Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T16:53:38.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2017

Ana Teresa Pérez-Leroux ,
Mihaela Pirvulescu  and
Yves Roberge
Ana Teresa Pérez-Leroux
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Mihaela Pirvulescu
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Yves Roberge
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Direct Objects and Language Acquisition , pp. 206 - 227
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2018

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

Aitchison, J. (1994). Words in the Mind: An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Akhtar, N., and Tomasello, M.. (1997). Young Children’s Productivity with Word Order and Verb Morphology. Developmental Psychology 33(6): 952–965.Google Scholar
Allen, S. (2000). A Discourse-Pragmatic Explanation for Argument Representation in Child Inuktitut. Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences 38(3): 483–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, S., and Schröder, H.. (2003). Preferred Argument Structure in Early Spontaneous Inuktitut Speech Data. In DuBois, J., Kumpf, L. and Ashby, W., eds., Preferred Argument Structure: Grammar as Architecture for Function. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 301–338.Google Scholar
Amaral, L., and Roeper, T.. (2014). Multiple Grammars and Second Language Representation. Second Language Research 30, 3–36.Google Scholar
Ariel, M. (2001). Accessibility Theory: An Overview. In Sanders, T. J. M., Schilperoord, J. and Spooren, W., eds., Text Representation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 29–87.Google Scholar
Auger, J. (1994). Pronominal Clitics in Québec French: A Morphological Analysis. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Avram, L. (1999). Clitic Omission in Child Language and Multiple Spell-Out, poster presented at GALA 1999, University of Potsdam.Google Scholar
Avram, L. (2001). Remarks on the Optional Clitic Stage in Child Romanian. University of Bucharest Working Papers in Linguistics 3(1): 16–28.Google Scholar
Avram, L. and Coene, M.. (2007). Object Clitics as Last Resort: Implications for Language Acquisition. In Baauw, S., Pinto, M. and van Kampen, J., eds., Proceedings of the Romance Turn II. Utrecht: UiL LOT, 7–26.Google Scholar
Avram, L., Coene, M. and Sevcenco, A.. (2015). Theoretical Implications of Children’s Early Production of Romanian Accusative Clitics. Lingua 161: 48–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babyonyshev, M. and Marin, S.. (2005). The Acquisition of Object Clitic Constructions in Romanian. In Gess, R., and Rubin, E., eds.,, Theoretical and Experimental Approaches to Romance Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 21–40.Google Scholar
Basilico, D. (1998). Object Position and Predication Forms. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16: 541–595.Google Scholar
Bates, E. and Goodman, J. C.. (1999). On the Emergence of Grammar from the Lexicon. In MacWhinney, B., ed., The Emergence of Language. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 29–70.Google Scholar
Bedore, L. and Leonard, L.. (2001). Grammatical Morphology Deficits in Spanish-Speaking Children with Specific Language Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 44: 905–924.Google Scholar
Belzil, I., Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. 2008. Object Clitic Production and Omission in Early French and the Role of the Extralinguistic Context. In Gavarró, A., and Freitas, M. J., eds., Language Acquisition and Development: Proceedings of GALA 2007. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press, 81–90.Google Scholar
Bello, S. (2014). Null Indirect Objects in Quebec French. Poster presented at the Canadian Linguistic Association (CLA). Brock University, St. Catharines, ON, May 25, 2014.Google Scholar
Bencini, G. M. L. and Valian, V. V.. (2007). Abstract Sentence Representations in 3-Year-Olds: Evidence from Language Production and Comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 59, 97–113.Google Scholar
Bender, E. (1999). Constituting Context: Null Objects in English Recipes Revisited. In Alexander, J., Han, N. -R. and Fox, M., eds., University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics – Proceedings of the Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium, vol. VI (1). Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol6/iss1/.Google Scholar
Berko Gleason, J. (1958). The Child’s Learning of English Morphology. Word 14: 150–177.Google Scholar
Bernard, G. (1991). Une conception linguistique méconnue de la transitivité. In Montaut, Annie, ed., Sur la transitivité dans les langues. Linx n° 17 (revue de linguistique de l’Université Paris 10, 13–35.Google Scholar
Berwick, R. (1985). The Acquisition of Syntactic Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Luk, G., Peets, K. and Yang, S.. (2010). Receptive Vocabulary Differences in Monolingual and Bilingual Children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 13: 525–531.Google Scholar
Biberauer, T., Holmberg, A., Roberts, I. and Sheehan, M.. (2010). Parametric Variation: Null Subjects in Minimalist Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blinkenberg, A. (1960). Le problème de la transitivité en français moderne: essai syntacto-sémantique. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., Miller, P. and Hood, L.. (1975). Variation and Reduction as Aspects of Competence in Language Development. In Pick, A., ed., The 1974 Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 3–56.Google Scholar
Bloom, P. (1990). Subjectless Sentences in Child Language. Linguistic Inquiry 21: 491–504.Google Scholar
Bock, K. and Warren, R.. (1985). Conceptual Accessibility and Syntactic Structure in Sentence Formulation. Cognition 21: 47–67.Google Scholar
Boeckx, C. (2011). Approaching Parameters from Below. In Di Sciullo, A. M. and Boeckx, C., eds., The Biolinguistic Enterprise. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 205–221.Google Scholar
Borer, H. (1984). Parametric Syntax: Case Studies in Semitic and Romance Languages. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Borer, H. (2004). The Grammar Machine. In Alexiadou, A., Anagnostopoulou, E. and Everaert, M., eds., The Unaccusativity Puzzle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 288–331.Google Scholar
Borer, H. 2005. Structuring Sense. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Borer, H. and Rohrbacher, B.. (2002). Minding the Absent: Arguments for the Full Competence Hypothesis. Language Acquisition 10: 123–175.Google Scholar
Bowers, J. (2002). Transitivity. Linguistic Inquiry 33: 283–224.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1982). Evaluating Competing Linguistic Models with Language Acquisition Data: Implication of Developmental Errors with Causative Verbs. Quaderrni di Semantica 3: 5–66.Google Scholar
Boeckx, C. (2011). Approaching Parameters from Below. In Di Sciullo, A. M. and Boeckx, C., eds., The Biolinguistic Enterprise: New Perspectives on the Evolution and Nature of the Human Language Faculty. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 205–221.Google Scholar
Bréal, M. (1897). Essai de sémantique. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1973). A First Language: the Early Stages. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brunetto, V. (2010). Syntactic Diagnostics for Referentiality Marking in Early Null Objects: Evidence from Italian. In Heselwood, B. and Plug, L., eds., Leeds Working Papers in Linguistics and Phonetics 15. Leeds: Department of Linguistics and Phonetics, University of Leeds, 1–13.Google Scholar
Cai, Z. G., Pickering, M. J., Wang, R. and Branigan, H. P.. (2015). It Is There Whether You Hear It or Not: Syntactic Representation of Missing Arguments. Cognition 136: 255–267.Google Scholar
Campos, H. (1986). Indefinite Object Drop. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 354–359.Google Scholar
Carroll, S. (2001). Input and Evidence: The Raw Material of Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Carlson, G., and Roeper, T.. (1981). Morphology and Subcategorization: Case and the Unmarked Complex Verb. In Hoekstra, T., van der Hulst, H., Moortgat, M., eds., Lexical grammar. Foris: Dordrecht, 123–164.Google Scholar
Castilla, A. (2008). Morphosyntactic Acquisition in Monolingual 3-, 4- and 5-Year-Old Spanish-Speaking Children, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Castilla, A. P., Pérez-Leroux, A. T. and Eriks-Brophy, A.. (2008a). Omission and Substitutions in Early Spanish Clitics. In Gavarró, A. and Freitas, J., eds., Language Acquisition of French Pronouns in Normal Children of GALA 2007. Newcastle, United Kingdom: Cambridge Scholars Press/CS, 112–122.Google Scholar
Castilla, A., Pérez-Leroux, A. T. and Eriks-Brophy, A. (2008b). Syntax and the Lexicon in Early Omission of Spanish Clitics. In Chan, H., Jacob, H. and Kapia, E. eds., BUCLD 32: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, Mass: Cascadilla Press, 72–83.Google Scholar
Castilla, A. and Pérez-Leroux, A. T.. (2010). Omissions and Substitutions in Spanish Object Clitics: Developmental Optionality as a Property of the Representational System. Language Acquisition 17: 2–25.Google Scholar
Castilla-Earls, A., Restrepo, M.A., Perez-Leroux, A. T., Gray, S., Holmes, P., Gail, D. and Chen, Z.. (2016). Interactions between Bilingual Effects and Language Impairment: Exploring Grammatical Markers in Spanish-Speaking Bilingual Children. Applied Psycholinguistics 37(5):1147–1173.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Childers, J. B. and Tomasello, M.. (2001). The Role of Pronouns in Young Children’s Acquisition of the English Transitive Construction. Developmental Psychology 37(6): 739–748.Google Scholar
Chillier, L., Arabatzi, M., Baranzini, L., Cronel-Ohayon, S., Deonna, T., Dubé, S., Franck, J., Frauenfelder, U., Hamann, C., Rizzi, L., Starke, M. and Zesiger, P.. (2001). The acquisition of French pronouns in normal children and in children with specific language impairment (SLI). In: Proceedings of Early Lexicon Acquisition [CD]. Lyon, France.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1986) Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origins and Use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (2001). Beyond Explanatory Adequacy. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics, 20. Cambridge: Mass.Google Scholar
Cheng, L. and Sybesma, R.. (1998). On Dummy Objects and the Transitivity of Run. In van Bezooijen, R. and Kager, R., eds., Linguistics in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: AVT/John Benjamins Publishing, 81–93.Google Scholar
Chung, S. and Ladusaw, W. A.. (2003). Restriction and Saturation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. (1993). Preferred Argument Structure in Korean Acquisition. In Clark, E., ed., Proceedings of the 25th Annual Child Language Research Forum. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications, 307–314.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. (1997). Discourse Motivations for Referential Choice in Korean Acquisition. In Sohn, H.–M. and Haig, J., eds., Japanese/Korean linguistics 6. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications, 639–659.Google Scholar
Cobo-Lewis, A., Pearson, B. Z., Eilers, R. E. and Umbel, V. C.. (2002a). Effects of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education on Oral and Written English Skills: A Multifactor Study of Standardized Test Outcomes. In Oller, D. K. and Eilers, R. E., eds., Language and Literacy in Bilingual Children. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 64–97.Google Scholar
Cobo-Lewis, A., Pearson, B. Z., Eilers, R. E. and Umbel, V. C.. (2002b). Effects of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education on Oral and Written Spanish Skills: A Multifactor Study of Standardized Test Outcomes. In Oller, D. K. and Eilers, R. E., eds., Language and Literacy in Bilingual Children. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 98–117.Google Scholar
Coene, M. and Avram, L.. (2011). An Asymmetry in the Acquisition of Accusative Clitics in Child Romanian. In Grimm, A., Muller, A., Hamann, C. and Ruigendijk, E., eds., Comprehension-Production Asymmetries in Child Language. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter, SOLA Series, 39–67.Google Scholar
Cornish, F. (1999). Anaphora, Discourse and Understanding: Evidence from English and French. Gloucestershire: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Costa, J. and Lobo, M.. (2007). Clitic Omission, Null Objects or Both in the Acquisition of European Portuguese? In Bauuw, S., Drijkoningen, F. and Pinto, M., eds., Romance languages and linguistic theory 2005: Selected Papers from “Going Romance”. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 59–72.Google Scholar
Costa, J., Lobo, M., Carmona, J. and Silva, C.. (2008). Clitic Omission in European Portuguese: Correlation with Null Objects? In Gavarró, A., and Freitas, M. J., eds., Language Acquisition and Development: Proceedings of GALA 2007. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press, 133–143.Google Scholar
Costa, J. and Lobo, M.. (2010). Clitic Omission Is Null Object: Evidence from Comprehension. In Costa, J., Castro, A., Lobo, M. and Pratas, F., eds., Language Acquisition and Development. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press, 96–106Google Scholar
Costa, J. and Lobo, M. and Silva, C.. (2012). Which Category Replaces an Omitted Clitic? The Case of European Portuguese. In Guijarro-Fuentes, P., and Larrañaga, M. Pilar, eds. Pronouns and Clitics in Early Acquisition. Berlin/New York: Mouton DeGruyter, 105–130.Google Scholar
Crain, S. and Thornton, R.. (1998). Investigations in Universal Grammar: A Guide to Experiments on the Acquisition of Syntax and Semantics, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Croft, W. (1991). Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations: The Cognitive Organization of Information, Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Cuervo, M. C. (2014). Alternating Unaccusatives and the Distribution of Roots. Lingua, 141, 48–70.Google Scholar
Culbertson, J. (2010). Convergent Evidence for Categorial Change in French: From Subject Clitic to Agreement Marker. Language, 86(1), 85–132.Google Scholar
Culbertson, J. and Legendre, G.. (2008). Qu’en est-il des clitiques sujet en français oral contemporain? Proceedings of the 1er Congres mondial de Linguistique Francaise. 1, 2663–2674.Google Scholar
Cummins, S. and Roberge, Y.. (2004). Null Objects in French and English. In Auger, J., Clements, C. and Vance, B., eds., Contemporary Approaches to Romance Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 121–138.Google Scholar
Cummins, S. and Roberge, Y.. (2005). A Modular Account of Null Objects in French. Syntax, 8(1), 44–64.Google Scholar
Dale, P.S., Dionne, G., Eley, T.C. and Plomin, R.. (2000). Lexical and Grammatical Development: A Behavioral Genetic Perspective. Journal of Child Language, 27(3), 619–642.Google Scholar
De Cat, C. (2004). A Fresh Look at How Young Children Encode New Referents. IRAL, 42, 111–127.Google Scholar
De Cat, C. (2007). French Dislocation without Movement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 25, 485–534.Google Scholar
De Cat, C. (2009). Experimental Evidence for Preschoolers’ Mastery of “Topic”. Language Acquisition, 16, 224–239.Google Scholar
De Houwer, A. (1990). The Acquisition of Two Languages from Birth: A Case Study, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De la Mora, J., Paradis, J., Grinstead, J., Flores, B. and Sanchez, M.. (2004). Object clitics in Spanish-speaking children with and without SLI. Poster presented at the 25th Annual Symposium on Research in Child Language Disorders, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Déchaine, R.–M. (2015). What “Spell-Out” reveals: Niger-Congo prosodification constraints the syntax-semantics interface, ms. University of British Columbia. http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/002085Google Scholar
Demuth, K. (1996). The prosodic structure of early words. In Morgan, J., and Demuth, K., eds., Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 171–184.Google Scholar
Demuth, K. and Tremblay, A.. (2008). Prosodically-Conditioned Variability in Children’s Production of French Determiners. Journal of Child Language, 35, 99–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Desclés, J.–P. (1998). Transitivité sémantique, transitivité syntaxique. In Rousseau, A., ed. La transitivité. Villeneuve-d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion, 161–180.Google Scholar
De Swart, H. (1998). Aspect Shift and Coercion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16, 347–385.Google Scholar
Diesing, M. (1992). Indefinites, Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dionne, G., Dale, Ph. S., Boivin, M. and Plomin, R.. (2003). Genetic Evidence for Bidirectional Effects of Early Lexical and Grammatical Development. Child Development, 74, 394–412.Google Scholar
Di Sciullo, A. M., and Isac, D.. (2008). The Asymmetry of Merge. Biolinguistics, 2, 260–290.Google Scholar
Dixon, J. and Marchman, V.. (2007). Grammar and the Lexicon: Developmental Ordering in Language Acquisition. Child Development, 78, 190–212.Google Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, C. (1998). Impersonal se constructions in Romance and the passivization of unergatives. Linguistic Inquiry, 29, 399–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elliott, M. and Pirvulescu, M.. (2015). Bilingual Delay in the Acquisition of Direct Object Clitics in the Spanish of Bilingual Spanish-French Children, paper presented at Going Romance – 28th Symposium on Romance Linguistics, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Elliott, M. (in progress). Delay without Crosslinguisitc Influences: The Acquisition of Direct, Indirect Object Clitics and Clitic Sequences in the Spanish of 3–6-year-old Spanish-French Balanced Bilinguals, PhD Thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Epstein, -S. D. and Seely, D.. (2006). Derivations in Minimalism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Erteschik-Shir, N. and Rapoport, T.. (2004). Bare Aspect: A Theory of Syntactic Projection. In Guéron, J., and Lecarme, A., eds., The Syntax of Time. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 217–234.Google Scholar
Everaert, M. B. H., Huybregts, M. A. C., Chomsky, N., Berwick, R. C. and Bolhuis, J. J.. (2015). Structures, Not Strings: Linguistics as Part of the Cognitive Sciences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, 729–743.Google Scholar
Farkas, D. and de Swart, H.. (2003). The Semantics of Incorporation. From Argument Structure to Discourse Transparency, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Fellbaum, C. and Kegl, J.. (1989). Taxonomic Structures and Cross-Category Linking in the Lexicon. Escol, 93–104.Google Scholar
Fiengo, R. and Lasnik, H.. (1972). On Nonrecoverable Deletion in Syntax. Linguistic Inquiry, 3, 528.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1986). Pragmatically Controlled Zero Anaphora. In Nikiforidou, V., VanClay, M., Niepokuj, M. and Feder, D., eds., Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Calif.: Berkeley Linguistics Society Publications, 95–107.Google Scholar
Flores, C. and Barbosa, P.. (2014). When Reduced Input Leads to Delayed Acquisition: A Study on the Acquisition of Clitic Placement by Portuguese Heritage Speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism 18 (3), 304–325.Google Scholar
Flores, C. (2015). Losing a Language in Childhood: A Longitudinal Case Study on Language Attrition. Journal of Child Language 42 (3), 562–590.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. (1998). Unambiguous Triggers. Linguistic Inquiry, 29, 1–36.Google Scholar
Forsyth, J. (1970). A Grammar of Aspect; Usage and Meaning in the Russian Verb, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Frazier, L. (1999). On Sentence Interpretation. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Frolova, A. (2013). Développement de la transitivité verbale chez les enfants russes, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Fujino, H. and Sano, T.. (2002). Aspects of the Null Object Phenomenon in Child Spanish. In Pérez-Leroux, A. T., and Muñoz-Liceras, J., eds., The Acquisition of Spanish Morphosyntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 67–88.Google Scholar
Garcia Mayo, M. del P. and Slabakova, R.. (2015). Object Drop in L3 Acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism, 19(5), 483–498.Google Scholar
García Velasco, D. and Portero Muñoz, C.. (2002). Understood Objects in Functional Grammar. University of Amsterdam Working Papers in Functional Grammar 76. Amsterdam: Functional Grammar Foundation.Google Scholar
Gathercole, V., C., Mueller, S. and Thomas, E. M.. (2009). Bilingual First-Language Development: Dominant Language Takeover, Threatened Minority Language Take-Up. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(2), 213–237.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. and Baddeley, A.. (1993). Working Memory and Language, New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Gavarró, A., Torrens, V. and Wexler, K. (2010). Object Clitic Omission: Two Language Types. Language Acquisition, 17, 192–219.Google Scholar
Gavarró, A., Pérez-Leroux, A. T. and Roeper, T.. (2006). Definite and Bare Noun Contrasts in Child Catalan. In Torrens, V., and Escobar, L., eds., The Acquisition of Syntax in Romance Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Publishing, 51–68.Google Scholar
Gavruseva, E. and Thornton, R.. (2001). Getting it Right: Acquisition of Whose Questions in Child English. Language Acquisition 9(3), 229–267.Google Scholar
Gelman, R. and Williams, E. M. (1998). Enabling Constraints for Cognitive Development and Learning: A Domain-Specific Epigenetic Theory. In Kuhn, D. and Siegler, R., eds., Cognition, Perception, and Language, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 5th ed., Vol. 2, 575–630.Google Scholar
Gelman, S. (2003). The Essential Child: Origins of Essentialism in Everyday Thought, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genesee, F., Nicoladis, E. and Paradis, J.. (1995). Language Differentiation in Early Bilingual Development. Journal of Child Language, 22(3), 611–631.Google Scholar
Gillette, J., Gleitman, H., Gleitman, L. and Lederer, A.. (1999). Human Simulations of Vocabulary Learning. Cognition 73, 135–176.Google Scholar
Gillon, B. S. (2006). English Relational Words, Context Sensitivity and Implicit Arguments, Ms. McGill University.Google Scholar
Gleitman, L. (1990). Structural Sources of Verb Learning. Language Acquisition, 1, 1–63.Google Scholar
Gleitman, L., Cassidy, R., Nappa, K., Papafragou, R. A. and Trueswell, J. C.. (2005). Hard Words. Language Learning and Development, 1(1) 23–64.Google Scholar
Göksun, T., Küntay, A. and Naigles, L.. (2008). Turkish Children Use Morphosyntax in Extending Verb Meaning. Journal of Child Language, 35, 291–323.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. (2001). Patient Arguments of Causative Verbs Can Be Omitted: The Role of Information Structure in Argument Distribution. Language Science, 23, 503–524.Google Scholar
Gordishevsky, G. and Avrutin, S.. (2003). Subject and Object Omission in Child Russian. In Falk, Y. N., ed., IATL 19, University Ben-Gurion of Negev. Retrieved from http://linguistics.huji.ac.il/IATL/19/Google Scholar
Gordishevsky, G. and Avrutin, S.. (2004). Optional Omissions in an Optionally Null Subject Language. In van Kampen, J. and Baauw, S., eds., Proceedings of GALA 2003. LOT Occasional series 3, Utrecht University, 187–198.Google Scholar
Gould, I. (2015). Syntactic Learning from Ambiguous Evidence: Errors and End-States. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Gould, I. (2016). Learning Parameter Setting from Ambiguous Evidence: Parameter Interaction and the Case of Korean. In Kim, K., Umbal, P., Block, T., Chan, Q., Cheng, T., Finney, K., Katz, M., Nickel-Thompson, S. and Shorten, L., eds., Proceedings of the 33rd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 157–166.Google Scholar
Graf, E., Theakston, A., Lieven, E. and Tomasello, M.. (2014). Subject and Object Omission in Children’s Early Transitive Constructions: A Discourse-Pragmatic Approach. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(3), 701–727.Google Scholar
Greenfield, P. and Smith, J.. (1976). The Structure of Communication in Early Language Development. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grinstead, J. (2004). Subjects and Interface Delay in Child Spanish and Catalan. Language, 80 (1), 40–72.Google Scholar
Grüter, T. (2006). Object Clitics and Null Objects in the Acquisition of French, Ph.D. thesis, McGill University.Google Scholar
Grüter, T. (2007). Investigating Object Drop in Child French and English: A Truth Value Judgment Task. In Belikova, A., Meroni, L. and Umeda, M., eds., Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 102–113.Google Scholar
Grüter, T. and Crago, M.. (2012). Object Clitics and Their Omission in Child L2 French: The Contributions of Processing Limitations and L1 Transfer. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(3), 531–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guasti, M. T., Gavarró, A., de Lange, J. and Caprin, C.. (2008). Article Omission across Child Languages. Language Acquisition, 15(2), 89–119.Google Scholar
Haeckel, Ernst. (1866). Generelle Morphologie der Organismen: allgemeine Grundzüge der organischen Formen-Wissenschaft, mechanisch begründet durch die von Charles Darwin reformirte Descendenz-Theorie. Berlin: Verlag.Google Scholar
Hale, K. and Keyser, S. J.. (1991). On the Syntax of Argument Structure. Lexicon Project Working Papers 34. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
Hale, K. and Keyser, S. J.. (1993). On Argument Structure and the Lexical Expression of Syntactic Relations. In Hale, K. and Keyser, S. J., eds., The View from Building. 20, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 53–109.Google Scholar
Hale, K. and Keyser, S.. (2002). Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haegeman, L. (1987). Complement Ellipsis in English: Or, How to Cook without Objects. In Simon-Vandenbergen, A.–M., ed., Studies in Honour of René Derolez. University of Ghent, 248–261.Google Scholar
Hamann, C. (2003). Phenomena in French Normal and Impaired Language Acquisition and Their Implications for Hypotheses on Language Development. Probus, 15, 91–122.Google Scholar
Hamann, C., Tuller, L., Monjauze, C., Delage, H. and Henry, C.. (2007). (Un)successful Subordination in French-speaking Children and Adolescents with SLI. In Caunt-Nulton, H., Kulatilake, S. and Woo, I., eds., BUCLD 31: Proceedings of the 31st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press, 286–297Google Scholar
Hayiou-Thomas, M., Kovas, Y., Harlaar, N., Plomin, R., Bishop, D. and Dale, Ph.. (2006). Common Etiology for Diverse Language Skills in 4 1/2 Year-Old Twins. Journal of Child Language, 33, 339–368.Google Scholar
Heim, I. 2008. Features on Bound Pronouns. In Adger, D., Bejar, S. and Harbour, D., eds., Phi Theory: Phi Features across Interfaces and Modules. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 35–56.Google Scholar
Hendrickson, K. and Sundara, M.. (2017). Fourteen-Month-Olds’ Decontextualized Understanding of Words for Absent Objects. Journal of Child Language, 44 (1), 239–254.Google Scholar
Hervé, C., Serratrice, L. and Corley, M.. (2016). Dislocations in French–English Bilingual Children: An Elicitation Study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, FirstView Article, February 2016, 1–14.Google Scholar
Hill, V. and Roberge, Y.. (2006). A Locally Determined Verb Typology. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique, 5, 5–22.Google Scholar
Hill, V. and Pirvulescu, M. (2012). French Object Clitics, L1 and the Left Periphery. In Ferré, S., Prévost, P., Tuller, L. and Zebib, R., eds., Selected Proceedings of the Romance Turn IV Workshop on the Acquisition of Romance Languages. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Publishing Scholars, 169–189.Google Scholar
Hirakawa, M. (1993). Null Objects Versus Null Objects in an Early Grammar of Japanese. McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, 9, 30–45.Google Scholar
Holmberg, A. (2005). Is There a Little Pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, 533–564.Google Scholar
Holmberg, A. and Roberts, I.. (2014). Parameters and the Three Factors of Language Design. In Picallo, C., ed., Linguistic Variation in the Minimalist Framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 61–81.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. and Thompson, S.. (1980). Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse. Language, 56, 253–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornstein, N., Nunes, J. and Grohmann, K. K.. (2005). Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hsin, L., Legendre, G. and Omaki, A.. (2013). Priming Cross-Linguistic Interference in Spanish-English Bilingual Children. In Baiz, S., Goldman, N. and Hawkes, R., eds., BUCLD 37: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press, 165–177.Google Scholar
Huang, J. (1982). Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Hudson Kam, C. and Newport, E.. (2005). Regularizing Unpredictable Variation: the Roles of Adult and Child Learners in Language Formation and Change. Language Learning and Development, 1(2), 151–195.Google Scholar
Hughes, M. and Allen, S.. (2013). The Effect of Individual Discourse-Pragmatic Features on Referential Choice in Child English. Journal of Pragmatics, 56, 15–30.Google Scholar
Hulk, A. (1997). The Acquisition of French Object Pronouns by a Dutch/French Bilingual Child. In Sorace, A., Heycock, C. and Shillcock, R., eds., Proceedings of GALA’97 Conference on Language Acquisition. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press, 521–527.Google Scholar
Hulk, A. and Müller, N.. (2000). Bilingual First Language Acquisition at the Interface between Syntax and Pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3(3), 227–244.Google Scholar
Hyams, N. (1983). The Pro Drop Parameter in Child Grammars. In Barlow, M., Flickinger, D. and Wescoat, M., eds., Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, vol. II. Mass.: Stanford University, 126–139.Google Scholar
Hyams, N. (1986). Language Acquisition and the Theory of Parameters. Dortrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Ingham, R. (1993/1994). Input and Learnability: Direct Object Omissibility in English. Language Acquisition, 3, 95–120.Google Scholar
Ivanov, I. (2008). L1 Acquisition of Bulgarian Object Clitics: Unique Checking Constraint or Failure to Mark Referentiality. In Chan, H., Jacob, H., Kapia, E., eds., Proceedings of the 32nd BUCLD, Vol.1. Somerville: Cascadilla Press, 189–200.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, C., Müller, N., Kang, O.–K., Riemer, B. and Rigaut, C.. (1996). On the Acquisition of the Pronominal System in French and German. In Stringfellow, A., Cahana-Amitay, D., Hughes, E. and Zukowski, A., eds., Proceedings of the 20th BUCLD. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press, 374–385.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, C., Müller, N., Riemer, B. and Rigaut, C.. (1997). The Case of Subject and Object Omissions in French and German. In Hugues, E., Hugues, M. and Greenhill, A., eds., Proceedings of the 21st BUCLD. Somerville, Mass: Cascadilla Press, 331–342.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, C., Nash, L., Rigaut, C. and Gérard, C.–L.. (1998). Determiners and Clitic Pronouns in French-Speaking Children with SLI. Language Acquisition, 7, 113–160.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, C. and Rigaut, C.. (2000). L’acquisition des clitiques nominatifs et des clitiques objets en Français. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 45, 119–157.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, C. and Nash, L.. (forthcoming). Why accusative clitics are avoided in normal and impaired language development. In Jakubowicz, C., Nash, L. and Wexler, K., eds., Essays in Syntax, Morphology and Phonology in SLI. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jones, M. A. (1988). Cognate Objects and the Case Filter. Journal of Linguistics 24: 89–110.Google Scholar
Katz, J. and Postal, P.. (1964). An Integrated Theory of Linguistic Descriptions, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kayama, Y. (2003). L1 Acquisition of Japanese Zero Pronouns: The Effect of Discourse Factors. In Burelle, S., and Somesfalean, S., eds., Proceedings of the 2003 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association. Retrieved from http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~claacl/2003/, 109–120.Google Scholar
Kim, Y.–J. (2000). Subject/Object Drop in the Acquisition of Korean: A Cross-Linguistics Study. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 9 (4), 325–351.Google Scholar
Kowalski, A. and Yang, C.. (2012). Verb Islands in Adult and Child Language. In Biller, A. K., Chung, E. Y. and Kimball, A. E., eds., BUCLD 36: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, Mass: Cascadilla Press, 281–289.Google Scholar
Krivochen, D. (2013). Towards a Geometrical Syntax: a Formalization of Radical Minimalism. Ms. Universidad Nacional de La Plata.Google Scholar
Krivochen, D. G. and Kosta, P.. (2013). Eliminating Empty Categories: A Radically Minimalist View on Their Ontology and Justification, Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Kuroda, S.–Y. (1972). The Categorical Judgement and the Thetic Judgement: Evidence from Japanese syntax. Foundations of Language, 9, 153–185.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representation of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. and Lemoine, K. (1996). Vers une grammaire des compléments zéro en français parlé. In Chuquet, J., and Frid, M., eds., Absence de marques et représentation de l’absence. Travaux Linguistiques du Cerlico 9, Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 279–309.Google Scholar
Larjavaara, M. (2000). Présence ou absence de l’objet. Limites du possible en français contemporain, Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica.Google Scholar
Larson, M. (2002). The Semantics of Object Drop in Baule. In Nissim, M., ed., Proceedings of the seventh ESSLLI Student Session. 1–10.Google Scholar
Lasnik, H. (2001). Subjects, Objects, and the EPP. In Davies, W. and Dubinsky, S., eds., Objects and Other Subjects: Grammatical Functions, Functional Categories, and Configurationality. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 103–121.Google Scholar
Lavidas, N. (2013). Null and Cognate Objects and Changes in (In)transitivity: Evidence from the History of English. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 60, 69–106.Google Scholar
Lavidas, N. (2016). Development of Transitivity in a Language without/with Object Clitics: English vs. Greek (A Diachronic Contrastive Study). In Mattheoudakis, M. and Nicolaidis, K., eds., Selected Papers of the 21st International Symposium on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics (ISTAL 21), Prothiki: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 186–210.Google Scholar
Lazard, G. (1994). L’actance. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Lebeaux, D. (1988). Language Acquisition and the Form of the Grammar, Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Legate, J. and Yang, C.. (2007). Morphosyntactic Learning and the Development of Tense. Language Acquisition, 14, 315–344.Google Scholar
Lee, T. H.–T. (2000). Finiteness and Null Arguments in Child Cantonese. The Tsinghua Journal of Chinese Studies, New Series 30, 365–393.Google Scholar
Lee, J.N. and Naigles, L.R.. (2005). The Input to Verb Learning in Mandarin Chinese: A Role for Syntactic Bootstrapping. Developmental Psychology, 41(3), 529–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levin, B. (1999). Objecthood: An Event Structure Perspective. In Billings, S., Boyle, J. and Griffith, A., eds., Proceedings of CLS 35, Vol. I: The Main Session. ILL: Chicago Linguistic Society Billings, 223–247.Google Scholar
Levin, B. (2000). Aspect, lexical semantic representation, and argument expression. In Simpson, A., ed., Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 413–429.Google Scholar
Levin, B. (2013). Verb Classes Thinking and across Languages. Ms. Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive Meaning: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lizsckowski, D. (1999). On the Acquisition of Pronominal Object Clitics. Unpublished thesis. Harvard University.Google Scholar
Longa, V. and Lorenzo, G.. (2008). What about a (Really) Minimalist Theory of Language Acquisition? Linguistics, 46, 541–570.Google Scholar
Lopez, L. (2003). Steps for a Well-Adjusted Dislocation. Studia Linguistica, 57(3), 193–231.Google Scholar
Lorenzo, G. and Longa, V.. (2009). Beyond Generative Geneticism: Rethinking Language Acquisition from a Developmentalist Point of View. Lingua, 119, 1300–1315.Google Scholar
Luraghi, S. (2004). Null Objects in Latin and Greek and the Relevance of Linguistic Typology for Language Reconstruction. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, JIES Monograph 49, 234–256.Google Scholar
Luraghi, S. (2010). Transitivity, Intransitivity and Diathesis in Hittite. In ИНДОЕВРОПЕЙСКОЕ ЯЗЫКОЗНАНИЕ И КЛАССИЧЕСКАЯ ФИЛОЛОГИЯ – XIV, vol. 2. St. Petersburg, Nauka, 133–154.Google Scholar
Macnamara, J. (1972). Cognitive Basis of Language Learning in Infants. Psychological Review, 79, 1–14.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analysing Talk, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Manzini, R. and Wexler, K.. (1987). Parameters, Binding Theory, and Learnability. Linguistic Inquiry, 18, 413–444.Google Scholar
Marchman, V. A., Fernald, A. and Hurtado, N.. (2010). How Vocabulary Size in Two Languages Relates to Efficiency in Spoken Word Recognition by Young Spanish–English Bilinguals. Journal of Child Language, 37(4), 817–840.Google Scholar
Marinis, T. (2000). The Acquisition of Clitic Objects in Modern Greek: Single Clitics, Clitic Doubling, Clitic Left Dislocation. ZAS Papers in Linguistics, 15, 259–281.Google Scholar
Massam, D. (1990). Cognate Objects as Thematic Objects. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 35, 161–190.Google Scholar
Massam, D. (2009). Noun Incorporation: Essentials and Extensions, Language and Linguistics Compass 3/4: 1076–1096.Google Scholar
Massam, D. and Roberge, Y.. (1989). Recipe Context Null Subjects. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 134–139.Google Scholar
Mateu, V. E. (2015). Object Clitic Omission in Child Spanish: Evaluating Representational and Processing Accounts. Language Acquisition, 22, 240–284.Google Scholar
Matsuo, A., Kita, S., Shinya, Y., Wood, G. C. and Naigles, L. (2012) Japanese Two-Year-Olds Use Morphosyntax to Learn Novel Verb Meanings. Journal of Child Language, 39(3), 637–663.Google Scholar
Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston, A. and Tomasello, M.. (2006). The Effect of Perceptual Availability and Prior Discourse on Young Children’s Use or Referring Expressions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 403–422.Google Scholar
Matthewson, L. (2013). On How (Not) to Uncover Cross-Linguistic Variation. In Keine, S. and Slogett, S., eds., Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 42, vol. II. Amherst, Mass.: GLSA, 323–342.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2001). The Simultaneous Acquisition of Two First Languages: Early Differentiation and Subsequent Development of Grammars. In Cenoz, J. and Genesee, F., eds., Trends in Bilingual Acquisition, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 11–41.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2007). On Autonomous Syntactic Development in Multiple First Language Acquisition. In Caunt-Nulton, H., Kulatilake, S. and Kulatilake, I. W., eds., Proceedings of the 31st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 1). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 25–45.Google Scholar
Merlo, P. and Stevenson, S.. (2001). Automatic Verb Classification Based on Statistical Distributions of Argument Structure. Computational Linguistics, 27, 373–408.Google Scholar
Moscati, V. (2014). Discourse Adherence and the Pronominal Status of Null-Objects in French-Speaking Children. Journal of Child Language Acquisition and Development 2.4: 1–15.Google Scholar
Müller, N., Crysmann, B. and Kaiser, G.. (1996). Interactions Between the Acquisition of French Object Drop and the Development of the C-System. Language Acquisition, 5, 35–63.Google Scholar
Müller, N. and Hulk, A.. (2001). Cross-Linguistic Influence in Bilingual Language Acquisition: Italian and French as Recipient Languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 1–21.Google Scholar
Müller, N. (2004). Null-Arguments in Bilingual Children: French Topics. In Paradis, J., and Prévost, Ph., eds., The Acquisition of French in Different Contexts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 275–304.Google Scholar
Müller, N., Schmitz, K., Cantone, K. and Kupisch, T.. (2006). Null Arguments in Monolingual Children: A Comparison of Italian and French. In Torrens, V. and Escobar, L., eds., The Acquisition of Syntax in Romance Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 69–93.Google Scholar
Mykhaylyk, R., Rodina, Y. and Anderssen, M.. (2013). Ditransitive Constructions in Russian and Ukrainian: Effect of Givenness on Word Order. Lingua, 137, 271–289.Google Scholar
Mykhaylyk, R. and Sopata, A.. (Forthcoming). Object Pronouns, Clitics, and Omissions in Child Polish and Ukrainian. Applied psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
Naigles, L. R. (2002). Form Is Easy, Meaning Is Hard: Resolving a Paradox in Early Child Language. Cognition, 86, 157–199.Google Scholar
Naigles, L.R. and Lehrer, N.. (2002). Language-General and Language-Specific Influences on Children’s Acquisition of Argument Structure: A Comparison of French and English. Journal of Child Language, 29(3), 545–566.Google Scholar
Newmeyer, F. J. (2003). Grammar Is Grammar and Usage Is Usage. Language, 79, 682–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, F. J. (2005). Possible and Probable Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nicoladis, E. (2012). Cross-Linguistic Influence in French–English Bilingual Children’s Possessive Constructions. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15:2, 320–328.Google Scholar
Ninio, A. (2015). Learning Transitive Verbs from Single-Word Verbs in the Input by Young Children Acquiring English. Journal of Child Language, available on CJO2015.Google Scholar
Noailly, M. (1997). Les mystères de la transitivité invisible. Langages, 127, 96–109.Google Scholar
O’Grady, W., Yamashita, Y. and Cho, S.. (2008). Object Drop in Japanese and Korean. Language Acquisition, 15, 58–68.Google Scholar
Olguin, R. and Tomasello, M.. (1993). Twenty-Five-Month-Old Children Do Not Have a Grammatical Category of Verb. Cognitive Development, 8, 245–272.Google Scholar
Oshima-Takane, Y., Ariyama, J., Kobayashi, T., Katerelos, M. and Poulin-Dubois, D.. (2011). Early Verb Learning in 20-Month-Old Japanese-Speaking Children. Journal of Child Language, 38(3), 455–484.Google Scholar
Panagiotidis, P. (2002). Pronouns, Clitics and Empty Nouns: Pronominality and Licensing in Syntax, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Pannemann, M. (2007). DP Acquisition as Structure Unravelling, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Paradis, J. and Genesee, F.. (1996). Syntactic Acquisition in Bilingual Children: Autonomous or Interdependent? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 1–25.Google Scholar
Paradis, J. and Genesee, F.. (1997). On Continuity and the Emergence of Functional Categories in Bilingual First Language Acquisition. Language Acquisition, 6, 91–124.Google Scholar
Paradis, J. and Navarro, S.. (2003). Subject Realization and Cross-Linguistic Interference in the Bilingual Acquisition of Spanish and English: What Is the Role of the Input? Journal of Child Language, 30, 371–393Google Scholar
Paradis, J., Nicoladis, E. and Crago, M.. (2007). French-English Bilingual Children’s Acquisition of Past Tense. In Caunt-Nulton, H., Kulatilake, S. and Woo, I.–H., eds., BUCLD 31 Proceedings. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 497–507.Google Scholar
Pearson, B. Z., Fernández, S. C. and Oller, D. Kimbrough. (1993). Lexical Development in Bilingual Infants and Toddlers: Comparison to Monolingual Norms. Language Learning, 43(1), 93–120.Google Scholar
Pearson, B. Z. (2008). Raising a Bilingual Child: A Step-by-Step Guide for Parents. NY: Random House.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A.T. (2005). Number Problems in Children. In Gurski, C., ed., Proceedings of the 2005 Canadian Linguistics Association Annual Conference, 1–12. http://ling.uwo.ca/publications/CLA-ACL/CLA-ACL2005.htmGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T. and Roeper, T.. (1999). Scope and the Structure of Bare Nominals: Evidence from Child Language. Linguistics, 37, 927–960Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. (2006a). Early Object Omission in Child French and English. In Nishida, C. and Montreuil, J.–P. Y., eds., New Perspectives in Romance Linguistics, (vol. I). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 213–228.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M., Roberge, Y., Thomas, D. and Tieu, L.. (2006b) Variable Input and Object Drop in Child Language. In Gurski, C. and Radisic, M., eds., Proceedings of the Canadian Linguistics Association Conference, http://ling.uwo.ca/publications/CLA2006/Perez-Leroux_etal.pdf.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. (2008a). Null Objects in Child Language: Syntax and the Lexicon, Lingua, 118(3), 370–398.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. (2008b). Children’s Interpretation of Null Objects under the Scope of Negation. In Jones, S., ed., Proceedings of the 2008 meeting of the Canadian Linguistics Association. Retrieved from www.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2008/actes2008.htmlGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. (2009a). Bilingualism as a Window into the Language Faculty: The Acquisition of Objects in French-Speaking Children in Bilingual and Monolingual Contexts. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12 (1), 1–16Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. (2009b). On the Semantic Properties of Implicit Objects in Young Children’s Elicited Production. In Chandlee, J., Franchini, J., Lord, M. S. and Rheiner, G.–M., eds., Proceedings of the 33 Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, Mass: Cascadilla Press, 398–409.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. (2011). Topicalization and Object Drop in Child Language. First Language 31(2), 1–20.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Castilla-Earls, A. P. and Brunner, J.. (2012). General and Specific Effects of Lexicon in Grammar: Determiner and Object Pronoun Omissions in Child Spanish. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 55, 313–327.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y., Castilla-Earls, A. P.. (2013). On the Development of Null Implicit Objects in L1 English. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 58(3), 443–464.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T. and Kahnemuyipour, A.. (2014). News, Somewhat Exaggerated: Commentary on Ambridge, Pine, and Lieven. Language, 90(3), 115–125.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D. and Torrego, E.. (2004). Tense, Case, and the Nature of Syntactic Categories. In Guéron, J. and Lecarme, A., eds., The Syntax of Time. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 495–537.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1984). Language Learnability and Language Development, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and Cognition: The Acquisition of Argument Structure, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M. (2006a). Theoretical Implications of Clitic Omission in Early French: Spontaneous vs. Elicited Production. Catalan Journal of Linguistics – Special Edition on Acquisition, 5, 221–236.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M. (2006b). The Acquisition of Object Clitics in French L1: Spontaneous vs. Elicited Production. In Belletti, A., Bennati, E., Chesi, C., Di Domenico, E. and Ferrari, I., eds., Proceedings of GALA 2005. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press, 450–462.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. (1999). Objects and the Structure of Imperatives. In Authier, J.–M., Bullock, B. and Reed, L., eds., Formal Perspectives on Romance Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 211–226.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M. and Roberge, Y.. (2005). Licit and Illicit Null Objects in L1 French. In Gess, R. and Rubin, E., eds., Theoretical and Experimental Approaches to Romance Linguistics, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 197–212.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M. and Belzil, I.. (2008). The Acquisition of Past Participle Agreement in Québec French L1. Language Acquisition, 15:2, 75–88.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M., Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Roberge, Y. and Strik, N.. (2011) Pousse-le! Clitic Production across Tasks in Young French-Speaking Children, Presentation, LSRL 41, University of Ottawa, May 5–7 2011.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M., Pérez-Leroux, A. T. and Roberge, Y.. (2012). A Bidirectional Study of Object Omissions in French-English Bilinguals. In Braunmüller, K., Gabriel, C. and Hänel-Faulhaber, B., eds., Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 171–188.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M., Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Roberge, Y., Strik, N. and Thomas, D.. (2014). Bilingual Effects: Exploring Object Omission in Pronominal Languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(3), 495–510.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M. and Strik, N.. (2014). The Acquisition of Object Clitic Features in French: A Comprehension Study. Lingua, 144, 58–71.Google Scholar
Postal, P. and Pullum, G.. (1988). Expletive Noun Phrases in Subcategorized Positions. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 635–670.Google Scholar
Prévost, P. (2006). The Phenomenon of Object Omission in Child L2 French. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9 (3), 263–280.Google Scholar
Pye, C. (1994). A Cross-Linguistic Approach to the Causative Alternation. In Levy, Y., ed., Other Children, Other Languages. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 243–264.Google Scholar
Pylkkänen, L. (2008). Introducing Arguments, Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Radford, A. (1990). Syntactic Theory and the Acquisition of English Syntax: The Nature of Early Child Grammar of English, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Raposo, E. (1986). On the Null Object in European Portuguese. In Jaeggli, O. and Silva-Corvalán, C., eds., Studies in Romance Linguistics. Dordrecht: Foris, 373–390.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M. and Levin, B. (2005). Change of State Verbs: Implications for Theories of Argument Projection. In Erteschik-Shir, N. and Rapoport, T., eds., The Syntax of Aspect. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 274–286.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, M. (2014). Lexical Content and Context: The Causative Alternation in English Revisited. Lingua, 141, 8–29.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. (1981) Pragmatics and Linguistics: An Analysis of Sentence Topics. Philosophica, 27, 53–94.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. and Reuland, E. (1993). Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry, 24: 657–720.Google Scholar
Ritter, E. and Wiltschko, M. (2016). Humanness as an Alternative to Case-Licensing. Paper Delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Linguistic Association, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1986). Null Objects in Italian and the Theory of Pro. Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 501–557.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2002). On the Grammatical Basis of Language Development: A Case Study, Manuscript Retrieved from www.ciscl.unisi.it/pubblicazioni.htm#2002Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2009). On the Grammatical Basis of Language Development: A Case Study. In Cinque, G. and Kayne, R., eds., Handbook of Comparative Syntax. Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press, 70–109.Google Scholar
Roberge, Y. (1990). The Syntactic Recoverability of Null Arguments: Montréal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
Roberge, Y. and Troberg, M.. (2007). Les objets indirects non thématiques en français. In Radišić, M. ed., Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association. www.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2007/Roberge_Troberg.pdf.Google Scholar
Roberge, Y. (2002). Transitivity Requirement Effects and the EPP. Paper Delivered at the Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL). Vancouver.Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (1992). From the Initial State to V2: Acquisition Principles in Action. In Meisel, J., ed., The Acquisition of Verb Placement: Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 333–370.Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (1999). Universal Bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 169–186.Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (2004). How Not to Undermine the Goal of an Acquisition Theory. Journal of Child Language, 31, 500–504.Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (2006). Watching Noun Phrases Emerge: Seeking Compositionality. In Van Geenhoven, V., ed., Semantics in Acquisition. Dordrecht: Springer, 37–64.Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (2007). The Prism of Grammar, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, P. S. (1967). The Grammar of English Predicate Complement Constructions. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Roussou, A. and Tsimpli, I. M.. (2007). Clitics and Transitivity. In Alexiadou, A., ed., Studies in the Morpho-Syntax of Greek, Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 138–174.Google Scholar
Rozendaal, M. (2006). The Acquisition of the Syntax-Pragmatics Interface in French L1: Evidence from DP’s and Pronouns. Paper Delivered at the Romance Turn 2, Utrecht.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2016). The Concept of Explanatory Adequacy. In Roberts, I., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Universal Grammar. Oxford University Press: New York.Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (1999). Universal Bilingualism. Bilingualism, Language and Cognition 2, 169–186.Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (2014). Strict Interface Principles and the Acquisition Engine: From Unlabeled to Labeled and Minimal Modular Contact. Language Sciences 46, 115–132.Google Scholar
Roeper, T. (2016). Multiple Grammars and the Logic of Learnability in Second Language acquisition. Frontiers in Psychology 7, 1–15.Google Scholar
Ruda, M. (2014). Missing Objects in Special Registers: The Syntax of Null Objects in English, Canadian Journal of Linguistics 59, 339–372.Google Scholar
Runner, J. T. (2000). The External Object Hypothesis and the Case of Object Expletives. In Crosswhite, K. and Magnuso, J. S., eds., University of Rochester Working Papers in the Language Sciences, 1 (2), 257–269.Google Scholar
Runner, J. T. and Baker, A.. (2015). New Evidence for Sensitivity to Syntax in English Verb Phrase Ellipsis, poster presentation, The 28th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, New York, March 19–21.Google Scholar
Sakas, W. and Fodor, J.. (2012). Disambiguating Syntactic Triggers. Language Acquisition, 19(2), 83–143.Google Scholar
Salomo, D., Lieven, E. and Tomasello, M.. (2010). Young Children’s Sensitivity to New and Given Information When Answering Predicate-Focus Questions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 101–115.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, J. (1997). Direct Object Scrambling and Clitic Placement in Dutch and Italian Child Language, Ph.D. thesis, University of California Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, J. (2000). The Acquisition of Direct Object Scrambling and Clitic Placement, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, J. and Matthewson, L.. (2005). Grammar and Pragmatics in the Acquisition of Article Systems. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 23, 53–101.Google Scholar
Scheele, A. F., Leseman, P. P. M. and Mayo, A. Y.. (2010). The Home Language Environment of Monolingual and Bilingual Children and Their Language Proficiency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31. 117–140.Google Scholar
Schmitz, K., Cantone, K., Müller, N. and Kupisch, T.. (2004). Clitic Realizations and Omissions in Early Child Grammar: A Comparison of Italian and French, paper presented at the Romance Turn Workshop on the acquisition of Romance Languages, Madrid, Spain.Google Scholar
Schwenter, S. (2006). Null Objects across South America. In Face, T. and Klee, C., eds., Selected Proceedings of the 8th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Press, 23–36.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L. (2005). The Role of Discourse Pragmatics in the Acquisition of Subjects in Italian. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 437–462.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., Paoli, S.. (2004). Cross-Linguistic Influence at the Syntax–Pragmatics Interface: Subjects and Objects in English–Italian Bilingual and Monolingual Acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 183–205.Google Scholar
Seston, R., Golinkoff, R. Michnick, Ma, W. and Hirsh-Pasek, K.. (2009). Vacuuming with My Mouth?: Children’s Ability to Comprehend Novel Extensions of Familiar Verbs. Cognitive Development, 24, 113–124.Google Scholar
Shetreet, E., Friedmann, N. and Hadar, U.. (2010). Cortical Representation of Verbs with Optional Complements: The Theoretical Contribution of fMRI. Human Brain Mapping, 31, 770–785.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. Á. (2011). Conditions on Argument Drop. Linguistic Inquiry, 42, 267–304.Google Scholar
Skarabela, B., Allen, S. and Scott-Phillips, T.. (2013). Joint Attention Helps Explain Why Children Omit New Referents. Journal of Pragmatics, 56: 5–14.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1985). Introduction: Why Study Acquisition Crosslinguistically. In Slobin, D., ed., The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition. Volume I: Data. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 3–24.Google Scholar
Smith, M. A. (2011) Everyday Talk Informs Toddlers’ Novel Verb Generalizations. First Language, 31(4), 404–424.Google Scholar
Snyder, W. (2007). Child Language: The Parametric Approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Snider, N. and Runner, J.. (2010). Structural Parallelism Aids Ellipsis and Anaphora Resolution: Evidence from Eye Movements to Semantic and Phonological Neighbors. Talk Presented at 16th Annual Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing. September 7–9, York, UK.Google Scholar
Sorace, A., Serratrice, L., Filiaci, F. and Baldo, M.. (2009). Discourse Conditions on Subject Pronoun Realization: Testing the Linguistic Intuitions of Older Bilingual Children. Lingua, 119, 460–477.Google Scholar
Stampe, D. (1993). Object Agreement Summary, Linguist List 4.447. https://linguistlist.org/issues/4/4-447.html.Google Scholar
Tedeschi, R. (2008). The Syntax-Discourse Interface: Referential Expressions in Early Italian. In Gavarró, A. and Freitas, J., eds., Language Acquisition and Development: Proceedings of GALA 2007. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press, 457–466.Google Scholar
Tedeschi, R. (2009). Acquisition at the Interfaces: A Case Study on Object Clitics in Early Italian, Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Tenny, C. (1994). Aspectual Roles and the Syntax/Semantics Interface, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Theakston, A. L., Lieven, E., Pine, J. M. and Rowland, C. F.. (2001). The Role of Performance Limitations in the Acquisition of Verb-Argument Structure: An Alternative Account. Journal of Child Language, 28, 127–152.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. L. (1979). Ellipsis: The Interplay of Sentence Structure and Context. Lingua 47, 43–68.Google Scholar
