Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T16:24:45.265Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The acquisition of relative clauses in spontaneous child speech in Mandarin Chinese*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2014

JIDONG CHEN  and
YASUHIRO SHIRAI
JIDONG CHEN*
Affiliation:
California State University at Fresno, USA
YASUHIRO SHIRAI
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Jidong Chen, California State University – Linguistics, 5245 N Backer Ave, PB92, Fresno, California 93740, United States. e-mail: jchen@csufresno.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates the developmental trajectory of relative clauses (RCs) in Mandarin-learning children's speech. We analyze the spontaneous production of RCs by four monolingual Mandarin-learning children (0;11 to 3;5) and their input from a longitudinal naturalistic speech corpus (Min, 1994). The results reveal that in terms of the syntactic role of the head noun in the matrix clause, isolated noun phrase RCs dominate, followed by those that modify the subject or object of the matrix clauses and predicate nominal relatives. This pattern differs from those observed in English (Diessel & Tomasello, 2000), German (Brandt, Diessel & Tomasello, 2008), and Japanese (Ozeki & Shirai, 2007). Regarding the syntactic role of the head noun inside the RC (i.e. subject, object, or oblique relatives), the early RCs are dominated by object relatives. This pattern also differs from those observed in English and Japanese. We propose a multifactorial usage-based learning account for the developmental patterns.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , March 2015 , pp. 394 - 422
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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.)

Footnotes

[*]

This research was supported by a Provost's award for research release time from California State University at Fresno. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the 35th Boston University Conference on Language Development, the 1st International Symposium on Chinese Language and Discourse, the 22nd Annual Convention of the Association for Psychological Science, and the 18th Annual Meeting of the International Association of Chinese Linguistics in 2010. We thank Xinchun Wang for coding part of the data for inter-coder reliability, and Amanda Brown and Hiromi Ozeki for helpful comments on the draft. We also thank Dylan Glynn for consultation on the statistics. Anonymous JCL reviewers and editors offered helpful comments and suggestions on previous versions of this paper. All of these contributions are acknowledged with grateful thanks. Any remaining errors are the authors'.

