The development of Hebrew zero and pronominal subject realization in the context of first and second person

The study investigates the acquisition of Hebrew zero and pronominal subjects in the context of first and second person. We provide distributional evidence relative to verb tense, number, person, and conversational utterance type, in a peer-talk corpus (2;0-8;0 years). Findings show that acquisition...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Journal of child language Ročník 51; číslo 4; s. 925 - 951
Hlavní autoři: DATTNER, Elitzur, RAVID, Dorit
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: England Cambridge University Press 01.07.2024
Témata:
Action
Child Development
Child Language
Cluster analysis
Conversation
Grammar
Hebrew language
Language Classification
Language Usage
Linguistics
Morphemes
Morphology
Native language acquisition
Performance Factors
Person
Profiles
Pronouns
Realization
Semantics
Semitic Languages
Syntax
Tense
Verbs
Null subject
Discourse Profile Constructions
Hebrew
Pronoun
Grammatical subject
ISSN:0305-0009, 1469-7602, 1469-7602
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:The study investigates the acquisition of Hebrew zero and pronominal subjects in the context of first and second person. We provide distributional evidence relative to verb tense, number, person, and conversational utterance type, in a peer-talk corpus (2;0-8;0 years). Findings show that acquisition starts early on, that verb inflectional morphology is crucial for the development of pronominal subjects, and that communicative contexts affect subject realization. Zero and pronominal subjects are not evenly distributed relative to the study variables, and cannot be treated as an alternation. A cluster analysis shows that each realization is linked to a distinguishable usage pattern, corresponding with particular discursive and communicative functions. These are defined as three Discourse Profile Constructions: (A) “calling for action” by 1st.Pl.Fut zero subjects (3;0 year olds); (B) “commenting on the interlocutor’s actions” by 2nd.Sg.Past zero subjects (ages 4;0-6;0); and (C) “planning one’s own actions” by 1st.Sg.Fut pronominal subjects (7;0-8;0 year olds).
Bibliografie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0305-0009
1469-7602
1469-7602
DOI:10.1017/S030500092200068X