Tieu, L. S. (2007). Transitivity Requirements in Chinese: Putting the Generic Object in Context. In Radišić, M., ed., Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association. http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~cla-acl/actes2007/Tieu.pdf.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1992). First verbs: A Case Study of Early Grammatical Development, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2000). Do Young Children Have Adult Syntactic Competence? Cognition, 74, 209–253.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2001). The Item-Based Nature of Children’s Early Syntactic Development. In Tomasello, M. and Bates, E., eds., Language Development: The Essential Readings. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 169–186.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a Language. A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., Akhtar, N., Dodson, K. and Rekau, L.. (1997). Differential Productivity in Young Children’s Use of Nouns and Verbs. Journal of Child Language, 24, 373–387.Google Scholar
Trzyna, M. M. (2015). Acquisition of Object Clitics in Child Polish: Evidence for Three Developmental Stages. Lingua, 161, 67–81.Google Scholar
Tsakali, V. and Wexler, K. (2004). Why Children Omit Clitics in Some Languages but Not in Others: New Evidence from Greek. In van Kampen, J. and Baauw, S., eds., Proceedings of GALA 2003. Utrecht: LOT Occasional Series, 493–504.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I.M. (2014). Early, Late or Very Late? Timing Acquisition and Bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4(3), 283–313.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I.M., Papadopoulou, D.. (2006). Aspect and Argument Realization: A Study on Antecedentless Null Objects in Greek. Lingua 116, 1595–1615.Google Scholar
Tuller, L., Délage, H., Monjauze, C., Piller, A.–G., and Barthez, M.–A.. (2011). Clitic Production as a Measure of Atypical Language Development in French. Lingua, 121, 423–441.Google Scholar
Tzakosta, M. (2003). The Acquisition of Clitics in Greek: A Phonological Perspective. In Agbayani, B., Koskinen, P. and Samijan, V., eds., Proceedings of the 31st Western Conference of Linguistics: WECOL 2002. Fresno: California State University, 306–321.Google Scholar
Ud Deen, K. (2004). Object Agreement and Specificity in Nairobi Swahili. In Brugos, A., Micciulla, L. and Smith, C., eds., Proceedings to the 28th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, Mass: Cascadilla Press, 129–140.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2001). The Declarative/Procedural Model of Lexicon and Grammar. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30 (1), 37–69.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S., Argyri, F., Cornips, L., Hulk, A., Sorace, A. and Tsimpli, I.. (2011). On the Role of Age of Onset and Input in Early Child Bilingualism in Greek and Dutch. In Pirvulescu, M., Cuervo, M. C., Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Steele, J. and Strik, N., eds., Selected Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA 2010), Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, 249–265.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S. (2014). Comparing the Role of Input in Bilingual Acquisition across Domains. In Grüter, T., and Paradis, J., eds., Input and Experience in Bilingual Development. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 181–201.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S., Argyri, F., Cornips, L., Hulk, A., Sorace, A. and Tsimpli, I.. (2014). The Role of Age of Onset and Input in Early Child Bilingualism in Greek and Dutch. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(4), 765–805.Google Scholar
Uriagereka, J. (1995). Aspects of the Syntax of Clitic Placement in Western Romance. Linguistic Inquiry, 26(1), 79–123.Google Scholar
Valian, V. (1991). Syntactic Subjects in the Early Speech of American and Italian Children, Cognition, 40, 21–81.Google Scholar
Valian, V. (2009). Innateness and Learnability. In Bavin, E., ed., Handbook of Child Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 15–34.Google Scholar
Valian, V., Prasada, S. and Scarpa, J.. (2006). Direct Object Predictability: Effects on Young Children’s Imitation of Sentences. Journal of Child Language, 33, 247–269.Google Scholar
van Hout, A. (1996). Event Semantics of Verb Frame Alternations: A Case Study of Dutch and Its Acquisition. Doctoral dissertation, Tilburg University. Published in 1998. New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
van Hout, A. (2008). Acquisition of Perfective and Imperfective Aspect in Dutch, Italian and Polish. Lingua, 118(11), 1740–1765.Google Scholar
van der Velde, M. (1998). L’acquisition des clitiques sujets et objets: Une étude sur deux enfants francophones, unpublished M.A thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam and CRNS Paris.Google Scholar
van der Velde, M., Jakubowicz, C. and Rigaut, C.. (2002). The Acquisition of Determiners and Pronominal Clitics by Three French-Speaking Children. In Lasser, I., ed., The Process of Language Acquisition, Proceedings of the 1999 GALA Conference, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 115–132.Google Scholar
van der Velde, M. (2003). Déterminants et pronoms en néerlandais et en français: syntaxe et acquisition, Ph.D. Thesis, Université Paris 8.Google Scholar
Verdelle, A. J. (1995). The Good Negress, Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Vergnaud, J.–R. and Zubizarreta, M. L.. (1992). The Definite Determiner in French and English. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 595–652.Google Scholar
Verkuyl, H. (1993). A Theory of Aspectuality: The Interaction between Temporal and Attemporal Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Varlokosta, S., Belletti, A., Costa, J., Friedmann, N., Gavarró, A. and Grohmann, K. K., et al. (2016). A Cross-Linguistic Study of the Acquisition of Clitic and Pronoun Production. Language Acquisition 23, 1–26.Google Scholar
Wang, Q., Lillo-Martin, D., Best, C. and Levitt, A.. (1992). Null Subject versus Null Object: Some Evidence from the Acquisition of Chinese and English. Language Acquisition, 2(3), 221–254.Google Scholar
Wexler, K. (1998). Very Early Parameter Setting and the Unique Checking Constraint: A New Explanation of the Optional Infinitive Stage. Lingua, 106, 23–79.Google Scholar
Wexler, K. (2004). Lennenberg’s Dream. In Jenkins, L., ed., Variation and Universals in Biolinguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 239–284.Google Scholar
Wexler, K., Gavarrò, A. and Torrens, V.. (2003/2004). Object Clitic Omission in Child Catalan and Child Spanish, Reports de Recerca, Grup de Gramatica Teorica, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Wexler, K., Gavarrò, A. and Torrens, V.. (2004). Feature Checking and Object Clitic Omission in Child Catalan. In Bok-Bennema, R., Hollebrandse, B., Kampers-Manhe, B., and Sleeman, P., eds., Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2002. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing, 253–268.Google Scholar
Yang, C. (2002). Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yang, C. (2002). Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language. Oxford University Press: Oxford.Google Scholar
Yang, C. (2004). Universal Grammar, Statistics, or Both. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 451–456.Google Scholar
Yang, C. (2010). Three Factors in Language Variation. Lingua, 120, 1160–1177.Google Scholar
Yang, C., and Roeper, T.. (2011). Minimalism and Language Acquisition. In Boeckx, C., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 551–573.Google Scholar
Yang, C. (2013). Who’s Afraid of George Kingsley Zipf?: Do Children and Chimps Have Language? Significance, 10(6): 29–34.Google Scholar
Yang, C. (2015). Negative Knowledge from Positive Evidence. Language, 91(4), 938–953.Google Scholar
Yip, V. and Matthews, S.. (2000). Syntactic Transfer in a Cantonese–English Bilingual Child. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3, 193–208.Google Scholar
Yip, V. and Matthews, S.. (2005). Dual Input and Learnability: Null Objects in Cantonese–English Bilingual Children. In Cohen, J., McAlister, K. T., Rolstad, K. and MacSwan, J., eds., Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 2421–2431.Google Scholar
Zesiger, P., Chillier-Zesiger, L., Arabatzi, M., Baranzini, L., Cronel-Ohayon, S., Frank, J., Frauenfelder, U.H., Hamann, C. and Rizzi, L.. (2010). The Acquisition of Pronouns by French Children: A Parallel Study of Production and Comprehension. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31(4), 571–603.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×