Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T15:06:23.174Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The acquisition of morphosyntax in Italian: A cross-sectional study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2009

CLAUDIA CAPRIN  and
MARIA TERESA GUASTI
CLAUDIA CAPRIN*
Affiliation:
University of Milano–Bicocca
MARIA TERESA GUASTI
Affiliation:
University of Milano–Bicocca
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Claudia Caprin, Department of Psychology, University of Milano–Bicocca, Piazza Ateneo Nuovo, 1-20100 Milano, Italy. E-mail: claudia.caprin@unimib.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study provides new evidence concerning the pattern of acquisition of free and bound morphemes in Italian, based on the speech of 59 children recorded through a cross-sectional method. We found that inflectional morphology is mastered before free-standing morphology. Despite the great variety of verb inflections, the analyses showed that children partially master present indicative from early productions. Although free-standing morphemes are used correctly, they are optionally omitted. Here we have explored the use and omission of articles, clitics, the copula, and auxiliaries and have shown that omission is subject to certain constraints. Articles are mainly omitted from the root of the clause, much as null subjects, because from this position the requirement of clausal identification is voided. A higher omission of accusative clitics than dative clitics was observed that has also been explained in terms of the uniqueness checking constraint: accusative, but not dative clitics need to check the D feature twice, because the former, but not the latter, trigger past particle agreement. The uniqueness checking constraint has been adopted to explain the higher omission of auxiliaries with respect to the copula: the former, but not the latter, have to check the T feature twice. Together, these findings suggest that children omit, but in principled ways.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 23 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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

Antelmi, D. (1997). La prima grammatica dell’ Italiano. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Avram, L. (1999). Clitic omission in child language and multiple spell out. Poster presented at Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition (GALA) Congress, Postdam, Germany, September 10–12, 1999.Google Scholar
Axia, G. (1994). Il Test del Primo Linguaggio (TPL). In Axia, G. (Ed.), La valutazione dello sviluppo, manuale di strumenti e metodi. Roma: La Nuova Italia Scientifica.Google Scholar
Babyonsyshev, M., & Marin, S. (2006). Acquisition of pronominal clitics in Romanian. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 5, 17–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, M. (2003). Agreement, dislocation, and partial configurationality. In Carnie, A., Harley, H., & Willie, M. (Eds.), Formal approaches to function. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bates, E. (1976). Language and context: The acquisition of pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, E., Devescovi, A., & D'Amico, A. (2000). Lessico psicologico nell'infanzia. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
Berretta, M. (1986). Per uno studio sull'apprendimento dell'Italiano in contesto naturale: Il caso dei pronomi personali atoni. In Ramat, A. Giacalone (Ed.), L'apprendimento spontaneo di una seconda lingua (pp. 329–352). Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Bortolini, U., Caselli, M. C., & Leonard, L. B. (1997). Grammatical deficits in Italian-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 809–820.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bottari, P., Cipriani, P., & Chilosi, A. M. (1993/1994). Protosyntactic devices in the acquisition of Italian free morphology. Language Acquisition, 3, 327–369.Google Scholar
Bottari, P., Cipriani, P., Chilosi, A. M., & Pfanner, L. (2001). The Italian determiner system in normal acquisition, specific language impairment, and childhood aphasia. Brain and Language, 77, 283–293.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A first language. The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caprin, C. (2003). La grammatica nei primi discorsi—Uno studio trasversale sull'acquisizione della morfo-sintassi in Italiano. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Pavia, Italy.Google Scholar
Camaioni, L. (1980). La prima infanzia. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Caselli, C., Leonard, L., Volterra, V., & Campagnoli, M. G. (1993). Toward mastery of Italian morphology: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Child Language, 20, 377–393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cazden, C. B. (1968). The acquisition of noun and verb inflexions. Child Development, 39, 443–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cipriani, P., Chilosi, A. M., & Bottari, P. (1993). L'evoluzione della morfosintassi nella disfasia congenita. In Cresti, E. & Moneglia, M. (Eds.), Ricerche sull'acquisizione dell'Italiano (pp. 189–215). Roma: Bulzoni.Google Scholar
Cipriani, P., Chilosi, A. M., Bottari, P., & Pfanner, L. (1993). L'acquisizione della morfosintassi: Fasi e processi. Padova, Italy: Unipress.Google Scholar
Crisma, P., & Tomasutti, E. (2000). Phonological effects on article omission in the acquisition of Italian. In Proceedings of the 24th BUCLD (pp. 220–231). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Deen, K. (2005). The acquisition of Swahili. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Devescovi, A., Caselli, M. C., Ossella, T., & Alviggi, A. (1992). Rilevazione delle prime fasi dello sviluppo morfosintattico attraverso una prova di ripetizione. Rassegna di Psicologia, 2, 39–54.Google Scholar
