Heritage speaker competence differences, language change, and input type: Inflected infinitives in Heritage Brazilian Portuguese

Abstract

It has been argued that colloquial dialects of Brazilian Portuguese (BP) have undergone significant linguistic change resulting in the loss of inflected infinitives (e.g., Pires, 2002, 2006). Since BP adults, at least educated ones, have complete knowledge of inflected infinitives, the implicit claim is that they are transmitted via formal education in the standard dialect. In the present article, I test one of the latent predictions of such claims; namely, the fact that heritage speakers of BP who lack formal education in the standard dialect should never develop native-like knowledge of inflected infinitives. In doing so, I highlight two significant implications (a) that heritage speaker grammars are a good source for testing dialectal variation and language change proposals and (b) incomplete acquisition and/or attrition are not the only sources of heritage language competence differences. Employing the syntactic and semantic tests of Rothman and Iverson (2007), I compare heritage speakers' knowledge to Rothman and Iverson's advanced adult L2 learners and educated native controls. Unlike the latter groups, the data for heritage speakers indicate that they do not have target knowledge of inflected infinitives, lending support to Pires' claims, suggesting that literacy plays a significant role in the acquisition of this grammatical property in BP.

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

“…First, our data directly support claims made in the literature for over a decade that have, to date, not been sufficiently evidenced empirically. Sorace (2004) and Rothman (2007) independently suggested that some HS differences might be most accurately explained by them not having access to education in the standard variety and thus literacy in the HL. However, tangible evidence to support such a suggestion was extremely limited at the time.…”

“…More recent work has challenged this assumption (e.g., Kupisch 2013; Kupisch and Rothman 2016;Pascual y Cabo 2013; Pascual y Cabo and Rothman 2012; Pires and Rothman 2009;Putnam and Sánchez 2013;Rothman 2007;Scontras, Fuchs and Polinsky 2015). These newer approaches argue that differential ultimate attainment in the HL is not a case of incomplete acquisition, but rather reflects alternative developmental paths that arise because of the variation HSs confront related to key factors that contribute to monolingual conformity.…”

“…Barton 2015;Kupisch, Lein, Barton, Schröder, Stangen and Stoehr, 2014;Montrul and Sánchez Walker 2013;Pascual y Cabo 2013;Pires and Rothman 2009;Polinsky 2011;Rothman 2007). Rothman (2007), Pires and Rothman (2009) and Montrul and Sánchez Walker (2013) each investigate the role that qualitative differences in the input to which HS versus monolingual children are exposed (e.g., as a consequence of grammatical change/L1 attrition effects in the input) might better explain the path and ultimate attainment of particular grammatical properties. Kupisch and colleagues (see Kupisch and Rothman, 2016, for a review of studies) have compared HSs who have had the HS as a medium of instruction at school to those who have not.…”

A Comparison of the Grammatical Production of Child Heritage Speakers of Spanish across Language and Grade: Kindergarten and Grade 1

“…The intravariability in HSs has been investigated by several authors [5,12,14,16], among others. Some of the differences in linguistic proficiency in given groups of HSs may be due to differential literacy levels in the heritage language, and to the degree of its use at home and in social contexts [17].…”

A Rare Structure at the Syntax-Discourse Interface: Heritage and Spanish-Dominant Native Speakers Weigh In

“…In general, HSs do not receive a formal education in the heritage language, which delimits the type and contextualization of the linguistic input they receive, especially when compared to speakers from monolingual environments (Rothman 2007, Pires & Rothman 2009. Moreover, the input that HSs receive is mainly provided by speakers who themselves may be undergoing a process of language change (i.e.…”