Children always go beyond the input: The Maximise Minimal Means perspective

References

Biberauer, T. 2011. In defence of lexico-centric parametric variation: Two 3rd factor-constrained case studies. Paper presented at the Workshop on Formal Grammar and Syntactic. Variation: Rethinking Parameters (Madrid).Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. 2017a. Factors 2 and 3: A principled approach. In C. Song & J. Baker (eds.), Cambridge occasional papers in linguistics, vol. 10. 38–65.Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. 2017b. Optional V2 in modern Afrikaans: A Germanic peculiarity. In B. Los & P. de Haan (eds.), Word order change in acquisition and language contact: Essays in honour of Ans van Kemenade, 79–99. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.243.05bibSearch in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. in press. Factors 2 and 3: Towards a principled explanation. Catalan Journal of Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. & I. Roberts. 2012. The significance of what hasn’t happened. Paper presented at DiGS12 (Lisbon).Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. & I. Roberts. 2015. Rethinking formal hierarchies: A proposed unification. In J. Chancharu (ed.), Cambridge occasional papers in linguistics, vol. 7. 1–31.Search in Google Scholar

Biberauer, T. & I. Roberts et al. 2017. Parameter setting. In A. Ledgeway & I. Roberts (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of historical syntax, 134–162. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/9781107279070.008Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–50. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2005. Three factors in Language Design. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 1–22.10.1162/0024389052993655Search in Google Scholar

Dehaene, S. 2007. Reading in the brain: The new science of how we read, London: Penguin.Search in Google Scholar

Dresher, E. 1999. Charting the learning path: Cues to parameter setting. Linguistic Inquiry 30. 27–67.10.1162/002438999553959Search in Google Scholar

Evers, A. & J. van Kampen. 2008. Parameter setting and input reduction. In T. Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation, 483–515. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.132.22eveSearch in Google Scholar

Ferreira, F. & N. Patson. 2007. The good enough approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass 1. 71–83.10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00007.xSearch in Google Scholar

Freywald, U. 2008. Zur Syntax und Funktion von dass-Sätzen mit Verbzweitstellung. Deutsche Sprache 36. 246–285.10.37307/j.1868-775X.2008.03.04Search in Google Scholar

Freywald, U. 2014. Parataktische Konjunktionen. University of Potsdam Ph.D. Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Gagliardi, A. (2012). Input and intake in language acquisition. Maryland Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Gervain, J. & J. Werker. 2008. How infant speech perception contributes to language acquisition. Language and Linguistics Compass 2. 1149–1170.10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00089.xSearch in Google Scholar

Gianollo, C., C. Guardiano & G. Longobardi. 2008. Three fundamental issues in parametric linguistics. In T. Biberauer (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation, 109–142. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.132.05giaSearch in Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. & P. Todd. 2000. Fast and frugal heuristics: The adaptive toolbox. In G. Gigerenzer et al. (eds.), Evolution and cognition. Simple heuristics that make us smart, 3–34. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Green, G. 1996. Pragmatics and natural language understanding. Marwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Haider, H. 1993. Deutsche Syntax Generativ. Tübingen: Narr.Search in Google Scholar

Haider, H. 2010. The Syntax of German. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511845314Search in Google Scholar

Jakobson, R. 1949. On the identification of phonemic entities. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Copenhague 5. 205–13. Reprinted in: Jakobson, R. 1962. Selected writings 1. Phonological studies. The Hague: Mouton.10.1080/01050206.1949.10416304Search in Google Scholar

Kahnemann, D. 2001. Thinking, fast and slow. London: Penguin.Search in Google Scholar

Kidd, C., S. Piantadosi & R. Aslin. 2012. The Goldilocks Effect: Human infants allocate attention to visual sequences that are neither too simple nor too complex. PLOS One7(5). e36399.10.1371/journal.pone.0036399Search in Google Scholar

Kidd, C., S. Piantadosi & R. Aslin. 2014. The Goldilocks Effect in infant auditory attention. Child Development 85(5). 1795–1804.10.1111/cdev.12263Search in Google Scholar

Krifka, M. 2001. Quantifying into question acts. Natural Language Semantics 9. 1–40.10.1023/A:1017903702063Search in Google Scholar

Labov, W., P. Cohen, C. Robbens & J. Lewis. 1968. A study of the non-standard English of Negro and Puerto-Rican speakers in New York City: Volume 1. Phonological and grammatical analyses. New York, NY: Columbia University.Search in Google Scholar

Lidz, J. & A., Gagliardi. 2015. How nature meets nurture: Universal Grammar and statistical learning. Annual Review of Linguistics 1. 333–353.10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-125236Search in Google Scholar

McCloskey, J. 2006. Questions and questioning in a local English. In R. Zanuttini et al. (eds.), Crosslinguistic research in syntax and semantics: Negation, tense, and clausal architecture, 87–126. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Morin, O. 2018. Spontaneous emergence of legibility in writing systems: The case of orientation anisotropy. Cognitive Science 42(2). 664–677.10.1111/cogs.12550Search in Google Scholar

Pearl, L. in press. Modelling syntactic acquisition. In J. Sprouse (ed.), Oxford handbook of experimental syntax. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Pinker, S. 1984. Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Pozzan, L. 2011. Asking questions in learner English: First and second language acquisition of main and embedded interrogative structures. CUNY Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Ramchand, G. & P. Svenonius. 2014. Deriving the functional hierarchy. Language Sciences 46. 152–174.10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.013Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, I. 2007. Diachronic syntax. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, I. & A. Roussou. 2003. Syntactic change. A minimalist approach to grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511486326Search in Google Scholar

Sandler, W. 2010. Prosody and syntax in sign language. Transactions of the Philological Society 108(3). 298–328.10.1111/j.1467-968X.2010.01242.xSearch in Google Scholar

Sandler, W. 2012. The phonological organization of sign languages. Language and Linguistics Compass 6(3). 162–182.10.1002/lnc3.326Search in Google Scholar

Schönenberger, M. 2001. Embedded V-to-C in child grammar: The acquisition of verb placement in Swiss German. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-010-0798-6Search in Google Scholar

Schuler, K., C. Yang & E. Newport. 2016. Testing the Tolerance Principle: children form productive rules when it is computationally more efficient to do so. In A. Papafragou et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Search in Google Scholar

Trudgill, P. 2011. Sociolinguistic typology: Social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Tsimpli, I. 2014. Early, late or very late? Timing acquisition and bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 4(3). 283–313.10.1075/lab.4.3.01tsiSearch in Google Scholar

Vikner, S. 1995. Verb movement and expletive subjects in the Germanic languages, Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Wiltschko, M. 2014. The universal structure of categories. Towards a formal typology, Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9781139833899Search in Google Scholar