Chapter 9. The processing of Differential Object Marking by heritage speakers of Spanish

Regulez, Begoña Arechabaleta

doi:10.1075/tilar.26.09are

Cited by 5 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies have consistently shown that both heritage speakers and L2 learners omit the a-marker with animate objects (Farley and McCollam, 2004;McCollam Wiebe, 2004;Montrul, 2004;Guijarro-Fuentes and Marinis, 2007;Bowles andMontrul, 2008, 2009;Guijarro-Fuentes, 2012;Montrul and Sánchez-Walker, 2013;Arechabaleta-Regulez, 2014). For example, Montrul (2010) compared heritage speakers and L2 learners on the acquisition of DOM.…”

Section: Omission Of Dom By L2 Learners and Heritage Speakersmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…¿Qué usó el actor? Based on previous studies, heritage speakers and L2 learners were expected to show no sensitivity to DOM with animate objects with canonical word order sentences (Arechabaleta-Regulez, 2016;Jegerski, 2018;Jegerski and Sekerina, 2019). Therefore, participants were expected to produce comparable reading times when reading sentences with marked animate objects than with sentences with DOM omission.…”

Section: Reading Comprehension Task With Eye-trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is still not known whether this variability is due to problems at the level of linguistic representations in the weaker, or non-dominant language or whether it is access to linguistic representations for comprehension, production and processing that is at the root of such variability. Both second language (L2) learners of Spanish and heritage speakers of Spanish have been shown to have difficulty with differential object marking (DOM), the overt morphological marking of animate, specific direct objects with the preposition “a” ( Farley and McCollam, 2004 ; McCollam Wiebe, 2004 ; Montrul, 2004 , 2010 ; Guijarro-Fuentes and Marinis, 2007 ; Bowles and Montrul, 2008 , 2009 ; Guijarro-Fuentes, 2012 ; Montrul and Sánchez-Walker, 2013 ; Arechabaleta-Regulez, 2014 ). These studies have found high rates of omission of DOM in bilingual situations, where Spanish is in contact with a non-DOM language.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Arechabaleta-Regulez (2016) , investigated heritage speakers’ processing of DOM in sentences with canonical (SVO) and non-canonical (VSO) word order. Results of an eye-tracking during reading task demonstrated that heritage speakers were more sensitive to DOM omission with non-canonical VSO word order than with canonical SVO sentences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, omission of DOM was evident in their processing of canonical word order sentences but not in their processing of non-canonical word order sentences. Building on Arechabaleta-Regulez (2016) , this study examines whether L2 learners behave like heritage speakers in their processing of DOM. We predicted that their different language learning experiences regarding timing (before vs. after the critical period) and context of acquisition (naturalistic vs. formal environment), may affect their processing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Production, acceptability, and online comprehension of Spanish differential object marking by heritage speakers and L2 learners

Regulez

Montrul

2023

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyzed the production, acceptability and online comprehension of Spanish differential object marking (DOM) by two groups of bilingual speakers living in the U.S.: heritage speakers and L2 learners. DOM is the overt marking of direct objects that are higher on the animacy and referentiality scales, such as animate and specific objects in Spanish, marked by the preposition a (Juan ve a María ‘Juan sees DOM María’). Previous studies have reported variability and high omission rates of obligatory DOM in bilingual situations where Spanish is in contact with a non-DOM language.Our study combined different methodologies to tap knowledge of DOM in the two groups. The results showed that heritage speakers and L2 learners (1) exhibited variability with DOM in production (in two oral tasks), comprehension (in an acceptability judgement task), and processing (in an eye-tracking reading task); (2) can integrate DOM into their production, judgments and processing, but they do so inconsistently, and (3) type of task and type of sentence each have an effect on speakers’ use of DOM.

show abstract

Section: Omission Of Dom By L2 Learners and Heritage Speakersmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Reading Comprehension Task With Eye-trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Production, acceptability, and online comprehension of Spanish differential object marking by heritage speakers and L2 learners

Regulez

Montrul

2023

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Chapter 10. Comprehension of Differential Object Marking by Hindi heritage speakers

Bhatia

Montrul

2020

The Acquisition of Differential Object Marking

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heritage Languages: Language Acquired, Language Lost, Language Regained

Montrul

2023

Annu. Rev. Linguist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A heritage language is a sociopolitically minority and/or minoritized language acquired as the first or one of the first languages in a bilingual or multilingual context. Heritage languages are typically acquired under conditions of reduced exposure and are often used less than the majority language during late childhood and adolescence. Heritage languages show structural differences and changes at all levels of linguistic analysis from baseline grammars that arise from the complex interaction between the nature and quantity of input and the age of bilinguals. Although many situations give rise to heritage languages, this article focuses on immigrants and their children and reviews foundational studies of the linguistic properties of heritage languages; studies of age effects that have shed light on critical differences between first, second, and heritage language acquisition; and recent studies of heritage language relearning and reactivation. The implications of the study of heritage languages for bilingualism and society and for the language and cognitive sciences are discussed. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Linguistics, Volume 9 is January 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

show abstract

Chapter 9. The processing of Differential Object Marking by heritage speakers of Spanish

Cited by 5 publications

References 23 publications

Production, acceptability, and online comprehension of Spanish differential object marking by heritage speakers and L2 learners

Production, acceptability, and online comprehension of Spanish differential object marking by heritage speakers and L2 learners

Chapter 10. Comprehension of Differential Object Marking by Hindi heritage speakers

Heritage Languages: Language Acquired, Language Lost, Language Regained

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About