Nada Vasić

Reference Assignment: Using Language Breakdown to Choose between Theoretical Approaches.

We report results of an experimental study with Dutch agrammatic aphasics that investigated their ability to interpret pronominal elements in transitive clauses and Exceptional Case Marking constructions (ECM). Using the obtained experimental results as a tool, we distinguish between three competing linguistic theories that aim at determining principles responsible for pronoun distribution: Government and Binding (Chomsky, 1981), Reflexivity (Reinhart & Reuland, 1993), and Primitives of Binding (Reuland, 2001). The obtained results are inconsistent with Government and Binding, but consistent with the latter two theories. We further show that the Primitives of Binding framework most naturally explains our results. Our proposal is based on the different performance demonstrated by patients in transitive clauses and ECM constructions, in combination with the often-made claim in the literature regarding the limitation of processing resources in this population (e.g., Haarmann and Kolk, 1991, Haarmann and Kolk, 1994 and Zurif et al., 1993, among others).

Interpretation of pronouns in VP-ellipsis constructions in Dutch Broca’s and Wernicke’s aphasia

In this paper, we investigate the ability of Dutch agrammatic Brocas and Wernickes aphasics to assign reference to possessive pronouns in elided VP constructions. The assumption is that the comprehension problems in these two populations have different sources that are revealed in distinct patterns of responses. The focus is primarily on the performance of the agrammatic group whose errors in comprehension are not viewed as a consequence of a breakdown of grammatical knowledge but as a result of limited processing resources (for an overview see Grodzinsky, 2000). The results of the present study provide evidence for the psycholinguistic reality of the economy hierarchy as proposed in the Primitives of Binding (Reuland, 2001). According to the economy hierarchy proposed for the non-brain-damaged, the more economical semantic dependencies are preferred over the costlier discourse dependencies. This hierarchy is reflected in agrammatic aphasia where the semantic dependencies are available on time and preferred over the discourse dependences that are not available on time as a result of the lack of processing resources with consequences for comprehension.

Cross-serial dependencies in Dutch: testing the influence of NP type on processing load.

We tested the cross-linguistic generalizability of three models of sentence processing complexity— Lewis (1996), Gibson (1998, 2000), and Gordon (Gordon, Hendrick, & Johnson, 2001; Gordon, Hendrick, & Levine, 2002)—by investigating the on-line processing of cross-serial dependencies in Dutch. The number of subject-verb relations in a clause was manipulated, as well as type of noun phrase (indexical pronouns vs. proper names or full definite NPs). Several of our findings diverged from Gibson’s model: Processing difficulty at the verbs was not affected by the use of proper names versus first- and second-person pronouns; an increase at the first verb was seen for full NPs versus pronouns in 3-verb constructions, which was predicted by the Gibson model, but is in contrast to Lewis’s model. These findings are best explained within the framework of similarity-based inference models (Gordon et al., 2001; Gordon et al., 2002), according to which the number of similar NPs affects processing difficulty at the point of retrieval, and not specifically their discourse status or syntactic function.

Production and Processing of Subject–Verb Agreement in Monolingual Dutch Children With Specific Language Impairment

PURPOSEnIn this study, the authors investigated whether errors with subject-verb agreement in monolingual Dutch children with specific language impairment (SLI) are influenced by verb phonology. In addition, the productive and receptive abilities of Dutch acquiring children with SLI regarding agreement inflection were compared.nnnMETHODnAn SLI group (6-8 years old), an age-matched group with typical development, and a language-matched, younger, typically developing (TD) group participated in the study. Using an elicitation task, the authors tested use of third person singular inflection after verbs that ended in obstruents (plosive, fricative) or nonobstruents (sonorant). The authors used a self-paced listening task to test sensitivity to subject-verb agreement violations.nnnRESULTSnOmission was more frequent after obstruents than nonobstruents; the younger TD group used inflection less often after plosives than fricatives, unlike the SLI group. The SLI group did not detect subject-verb agreement violations if the ungrammatical structure contained a frequent error (omission), but if the ungrammatical structure contained an infrequent error (substitution), subject-verb agreement violations were noticed.nnnCONCLUSIONSnThe use of agreement inflection by children with TD or SLI is affected by verb phonology. Differential effects in the 2 groups are consistent with a delayed development in Dutch SLI. Parallels between productive and receptive abilities point to weak lexical agreement inflection representations in Dutch SLI.

