Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T18:44:59.457Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Focus identification in child Mandarin*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 November 2009

PENG ZHOU  and
STEPHEN CRAIN
PENG ZHOU*
Affiliation:
Macquarie University
STEPHEN CRAIN
Affiliation:
Macquarie University
*
Address for correspondence: Peng Zhou, Macquarie Centre for Cognitive Science, Macquarie University, Level 4 Building C5C, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia. e-mail: pzhou@maccs.mq.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study, we investigated how Mandarin-speaking children and adults interpret focus structures like Zhiyou Yuehan chi-le pingguo ‘Only John ate an apple’ and Shi Yuehan chi-de pingguo ‘It is John who ate an apple’. We found that children tended to associate focus operators zhiyou ‘only’ and shi ‘be’ with the verb phrase (VP), whereas adults uniquely associated them with the subject noun phrase (NP). To account for this difference, we propose that children initially treat focus operators as adverbials, thus ending up associating them with the VP. In order to assess our proposal, we examined children's understanding of zhiyou-constructions with negation, like Zhiyou Yuehan meiyou chi pingguo ‘Only John didn't eat an apple’. It was found that children, like adults, consistently associated the focus operator with the subject NP in this construction. The findings have an important bearing on language learnability, since negation assists children in reaching the adult-like interpretation.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 37 , Issue 5 , November 2010 , pp. 965 - 1005
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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 Australian Research Council Grant DP0879842 to Stephen Crain and Rosalind Thornton. We are grateful to Nobu Akagi, Anna Notley, Yi (Esther) Su, Francesco Ursini and especially Rosalind Thornton for advice and comments; we would also like to thank the Second Language Acquisition Research Group of Beijing Language and Culture University headed by Professor Liqun Gao for their assistance and support in running the experiments; and of course we thank the children and adults who took part in the experiments for their time and patience.

References

REFERENCES

Aoun, J. & Sportiche, D. (1983). On the formal theory of Government. The Linguistic Review 2, 211–36.Google Scholar
Breul, C. (2004). Focus structure in generative grammar: An integrated syntactic, semantic and intonational approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crain, S., Ni, W. J. & Conway, L. (1994). Learning, parsing and modularity. In Clifton, C., Frazier, L. & Rayner, K. (eds), Perspectives on sentence processing, 443–67. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Inc.Google Scholar
Crain, S. & Thornton, R. (1998). Investigations in Universal Grammar: A guide to experiments on the acquisition of syntax and semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Crain, S., Thornton, R., Boster, C., Conway, L., Lillo-Martin, D. & Woodams, E. (1996). Quantification without qualification. Language Acquisition 5, 83–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gualmini, A., Maciukaite, S. & Crain, S. (2002). Children's insensitivity to contrastive stress in sentences with only. In Arunachalam, S., Kaiser, E. & Williams, A. (eds), Proceedings of the 25th Penn Linguistics Colloquium, 87–110. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Halbert, A., Crain, S., Shankweiler, D. & Woodams, E. (1995). Children's interpretive use of emphatic stress. Poster presented at the 8th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing. Tucson, AZ.Google Scholar
Horn, L. R. (1969). A presuppositional approach to only and even. Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 5, 98–107.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J. (1982). Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kiss, K. É. (1998). Identificational focus versus informational focus. Language 74(2), 245–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krifka, M. (1991). A compositional semantics for multiple focus constructions. Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 127–58.Google Scholar
Lee, H.-C. (2005 a). On Chinese focus and cleft constructions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan.Google Scholar
Lee, H.-C. (2005 b). On de in shi…de construction. UST working papers in Linguistics, 131–60. National Tsing Hua University: Taiwan.Google Scholar
Paterson, K. B., Liversedge, S. P., Rowland, C. & Filik, R. (2003). Children's comprehension of sentences with focus particles. Cognition 89, 263–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paterson, K. B., Liversedge, S. P., White, D., Filik, R. & Jaz, K. (2005/2006). Children's interpretation of ambiguous focus in sentences with only. Language Acquisition 13(3), 253–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philip, W. & Lynch, E. (2000). Felicity, relevance, and acquisition of the grammar of every and only. In Howell, S. C., Fish, S. A. & Keith-Lucas, T. (eds), Proceedings of the 24th annual Boston University conference on language development, 583–96. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Radford, A. (1997). Syntactic theory and the structure of English: A Minimalist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T. (1976). The syntactic domain of anaphora. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. (2004). The processing cost of reference set computation: Acquisition of stress shift and focus. Language Acquisition 12(2), 109–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T. (2006). Interface strategies: Optimal and costly computations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2001). Relativized Minimality effects. In Baltin, M. & Collins, C. (eds), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, 89–110. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rochemont, M. (1986). Focus in generative grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rooth, M. (1985). Association with focus. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
Russell, B. (1948). Human knowledge: Its scope and limits. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Shi, D. X. (1994). The nature of Chinese emphatic sentences. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 3, 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teng, S.-H. (1979). Remarks on cleft sentences in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 7, 101–112.Google Scholar
Wexler, K. (1979). Untitled paper presented at the Workshop on Learnability, Laguna Beach, California.Google Scholar
Xu, L. J. (2004). Manifestation of informational focus. Lingua 114, 277–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, X. L. (2002). Restrictive focus in child Mandarin. Contemporary Linguistics 3, 225–37 [in Chinese].Google Scholar