TY  - JOUR
T1  - Acquisition of Passives: A Semantico-Pragmatic Approach
TT  - Edilgen Yapıların Edinimi: Anlambilimsel Ve Edimbilimsel Yaklaşım
AU  - Karakaş, Sercan
PY  - 2019
DA  - October
Y2  - 2019
DO  - 10.21733/ibad.610878
JF  - IBAD Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi
JO  - IBAD
PB  - Hayrullah KAHYA
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 2687-2811
SP  - 53
EP  - 63
LA  - en
AB  - This paper presents a general review of literature interms of acquisition of passives as well as providing new theoretical insightsconsidering the semantics and pragmatics of passives, which are thought to bethe underlying reasons of difficulty. There is a disagreement in the literatureas to whether passive structures are difficult and if so, what may be theunderlying causes of this difficulty. Based on the arguments presented in theliterature, the syntactic hypothesis (Wexler 2004) and the incrementalprocessing hypothesis (Trueswell and Gleitman 2004) stand out. Wexler’ssyntactic hypothesis is that children regard all vP’s and CP’s as strongphases, which makes non-grammatical passives for them, which is the source ofthe difficulty. In the meantime, in both cases (syntax or incrementalprocessing), frequency plays a major role in boosting the acquisition processby either making children be faster at reassigning thematic roles, which is thesource of difficulty according to incremental processing hypothesis, or makingchildren be aware of the fact that vPs are not strong phases, thereby makingpassives grammatical, so that children can use them. Finally, in this study, atheoretical analysis based on semantic and pragmatical perspectives ispresented to explain why passive structures are difficult to acquire in somelanguages because the studies on passive structures in the literature neglectthe meaning component. In this study, the introspective semantics model (VonFintel and Heim 2011) was used to provide a new theoretical perspective on theacquisition of passive structures.
KW  - Syntactic Accounts for Passives
KW  - Incremental Processing Hypothesis
KW  - Passives
KW  - Truncated Passives
N2  - Bu makale, edilgen yapıların edinilmesi açısındanalanyazının genel bir incelemesini sunmanın yanı sıra, edilgen yapıların temelzorluk nedenleri olduğu düşünülen anlambilimi ve edimbilimi göz önündebulundurularak yeni bir teorik yaklaşım sunmaktadır. Alanyazında edilgenyapıların zor olup olmadığı ve eğer zor ise, bu zorluğun altında yatannedenlerin ne olabileceği konusunda bir anlaşmazlık vardır. Alanyazında sunulanargümanlara dayanarak, sözdizimsel hipotez (Wexler 2004) ve artımlı işlemehipotezi (Trueswell ve Gleitman 2004) öne çıkmaktadır. Wexler'ın sözdizimselhipotezi, çocukların tüm küçük eylem öbeklerini ve tümleyici öbeklerini güçlüfazlar olarak görmelerini savunur ve bunun sonucunda çocuklar edilgen yapılarıdilbilgisi dışı olarak gördüklerini iddia eder ki bu da Wexler’a göre zorluğunkaynağıdır. Bununla birlikte, her iki durumda da (sözdizimsel hipotez veyaartımlı işleme), bu yapıların frekansı büyük rol oynamaktadır. Bu çalışmada sonolarak ise edilgen yapıların neden bazı dillerde edinilmesinin zor olduğunuaçıklamak için anlambilimsel ve edimbilimsel bakış açıları temel alınarakkuramsal bir analiz sunulmaktadır çünkü alanyazındaki edilgen yapılar ileilgili çalışmalar anlam bileşenini ihmal etmektedir. Bu çalışmada, edilgenyapıların edinilmesine yeni teorik bir bakış açısı sağlamak için içlemselanlambilim modeli (Von Fintel ve Heim 2011) kullanılmıştır.
CR  - Alcock, K. J., Rimba, K., & Newton, C. R. (2012). Early production of the passive in two Eastern  	Bantu languages. First Language, 32(4), 459-478.Allen, S., Crago M. (1996). Early passive acquisition in Inuktitut. Journal of Child  	Language 23(1). 129–155.Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1989). Functionalism and the competition model. The  	Crosslinguistic Study of Sentence Processing, 3, 73-112.Bates, E., MacWhinney, B., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, variation, and language  	learning. Mechanisms of Language Acquisition, 157-193.Bencini, G. M. L., Valian V. (2008). Abstract sentence representation in 3-year-olds:  	Evidence from comprehension and production. Journal of Memory and Language 59. 97– 	133.Borer, H., Wexler K. (1987). The maturation of syntax. In Thomas Roeper & Edwin  	Williams (eds.), Parameter Setting and Language Acquisition, 123–172. Dordrecht: Reidel.Borer, H., Wexler K. (1992). Bi-unique relations and the maturation of grammatical  	principles. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10. 147–189.Bresnan, J., Mchombo, S. (1987). Topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chichewa. Language  	63. 741–782.Brooks, Patricia & Michael Tomasello. 1999.Young children learn to produce passives with  	nonce verbs. Developmental Psychology 35(1). 29–44.Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by Phase. In M. Kenstowicz (ed.) Ken Hale: A life in language. 1- 	52. Cambridge: MIT Press.Demuth, K. (1989). Maturation and the acquisition of the Sesotho passive. Language 65(1).  	56–80.Embick, D. (2004). On the Structure of Resultative Participles in English, Linguistic Inquiry 35(3).Fox, D., Grodzinsky, Y. (1998). Children’s passives: A view from the by-phrase.  	Linguistic Inquiry 29(2). 311–332.Gordon, P., Chafetz, J. (1990). Verb-based versus class-based accounts of actionality effects in  	children’s comprehension of passives. Cognition, 36(3), 227–254.Hirsch, C., Wexler, K. (2006). Children’s passives and their resulting interpretation. In The  	proceedings of the inaugural conference on generative approaches to language  	acquisition–North America, University of Connecticut Occasional Papers in Linguistics  	(Vol. 4, pp. 125-136).Huang, Y. T., Zheng, X., Meng, X., Snedeker, J. (2013). Children’s assignment of grammatical  	roles in the online processing of Mandarin passive sentences. Journal of Memory and  	Language, 69(4), 589-606.Huttenlocher, J., Vasilyeva, M., Cymerman, E., Levine, S. (2002). Language input and child  	syntax. Cognitive Psychology, 45(3), 337.Huttenlocher, J., Vasilyeva M., Shimpi P. (2004). Syntactic priming in young  	children. Journal of Memory and Language 50. 182–195.Kline, M., Demuth, K. (2010). Factors facilitating implicit learning: The case of the Sesotho  	passive. Language acquisition, 17(4), 220-234.Messenger, K., Branigan, H. P., McLean, J. F., Sorace, A. (2012). Is young children’s passive  	syntax semantically constrained? Evidence from syntactic priming. Journal of Memory  	and Language, 66(4), 568-587.Savage, C., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., Tomasello, M. (2003). Testing the abstractness of  	children’s linguistic representations: Lexical and structural priming of syntactic  	constructions in young children. Developmental Science, 6(5), 557.Stromswold, K. (1996). Does the VP-internal subject stage really exist? Paper presented at the 21st  	Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development.Trueswell, J., Gleitman, L. (2004). Children’s eye movements during listening: Developmental  	evidence for a constraint-based theory of sentence processing. The interface of language,  	vision, and action: Eye movements and the visual world, 319-346.Wexler, K. (2004). Theory of Phasal Development: Perfection in Child Grammar. MIT Working  	Papers in Linguistics 48, 159-209.
UR  - https://doi.org/10.21733/ibad.610878
L1  - https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/842032
ER  -