On the Acquisition of Pronominal Reference in Child—Greek

  • Spyridoula Varlokosta
  • Panayiota Karafoti
  • Varvara Karzi

Abstract

The interpretation of ordinary pronouns, such as him in English, is syntactically constrained by Principle B of the Binding Theory (Chomsky, 1981, Chomsky, 1986). Essentially, what Principle B states is that if an NP c-commands a pronoun within the same clause, they cannot be coindexed, hence they cannot be anaphorically linked (Crain & Thornton, 1998). According to this constraint, him in (1) cannot refer to John:
  1. (1)

    John likes him

     
  1. a

    John; likes him; (John likes Bill)

     
  2. b

    *John; likes him; (John likes John)

     
Principle B also imposes restriction on the interpretation of pronouns that co-occur with quantificational (non-referential) NPs, as in (2):
  1. (2)

    No president hates him

     
  1. a

    No president, hates him, (No presidential hates Bill Clinton)

     
  2. b

    *No president, hates him, (No president hates himself)

     

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Avrutin, S., & K. Wexler (1992). Development of Principle B in Russian: Coindexation at LF and Coreference. Language Acquisition, 2 259–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baauw, S.M. Escobar, & W. Philip (1997). A Delay of Principle B Effect in Spanish Speaking Children: The role of Lexical Feature Acquisition. In A. Sorace, C. Heycock, & R. Shillcock (Eds.), Proceedings of the GALA 97 Conference on Language Acquisition (pp. 16–21). University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  3. Chien, Y.-C., & K. Wexler (1990). Children’s knowledge of locality conditions in binding as evidence for the modularity of syntax and pragmatics. Language Acquisition, 1 225–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  5. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of Language: its nature, origin and use. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  6. Crain, S., & C. McKee (1985). The acquisition of structural restrictions on anaphora. In S. Berman, J. Choe, & J. McDonough (Eds.), Proceedings of NELS 15 (pp. 94–110), Amherst: University of Massachusetts, GLSA.Google Scholar
  7. Crain, S., & R. Thornton (1998). Investigations in Universal Grannnar.• A guide to research on the acquisition of syntax and.semantics. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Grimshaw, J., & S. Rosen (1990). Knowledge and obedience: The developmental status of the Binding Theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 21 I87–222.Google Scholar
  9. Grodzinsky, Y., & T. Reinhart (1993). The Innateness of Binding and Coreference. Linguistic Inquiry, 24 69–102.Google Scholar
  10. Holton, D., Mackridge, P, & I. Philippaki-Warburton (1997). Greek: A Comprehensive Grammar of the Modern Language. Routledge, London/New York.Google Scholar
  11. Jakubowicz, C. (1984). On markedness and Binding Principles. In C. Jones, & P. Sells (Eds.), Proceedings of NELS 14, Amherst: University of Massachusetts, GLSA.Google Scholar
  12. McDaniel, D., Cairns, H.S., & J.R. Hsu (1990). Binding Principles in the Grammar of Young Children, Language Acquisition,1 121-I39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McKee, S. (1992). A comparison of pronouns and anaphors in Italian and English Acquisition. Language Acquisition, 2 21–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Padilla, J. (1990). On the Definition of Binding Domains in Spanish. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston/London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Philip, W., & P. Coopmans (1996). The double Dutch Delay of Principle B Effect. Proceedings of the 20 th Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 576–587). Cascadilla Press, Boston.Google Scholar
  16. Reinhart, T. (1983). Coreference and Bound Anaphora: A restatement of the anaphora question. Linguistics and Philosophy, 6 47–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Reinhart, T. (1986). Center and Periphery in the Grammar of Anaphora. in B. Lust (Ed.), Studies in the acquisition of Anaphora (Vol. 1). Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  18. Sigurjónsdóttir, S., Hyams, N., & Y-C. Chien (1988). The acquisition of reflexives and pronouns by Icelandic children. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 27 (pp. 97–106). Stanford University.Google Scholar
  19. Thornton, R. (1990). Adventures in Long-Distance Moving: the Acquisition of Complex Wh-Questions. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  20. Wexler, K., & Y.-C. Chien (1985). The development of lexical anaphors and pronouns. Papers and reports on child language development, 24 (pp. 138–149). Stanford University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Spyridoula Varlokosta
    • 1
  • Panayiota Karafoti
    • 1
  • Varvara Karzi
    • 1
  1. 1.University of AthensAthensThe Hellenic Republic

Personalised recommendations