References

Arnon, I. (2010). Rethinking child difficulty: the effect of NP type on children's processing of relative clauses in Hebrew. Journal of Child Language 37, 27–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bates, E. & MacWhinney, B. (1989). Functionalism and the competition model. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (eds), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing, 3–73. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brandt, S., Diessel, H. & Tomasello, M. (2008). The acquisition of German relation clauses: a case study. Journal of Child Language 35, 325–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt, S. & Kidd, E. (2011). Relative clause acquisition and representation: evidence from spontaneous speech, sentence repetition, and comprehension. In Schönefeld, D. (ed.), Converging evidence: methodological and theoretical issues for linguistic research, 273–92. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt, S., Kidd, E., Lieven, E. & Tomasello, M. (2009). The discourse bases of relativization: an investigation of young German- and English-speaking children's comprehension of relative clauses. Cognitive Linguistics 20(3), 539–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A first language: the early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chan, A., Lau, E. & Lieven, E. (2007). Cantonese children's acquisition of relative clauses: cross-linguistic comparisons with English and German children. Paper presented at the Conference on the Interdisciplinary Approach to Relative Clauses, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Chan, A., Matthews, S. & Yip, V. (2011). The acquisition of relative clauses in Cantonese and Mandarin. In Kidd, E. (ed.), The acquisition of relative clauses: processing, typology and function, 197–226. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, F., Dell, G. S. & Bock, K. (2006). Becoming syntactic. Psychological Review 113(2), 234–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, H.-W. (1984). The comprehension of complex Chinese sentences by children: relative clause. Chinese Journal of Psychology 26, 57–66.Google Scholar
Chao, Y.-R. (1968). A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley, CA: University of California.Google Scholar
Cheng, L. L.-S. & Sybesma, R. (2006). A Chinese relative. In Broekhuis, H., Corver, N., Huybregts, R., Kleinhenz, U. & Koster, J. (eds), Organizing grammar: linguistic studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk, 69–76. Berlin: Mouton.Google Scholar
Cheng, Y.-Y. (1995). The acquisition of relative clauses in Chinese. (Unpublished MA thesis), National Taiwan Normal University.Google Scholar
Cheung, H.-T. (1998). Pingjun huayu changdu zai zhongwen de yingyong [The application of MLU measurement for Mandarin Chinese]. Ting Yu Hui Kan [Journal of Hearing Science] 13, 36–48.Google Scholar
Chiu, B. (1996). The nature of relative clauses in Chinese-speaking children (National Science Council Research Report). National Taiwan Normal University.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1996). The unity of noun-modifying clauses in Asian languages. Pan-Asiantic linguistics: Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on language and linguistics, 1077–88. Salaya: Institute of Language and Culture for Rural Development.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1998). Attributive clauses in Asian languages: towards an areal typology. In Boeder, W., Schroeder, C., Wagner, K. H. & Wildgen, W. (eds), Sprache in Raum und Zeit. In memoriam Johannes Bechert, Band 2: Beitrage zur empirischen Sprachwissenschaft, 51–60. Tugingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (2002). Typology and language acquisition: the case of relative clauses. In Ramat, A. G. (ed.), Typology and second language acquisition, 19–37. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (2007). The acquisition of relative clauses in relation to language typology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29, 301–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H. (2004). The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H. (2007). A construction-based analysis of the acquisition of East Asian relative clauses. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29, 311–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H. (2009). On the role of frequency and similarity in the acquisition of subject and non-subject relative clauses. In Givon, T. & Shibatani, M. (eds), Syntactic complexity: diachrony, acquisition, neuro-cognition, evolution, 251–76. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H. & Tomasello, M. (2000). The development of relative clauses in spontaneous child speech. Cognitive Linguistics 11, 131–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H. & Tomasello, M. (2005). A new look at the acquisition of relative clauses. Language 81, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. J. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference: evidence from an empirical study of SL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13, 431–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitz, H., Chang, F. & Christiansen, M. H. (2011). A connectionist account of the acquisition and processing of relative clauses. In Kidd, E. (ed.), The acquisition of relative clauses: processing, typology, and function, 39–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedmann, N., Belletti, A. & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua 119, 67–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (1979). Language transfer and universal grammatical relations. Language Learning 29, 327–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haig, J. H. (1996). Subjacency and Japanese grammar: a functional account. Studies in Language 20(1), 53–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (1990). A parsing theory of word order universals. Linguistic Inquiry 21, 223–62.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (2004). Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. (2007). Acquisition of relative clauses in relation to language universals. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29(2), 337–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsu, C.-C. N., Hermon, G. & Zukowski, A. (2009). Young children's production of head-final relative clauses: elicited production from Chinese children. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 18(4), 323–60.Google Scholar
Juffs, A. (2007). Second language acquisition of relative clauses in the languages of East Asia. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29, 361–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keenan, E. (1985). Relative clauses. In Shopen, T. (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. II: Complex constructions, 141–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8, 63–99.Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & Hawkins, S. (1987). The psychological validity of the accessibility heirarchy. In Keenan, E. (ed.), Universal grammar: 15 essays, 60–85. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Kidd, E., Brandt, S., Lieven, E. & Tomasello, M. (2007). Object relatives made easy: a cross-linguistic comparison of the constraints influencing young children's processing of relative clauses. Language and Cognitive Processes 22(6), 860–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, T. H.-T. (1992). The inadequacy of processing heuristics – evidence from relative clause acquisition in Mandarin Chinese. In Lee, T. H.-T. (ed.), Research on Chinese linguistics in Hong Kong, 47–85. Hong Kong: Linguistics Society of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Li, C. & Thompson, S. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: a functional reference grammar. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Matthews, S. & Yip, V. (2003). Relative clauses in early bilingual development transfer and universals. In Ramat, A. G. (ed.), Typology and second language acquisition, 39–81. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Min, R.-F. (1994). The acquisition of referring expressions by young Chinese children: a longitudinal study of the forms and functions of early noun phrases. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Catholic University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Ning, C.-Y. & Liu, H.-Y. (2009). Milestones in the acquisition of Mandarin Chinese based on HUCOLA. Paper presented at the Workshop on Milestones in the First Language Acquisition of Chinese, Hong Kong: CUHK.Google Scholar
O'Grady, W. (2011). Relative clauses: processing and acquisition. In Kidd, E. (ed.), The acquisition of relative clauses: processing, typology and function, 13–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ozeki, H. (2008). Daiiti daini gengo ni okeru nihongo meisi syuusyokusetu no syuutoku katei [The acquisition process of Japanese noun-modifying clauses by first and second language learners]. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.Google Scholar
Ozeki, H. & Shirai, Y. (2007). The consequences of variation in the acquisition of relative clauses: an analysis of longitudinal production data from five Japanese children. In Matsumoto, Y., Oshima, D. Y., Robinson, O. R. & Sells, P. (eds), Diversity in language: perspectives and implications, 243–70. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Ozeki, H. & Shirai, Y. (2010). Semantic bias in the acquisition of relative clauses in Japanese. Journal of Child Language 37, 197–215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Özge, D., Marinis, T. & Zeyrek, D. (2010). Production of relative clauses in monolingual Turkish children. In Chandlee, J., Franich, K., Iserman, K. M. & Keil, L. (eds), The 34th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development Online Proceedings Supplement, online: <http://www.bu.edu/bucld/proceedings/supplement/vol34/>. Boston: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Rahmany, R., Marefat, H. & Kidd, E. (2011). Persian speaking children's acquisition of relative clauses. European Journal of Developmental Psychology 8(3), 367–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1986). The acquisition and use of relative clauses in Turkic and Indo-European languages. In Slobin, D. I. & Zimmer, K. (eds), Studies in Turkish linguistics, 273–94. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Su, Y.-C. (2004). Relatives of Mandarin children. Paper presented at the Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition in North America, University of Hawaii at Manoa.Google Scholar
Tjung, Y. (2006). The formation of relative clauses in Jakarta Indonesian: a subject–object asymmetry. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Delaware.Google Scholar
Yip, V. & Matthews, S. (2007a). The bilingual child: early development and language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yip, V. & Matthews, S. (2007b). Relative clauses in Cantonese–English bilingual children: typological challenges and processing motivations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 29, 277–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar