In this paper, we present evidence for a root infinitive (RI) stage in Malagasy, an Austronesian language typologically distinct from previously studied RI languages. Drawing on a longitudinal corpus of three Malagasy-speaking children, we show that children frequently produce bare verb forms in root contexts not attested in adult input. These bare forms pattern with null subjects, default pronouns (notably first person izaho instead of aho), and avoid negation and stative predicates, aligning closely with properties observed with RIs in other languages supporting the existence of an RI analogue in Malagasy. Our findings challenge input-based and constructivist models, which predict that RI forms should be reflected in the input, as Malagasy children’s RI forms emerge despite a near-total absence in caregiver speech. These results reinforce a universalist account of grammatical development and provide new empirical support for syntactic explanations of the RI phenomenon, including use of the aspectual properties of verbs in the temporal anchoring of clauses in child language.
AdnyaniN. L. P. S.BerathaN. L. S.PastikaI. W.SuparwaI. N. (2018). The development of verbal morphology and word order in an Indonesian-German bilingual child: A case study. Topics in Linguistics, 19(1), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2018-0003
2.
BeckerM. (2000). The development of the copula in English: The lightness of be [PhD dissertation]. UCLA.
3.
ChienL. Y. M. (2009). Is there a root infinitives or root infinitive analogue stage in early mandarin? [Master’s thesis]. National Tsing-Hua University, Taiwan.
4.
DavidsonL.GoldrickM. (2003). Tense, agreement and defaults in child catalan: An optimality theory analysis. In MontrulS.OrdóñezF. (Eds.), Linguistic theory and language development in Hispanic languages (pp. 193–211). Cascadilla Press.
5.
De CatC. (2002). Apparent non-Nominative subjects in L1 French. In ParadisJ.PrévostP. (Eds.), The acquisition of French in different contexts: Focus on functional categories (pp. 53–88). J. Benjamins.
6.
DeenK. U. (2005). The acquisition of Swahili. John Benjamins Publishing.
7.
De LisserT. N.DurrlemanS.RizziL.ShlonskyU. (2021). Root infinitives in Jamaican Creole. Glossa, 39(1), 127. https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5705
8.
FerdinandA. (1996). The acquisition of the subject in French [PhD dissertation]. HIL/Leiden University.
9.
FreudenthalD.PineJ. M.GobetF. (2006). Modelling the development of children’s use of optional infinitives in Dutch and English using MOSAIC. Cognitive Science, 30(2), 277–310.
10.
FreudenthalD.PineJ. M.GobetF. (2011). Syllabifying MOSAIC: Simulating the pattern of verb-marking errors in K’iche’ Mayan [Paper presentation]. 12th Triennial Congress of the International Association for the Study of Child Language, Montreal, Canada.
11.
FreudenthalD.PineJ. M.JonesG.GobetF. (2015). Simulating the cross-linguistic pattern of Optional Infinitive errors in children’s declaratives and Wh- questions. Cognition, 43, 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.05.027
12.
FriedemannM. A. (1993). The underlying position of external arguments in French: A study in adult and child grammar. Language Acquisition, 3(3), 209–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327817la0303_2
13.
GarciaR.KiddE. (2022). Acquiring verb-argument structure in Tagalog: A multivariate corpus analysis of caregiver and child speech. Linguistics, 60(6), 1855–1906.
14.
GerkenL. (1994). A metrical template account of children’s weak syllable omissions from multisyllabic words. Journal of Child Language, 21(3), 565–584.
15.
GrinsteadJ. (2000). Case, inflection and subject licensing in child Catalan and Spanish. Journal of Child Language, 27(1), 119–155.
16.
GiorgiA.PianesiF. (2001). Ways of terminating. In G. ChierchiaC.GuastiM.T. (Eds.), Semantic Interfaces: Reference, Anaphora and Aspect (p.p. 211–277). Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI-LN).
17.
GrinsteadJ. (2016). Root infinitives in child language and the structure of the clause. In LidzJ.SnyderW.PaterJ. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of developmental linguistics. Oxford Handbooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199601264.013.15
18.
