Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T12:21:07.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The marking of new information in children's narratives: a comparison of English, French, German and Mandarin Chinese*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Maya Hickmann ,
Henriëtte Hendriks ,
Françoise Roland  and
James Liang
Maya Hickmann*
Affiliation:
Université René Descartes, Paris, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Henriëtte Hendriks
Affiliation:
Max-Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen
Françoise Roland
Affiliation:
Université de Nantes
James Liang
Affiliation:
University of Leiden
*
[*] Laboratoire Cognition et Développement, 28 rue Serpente, 75006 Paris, France. E-mail: vidoj@idf.ext.jussieu.fr, Fax: (33)(1)40 51 70 85.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examines children's uses of nominal determiners (‘local markings’) and utterance structure (‘global markings’) to introduce new referents. Two narratives were elicited from preschoolers, seven-year-olds, ten-year-olds, and adults in English (N = 80), French (N = 40), German (N = 40), and Chinese (N = 40). Given typological differences (e.g. richness of morphology), these languages rely differentially on local vs. global devices to mark newness: postverbal position is obligatory in Chinese (determiners optional), indefinite determiners in the other languages (position optional). Three findings recur across languages: obligatory newness markings emerge late (seven-year-olds); local markings emerge first, including Chinese optional ones; local and global markings are strongly related. Crosslinguistic differences also occur: English-speaking preschoolers use local markings least frequently; until adult age global markings are rare in English, not contrastive in German and not as frequent in Chinese as in French, despite obligatoriness. It is concluded that three factors determine acquisition: (1) universal discourse factors governing information flow; (2) cognitive factors resulting from the greater functional complexity of global markings; (3) language-specific factors related to how different systems map both grammatical and discourse functions onto forms.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , October 1996 , pp. 591 - 619
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

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

Ammon, M. & Slobin, D. I. (1979). A cross-linguistic study of the processing of causative sentences, Cognition 7, 3–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bamberg, M. G. W. (1987). The acquisition of narratives: learning to use language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, E. (1976). Language and context: the acquisition of pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bates, E. & Devescovi, A. (1989). Crosslinguistic studies of sentence production. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (eds), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berman, R. A. & Slobin, D. I. (1994). Different ways of relating events in narrative: a crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A first language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics and point of view. In Li, C. N. (ed.), Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Chang, H. W. (1992). The acquisition of Chinese syntax. In Chen, H. C. and Tzeng, O. J. L. (eds.), Language processing in Chinese. Elsevier Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Charvillat, A. & Kail, M. (1991). The status of ‘canonical SVO sentences’ in French: a developmental study of the on-line processing of dislocated sentences. Journal of Child Language 18, 591–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cziko, G. A. (1986). Testing the Language Bioprogram Hypothesis: a review of children's acquisition of articles. Language 62, 878–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasinger, L. & Toupin, C. (1994). The development of relative clause functions in narrative. In Berman, R. A. & Slobin, D. I. (eds), Different ways of relating events in narrative: a crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
De Weck, G. (1991). La cohésion dans les narrations d'enfants: Etude du développement des processus anaphoriques. Neuchâtel & Paris: Delachaux & Niestlé.Google Scholar
Emslie, H. C. & Stevenson, R. J. (1981). Pre-school children's use of the articles in definite and indefinite referring expressions. Journal of Child language 8, 313–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erbaugh, M. (1986). Taking Stock: The development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children. In Craig, C. (ed.), Noun classes and categorization. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Grubin, M. L., Bower, J. A. & Walker, E. C. T. (1976). Alice User's Guide (2nd Edition). Natick, MA: Alice Associates.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M. (1980). Creating referents in discourse: a developmental analysis of linguistic cohesion. In Kreiman, J. & Ojeda, E. (eds), Papers from the parasession on pronouns and anaphora, Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M. (1982). The development of narrative skills: pragmatic and metapragmatic aspects of discourse cohesion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M. (1991). The development of discourse cohesion: some functional and cross-linguistic issues. In Piéraut-Le Bonniec, G. & Dolitsky, M. (eds), Language bases … discourse bases. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M. (1995). Discourse organization and the development of reference to person, space and time. In Fletcher, P. & MacWhinney, B. (eds), Handbook of child language. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kail, M. & Charvillat, A. (1988). Local and topological processing in sentence comprehension by French and Spanish children. Journal of Child Language 15, 637–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kail, M. & Hickmann, M. (1992). French children's ability to introduce referents in narratives as a function of mutual knowledge. First language 12, 73–94.Google Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1979). A functional approach to child language: a study of determiners and reference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1981). The grammatical marking of thematic structure in the development of language production. In Deutsch, W. (ed.), The child's construction of language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1981). Topic, antitopic, and verb agreement in non-standard French. Series Pragmatics and beyond. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, C. N. & Thompson, S. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: a functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, P., MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (1991). Processing a language without inflections: An online study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. CRL Technical Report 9102, Center for Research in Language, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (1978). Sentential devices for conveying givenness and newness: a cross-cultural developmental study. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 539–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (1989). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E. & Kliegel, R. (1984). Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23, 127–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maratsos, M. P. (1976). The use of definite and indefinite reference in young children. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Miao, X-C. & Zhu, M. S. (1992). Language development in Chinese children. In Chen, H. C. & Tzeng, O. J. L. (eds), Language processing in Chinese. Elsevier Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Min, R. (1994). The acquisition of referring expression by young Chinese children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Power, R. J. D. & Dal Martello, M. F. (1986). The use of the definite and indefinite articles by Italian preschool children. Journal of Child Language 13, 145–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slobin, D. I. (1982). Universal and particular in the acquisition of language. In Wanner, E. & Gleitman, L. (eds), Language acquisition: the state of art. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1985). Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In Slobin, D. I. (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. & Bever, T. (1982). Children's use of canonical sentence schemas: a cross-linguistic study of word order and inflections. Cognition 12, 229–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sridhar, S. N. (1989). Cognitive structures in language production: a cross-linguistic study. In MacWhinney, B. & Bates, E. (eds), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sun, C-F. (1988). The discourse function of numeral classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 16, 298–322.Google Scholar
Vion, M. & Colas, A. (1987). La présentation du caractère ancien on nouveau d'une information en français. Archives de Psychologie 55, 243–264.Google Scholar
Warden, D. (1981). Learning to identify referents. British Journal of Psychology 72, 93–9.Google Scholar
Wigglesworth, G. (1990). Children's narrative acquisition: a study of some aspects of reference and anaphora. First Language 10, 105–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar