The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the patterns of subject-auxiliary inversion in child English questions can be explained by the constrainted in Grinshaw's(1992) Optinmality Theory account of inversion patterns in adult English ques ...

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the patterns of subject-auxiliary inversion in child English questions can be explained by the constrainted in Grinshaw's(1992) Optinmality Theory account of inversion patterns in adult English question. I briefly review the treatment of subject-auxiliary inversion within the Minimalist Theory. The theory claims that subject-auxiliary inversion is a subcase of head mevement that moves an auxiliary across the sentence to the head of the presential complementizer(CP) position in nonsewlected CPs. in this paper I try to show that the stages of acquisition in subject-auxiliary inversion and the patterns of inversion in child English. And I also show that an Optimality-Theoretic approach can explain several facts regarding the pattern of auxiliary inversion in child English. In addition, this paper argues that the constraints ranking of child English must be different those of adult English to captire the chasacteristics of subject-auxiliary inversion in child English.

1. 머리말
2. 아이들의 의문문에 나타나는 도치구문의 유형과 습득과정
3. 최적이론과 도치구문
결론
참고문헌

1. 머리말
2. 아이들의 의문문에 나타나는 도치구문의 유형과 습득과정
3. 최적이론과 도치구문
결론
참고문헌