GrinsteadJ.Vega-MendozaM.GoodallG. (2018). Inversion and finiteness in Spanish and English: Developmental evidence from the optional infinitive and optional inversion stages. Language, 94(3), 575–610.
19.
GuastiM. T. (1994). Verb syntax in Italian child grammar: Finite and nonfinite verbs, Language Acquisition, 3, 1–40.
20.
GuastiM. T. (2016). Language acquisition: The growth of grammar (2nd ed.). The MIT Press.
21.
GuastiM. T.RizziL. (1996). Null aux and the acquisition of residual V2. In StringfellowA.Cahana-AmitayD.HughesE.ZukowskiA. (Eds.), Proceedings of BUCLD 20 (pp. 284–295). Cascadilla Press.
22.
GuilfoyleE.H.HungLTravis. (1992). Spec of IP and spec of VP: Two subjects in Austronesian languages. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 10(3), 375–414.
23.
HaanG. de (1986). A theory-bound approach to the acquisition of verb placement in Dutch. In HaanG. deZonneveldW. (Eds.), Formal parameters of generative grammar (Vol. 3, pp. 15–30). University of Utrecht.
24.
HaegemanL. (1995). Root infinitives, tense, and truncated structures in Dutch. Language Acquisition, 4(3), 205–255.
25.
HamannC. (2000). Negation, infinitives, and heads. In PowersS. M.HamannC. (Eds.), The acquisition of scrambling and cliticization. Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics (Vol. 26, pp. 423–477). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3232-1_16
26.
HarrisT.WexlerK. (1996). The optional infinitive stage in child English: Evidence from negation. In ClahsenH. (Ed.), Generative approached to first and second language acquisition (pp. 1–42). John Benjamins.
27.
HoekstraT.HyamsN. (1998). Aspects of root infinitives. Lingua, 106(1–4), 81–112.
28.
HyamsN. (1996). The underspecification of functional categories in early grammar. In ClahsenH. (Ed.), Generative perspective on language acquisition (pp. 91–127). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
29.
HyamsN. (2006). An RI stage in Malagasy? Implications for the adult grammar. In BellettiA.BennatiE.ChesiC.DiDomenicoE.FerrariI. (Eds.), Language acquisition and development. Proceedings of GALA 2005 (pp. 293–307). Cambridge Scholars Press.
30.
HyamsN. (2007). Aspectual effects on interpretation in early grammar. Language Acquisition, 14(3), 231–268.
31.
HyamsN. (2011). Eventivity effects in early grammar. The case of non-finite verbs. First Language, 32(1–2), 239–269.
32.
HyamsN.NtelitheosD.ManorohantaC. (2006). Acquisition of the Malagasy voicing system: Implications for the adult grammar. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 24, 1049–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-006-9009-2
33.
IngramD.ThompsonW. (1996). Early syntactic acquisition in German: Evidence for the modal hypothesis. Language, 72(1), 97–120.
34.
KeenanE. L.ManorohantaC. (2001). A quantitative study of voice in Malagasy. Oceanic Linguistics, 40, 67–85.
35.
KeenanE. L.PolinskyM. (1998). Malagasy (Austronesian). In SpencerA.ZwickyA. (Eds.), The handbook of morphology (pp. 563–623). Oxford University Press.
36.
KrämerI. (1993). The licensing of subjects in early child language. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 19, 197–212.
37.
LegateJ. A.YangC. (2007). Morphosyntactic learning and the development of tense. Language Acquisition, 14(3), 315–344.
38.
NtelitheosD. (2005). Root infinitives in Malagasy. In HeinzJ.NtelitheosD. (Eds.), UCLA working papers in linguistics, no. 12: Proceedings of the twelfth annual conference of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association (AFLA XII) (pp. 329–342). UCLA Department of Linguistics.