Production and on-line comprehension of definiteness in English and Dutch by monolingual and sequential bilingual children

The present article examines production and on-line processing of definite articles in Turkish-speaking sequential bilingual children acquiring English and Dutch as second languages (L2) in the UK and in the Netherlands, respectively. Thirty-nine 6–8-year-old L2 children and 48 monolingual (L1) age-matched children participated in two separate studies examining the production of definite articles in English and Dutch in conditions manipulating semantic context, that is, the anaphoric and the bridging contexts. Sensitivity to article omission was examined in the same groups of children using an on-line processing task involving article use in the same semantic contexts as in the production task. The results indicate that both L2 children and L1 controls are less accurate when definiteness is established by keeping track of the discourse referents (anaphoric) than when it is established via world knowledge (bridging). Moreover, despite variable production, all groups of children were sensitive to the omission of definite articles in the on-line comprehension task. This suggests that the errors of omission are not due to the lack of abstract syntactic representations, but could result from processes implicated in the spell-out of definite articles. The findings are in line with the idea that variable production in child L2 learners does not necessarily indicate lack of abstract representations (Haznedar and Schwartz, 1997).

The Influence of Texting Language on Grammar and Executive Functions in Primary School Children

When sending text messages on their mobile phone to friends, children often use a special type of register, which is called textese. This register allows the omission of words and the use of textisms: instances of non-standard written language such as 4ever (forever). Previous studies have shown that textese has a positive effect on children’s literacy abilities. In addition, it is possible that children’s grammar system is affected by textese as well, as grammar rules are often transgressed in this register. Therefore, the main aim of this study was to investigate whether the use of textese influences children’s grammar performance, and whether this effect is specific to grammar or language in general. Additionally, studies have not yet investigated the influence of textese on children’s cognitive abilities. Consequently, the secondary aim of this study was to find out whether textese affects children’s executive functions. To investigate this, 55 children between 10 and 13 years old were tested on a receptive vocabulary and grammar performance (sentence repetition) task and various tasks measuring executive functioning. In addition, text messages were elicited and the number of omissions and textisms in children’s messages were calculated. Regression analyses showed that omissions were a significant predictor of children’s grammar performance after various other variables were controlled for: the more words children omitted in their text messages, the better their performance on the grammar task. Although textisms correlated (marginally) significantly with vocabulary, grammar and selective attention scores and omissions marginally significantly with vocabulary scores, no other significant effects were obtained for measures of textese in the regression analyses: neither for the language outcomes, nor for the executive function tasks. Hence, our results show that textese is positively related to children’s grammar performance. On the other hand, use of textese does not affect—positively nor negatively—children’s executive functions.

Textese and use of texting by children with typical language development and specific language impairment

The purpose of this study was to investigate texting and textese, which is the special register used for sending brief text messages, across children with typical development (TD) and children with Specific Language Impairment (SLI). Using elicitation techniques, texting and spoken language messages were collected from 55 children with TD and 15 children with SLI between 10 and 13 years old. The results show that text messages in the two groups were of equal length, but the children with TD used more textisms (alternative ways of spelling words) than the children with SLI. Both groups omitted words in their texting messages with similar frequencies, but while the SLI group omitted words equally frequently in texting messages and spoken language messages, omissions in the TD group were more specific to texting. This suggests that TD children omit words in texting because it is a register-specific convention, whereas children with SLI omit words regardless of the register. Socio-emotional reasons to use texting were found to be relatively important for children with SLI. This may be related to their higher level of shyness.

The acquisition of verbal paradigms in Dutch and Greek L2 children: Cross-linguistic differences and inflectional defaults

Previous research with children learning a second language (L2) has reported errors with verb inflection and cross-linguistic variation in accuracy and error patterns. However, owing to the cross-linguistic complexity and diversity of different verbal paradigms, the cross-linguistic effects on the nature of default forms has not been directly addressed in L2 acquisition studies. In the present study, we compared accuracy and error patterns in verbal agreement inflections in L2 children acquiring Dutch and Greek, keeping the children’s L1 constant (Turkish). Results showed that inflectional defaults in Greek follow universal predictions regarding the morphological underspecification of paradigms. However, the same universal predictions do not apply to the same extent to Dutch. It is argued that phonological properties of inflected forms should be taken into account to explain cross-linguistic differences in the acquisition of inflection. By systematically comparing patterns in child L2 Dutch and Greek, this study shows how universal mechanisms and target language properties work in tandem in the acquisition of inflectional paradigms.

Cross-linguistic aspects in child L2 acquisition

Cross-linguistic effects in successive childhood bilingualism have received increased attention in the last few years. The goal of this special issue is to bring together studies that investigate cross-linguistic influence in child second language (L2) learners by examining how first language (L1) and L2 properties develop and interact in the context of child L2 acquisition. Specifically, the articles in this special issue address the following questions: (a) What is the role of cross-linguistic influence at the syntax-discourse interface? (b) How do target language properties influence L2 developmental paths? (c) Does the L2 influence the L1 when acquiring a syntax-semantics interface phenomenon? (d) What does cross-linguistic influence look like in the context of atypical bilingual acquisition? These questions are answered in the context of diverse child L2 populations growing up in different acquisition settings and with varied degrees of exposure to the two languages.