Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T21:17:14.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The emergence of complex sentences in a French child's language from 0;10 to 4;01: causal adverbial clauses and the concertina effect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2012

MARTINE SEKALI
MARTINE SEKALI*
Affiliation:
University of Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense
*
Address for correspondence: Martine Sekali, UFR Langues, Littérature, Civilisation, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense, 200 Avenue de la République, 92001 Nanterre cedex, France e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article tests Diessel's ‘integration’ path of development of adverbial clauses (cf. Diessel, 2004), with special focus on the acquisition of ‘causal’ adverbial clauses, in the context of the overall development of grammatical/semantic complexification in a French child's longitudinal corpus of spontaneous speech (Madeleine, Paris Corpus) from 10 months to 4;01 years old. Three main patterns are retrieved in the child's uses of parce que constructions in interactional contexts. Linguistic analysis of these constructions reveals a dynamic pattern of syntactic expansion, integration and diversification, here called the concertina effect, which may provide an insight into the cognitive and pragmatic motives for syntax development in first language acquisition of French.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of French Language Studies , Volume 22 , Special Issue 1: First language acquisition of French grammar (from 10 months to 4 years old) , March 2012 , pp. 115 - 141
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

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

Bernicot, J., Veneziano, E., Muriol, M. and Bert-Erboul, A. (2010). Interactions verbales et acquisition du langage. Paris: L'Hartmattan.Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1979). The acquisition of complex sentences. In: Fletcher, P. and Garman, M. (eds), Language Acquisition: Studies of First Language Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 285–305.Google Scholar
Clancy, P., Jacobsen, T. and Silva, M. (1976) The acquisition of conjunction: a crosslinguistic study. Stanford Papers and Reports on Child Language, 12: 71–80.Google Scholar
Clancy, P., Lee, H., Zoh, M. H. (1986). Processing strategies in the acquisition of relative clauses: universal principles and language-specific realizations. Cognition 24: 225–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, E. (1971). On the acquisition of the meaning of before and after. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10: 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cristofaro, S. (2003). Subordination Strategies. A Typological Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dancygier, B., Sweetser, E. (2005). Mental Spaces in Grammar: Conditional Constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H. (2004). The Acquisition of Complex Sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evers-Vermeul, J., Sanders, T. (2011). Discovering domains. On the acquisition of causal connectives. Journal of Pragmatics, 43: 1645–1662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feagans, L. (1980). Children's understanding of some temporal terms denoting order, duration, and simultaneity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 9: 41–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
François, F., Francois, D., Sabeau-Joannet, E. and Sourdot, M. (1977). La syntaxe de l'enfant avant 5 ans. Paris: Larousse.Google Scholar
Kyratzis, A., Guo, J., Ervin-Tripp, S. (1990). Pragmatic conventions influencing children's use of causal constructions in natural discourse. In: Hall, K., Koenig, J-P., Meacham, M., Reinman, S. and Sutton, S. (eds), Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley, CA: BLS, pp. 205–214.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. II, Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Morgenstern, A., Sekali, M. (2009). i m'énève paque i m'énève: spécificité de l'explication verbale chez l'enfant entre 2 et 3 ans: une articulation modale. In: Hudelot, C., Salazar Orvig, A. and Veneziano, E. (eds), L'explication: enjeux cognitifs et communicationnels. Leuven: Peeters, pp. 125–141.Google Scholar
O'Grady, W. (1997). Syntactic Development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pander Maat, H. and Sanders, T. (2001). Subjectivity in causal connectives: An empirical study of language in use. Cognitive Linguistics, 12: 247–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piaget, J. (1948). Language and Thought in the Child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Sanders, T. (2005). Coherence, causality and cognitive complexity in discourse. In: Aurnague, M., Bras, M., Le Draoulec, A. and Vieu, L. (eds), Proceedings of the First International Symposium on the exploration an modelling of meaning, SEM-05, pp. 105–114.Google Scholar
Sekali, M. (1991). Connexion inter-énoncés et relations intersubjectives: because, since et for. Langages, 104: 62–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekali, M. (2010). Coordination et dynamique discursive: étude comparative des coordonnants anglais and, or, but et for, In: Florea, L.-S., Papahagi, C., Pop, L. and Curea, A. (eds), Directions Actuelles en Linguistique du Texte. Cluj-Napoca: Casa Cărţii de Ştiinţă, pp. 235–245.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (1997). The origins of grammaticizable notions: beyond the indidivual mind, In: Slobin, D. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition, Vol. V, Expanding the Context. London: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 265–323.Google Scholar
Sweetser, E. (1990). From Etymology to Pragmatics. Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge US: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Veneziano, E. (2009). Emergence des conduites explicatives dans l'interaction naturelle mère-enfant: méthodes d'analyse et modèle d'acquisition basé sur les situations conflictuelles, In: Hudelot, C., Salazar Orvig, A. and Veneziano, E. (eds), L'explication: enjeux cognitifs et communicationnels. Leuven: Peeters, pp. 151–173.Google Scholar
Zufferey, S. (2006). Connecteurs pragmatiques et métareprésentation: l'exemple de parce que. Cahiers de linguistique française, 27: 161–179.Google Scholar