Devescovi, A., & D'Amico, S. (2001). Lo sviluppo della morfosintassi. In Camaioni, L. (Ed.), Psicologia dello sviluppo del linguaggio. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Devescovi, A., & Pizzuto, E. (1995). Lo sviluppo grammaticale. In Sabbadini, G. (Ed.), Manuale di neuropsicologia dell'età evolutiva (pp. 260–285). Bologna: Zanichelli.Google Scholar
D'Odorico, L., & Carrubbi, S. (1997). Dalle espressioni di una sola parola alle prime combinazioni di parole. Forme di transizione linguistica nel processo di acquisizione della lingua Italiana. Età Evolutiva, 26, 26–39.Google Scholar
Elman, J. L., Bates, E. A., Johnson, M., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gerken, L. A. (1991). The metrical basis for children's subjectless sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 431–451.Google Scholar
Gerken, L. A. (1996). Prosodic structure in young children's language production. Language, 72, 683–712.Google Scholar
Guasti, M. T. (1993/1994). Verb syntax in Italian child grammar: Finite and nonfinite verbs. Language Acquisition, 3, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guasti, M. T. (1995). Acquisition of Italian interrogatives. In Clahsen, H. (Ed.), Generative perspectives on language acquisition (pp. 241–269). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Guasti, M. T. (2002). Language acquisition. The growth of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haegeman, L. (1995). Root infinitives and initial root null subjects in early Dutch. In Koester, C. & Wijnen, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Groningen assembly on language acquisition. Groningen: Groningen University.Google Scholar
Hamann, C., & Plunkett, K. (1998). Subjectless sentences in child Danish. Cognition, 69, 35–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hyams, N. M. (1986). Language acquisition and the theory of parameters. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Hyams, N. M. (1992). Morphosyntactic development in Italian and its relevance to parameter-setting models: Comments on the paper by Pizzuto & Caselli. Journal of Child Language, 19, 695–709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klee, T., & Fitzgerald, D. M. (1985). The relation between grammatical development and mean length of utterances in morphemes. Journal of Child Language, 12, 251–268.Google Scholar
Leonard, L., Caselli, M. C., & Devescovi, A. (2002). Italian children's use of verb and noun morphology during the preschool years. First Language, 22, 287–304.Google Scholar
Lleó, C., & Demuth, K. (1999). Prosodic constraints on the emergence of grammatical morphemes: Crosslinguistic evidence from Germanic and Romance languages. Proceedings of the 23rd BUCLD (pp. 407–418). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). Il progetto CHILDES. Pisa, Italy: Edizioni del Cerro.Google Scholar
Nelli, C. (1998). L'acquisizione della morfologia libera Italiana. Fasi di un percorso evolutivo. Studi di Grammatica, 17, 229–362.Google Scholar
Pine, J. M., Conti-Ramsden, G., Joseph, K. L., Lieven, E. V. M., & Serratrice, L. (2008). Tense over time: Testing the agreement/tense omission model as an account of the pattern of tense-marking provision in early child English. Journal of Child Language, 25, 55–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pizzuto, E., & Caselli, M. C. (1992). The acquisition of Italian morphology. Implications for models of language development. Journal of Child Language, 19, 491–557.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramus, F., Nespor, M., & Mehler, J. (1999). Correlates of linguistic rhythm in the speech signal. Cognition, 73, 265–292.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rizzi, L. (1982). Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1993/1994). Some notes on linguistic theory and language development: The case of root infinitives. Language Acquisition, 3, 371–393.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2002). On the grammatical basis of language development: A case study. Siena, Italy: University of Siena.Google Scholar
Rondal, J. A., Ghiotto, M., Bredart, S., & Bachelet, J. F. (1987). Age-relation, reliability and grammatical validity of measures of utterance length. Journal of Child Language, 14, 433–446.Google Scholar
Scarborough, H. S. (1990). Index of productive syntax. Applied Psycholinguistics, 11, 1–22.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L. (2006). The role of discourse pragmatics in the acquisition of subjects in Italian. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 437–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, W., Hyams, N., & Crisma, P. (1995). Romance auxiliary selection with reflexive clitics: Evidences for early knowledge of unaccusativity. In Clark, E. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 26th annual Child Research Forum. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Sportiche, D. (1996). Clitic constructions. In Rooryck, J. & Zaring, L. (Eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Stromswold, K. (1996). Analysing children's spontaneous speech. In McDaniel, D., McKee, C., & Smith Cairns, H. (Eds.), Methods for assessing children's syntax (pp. 23–53). London: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valian, V. (1990). Null subjects: A problem for parameter-setting models of language acquisition. Cognition, 35, 105–122.Google Scholar
Valian, V. (1991). Syntactic subjects in the early speech of American and Italian children. Cognition, 40, 21–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Veneziano, E., & Sinclair, H. (2000). The changing status of “filler syllables” on the way to grammatical morphemes. Journal of Child Language, 27, 461–500.Google Scholar
Wexler, K., Gavarrò, A., & Torrens, V. (2004). Feature checking and object clitic omission in child Catalan and Spanish. In Bok-Bennema, R., Hollebrandse, B., Kampers Mahne, B., & Sleeman, P. (Eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar