Negative evidence on negative evidence.

Abstract

Previous work has shown that recasts may be contingent responses to children's early ungrammati-cally. On this basis, it has been claimed that recasts provide negative evidence, thereby offsetting the need for linguistic constraints in theories of acquisition. This study explores whether children exploit negative evidence putatively provided by recasts by examining whether parental recasts are associ-ated with children's recovery from particular overgeneralization errors. Data from longitudinal in-vestigations of 2 common syntactic errors reveal that recasts are related to children's subsequent grammaticality. However, contrary to what would be expected if recasts serve as corrections, the data show that recasts are negative leading indicators of grammaticality. Finally, correction and negative evidence axe examined and are shown to be nonequivalent. Therefore, corrections in whatever form they might exist can offset only a limited subset of proposed innate constraints on language acquisition. In the course of development, children may at times adopt grammars that appear to be overgeneral with respect to the lan-guage they are acquiring. For example, children learning En-glish may alternate between using and omitting articles preced-

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 96 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.