The Acquisition of Referring Expressions : : A Dialogical Approach.

• Superior document: Trends in Language Acquisition Research Series ; v.28
• Author: Salazar-Orvig, Anne.
• TeilnehmendeR: Hassan, Rouba.; Rialland, Annie.; Weck, Geneviève de.
• Place / Publishing House: Amsterdam/Philadelphia : : John Benjamins Publishing Company,, 2021.; ©2021.
• Year of Publication: 2021
• Edition: 1st ed.
• Language: English
• Series: Trends in Language Acquisition Research Series
• Physical Description: 1 online resource (394 pages)

This book describes the repertoire and uses of referring expressions by French-speaking children and their interlocutors in naturally occurring dialogues at home and at school, in a wide range of communicative situations and activities.

Table of Contents

• Intro
• The Acquisition of Referring Expressions
• Editorial page
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Dedication page
• Table of contents
• List of Figures
• Figure 1. Distribution (in percentage) of target forms and fillers in the prenominal and preverbal positions by age in months for two longitudinal follow-ups
• Figure 2. Types of consonants in prenominal forms where le or la ('the') was expected (Adrien)
• Figure 3. Types of consonants in prenominal forms where le or la ('the') was expected ­(Madeleine)
• Figure 4. Types of consonants in preverbal forms where je ('I') was expected (Adrien)
• Figure 5. Types of consonants in preverbal forms where je ('I') was expected (Madeleine)
• Figure 6. Distribution (in percentage) of the different types of forms in preverbal position, by type of referent
• Figure 7. Distribution (in percentage) of the different types of forms in the preverbal position, by type of referent, for verbs produced both in utterances referring to the self and in ones referring to entities in the same session
• Figure 1. Binary partition tree for referring uses of nouns
• Figure 2. Binary partition tree for strong demonstrative pronouns
• Figure 3. Binary partition tree for strong personal pronouns
• Figure 4. Binary partition tree for clitic personal pronouns
• Figure 5. Binary partition tree for fillers
• Figure 6. Binary partition tree for null forms
• Figure 1. Binary partition tree for clitic and strong third-person pronouns
• Figure 2. Binary partition tree for nouns
• Figure 1. Binary partition tree for clitic pronouns, by position in the referential chain, syntactic function, and population
• Figure 1. Binary partition tree for third-person pronouns for discourse-given referents
• Figure 2. Binary partition tree for nouns for discourse-given referents.
• Figure 3. Binary partition tree for strong demonstrative pronouns for discourse-given ­referents
• Figure 1. Binary partition tree for nouns
• Figure 1. Binary partition tree for third-person pronouns in the toddler corpus
• Figure 2. Binary partition tree for nouns in the toddler corpus
• Figure 3. Binary partition tree for clitic demonstrative pronouns in the toddler corpus
• Figure 4. Binary partition tree for strong demonstrative pronouns in the toddler corpus
• Figure 5. Binary partition tree for strong demonstrative pronouns in narrative sequences
• Figure 6. Binary partition tree for clitic demonstrative pronouns in narrative sequences
• Figure 7. Binary partition tree for nouns in narrative sequences
• Figure 8. Binary partition tree for third-person pronouns in narrative sequences
• List of Tables
• Table 1. Data used
• Table 2. Data groups for quantitative analyses
• Table 3. Distribution (in percentage) of forms in the prenominal position (total for all sessions, and maximum and minimum values), by MLU group
• Table 4. Distribution (in percentage) of forms in the preverbal position (total for all sessions, and maximum and minimum values), by MLU group
• Table 5. Percentages of unexpected realizations of /l/ in lexical words and in prenominal fillers, across all sessions
• Table 6. Percentage of unexpected realizations of /ʒ/ in lexical words and in preverbal fillers
• Table 7. Distribution (in percentage) of the noun and verb lemmas according to the types of occurrences in the prelexical position (total for all sessions, and maximum and minimum values)
• Table 8. Distribution (in percentage) of noun and verb lemmas associated (or not) to fillers, according to whether or not fluctuation was present in the prenominal and preverbal positions.
• Table 9. Regression tables for clitic pronouns, fillers and no-form in pre-verbal position
• Table 1. Participants, by MLU group, age and number of sessions
• Table 2. Distribution (in percentage) of the referring expressions for each MLU group
• Table 3. Distribution (in percentage) of referring expressions for each syntactic function
• Table 4. Distribution (in percentage) of referring expressions for each type of referent
• Table 5. Distribution (in percentage) of referring expressions for each attentional and discursive status
• Table 6. Regression tables for strong referring expressions (nouns, strong demonstrative pronouns, strong personal pronouns)
• Table 7. Regression tables for weak referring expressions (clitic personal pronouns, fillers, and null forms)
• Table 1. Distribution of referring expressions (in percentage) by their position in the referential chain, their syntactic function, the referent's characteristics, and the child's age, for all participants pooled
• Table 2. Distribution (in percentage) of determiners preceding a noun according to their position in the referential chain and the referent's characteristics
• Table 3. Regression tables for clitic and strong third-person pronouns and nouns
• Table 1. Type of referring expression, by population and position in the referential chain (group percentage)
• Table 2. Regression tables for clitic pronouns, nouns without a determiner, and null subjects
• Table 1. Distribution (in percentage) of the prosodic contours of the referring expressions used by the children and their mothers, by position in the referential chain
• Table 2. Distribution (in percentage) of left dislocations, right dislocations, and double dislocations for noun, demonstrative and strong personal pronouns dislocated forms used by the children and their mothers.
• Table 3. Distribution (in percentage) of dislocations by position in the referential chain, used by the children and their mothers
• Table 4. Distribution (in percentage) of all referring expressions by position in the referential chain, used by the children and their mothers
• Table 5. Number of occurrences of prosodic contours in left dislocations and right dislocations, produced by the children and their mothers
• Table 6. Distribution (in percentage) of the referring expressions for all complements and for Mettre+X, Vouloir+X, and C'est+X, used by the children and their mothers
• Table 7. Distribution (in percentage) of referring expressions according to their position in the referential chain, for all complements, Mettre+X, Vouloir+X, and C'est+X, used by the children and their mothers
• Table 8. Distribution (in percentage) of common nouns, according to their position in the referential chain, for all complements, Mettre+X, Vouloir+X, and C'est+X, used by the children and their mothers
• Table 9. Distribution (in percentage) of clitic pronouns used by the children and their mothers, according to their position in the referential chain for all complements of Mettre+X, and Vouloir+X
• Table 1. Distribution (in percentage) of the referring expressions for the children and their interlocutors
• Table 2. Distribution (in percentage) of referring expressions for each attentional and discursive status of the referents, for the children and their interlocutors
• Table 3. Regression tables for third-person clitic pronouns, nouns, and strong demonstrative pronouns for all referring expressions used by the children and their interlocutors
• Table 4. Distribution (in percentage) of children's referring expressions for discourse- given referents, according to their correspondence with the form used by their interlocutors.
• Table 5. Distribution (in percentage) of children's referring expressions for discourse-given referents, according to their correspondence category of interlocutor's antecedents
• Table 6. Regression tables for third-person clitic pronouns, nouns, and strong demonstrative pronouns for discourse-given referring expressions in the children's discourse
• Table 7. Distribution (in percentages) of the children's referring expressions for given referents, according to the type of dialogical relations
• Table 1. Distribution (in percentage) of the referring expression categories in the Adult-to-Experimenter and Mother-to-Child contexts, by position in the referential chain
• Table 2. Overall distribution (in percentage) of NPs (simple and dislocated) in first mentions, in the Adult-to-Experimenter and Mother-to-Child contexts
• Table 3. Distribution (in percentage) of the referring expressions categories in Home and School contexts, by position in the referential chain
• Table 4. Distribution (in percentage) of dislocations in Home and School contexts
• Table 5. Distribution (in percentage) of the referring expressions categories for mothers of typically developing children and mothers of children with DLD, by position in the referential chain
• Table 1. Distribution (in percentage) of referring expressions used by the toddlers, in each activity and for all activities pooled
• Table 2. Distribution (in percentage) of referring expressions used by the older group, for each activity and for all activities pooled
• Table 3. Distribution (in percentage) of referring expressions produced by the older children, for each social setting and for both settings taken together.
• Table 4. Distribution (in percentage) of the referring expressions used by the toddler group at each position in the referential chain, for all activities pooled and for each ­activity taken separately.