Linked e-resources
Details
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.
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.