Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-8p85h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-25T01:21:29.635Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Structure Dependence in Grammar Formation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Stephen Crain  and
Mineharu Nakayama
Stephen Crain
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut
Mineharu Nakayama
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A fundamental goal of linguistic theory is to account for language acquisition. At the heart of the problem is the poverty of the stimulus, which underdetermines the hypotheses that children formulate. Generative grammar proposes that the form for expressing rules is innately constrained, and one putative constraint is structure-dependence. The present study subjected this proposal to an empirical test. In the first experiment, yes/no questions—amenable in principle to both structure-dependent and structure-independent analyses—were elicited from thirty 3- to 5-year-old children. A second experiment explored the nature of children's errors in Experiment 1. A third experiment contrasted a structurally-based account of the acquisition of interrogatives with one based on semantic generalization. The results of these experiments support Chomsky's contention that children unerringly hypothesize structure-dependent rules. Moreover, it was found that the rules which children invoke are formally insensitive to the semantic properties of noun phrases—a finding that supports the developmental autonomy of syntax.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 63 , Issue 3 , September 1987 , pp. 522 - 543
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by the Linguistic Society of America

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bellugi, Ursula. 1971. Simplification in children's language. Language acquisition: Models and methods, ed. by Huxley, Renira and Ingram, Elisabeth, 95–119. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bowerman, Melissa. 1973. Early syntactic development. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Bowerman, Melissa. 1974. Learning the structure of causative verbs: A study in the relationship of cognitive, semantic and syntactic development. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, Stanford University, 8.142–178.Google Scholar
Braine, Martin. 1976. Children's first word combinations. (Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 164:1.) Chicago.Google Scholar
Brown, Roger. 1973. A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Carol. 1969. The acquisition of syntax in children from 5 to 10. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1968. Language and mind. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1971. Problems of knowledge and freedom. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1975. Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Cooper, William E., and Paccia-Cooper, Jeanne. 1980. Syntax and speech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crain, Stephen. 1982. Temporal terms: Mastery by age five. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, Stanford University, 21.33–8.Google Scholar
Crain, Stephen, and McKee, Cecile. 1985. Acquisition of structural restrictions on anaphora. NELS 16.94–110.Google Scholar
Crain, Stephen, and Long, Yinxia. 1986. Syntactic theory as a theory of language acquisition. University of Connecticut, ms.Google Scholar
Gleitman, Lila R. 1981. Maturational determinates of language growth. Cognition 10.105–13.Google ScholarPubMed
Goodluck, Helen. 1981. Children's grammar of complement-subject interpretation. Language acquisition and linguistic theory, ed. by Tavakolian, Susan L., 139–66. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hamburger, Henry. 1980. A deletion ahead of its time. Cognition 8.389–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamburger, Henry, and Crain, Stephen. 1982. Relative acquisition. Language development 1: Syntax and semantics, ed. by II, Stan Kuczaj, 245–74. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hamburger, Henry. 1984. Acquisition of cognitive compiling. Cognition 17.85–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hyams, Nina. 1986. Language acquisition and the theory of parameters. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuczaj, Stan II, and Maratsos, Michael. 1983. Initial verbs of yes-no questions: A different kind of general grammatical category. Developmental Psychology 19.440–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasnik, Howard, and Crain, Stephen. 1985. On the acquisition of pronominal reference. Lingua 65.135–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehiste, Ilse. 1973. Phonetic disambiguation of syntactic ambiguity. Glossa 7.107–22.Google Scholar
Maratsos, Michael. 1974. How preschool children understand missing complement subjects. Child Development 45.700–706.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayer, Judith Winzemer, Erreich, Anne; and Valían, Virginia. 1978. Transformations, basic operations and language acquisition. Cognition 6.1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNeill, David. 1966. Developmental psycholinguistics. Genesis of language: A psycholinguistic approach, ed. by Smith, Frank and Miller, George A., 15–84. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nakayama, Mineharu. 1986. Performance factors in Subject-Aux Inversion by children. Journal of Child Language, to appear.Google Scholar
Read, Charles, and Schreiber, Peter. 1982. Why short subjects are harder to find than long ones. Language acquisition: The state of the art, ed. by Wanner, Eric and Gleitman, Lila R., 78–101. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1982. Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlesinger, I. M. 1971. Production of utterances and language acquisition. The ontogenesis of grammar, ed. by Slobin, Dan I., 61–101. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Shankweiler, Donald, and Crain, Stephen. 1986. Language mechanisms and reading disorder. Cognition 24.139–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Solan, Lawrence. 1983. Pronominal reference: Child language and theory of grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stemmer, Nathan. 1981. A note on empiricism and structure-dependence. Journal of Child Language 8.649–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tager-Flusberg, Helen. 1982. The development of relative clauses in child speech. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, Stanford University, 21.104–11.Google Scholar
Tavakolian, Susan. 1978. Children's comprehension of pronominal subjects and missing subjects in complicated sentences. Papers in the structure and development of child language (UMass occasional papers in linguistics 4), ed. by Goodluck, Helen & Solan, Lawrence, 145–52. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Wales, Roger, and Toner, Hugh. 1979. Intonation and ambiguity. Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett, ed. by Cooper, William E. and Walker, Edward C. T., 135–58. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Wexler, Kenneth. 1979. Presentation at the Workshop on Learnability, Laguna Beach, CA, June 4–8.Google Scholar