This article criticizes the wide-spread view, sometimes referred to as the “aspect first hypothesis” (initiated by Antinucci and Miller 1976 and supported by Bloom et al. 1980; Bickerton 1981; Weist et al. 1984; Shirai and Andersen 1995, among others), according to which a universal acquisition path is postulated in the tense-aspect domain, based on the leading role of actionality (or Aktionsart) and aspect.
The acquisition of tense and aspect in a morphology-sensitive framework: Data from Italian and Austrian-German children
LENCI, ALESSANDRO;NOCCETTI, SABRINA;
2015-01-01
Abstract
This article criticizes the wide-spread view, sometimes referred to as the “aspect first hypothesis” (initiated by Antinucci and Miller 1976 and supported by Bloom et al. 1980; Bickerton 1981; Weist et al. 1984; Shirai and Andersen 1995, among others), according to which a universal acquisition path is postulated in the tense-aspect domain, based on the leading role of actionality (or Aktionsart) and aspect.File in questo prodotto:
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
ling-2015-0030.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione finale editoriale
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione
1.75 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.75 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
