Object extraction is not subject to Child Relativized Minimality

Friedmann et al. (2009) propose that the grammar of three–five-year-old children imposes a stricter version of Relativized Minimality that the adult grammar does. This allows them to explain several experimental findings, including the difficulty children have in comprehending object relative clause...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inLingua Vol. 120; no. 6; pp. 1516 - 1521
Main Author Goodluck, Helen
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 01.06.2010
Elsevier
Subjects
Child Language
Child language. Acquisition and development
Continuity
D(iscourse)-linking
Language Acquisition
Linguistics
Minimalist Program
Object extraction
Predicate
Production and comprehension processes
Psycholinguistics
Psychology of language
Relative Clauses
Relativized Minimality
Syntax Discourse Relationship
Object extraction
Relativized Minimality
Continuity
Child language
D(iscourse)-linking
Language comprehension
Relative (clause)
Syntax
Language acquisition
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Friedmann et al. (2009) propose that the grammar of three–five-year-old children imposes a stricter version of Relativized Minimality that the adult grammar does. This allows them to explain several experimental findings, including the difficulty children have in comprehending object relative clauses when the subject of the relative is a lexical NP, and in comprehending object questions when the object is D(iscourse)-linked. The purpose of this paper is to challenge their analysis, in terms of both its empirical coverage and its implications for a theory of acquisition that assumes continuity.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0024-3841
1872-6135
DOI:10.1016/j.lingua.2009.10.005