Structure building model of child language: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:22, 18 January 2018

Latest revision as of 05:55, 28 March 2018

Line 1:

{{Afd-merge#REDIRECT to|[[Andrew Radford (linguist)|Structure building model of child language|18 January 2018}}]]

{{R from merge}}

{{essaylike|date=October 2017}}

{{Underlinked|date=May 2017}}

In his seminal 1990 book ''Syntactic Theory and the Acquisition of English Syntax'',<ref group="n">{{cite book|author= Radford, Andrew|year=1990|title=Syntactic Theory and the Acquisition of English Syntax|publisher=Blackwell|isbn=0-631-16358-1}}</ref> [[Andrew Radford (linguist)|Andrew Radford]] summarizes the state of a maturation hypothesis for child [[language acquisition]].<ref>Joseph Galasso, "[https://www.academia.edu/32968700/Synopsis_of_the_Structure-building_model_of_Andrew_Radford_1990_And_other_maturational_hypotheses_leading_to_child_development_theories_of_the_time1 Synopsis of the Structure-building model of Andrew Radford (1990): And other maturational hypotheses leading to child development theories of the time]" (MS, California State University Northridge, 2017).</ref> Working within the [[principles and parameters]] framework<ref group="n">See [[Noam Chomsky]], ''Lectures on Government and Binding'' (Dordrecht: Foris, 1981), and ''Some notes on Economy of Derivation and Representation'' (MS, MIT, 1988).</ref> as his point of departure, and drawing from previous work done by [[Hagit Borer]] and Kenneth Wexler<ref group="n">Hagit Borer and Kenneth Wexler, "The maturation of Syntax" (1983); in Thomas Roeper and Edwin Williams (eds), ''Parameter Setting'' (Dordrecht: D.&nbsp;Reidel, 2013), pp.&nbsp;123–172.</ref> on the apparent absence of A-chains in early grammar, Radford proposed a structure-building model which focused (inter alia) on the lack of syntactic movement-operations in the early multi-word stage of child English syntax, ''viz.'' the lack of inflectional morphology. This led to an analysis which saw children as gradually building up increasingly complex structure, with ''Lexical/thematic stage-1'' (lexical categories like [[noun]] and [[verb]]) preceding ''Functional/syntactic stage-2'' (functional categories like [[determiner (linguistics)|determiner]] and [[complementiser]]).

Since theory-internal considerations define functional categories as the only type of phrasal projections which could serve as potential landing-sites for [[Move α|move]]-based elements displaced from lower down within the base-generated syntactic structure &ndash; e.g., ''A-movement'' such as [[English passive voice|passives]] ("The apple was eaten by [John (ate the apple)]"), or [[Raising (linguistics)|raising]] ("Some work does seem to remain"; "(There) does seem to remain (some work)") &ndash; as a consequence, any structure-building model which calls for an exclusive lexical stage-1 before a functional stage-2 means that early child speech simply lacks the ability to generate and host elements derived via movement operation. Particularly, the theoretical [[Specifier (linguistics)|specifier]] position of a functional head is seen as projecting for the sole purpose of hosting moved elements. Hence, according to a structure-building model, early child utterances at the early multi-word lexical stage-1 simply lack movement. In addition to the lack of A-movement talked about by Borer and Wexler, Radford considers the absence of a second kind of movement, termed ''f-movement'' since it involves movement of a base-generated item into a higher ''f''(unctional) position — namely, a head or specifier position within a functional category ([[Determiner phrase|DP]], [[Tense phrase|TP]], [[Complementiser phrase|CP]]) (e.g., [[Auxiliary verb|auxiliary]] [[Inversion (linguistics)|inversion]] from T to C ["Does [he (does) like it]?"]). This glass-ceiling of move-based morphosyntax suggests that all early multi-word utterances (usually associated with children aged 18 to 23 months, ±20%) involve flat structure-building elements (N, V) not motivated by movement: what Radford terms ''bricolage''. These prosaic bricolage structures are considered lexical/thematic in nature, with any observed early morphology being relegated to lexicalization (such as [[derivational morphology]], or [[Formulaic language|formulaic]] chunking) whereby the fixed [[morpheme]] involved is said to be incorporated, unsegmented and undecomposed within the lexical stem. When true [[inflectional morphology]] emerges, it follows a gradual growth trajectory with the simple lexical noun and verb inflections emerging first: e.g., plural [N + [{s}]], gerund [V + [{ing}]], [V + [{en}]], with the later onset of more formal inflections associated with functional phrases DP (e.g., possessive {'s}, Case on pronouns ("he" vs "him"), and TP (e.g., Agreement {s}, and Tense {ed}). For example, regarding the AGReement/INFLection of possessive as well as verbal morphology, the mere lack of recursive [ [ ] {s}] could be singularly interpreted as due to the lack of full movement operations. Thus, a young child at the early lexical stage-1 goes from ''[[Merge (linguistics)|Merge]]-based'' [(-'s) [Tom book]], He [(-s) [drink]] to ''Move-based'' and recursive [[Tom] 's] and [[drink] s] respectively.<ref>Andrew Radford and Joseph Galasso, "Children's possessive structures: A case study"; ''Essex Research Reports in Linguistics'', vol.&nbsp;19 (University of Essex, 1998).</ref> In this way, AGR is seen as the quintessential trigger to recursion/Movement.<ref group="n">For more recent discussion of AGR as a trigger for all move-based syntactic operations, see Shigeru Miyagawa, ''Why Agree? Why Move? Unifying Agreement-Based and Discourse-Configurational Languages'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010).</ref> The central tenet of the structure-building model is that such a disparity between the two categories (lexical vs functional) is the main characteristic of any maturation-based theory of child language acquisition.

In recent research dealing with the ''brain-to-language corollary'' (brain imaging devices such as [[fMRI]] and [[Event-related potential|ERP]]), some have argued that the schedule for these morphosyntax onsets is pegged to the neurological maturation of the front-left-hemisphere which houses [[Broca's area]] — that area of the brain seemingly responsible for movement-based operations found in language.<ref>Yosef Grodzinsky, ''Theoretical perspectives on language deficits'' (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1990).</ref>

==Notes==

<references group="n" />

==References==

{{Reflist}}

[[Category:Language acquisition]]