In:L1 Acquisition and L2 Learning: The view from Romance
Edited by Larisa Avram, Anca Sevcenco and Veronica Tomescu
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 65] 2021
► pp. 83–108
Chapter 4Some thoughts on (the acquisition of) control
Published online: 17 November 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.65.04san
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.65.04san
Abstract
This paper discusses the subject / object control asymmetry in child language acquisition. Based on data reflecting the acquisition of European Portuguese, I argue that children do not have an initial absolute preference for object control and that not only subject control but also object control structures show developmental effects. This argues against analyses which assume that children are initially guided only by syntactic principles that preclude a non-local controller. Even though not excluding a syntactic bias that may favour object control, the acquisition data reviewed in this paper show that lexical acquisition has a larger role in the acquisition of control structures than is often assumed.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction and general goals
- 2.The classic acquisition problem, control as movement and intervention effects
- 2.1Control as a case of A-movement
- 2.2Problems for an account of children’s difficulties with control as a result of intervention
- 3.An alternative analysis: Subject control and smuggling
- 3.1A smuggling analysis of promise structures
- 3.2The difficulties with object control
- 4.Assessing the object control bias and the effects of the inflected infinitive
- 5.General conclusion
Notes References
References (35)
Agostinho, C. (2014). The acquisition of control in European Portuguese complement clauses. (Unpublished Master’s thesis). University of Lisbon.
Agostinho, C., Santos, A. L., & Duarte, I. (2018). The acquisition of control in European Portuguese. In A. L. Santos & A. Gonçalves (Eds.), Complement clauses in European Portuguese (pp. 263–293). John Benjamins.
Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2012). Ways of avoiding intervention: Some thoughts on the development of object relatives, passive and control. In M. Piattelli-Palmarini & R. C. Berwick (Eds.), Rich languages from poor inputs (pp. 115–126). Oxford University Press.
(2013). Intervention in grammar and processing. In I. Caponigro & C. Cecchetto (Eds.), From grammar to meaning. The spontaneous logicality of language (pp. 294–311). Cambridge University Press.
Betancort, M., Carreiras, M., & Acuña-Fariña, C. (2006). Processing controlled PROs in Spanish. Cognition, 100, 217–282.
Boland, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M. (1990). Evidence for the immediate use of verb control information in sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 413–432.
Delgado, J. P., Raposo, A., & Santos, A. L. (2021). Assessing intervention effects in sentence processing: Object relatives vs. subject control. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1–19.
Friedmann, N., Belletti, A., & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua, 119(1), 67–88.
Gonçalves, A., Santos, A. L., & Duarte, I. (2014). (Pseudo-)inflected infinitives and control as Agree. In K. Lahousse & S. Marzo (Eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2012. Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ Leuven 2012 (pp. 161–180). John Benjamins.
Gonçalves, R. (2015). Romance languages do not have double objects: evidence from European Portuguese and Spanish. Estudos de Lingüistica Galega, 7, 53–67.
Hornstein, N., & Polinsky, M. (2010). Control as movement. Across languages and constructions. In N. Hornstein & M. Polinsky (Eds.), Movement theory of control (pp. 1–41). John Benjamins.
Landau, I. (2000). Elements of control: Structure and meaning in infinitival constructions. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Madeira, A. M. (1994). On the Portuguese inflected infinitive. In J. Harris (Ed.), UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 6, 179–203.
Martins, A., Santos, A. L., & Duarte, I. (2018). Comprehension of relative clauses vs. control structures in SLI and ASD children. In A. B. Bertolini & M. J. Kaplan (Eds.), BUCLD 42: Proceedings of the 42nd annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 493–506). Cascadilla Press.
Mateu, V. (2016). Intervention effects in the acquisition of raising and control: Evidence from English and Spanish. (Unpublished PhD dissertation). UCLA.
Modesto, M. (2010). What Brazilian Portuguese has to say about control: Remarks on Boeckx & Hornstein. Syntax, 13(1), 78–96.
Orfitelli, R. (2012). Argument intervention in the acquisition of A-movement (Unpublished PhD dissertation). UCLA.
Raposo, E. P. (1989). Preposition infinitival constructions in European Portuguese. In O. Jaeggli & K. Safir (Eds.), The null subject parameter (pp. 277–305). Kluwer.
(1970). A principle governing deletion in English. In R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in transformational grammar (pp. 220–229). Ginn & Co.
Santos, A. L., Gonçalves, A., & Hyams, N. (2016). Aspects of the acquisition of object control and ECM-type verbs in European Portuguese. Language Acquisition, 23(3), 199–233.
Santos, A. L., Jesus, A., & Abalada, S. (2019). How do children interpret novel control verbs? In M. Brown & B. Dailey (Eds.), BUCLD 43: BUCLD 43: Proceedings of the 43rd annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 585–598). Cascadilla Press.
Sheehan, M. (2018). Control of inflected infinitives in European Portuguese. In A. L. Santos & A. Gonçalves (Eds.), Complement clauses in European Portuguese (pp. 29–58). John Benjamins.
Snyder, W. & Hyams, N. (2015). Minimality effects in children’s passives. In E. Di Domenico, C. Hamann, & S. Matteini (Eds.), Structures, strategies and beyond. Studies in honour of Adriana Belletti (pp. 343–368). John Benjamins.
