Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T00:52:37.369Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learning to liaise and elide comme il faut: evidence from bilingual children*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2010

ELENA NICOLADIS  and
JOHANNE PARADIS
ELENA NICOLADIS*
Affiliation:
University of Alberta
JOHANNE PARADIS
Affiliation:
University of Alberta
*
[*]Address for correspondence: Elena Nicoladis, University of Alberta, Department of Psychology, P-217 Biological Sciences Building, Edmonton AB, T6G 2E9, Canada. tel: +1 (780) 492-0124; e-mail: elenan@ualberta.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Liaison and elision in French are phonological phenomena that apply across word boundaries. French-speaking children make errors in contexts where liaison/elision typically occurs in adult speech. In this study, we asked if acquisition of French liaison/elision can be explained in a constructivist framework. We tested if children's liaison/elision was sensitive to co-occurrence and meaning. We expected children's use of liaison/elision to correlate with their experience with French (estimated by vocabulary). Thirty-one French-speaking children (twenty-five bilingual) between three and five years old produced familiar vowel-initial words, following four words: (1) un, (2) deux, (3) un petit and (4) beaucoup de. The children with smaller French vocabularies produced many vowel-initial words and some consonant-initial chunks. The children with larger French vocabularies produced liaison/elision correctly across several frames while associating a number interpretation with liaised consonants. These results suggest that children use a variety of cues to construct the appropriate use of liaison/elision.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 38 , Issue 4 , September 2011 , pp. 701 - 730
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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

REFERENCES

Ågren, J. (1973). Étude sur quelques liaisons facultatives dans le français de conversation radiophonique: Fréquences et facteurs. Uppsala: University of Uppsala.Google Scholar
Armstrong, N. (2001). Social and stylistic variation in spoken French. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres-Bennett, W. & Carruthers, J. (2001). Problems and perspectives: Studies in the Modern French Language. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
Booij, G. & De Jong, D. (1987). The domain of liaison: Theories and data. Linguistics 25, 1005–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10, 425–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2001a). Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2001b). Frequency effects on French liaison. In Bybee, J. & Hopper, P. (eds), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, 337–59. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2002). Phonological evidence for exemplar storage of multiword sequences. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24, 215–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chevrot, J.-P., Chabanal, D. & Dugua, C. (2007). Pour un modèle de l'acquisition des liaisons basé sur l'usage: Trois études de cas. French Language Studies 17, 103–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chevrot, J.-P., Dugua, C. & Fayol, M. (2005). Liaison et formation des mots en français: Un scénario développemental. Langages 158, 38–52.Google Scholar
Chevrot, J.-P., Dugua, C. & Fayol, M. (2009). Liaison acquisition, word segmentation and construction in French: A usage based account. Journal of Child Language 36, 557–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dugua, C. (2002). Liaison et segmentation du lexique en français: Vers un scénario développemental. Unpublished Mémoire de D. E. A., Université Grenoble 3.Google Scholar
Dugua, C. (2005). De la liaison à la formation du lexique chez les jeunes enfants francophones. Le Langage et L'Homme 40, 163–82.Google Scholar
Dunn, L. M. & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, 3rd edn.Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Dunn, L. M., Thériault-Whalen, C. M. & Dunn, L. M. (1993). Échelle de vocabulaire en image Peabody. Toronto: Psycan.Google Scholar
Durand, J. & Lyche, C. (2008). French liaison in light of corpus data. French Language Studies 18, 33–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Encrevé, P. (1988). La liaison avec et sans enchaînement. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Fortin, J. & Crago, M. B. (1999). French language acquisition in North America. In Taylor, O. L. & Leonard, L. B. (eds), Language acquisition across North America: Cross-cultural and cross-linguistic perspectives, 209–43. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Genesee, F., Nicoladis, E. & Paradis, J. (1995). Language differentiation in early bilingual development. Journal of Child Language 22, 611–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hulk, A. & Müller, N. (2000). Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3, 227–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klausenburger, J. (1984). French liaison and linguistic theory. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Morel, E. (1994). Le traitement de la liaison chez l'enfant: Études experimentales. Travaux neuchâtelois de linguistique 21, 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morin, Y.-C. & Kaye, J. D. (1982). The syntactic bases for French liaison. Journal of Linguistics 18, 291–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nardy, A. (2003). Production et jugement d'acceptabilité entre 2 et 6 ans: Aspects psycholinguistiques et sociolinguistiques de l'acquisition des liaisons. Unpublished master's thesis, Université Grenoble 3.Google Scholar
Newton, C. & Wells, B. (2002). Between-word junctures in early multi-word speech. Journal of Child Language 29, 275–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicoladis, E. (2003). Cross-linguistic transfer in deverbal compounds of preschool bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 6, 17–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. (2001). Do bilingual two-year-olds have separate phonological systems? International Journal of Bilingualism 5, 19–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. & Genesee, F. (1996). Syntactic acquisition in bilingual children: Autonomous or interdependent? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. & Navarro, S. (2003). Subject realization and crosslinguistic interference in the bilingual acquisition of Spanish and English. Journal of Child Language 30, 371–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, J., Nicoladis, E. & Genesee, F. (2000). Early emergence of structural constraints on code-mixing: Evidence from French–English bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3, 245–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, J. & Pearson, B. (2004). Bilingual lexical development. In Goldstein, B. (ed.), Bilingual language development and disorders in Spanish–English speakers, 77–104. Baltimore, MA: Brookes.Google Scholar
Pearson, B. Z., Fernández, S., Lewedag, V. & Oller, D. K. (1997). Input factors in lexical learning of bilingual infants (ages 10 to 30 months). Applied Psycholinguistics 18, 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, R. (2001). Liaison, nasal vowels and productivity. French Language Studies 11, 241–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saffran, J. (2001). The use of predictive dependencies in language learning. Journal of Memory and Language 44, 493–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thordardottir, E., Rothenberg, A., Rivard, M. E. & Naves, R. (2006). Bilingual assessment: Can overall proficiency be estimated from separate measurement of two languages? Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders 4, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tranel, B. (1996). French liaison and elision revisited: A unified account within Optimality Theory. In Parodi, C., Quicoli, C., Saltarelli, M. & Zubizarreta, M. L. (eds), Aspects of Romance linguistics: Selected papers on Romance languages XXIV March 10–13, 1994, 435–55. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Vihman, M. (2002). Getting started without a system: From phonetics to phonology in bilingual development. International Journal of Bilingualism 6, 239–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wauquier-Gravelines, S. (2005). Statut des représentations phonologiques en acquisition, traitement de la parole continue et dysphasie développementale. Unpublished Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris.Google Scholar