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

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.
Bertinetto, Pier Marco; Freiberger, Eva Maria; Lenci, Alessandro; Noccetti, Sabrina; Agonigi, Maddalena
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.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11568/762117
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 7
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 5
social impact