Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Oct 18:8:1822.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01822. eCollection 2017.

Similarity-Based Interference and the Acquisition of Adjunct Control

Affiliations

Similarity-Based Interference and the Acquisition of Adjunct Control

Juliana Gerard et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

Previous research on the acquisition of adjunct control has observed non-adultlike behavior for sentences like "John bumped Mary after tripping on the sidewalk." While adults only allow a subject control interpretation for these sentences (that John tripped on the sidewalk), preschool-aged children have been reported to allow a much wider range of interpretations. A number of different tasks have been used with the aim of identifying a grammatical source of children's errors. In this paper, we consider the role of extragrammatical factors. In two comprehension experiments, we demonstrate that error rates go up when the similarity increases between an antecedent and a linearly intervening noun phrase, first with similarity in gender, and next with similarity in number marking. This suggests that difficulties with adjunct control are to be explained (at least in part) by the sentence processing mechanisms that underlie similarity-based interference in adults.

Keywords: adjunct control; anaphora; binding; intervention; language acquisition; similarity-based interference.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Example item for Experiment 1, to go with (12).
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Results from Experiments 1 and 2, with proportion of correct answers for test sentences (MATCH/MISMATCH) in (12/13) and (15/16), and for control sentences in (14). Means that there is a significant difference between the two conditions at p < 0.05.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Example MISMATCH item for Experiment 2, to go with (16).

References

    1. Adani F. (2011). Rethinking the acquisition of relative clauses in Italian: towards a grammatically based account. J. Child Lang. 38 141–165. 10.1017/S0305000909990250 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Adani F., Forgiarini M., Guasti M. T., Van der Lely H. K. (2014). Number dissimilarities facilitate the comprehension of relative clauses in children with (Grammatical) Specific Language Impairment. J. Child Lang. 41 811–841. 10.1017/S0305000913000184 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Adani F., Van der Lely H. K., Forgiarini M., Guasti M. T. (2010). Grammatical feature dissimilarities make relative clauses easier: a comprehension study with Italian children. Lingua 120 2148–2166. 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.03.018 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Adler A. N. (2006). Syntax and Discourse in the Acquisition of Adjunct Control. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    1. Alvarez G. A., Franconeri S. L. (2007). How many objects can you track?: evidence for a resource-limited attentive tracking mechanism. J. Vis. 7 14–14. 10.1167/7.13.14 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources