.
Rice, M. L., Wexler, K. & Hershberger, S. (1998). Tense over time: the longitudinal course of tense acquisition in children with Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 41, 1412–31.
Rice, M. L., Wexler, K., Marquis, J. & Hershberger, S. (2000). Acquisition of irregular past tense by children with Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 43, 1126–45.
Schütze, C. T. & Wexler, K. (1996). Subject case licensing and English root infinitives. In Stringfellow, A., Cahma-Amitay, D., Hughes, E. & Zukowski, A. (eds) Proceedings of the 20th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 670–81. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Theakston, A. L., Lieven, E. V. M., Pine, J. M. & Rowland, C. (2001). The role of performance limitations in the acquisition of verb-argument structure. Journal of Child Language 28, 127–52.
Tomasello, M. (2000 a). Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition 74, 209–53.
Tomasello, M. (2000 b). The item-based nature of children's early syntactic development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4, 156–63.
Wexler, K. (1994). Optional infinitives, head movement and the economy of derivation in child grammar. In Hornstein, N. & Lightfoot, D. (eds) Verb movement, 305–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wexler, K. (1998). Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage. Lingua 106, 2379.
Wilson, S. (2003). Lexically specific constructions in the acquisition of inflection in English. Journal of Child Language 30, 75115.

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed