Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T04:25:40.672Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bilingual effects: Exploring object omission in pronominal languages*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2013

MIHAELA PIRVULESCU ,
ANA-TERESA PÉREZ-LEROUX ,
YVES ROBERGE ,
NELLEKE STRIK  and
DANIELLE THOMAS
MIHAELA PIRVULESCU*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
ANA-TERESA PÉREZ-LEROUX
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
YVES ROBERGE
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
NELLEKE STRIK
Affiliation:
Dalhousie University
DANIELLE THOMAS
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
*
Address for correspondence: Mihaela Pirvulescu, University of Toronto Mississauga, 3359 Mississauga Rd. North, North Bldg., Mississauga, Ontario, L5L 1C6, Canada. ma.pirvulescu@utoronto.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article assesses the impact of bilingualism on the acquisition of pronominal direct objects in French and English (clitics in French and strong pronouns in English). We show that, in comparison to monolingual children, bilingual children omit more pronominal objects for a longer period in both languages. At the same time, the development in each language spoken by the bilinguals follows the developmental asymmetry found in the language of their monolingual counterparts: there are more omissions in French than in English. It is also shown that language dominance affects the rate of omissions as there are fewer omissions in the language in which children receive more exposure, i.e. the dominant language. We analyze these results as reflecting a bilingual effect based on the retention of a default null object representation. This in turn is supported by reduced overall input for bilingual children and by language-internal input ambiguity.

Keywords

simultaneous bilingual acquisitionbilingual delayobject cliticsnull objectsobject omissioncross-linguistic influenceinputvariational learning modelFrenchEnglish
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , July 2014 , pp. 495 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

*

We would like to thank Isabel Belzil, Jürgen Meisel and Johanne Paradis, the audience at the conference International Symposium on Bilingualism 8, Oslo 2011, and three anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments. This work was partially funded by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (410–05–0239 and 410–09–2026).

