Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T11:59:30.338Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Acquisition of complement clitics and tense morphology in internationally adopted children acquiring French*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 September 2011

K. GAUTHIER ,
F. GENESEE  and
K. KASPARIAN
K. GAUTHIER*
Affiliation:
McGill University
F. GENESEE
Affiliation:
McGill University
K. KASPARIAN
Affiliation:
McGill University
*
Address for correspondence: Karine Gauthier, Department of Psychology, The Montreal Children's Hospital, 4018 Ste-Catherine West, Montreal (Qc), H3Z 1P2karine.gauthier@mail.mcgill.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study examined the language development of children adopted from China to examine possible early age effects with respect to their use of complement clitics, lexical diversity and verb morphology. We focused on these aspects of French because they distinguish second language learners of French and native French-speaking children with language impairment from children learning French as a native language and, in the case of object clitics and certain verb tenses, are relatively late to emerge in native speakers. Thus, it might be expected that they would be susceptible to the delayed onset of acquisition of French experienced by internationally adopted children. Language samples of twelve adopted children from 3;6 to 4;8 living in French-speaking families were analyzed and compared to those of non-adopted monolingual French-speaking children of the same age, sex and socio-economic status. The adopted and control children had similar levels of socio-emotional adjustment and non-verbal intellectual abilities. The adopted children exhibited accelerated language development in general, and there were no significant differences between the internationally adopted and control children with respect to lexical diversity and verb tense. However, the adopted children made significantly more errors using complement clitics, and in particular object clitics, compared to the non-adopted children. The results are discussed in terms of possible effects related to delayed age of acquisition of French.

Keywords

adopted childrencliticstense morphology
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , April 2012 , pp. 304 - 319
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) and by the Center for Research on Language, Mind and Brain (CRLMB). We are also deeply indebted to the parents for their interest and commitment during this study. The adoption agency Société Formons une Famille inc. was of great help in the recruitment of participants. Special thanks to Sonia Guerriero for her helpful input concerning transcription and coding of the data as well as for her guidance at different stages of this study. We thank Theres Grüter and Johanne Paradis for their valuable comments on an earlier version of this manuscript. We would also like to thank Elisa-Maude McConnell and Michelle Limoges for assisting with data collection.

References

Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2009). Age of onset and nativelikeness in a second language: Listener perception versus linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning, 59, 249–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adiv, E. (1984). Language learning strategies: The relationship between L1 operating principles and language transfer in L2 development. In Anderson, R. (ed.), Second languages: A cross-linguistic perspective, 125–142. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Beaulne, G., & Lachance, J.-F. (2000). Les adoptions internationales au Québec, portrait statistique. Québec: Secrétariat à l'adoption internationale, Ministère de la santé et des services sociaux.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1999). Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brownell, R. (2000). Expressive One-word Picture Vocabulary Test, 3rd edn. Novato, CA: Academic Therapy Publications.Google Scholar
Capron, C., & Duyme, M. (1989). Assessment of effects of socioeconomic status on IQ in a full cross-fostering study. Nature, August 17, 552–553.Google Scholar
Cohen, N. J., Lojkasek, M., Zadeh, Z. Y., Pugliese, M., & Kiefer, H. (2008). Children adopted from China: A prospective study of their growth and development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49 (4), 458–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalen, M., & Rygvold, A.-L. (2006). Educational achievement in adopted children from China. Adoption Quarterly, 9, 45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delcenserie, A., Genesee, F., & Gauthier, K. (in press). Language abilities of internationally-adopted children from China during the early school years. Applied Psycholinguistics.Google Scholar
De Geer, B. (1992). Internationally adopted children in communication: A developmental study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Lund University, Sweden.Google Scholar
Dunn, L. M., Thériault-Whalen, C. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1993). Échelle de vocabulaire en images Peabody – EVIP. Toronto: Psycan.Google Scholar
Duran, P., Malvern, D., Richards, B., & Chipere, N. (2004). Developmental trends in lexical diversity. Applied Linguistics, 25, 220–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duyme, M. (1988). School success and social class: An adoption study. Developmental Psychology, 24, 203–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauthier, K., & Genesee, F. (2011). Language acquisition in cross-language adopted children: Evidence for language specific vulnerabilities in development Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Genesee, F. (2010). Language development in internationally-adopted children. In Paradis, J., Genesee, F. & Crago, M., Dual language development and disorders: A handbook for parents and professionals, 145–163. Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
Glennen, S. (2002). Language development and delay in internationally adopted infants and toddlers. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 333–339.Google Scholar
Glennen, S., & Masters, M. G. (2002). Typical and atypical language development in infants and toddlers adopted from Eastern Europe. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golberg, H., Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2008). Lexical acquisition over time in minority first language children learning English as a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 41–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grondin, N., & White, L. (1996). Functional categories in child L2 acquisition of French. Language Acquisition, 5, 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grüter, T. (2005). Comprehension and production of French object clitics by child second language learners and children with specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 26, 363–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamann, C. (2003). Phenomena in French normal and impaired language acquisition and their implications for hypotheses on language development. Probus, 15, 91–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamann, C. (2004). Comparing the development of the nominal and the verbal functional domain in French language impairment. In Prévost, P. & Paradis, J. (eds.), The acquisition of French in different contexts: Focus on functional categories, 109–144. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamann, C., & Belletti, A. (2006). Developmental patterns in the acquisition of complement clitic pronouns: Comparing different acquisition modes with an emphasis on French. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa, 31, 39–78.Google Scholar
Hamann, C., Rizzi, L., & Frauenfelder, U. (1996). On the acquisition of subject and object clitics in French. In Clahsen, H. (ed.), Generative perspectives on language acquisition, 309–334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harlaar, N., Hayiou-Thomas, M. E., Dale, P. S., & Plomin, R. (2008). Why do preschool language abilities correlate with later reading? A twin study. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51, 688–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harley, B. (1992). Patterns of second language development in French immersion. Journal of French Language Studies, 2, 159–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.Google Scholar
Hoff, E. (2006). How social contexts support and shape language development. Developmental Review, 26, 55–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulk, A. (1997). The acquisition of French object pronouns by a Dutch/French child. Paper presented at Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition Symposium, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Hulk, A., & Müller, N. (2000). Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3, 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakubowicz, C., & Nash, L. (2001). Functional categories and syntactic operations in (ab)normal language acquisition. Brain and Language, 77, 321–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jakubowicz, C., Nash, L., Rigaut, C., & Gérard, C. L. (1998). Determiners and clitic pronouns in French-speaking children with SLI. Language Acquisition, 7, 113–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayne, R. S. (1975). French syntax: The transformational cycle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Klee, T., Stokes, S. F., Wong, A. M. Y., Fletcher, P., & Gavin, W. J. (2004). Utterance length and lexical diversity in Cantonese-speaking children with and without specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 1396–1410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krakow, R. A., Tao, S., & Roberts, J. A. (2005). Adoption age effects on English language acquisition: Infants and toddlers from China. Seminars in Speech and Language, 26, 33–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Padden, D., Nelson, T., & Pruitt, J. (2005). Early speech perception and later language development: Implications for the “Critical Period”. Language Learning and Development, 1, 237–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Normand, M. T., Parisse, C., & Cohen, H. (2008). Lexical diversity and productivity in French preschoolers: Developmental, gender and sociocultural factors. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 22, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leonard, L. (1989). Language learnability and specific language impairment in children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 179–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for analyzing talk: Transcription format and programs, 3rd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Marton, W. (1977). Foreign vocabulary learning as problem number one of foreign language teaching at the advanced level. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 2, 33–47.Google Scholar
Mayberry, R. I., Lock, E., & Kazmi, H. (2002). Linguistic ability and early language exposure. Nature, 417, 38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, J. (2001). Are object omissions in Romance object clitic omissions? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 36–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. (2004). The relevance of specific language impairment in understanding the role of transfer in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2000). Tense and temporality: A comparison between children learning a second language and children with SLI. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 834–847.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2001). The morphosyntax of specific language impairment in French: Evidence for an Extended Optional Default Account. Language Acquisition, 9, 269–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2004). Comparing L2 and SLI grammars in French: Focus on DP. In Prévost, P. & Paradis, J. (eds.), The acquisition of French in different contexts: Focus on functional categories, 89–108. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J., Crago, M., & Genesee, F. (2003). Object clitics as a clinical marker of SLI in French: Evidence from French–English bilingual children. In Beachley, B., Brown, A. & Conlin, F. (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, vol. 2, pp. 638–649. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Paradis, J., Crago, M., & Genesee, F. (2005–2006). Domain-general versus domain-specific accounts of specific language impairment: Evidence from bilingual children's acquisition of object pronouns. Language Acquisition: A Journal of Developmental Linguistics, 13, 33–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parisse, C., & Maillart, C. (2004). Morphosyntactic development in French-speaking children with developmental language disorders. Enfance, 56, 20–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, M. (2003). A unified model of specific and general language delay: Grammatical tense as a clinical marker of unexpected variation. In Levy, Y. & Schaeffer, J. (eds.), Language competence across populations: Toward a definition of specific language impairment, 63–94. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rice, M., & Bode, J. (1993). GAPS in the verb lexicons of children with specific language impairment. First Language, 13, 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, M. L., Redmond, S. M., & Hoffman, L. (2006). Mean Length of Utterance in children with specific language impairment and younger control children shows concurrent validity, and stable and parallel growth trajectories. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 793–808.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, J., Pollock, K., & Krakow, R. (2005). Continued catch-up and language delay in children adopted from China. Seminars in Speech and Language, 26, 76–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roid, G. H., & Miller, L. J. (1997). Leiter International Performance Scale-Revised. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Schiff-Myers, N. (1992). Considering arrested language development and language loss in the assessment of second language learners. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 23, 28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, K. A., Roberts, J. A., & Krakow, R. (2008). Oral and written language development of children adopted from China. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17, 150–160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sparrow, S. S., Balla, D. A., & Cicchetti, D. V. (1998). Vineland Social-Emotional Early Childhood Scales/Vineland SEEC. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service, Inc.Google Scholar
Tan, T. X., & Yang, Y. (2005). Language development of Chinese adoptees 18–35 months old. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thordardottir, E. T., & Namazi, M. (2007). Specific language impairment in French-speaking children: Beyond grammatical morphology. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 698–715.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thordardottir, E. T., & Weismer, S. E. (2001). High-frequency verbs and verb diversity in the spontaneous speech of school-age children with specific language impairment. International Journal of Language, 36, 221–244.Google ScholarPubMed
van der Lely, H. (1998). SLI in children: Movement, economy, and deficits in the computational-syntactic system. Language Acquisition, 7, 161–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, D., Greenwood, C., Hart, B., & Carta, J. (1994). Prediction of school outcomes based on early language production and socioeconomic factors. Child Development, 65, 606–621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watkins, R., Rice, M., & Moltz, C. (1993). Verb use by language-impaired and normally developing children. First Language, 13, 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werker, J., & Tees, R. (2002). Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 25, 121–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1996). Clitics in child L2 French. In Clahsen, H. (ed.), Generative perspectives on language acquisition, 335–368. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, I. L., Steiner, V. G., & Pond, R. E. (1992). Preschool Language Scale-Third Edition (PLS-3). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar