The acquisition of auxiliary syntax: BE and HAVE

Anna L. Theakston, Elena V M Lieven, Julian M. Pine, Caroline F. Rowland

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    This study examined patterns of auxiliary provision and omission for the auxiliaries BE and HAVE in a longitudinal data set from 11 children between the ages of two and three years. Four possible explanations for auxiliary omission - a lack of lexical knowledge, performance limitations in production, the Optional Infinitive hypothesis, and patterns of auxiliary use in the input - were examined. The data suggest that although none of these accounts provides a full explanation for the pattern of auxiliary use and nonuse observed in children's early speech, integrating input-based and lexical learning-based accounts of early language acquisition within a constructivist approach appears to provide a possible framework in which to understand the patterns of auxiliary use found in the children's speech. The implications of these findings for models of children's early language acquisition are discussed. © Walter de Gruyter.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)247-277
    Number of pages30
    JournalCognitive Linguistics
    Volume16
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2005

    Keywords

    • Auxiliary syntax
    • Constructivist approach
    • Language acquisition

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The acquisition of auxiliary syntax: BE and HAVE'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this