References

Barreña, A., Ezeizabarrena, M.-J., & García, I. (2008). Influence of the linguistic environment on the development of the lexicon and grammar of Basque bilingual children. In Pérez-Vidal, C., Juan-Garau, M. & Bel, A. (eds.), A portrait of the young in the new multilingual Spain, pp. 86–110. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Bernardini, P., & Schlyter, S. (2004). Growing syntactic structure and code-mixing in the weaker language: The ivy hypothesis. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 49–70.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Luk, G., Peets, K., & Yang, S. (2010). Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 525–531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blais, M.-J., Oshima-Takane, Y., Genesee, F., & Hirakawa, M. (2010). Crosslinguistic influence on argument realization in Japanese–French bilinguals. In Franich, K., Iserman, K. M., & Keil, L. L. (eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 34–45. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, P. (1990). Subjectless sentences in child language. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 491–504.Google Scholar
Castilla, A. P., & 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
Costa, J., Lobo, M., Carmona, J., & Silva, C. (2007). Clitic omission en European Portuguese: Correlation with null objects? In Gavarró, A. & Freitas, M. J. (eds.), Language Acquisition and Development: Proceedings of GALA 2007, pp. 133–143. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Costa, J., Lobo, M., & Silva, C. (2012). Which category replaces an omitted clitic? The case of European Portuguese. In Larranaga, P. & Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (eds.), Pronouns and clitics in early language, pp. 105–130. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cummins, S., & Roberge, Y. (2004). Null objects in French and English. In Auger, J., Clements, J. C. & Vance, B. (eds.), Contemporary approaches to Romance linguistics, pp. 121–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cummins, S., & Roberge, Y. (2005). A modular account of null objects in French. Syntax, 8, 44–64.Google Scholar
De Houwer, A. (1990). The acquisition of two languages from birth: A case study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Döpke, S. (1998). Competing language structures: The acquisition of verb placement by bilingual German–English children. Journal of Child Language, 25, 555–584.Google Scholar
Döpke, S. (2000). Generation of and retraction from cross-linguistically motivated structures in bilingual first language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3, 209–226.Google Scholar
Gawlitzek-Maiwald, I., & Tracy, R. (1996). Bilingual bootstrapping. Linguistics, 34, 901–926.Google Scholar
Genesee, F. (1989). Early bilingual development: One language or two? Journal of Child Language, 16, 161–179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Genesee, F. (2001). Bilingual first language acquisition: Exploring the limits of the language faculty. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 21, 153–168.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. (2001). Patient arguments of causative verbs can be omitted: The role of information structure in argument distribution. Language Sciences, 23, 503–524.Google Scholar
Granfeldt, J., & Schlyter, S. (2004). Cliticisation in the acquisition of French as L1 and L2. In Prévost, P. & Paradis, J. (eds.), The acquisition of French in different contexts, pp. 333–370. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Grüter, T. (2006). Object clitics and null objects in the acquisition of French. Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University.Google Scholar
Grüter, T. (2009). A unified account of object clitics and referential null objects in French. Syntax, 12, 215–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez-Clellen, V. F., & Kreiter, J. (2003). Understanding child bilingual acquisition using parent and teacher reports. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 267–288.Google Scholar
Hale, K., & Keyser, S. J. (2002). Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J. (1982). Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J. (1984). On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry, 15, 531–574.Google Scholar
Huang, P.-Y. (1999). The development of null arguments in a Cantonese–English bilingual child. M.Phil. thesis, Chinese University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Hulk, A. (2000). L’acquisition des pronoms clitiques français par un enfant bilingue français–néerlandais. Revue canadienne de linguistique, 45, 97–117.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
Hyams, N., & Wexler, K. (1993). The grammatical basis of null subjects in child language. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 421–459.Google Scholar
Ingham, R. (1993/1994). Input and learnability: Direct object omissibility in English. Language Acquisition, 3, 95–120.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, C., Müller, N., Kang, O., Riemer, B., & Rigaut, C. (1996). On the acquisition of the pronominal system in French and German. In Springfellow, A., Cahana-Amitay, D., Hughes, E. & Zukowski, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 374–385. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, C., Müller, N., Riemer, B., & Rigaut, C. (1997). The case of subject and object omissions in French and German. In Hughes, E., Hughes, M. & Greenhill, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 331–342. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Kowaluk, A. (1999). Null objects in Polish: Pronouns and determiners in second language acquisition. University of Cambridge Research Centre for English and Applied Linguistics Working Papers, 6, 135–152.Google Scholar
Kupisch, T. (2007). Determiners in bilingual German–Italian children: What they tell us about the relation between language influence and language dominance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 57–78.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K., & Lemoine, K. (1996). Vers une grammaire des compléments zéro en français parlé. In Chuquet, J. & Frid, M. (eds.), Absence de marques et représentation de l’absence 1, pp. 279–309. Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
Larjavaara, M. (2000). Présence ou absence de l’objet. Limites du possible en français contemporain. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica.Google Scholar
Landau, I. (2010). The explicit syntax of implicit arguments. Linguistic Inquiry, 41, 357–388.Google Scholar
Li, H.-J. G. (2002). Ellipsis constructions in Chinese. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (1986). Word order and case marking in early child language. Evidence from simultaneous acquisition of two first languages: French and German. Linguistics, 24, 123–183.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2001). The simultaneous acquisition of two first languages: Early differentiation and subsequent development of grammars. In Cenoz, J. & Genesee, F. (eds.), Trends in bilingual acquisition, pp. 11–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2007a). On autonomous syntactic development in multiple first language acquisition. In Caunt-Nulton, H., Kulatilake, S. & , I. Woo (eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (vol. 1), pp. 25– 45. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2007b). The weaker language in early child bilingualism: Acquiring a first language as a second language? Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 495–514.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2009). Second language acquisition in early childhood. Zeitschrift fur Sprachwissenschaft, 28, 5–34.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2010). Age of onset in successive acquisition of bilingualism: Effects of grammatical development. In Kail, M. & Hickman, M. (eds.), Language acquisition across linguistics and cognitive systems, pp. 1–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Müller, N. (ed.) (2003). (In)Vulnerable domains in language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Müller, N., Crysmann, B., & Kaiser, G. A. (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., & Hulk, A. (2001). Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual language acquisition: Italian and French as recipient languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 1–21.Google Scholar
Nicoladis, E., & Genesee, F. (1997). Language development in preschool bilingual children. Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, 21, 258–270.Google Scholar
Noailly, M. (1997). Les mystères de la transitivité invisible. Langages, 127, 96–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. (2000). Beyond “One system or two?”: Degrees of separation between the languages of French–English bilingual children. In Döpke, S. (ed.), Cross-linguistic structures in simultaneous bilingualism, pp. 175–199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Paradis, J. (2001). Do bilingual two-year-olds have separate phonological systems? International Journal of Bilingualism, 5, 19–38.Google Scholar
Paradis, J., & Genesee, F. (1996). Syntactic acquisition in bilingual children: Autonomous or interdependent? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 1–25.Google Scholar
Paradis, J., & Navarro, S. (2003). Subject realization and crosslinguistic interference in the bilingual acquisition of Spanish and English: What is the role of input? Journal of Child Language, 30, 1–23.Google Scholar
Paradis, J., Nicoladis, E., & Crago, M. (2007). French–English bilingual children's acquisition of past tense. In Caunt-Nulton, H., Kulatilake, S. & Woo, I. (eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (vol. 2), pp. 497–507. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Cuza, A., & Thomas, D. (2011). Clitic placement in Spanish/English bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14, 221–232.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M., & Roberge, Y. (2008). Null objects in child language: Syntax and the lexicon. Lingua, 118, 370–398.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M., & 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, 97–112.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M., & Roberge, Y. (2009b). On the semantic properties of implicit objects in young children's elicited production. In Chandlee, J., Franchini, M., Lord, S. & Rheiner, G.-M. (eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 398–409. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M., Roberge, Y., Thomas, D., & Tieu, L. (2006). Variable input and object drop in child language. In Gurski, C. & Radisic, M. (eds.), Proceedings of the Canadian Linguistics Association Conference. westernlinguistics.ca/Publications/CLA2006/Pérez-Leroux_etal.pdf (retrieved March 19, 2013).Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M. (2006). Theoretical implications of clitic omission in early French: Spontaneous vs. clicited production. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 5, 221–236.Google Scholar
Pirvulescu, M., Pérez-Leroux, A. T., & Roberge, Y. (2012). A bidirectional study of object omissions in French–English bilinguals. In Braunmüller, K. & Gabriel, C. (eds.), Multilingual individulas and multilingual societies, pp. 171–188. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Raposo, E. (1986). On the null object in European Portuguese. In Jaeggli, O. & Silva-Corvalán, C. (eds.), Studies in Romance linguistics, pp. 373–390. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L., & Sorace, A. (2003). Overt and null subjects in monolingual and bilingual Italian acquisition. In Beachley, B., Brown, A. & Conlin, F. (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, pp. 739–750. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., Filiaci, F., & Baldo, M. (2009). Bilingual children's sensitivity to specificity and genericity: Evidence from metalinguistic awareness. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 239–257.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, H. A. (2011). Conditions on argument drop. Linguistic Inquiry, 42, 267–304.Google Scholar
Sorace, A., Serratrice, L., Filiaci, F., & Baldo, M. (2009). Discourse conditions on subject pronoun realization: Testing the linguistic intuitions of bilingual children. Lingua, 119, 460–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strik, N., & Pérez-Leroux, A. T. (2011). Jij doe wat girafe? Wh-movement and inversion in Dutch–French bilingual children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 175–205.Google Scholar
Tamburelli, M. (2008). The role of paradigm formation in lexical acquisition: Towards a unified account of overgeneralization and transfer effects. Language Acquisition, 15, 130–182.Google Scholar
Thordardottir, E. (2008). Relationship between amount of language exposure and language scores in older preschool children acquiring French and English simultaneously. Presented at the International Association for the Study of Child Language, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S., Argyri, F., Cornips, L., Hulk, A., Sorace, A., & 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. & Strik, N. (eds.), Proceedings of GALANA 4, pp. 249–265. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Van der Linden, E. H., & Hulk, A. (1996). Language differentiation in a French–Dutch bilingual child. EUROSLA 6: A selection of papers, 55, 89–103.Google Scholar
Van der Velde, M., Jakubowicz, C., & 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, pp. 115–132. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Yang, C. (2002). Knowledge and learning in natural language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yang, C. (2004). Universal Grammar, statistics, or both. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 451–456.Google Scholar
Yip, V., & Matthews, S. (2000). Syntactic transfer in a Cantonese–English bilingual child. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3, 193–208.Google Scholar
Yip, V., & Matthews, S. (2005). Dual input and learnability: Null objects in Cantonese–English bilingual children. In Cohen, J., McAlister, K. T., Rolstad, K. & MacSwan, J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism, pp. 2421–2431. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar