Meints, Kerstin (2003) To get or to be? Use and acquisition of get- versus be- passives: evidence from children and adults. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory: Motivation in Language: Studies in honor of Günter Radden, 243 . pp. 123-150. ISSN 0304-0763
|
PDF
Meints.pdf - Whole Document Download (284Kb) |
Abstract
The use and acquisition of the get-passive has so far yielded a variety of accounts and suggestions. This paper presents new experimental evidence concerning the use and the acquisition of the get-passive by children, as well as adult judgments of get- and be-passives. Within a prototype approach to the passive, experiments investigated when 2–4-year-old British children produce get- as opposed to be-passives. The role of direct affectedness of the patient on get-passive production was investigated further in a follow-up experiment. In addition to the child data, ratings of get- and be-passives were obtained from British English adult speakers to investigate the acceptability of these passives and their relationship to developmental data. The first experiment showed that the chosen prototype approach clearly predicts children’s acquisition of be-passives with get-passives being more peripheral members of the category ‘passive’ than be-passives. The second study shows that even if the child herself is the affected patient in the play action, get-passives are only rarely produced. In contrast to American children, direct affectedness did not induce British children to produce a significant amount of getpassives. Last, adult ratings confirm that British English speakers rate be-passives consistently as better examples of passive sentences than get-passives. The evidence suggests that getpassives are more peripheral for British than for American children and adults. Implications for the possible role of parental input and the validity of existing accounts of the get-passive are discussed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | The use and acquisition of the get-passive has so far yielded a variety of accounts and suggestions. This paper presents new experimental evidence concerning the use and the acquisition of the get-passive by children, as well as adult judgments of get- and be-passives. Within a prototype approach to the passive, experiments investigated when 2–4-year-old British children produce get- as opposed to be-passives. The role of direct affectedness of the patient on get-passive production was investigated further in a follow-up experiment. In addition to the child data, ratings of get- and be-passives were obtained from British English adult speakers to investigate the acceptability of these passives and their relationship to developmental data. The first experiment showed that the chosen prototype approach clearly predicts children’s acquisition of be-passives with get-passives being more peripheral members of the category ‘passive’ than be-passives. The second study shows that even if the child herself is the affected patient in the play action, get-passives are only rarely produced. In contrast to American children, direct affectedness did not induce British children to produce a significant amount of getpassives. Last, adult ratings confirm that British English speakers rate be-passives consistently as better examples of passive sentences than get-passives. The evidence suggests that getpassives are more peripheral for British than for American children and adults. Implications for the possible role of parental input and the validity of existing accounts of the get-passive are discussed. |
| Keywords: | Psychology of language, Language and Linguistics, child development |
| Subjects: | C Biological Sciences > C800 Psychology C Biological Sciences > C850 Cognitive Psychology C Biological Sciences > C820 Developmental Psychology |
| Divisions: | College of Social Sciences > Faculty of Health & Social Sciences > School of Psychology |
| Depositing User: | Alison Wilson |
| Date Deposited: | 15 Jul 2010 21:43 |
| Last Modified: | 13 Mar 2013 08:41 |
| URI: | http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/id/eprint/2865 |
Actions (login required)
![]() |
View Item |