NtelitheosD.ManorohantaC. (2006). Default pronouns and root infinitives in Malagasy acquisition. In DeenK. U.NomuraJ.SchulzB.SchwartzB. D. (Eds.), The proceedings of the inaugural conference on generative approaches to language acquisition–North America, Honolulu, HI. University of Connecticut occasional papers in linguistics (Vol. 4, pp. 249–260). MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
42.
PaulI. (2000). Malagasy clause structure [PhD dissertation]. Department of Linguistics, McGill University.
43.
PearsonM. (2001). The clause structure of Malagasy: A minimalist approach [UCLA dissertations in Linguistics 21]. University of California, Los Angeles.
44.
PearsonM. (2005). The Malagasy subject/topic as an A’-element. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 23, 381–457.
45.
PierceA. (1992). Language acquisition and syntactic theory: A comparative analysis of French and English child grammars. Kluwer.
46.
PoeppelD.WexlerK. (1993). The full competence hypothesis of clause structure in early German. Language, 69(1), 1–33.
PowersS. M. (1995). The acquisition of pronouns in Dutch and English: The case for continuity. In Proceedings of BUCLD 19 (pp. 439–450). Cascadilla Press.
50.
PyeC.PfeilerB.de LeónL.BrownP.MateoP. (2007). Roots or edges?Explaining variation in children’s early verb forms in five Mayan languages. In PfeilerB. (Ed.), Learning Indigenous Languages: Child Language Acquisition in Mesoamerica (pp. 15–47). Mouton de Gruyter.
51.
RadfordA. (1990). Syntactic theory and the acquisition of English syntax. Basil Blackwell.
52.
RäsänenS. H. MAmbdridgeBPineJ. M. (2014). Infinitives or bare stems? Are English-speaking children defaulting to the highest-frequency form?. Journal of Child Language, 41(4), 756–779. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000913000159
53.
RizziL. (1991). Residual verb second and the wh-criterion. University of Geneva.
54.
RizziL. (1994). Some notes on linguistic theory and language development: The case of root infinitives. Language Acquisition, 3(4), 371–393.
55.
SalustriM.HyamsN. (2003). Is there an analogue to the RI stage in the null subject languages? In BeachleyB.BrownA.ConlinF. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (BUCLD 27) (pp. 692–703). Cascadilla Press.
56.
SanoT.HyamsN. (1994). Agreement, finiteness, and the development of null arguments. In GonzàlezM. (Ed.), NELS 24: Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society (Vol. 2, pp. 543–558). GLSA, University of Massachusetts.
57.
SchützeC. T. (1995). Children’s subject case errors: Evidence for case-related functional projections. In GabrieleL.HardisonD.WestmorelandR. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Mid-America (FLSM VI) (Vol. 1, pp. 155–166). Indiana University Linguistics Club Publications.
58.
SchützeC. T. (1997). INFL in child and adult language: Agreement, case, and licensing [PhD thesis]. MIT.
59.
SchützeC. T. (2001). On the nature of default case. Syntax, 4(3), 205–238.
60.
VarlokostaS.VainikkaA.RohrbacherB. (1996). The question of root infinitives in early child Greek (IRCS technical reports series). Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania.
61.
WeissenbornJ. (1992). Null subjects in early child grammars: Implications for parameter-setting theories. In WeissenbornJ.GoodluckH.RoeperT. (Eds.), Theoretical issues in language acquisition: Continuity and change in development (pp. 269–301). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
62.
WeissenbornJ. (1994). Constraining the child’s grammar: Local well-formedness in the development of verb movement in German and French. In LustB.WhitmanJ.KornfiltJ. (Eds.), Syntactic theory and first language acquisition: Cross linguistic perspectives volume II: Binding, dependencies and learnability (pp. 215–247). Lawrence Erlbaum.
63.
WexlerK. (1994). Optional infinitives, head movement, and the economy of derivations in child grammar. In LightfootD.HornsteinN. (Eds.), Verb movement (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, Vol. 73, pp. 305–350). Cambridge University Press.
64.
WijnenF. (1998). The temporal interpretation of Dutch children’s root infinitives: The effect of eventivity. First Language, 18(54), 379–402.
