Assessment of Developmental Language Disorders in Bilinguals: Immigrant Turkish as a Bilectal Challenge in Germany

Chilla, Solveig

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-80072-7_16

Cited by 1 publication

(7 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the increasing number of studies conducted on subordination in both Standard and Heritage Turkish, no study has so far compared typically developing child heritage bilinguals to child heritage bilinguals with DLD concerning the production of subordinate clauses using different elicitation methods (see Chilla and Şan 2017;Chilla 2022). Since complex syntax was pointed out as a domain for identifying differences between bilingual children with TD and DLD (Scheidnes and Tuller 2019;Paradis et al 2022), this study attempted to determine whether the use of subordinate clauses differentiates heritage children with DLD from heritage children with DLD, in comparison with lL2ers and adult heritage bilinguals, who served as control groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Akıncı et al (2006) showed in their studies on older children that Turkish-speaking child heritage bilinguals in France may have similar performance in subordinations during their later school years, subject to the encouragement of biliteracy activities in the migrant setting determined by the educational system. The discrepancy between them and monolingual Turkish-speaking children in including subordinates results from the change in Turkish acquired in a heritage context, resulting from the cultural and linguistic differences between Standard Turkish (written) and its varieties (spoken) (Treffers-Daller et al 2007;Chilla 2022).…”

Section: Subordination In Heritage Turkishmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to a significant number of studies on DLD in Turkish, difficulties with counterfactuals, tense, and negation in verb morphology and case marking in nominal morphology have been observed in children with DLD (Babur et al 2007;Acarlar and Johnston 2011;Yarbay-Duman et al 2015;Topbaş et al 2016;Yarbay-Duman and Topbaş 2016;Chilla and Şan 2017;Şan 2018;Chilla 2022). Derivational morphology has also been shown to pose problems for children with DLD in SRT (Topbaş 2010).…”

Section: Subordination In Dld In Turkishmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The results of bilingual children tested in their heritage language using standardized language assessment tools may not be reliable due to the language-contact phenomena that may result in HL language change (Chilla and Şan 2017) and language attrition (Montrul 2008). For example, Ertanır et al (2018) and Chilla (2022) used the Türkçe Erken Dil Gelişim Testi (TED ˙IL) (Topbaş and Güven 2011) and the Türkce Okul Ça gı Dil Gelişim Testi (TOD ˙IL) (Topbaş and Güven 2017) assessment of Turkish HL abilities and showed that a significant proportion of heritage children performed not only below monolingual norms, but also below dominance-adjusted pathology cut-offs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The number of studies on DLD in Turkish-speaking children has increased in recent years (Topbaş 1997(Topbaş , 1999(Topbaş , 2005(Topbaş , 2007Acarlar et al 2006;Babur et al 2007;Uzuntaş 2008;Topbaş and Güven 2008;de Jong et al 2010;Rothweiler et al 2010;Topbaş and Yavaş 2010;Acarlar and Johnston 2011;Topbaş et al 2016;Güven and Leonard 2020;among others). In addition, Turkish, as a heritage language, has been systematically investigated in many studies (Ya gmur 1997; Backus and Boeshoten 1998;Türker 2000;Herkenrath and Karakoç 2002;Akıncı and Decool-Mercier 2010;Onar-Valk and Backus 2013;Schroeder 2016;Chilla and Şan 2017;Şan 2018;Schmid and Karayayla 2020;Chilla 2022). A very recent study by Özsoy et al (2022) focused on background factors, such as age and variation in shifting clause-combining strategies in Heritage Turkish varieties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Subordination in Turkish Heritage Children with and without Developmental Language Impairment

Șan

2023

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large body of cross-linguistic research has shown that complex constructions, such as subordinate constructions, are vulnerable in bilingual DLD children, whereas they are robust in bilingual children with typical language development; therefore, they are argued to constitute a potential clinical marker for identifying DLD in bilingual contexts, especially when the majority language is assessed. However, it is not clear whether this also applies to heritage contexts, particularly in contexts in which the heritage language is affected by L2 contact-induced phenomena, as in the case of Heritage Turkish in Germany. In this study, we compare subordination using data obtained from 13 Turkish heritage children with and without DLD (age range 5; 1–11; 6) to 10 late successive (lL2) BiTDs (age range 7; 2–12; 2) and 10 Turkish adult heritage bilinguals (age range 20; 3–25; 10) by analyzing subordinate constructions using both Standard and Heritage Turkish as reference varieties. We further investigate which background factors predict performance in subordinate constructions. Speech samples were elicited using the sentence repetition task (SRT) from the TODİL standardized test battery and the Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives (MAIN). A systematic analysis of a corpus of subordinate clauses constructed with respect to SRT and MAIN narrative production comprehension tasks shows that heritage children with TD and DLD may not be differentiated through these tasks, especially when their utterances are scored using the Standard Turkish variety as a baseline; however, they may be differentiated if the Heritage Turkish is considered as the baseline. The age of onset in the second language (AoO_L2) was the leading performance predictor in subordinate clause production in SRT and in both tasks of MAIN regardless of using Standard Turkish or Heritage Turkish as reference varieties in scoring.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%