Differences in use without deficiencies in competence: passives in the Turkish and German of Turkish heritage speakers in Germany

Bayram, Fatih; Rothman, Jason; Iverson, Michael; Miller, David; Puig-Mayenco, Eloi; Kupisch, Tanja; Westergaard, Marit

doi:10.1080/13670050.2017.1324403

Cited by 69 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because the heritage language is typically used in informal settings, these heritage speakers would only be exposed to the regional/informal variety that possibly differs in its properties from the monolingual standard (Rothman 2007;Pires and Rothman, 2009). In either case, differences in the heritage input could affect the outcome of heritage language acquisition, especially in instances of limited access to HL schooling that would expose them to the properties of the monolingual standard (Bayram, Rothman, Iverson, Kupisch, Miller, Puig-Mayenco, and Westergaard, 2017;Kupisch and Rothman, 2016).…”

Section: The Nature Of the Heritage Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of parental input quality in child heritage language acquisition

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the role of parental input quality on the acquisition of Greek as a heritage language in Western Canada. Focusing on subject use, we tested four groups of Greek speakers: monolingual children, heritage children, and the parents of each one of those groups. Participants completed an elicited production task designed to elicit subject placement in wide focus and embedded interrogative contexts, where postverbal subjects are preferred/required in the monolingual variety. Results gave rise to two main conclusions: first, the parental input received by heritage children may be qualitatively different from the parental input received by monolingual children, in that it contains a higher rate of deviant preverbal subjects. Second, parental input quality in addition to quantity may affect the outcome of heritage language acquisition, in that children producing a higher rate of preverbal subjects had parents whose Greek input was not only quantitatively reduced, but also richer in preverbal subjects.

show abstract

Section: The Nature Of the Heritage Inputmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of parental input quality in child heritage language acquisition

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One way to distinguish between these possibilities is to compare individual heritage speakers to one another and see whether inter-speaker variation is explained better by factors related to input quantity, or input quality, or possibly other variables 14 . Recent research (e.g., Bayram et al 2017;Kaltsa et al 2019) has demonstrated this to be a fruitful approach in explaining divergence in heritage speakers. Fortunately, the detailed information obtained through the extensive background questionnaire for the adult heritage speakers enabled us to explore the role that various variables related to input and use play in explaining individual differences.…”

Section: Explaining the Observed Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to shed more light on the various factors that may come to shape heritage speakers' grammars, recent papers (e.g., Polinsky 2011;Montrul 2018) have stressed the need to look at child heritage speakers. The present study intends to fill this gap in the literature by focusing on heritage speakers of around age 9 and 13, an age range in which environmental and input-related circumstances are likely to have important effects on the development of the heritage language (Bayram et al 2017). The children were tested on their knowledge of subject position in Spanish and the various linguistic factors that constrain it.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Subject Position in Dutch-Dominant Heritage Speakers of Spanish: From Age 9 to Adulthood

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This exploratory study investigates the knowledge of word order in intransitive sentences by heritage speakers of Spanish of different age groups: 9-year-olds, 13-year-olds and adults. In doing so, we aim to fill a gap in the heritage language literature, which, to date, has mainly focused on adult heritage speakers and preschool bilingual children. The results from a judgment task reveal that child- and adolescent heritage speakers do not entirely resemble monolingual age-matched children in the acquisition of subjects in Spanish, nor do they assimilate adult heritage speakers. The data suggest that several different processes can occur simultaneously in the acquisition of word order in heritage speakers: monolingual-like acquisition, delayed acquisition, and attrition. An analysis of the influence of extraneous variables suggests that most of these effects are likely to be the consequence of quantitatively reduced input in the heritage language and increased input in the majority language.

show abstract

“…Due to switching to the language of the environment, heritage speakers experience various changes in their L1 grammars. These changes follow certain patterns and/or rules, which results in a similarity in heritage grammars, like loss of the pro-drop parameter (Polinsky, 2016) or reluctance to reject ungrammatical or infelicitous material (Bayram et al, 2017), etc. In our study, we examine various patterns in the acquisition of lexicon and of some morphological categories in heritage Russian spoken by secondgeneration migrant children in Germany within the context of the input dominance shift.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Input Dominance and Development of Home Language in Russian-German Bilinguals

Gagarina

Klassert

2018

Front. Commun.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bilingual children experience a rapid shift in language preference and input dominance from L1 to L2 upon entering kindergarten when regular contact with L2 starts. Though this change in dominance affects further L1 development, little is known about how various factors shape this. The present study examines the combined influence of different background factors including not only chronological age, age of onset of L2 (L2 AoO), and gender, but also various L1 input measures on L1 receptive and expressive lexical and morphological (case and verb inflections) development in Russian-German bilingual children. For lexical skills, we found a general strong impact of chronological age, gender, and input factors but a differential impact of L2 AoO. Only expressive lexical skills were influenced by language dominance. Morphological development was influenced in the following way: chronological age and gender were most relevant for the acquisition of verb inflection, whereas age, L1 use in the nuclear family and L2 AoO affected the acquisition of case on nouns. This pattern explains the findings of the second series of analyses of longitudinal data, which showed that case is more vulnerable than verb inflection to language attrition-or, taking another perspective-to heritage Russian grammar restructuring.

show abstract

Differences in use without deficiencies in competence: passives in the Turkish and German of Turkish heritage speakers in Germany

Cited by 69 publications

References 56 publications

Effects of parental input quality in child heritage language acquisition

Effects of parental input quality in child heritage language acquisition

The Development of Subject Position in Dutch-Dominant Heritage Speakers of Spanish: From Age 9 to Adulthood

Input Dominance and Development of Home Language in Russian-German Bilinguals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About