No more reductions! — To the problem of evaluation of language attrition data

Schmitt, Elena

doi:10.1075/sibil.28.18sch

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some heritage speakers ultimately become nativelike although others end up with rudimentary skills, and this ultimate success may relate to a combination of factors, such as quantity/quality of input and heritage language instruction (Kupisch & Rothman, 2016;Montrul, 2016;Rothman, 2009). Studies tracing heritage speakers' L1 development longitudinally have provided further evidence for the rate and degree of structural erosion that these speakers often experience, which can be quite severe (especially in the case of international adoption) even if the property under investigation had stabilized before immigration took place (Altenberg, 1991;Isurin, 2000;Montrul, 2008;Schmitt, 2004;Zaretsky & Bar-Shalom, 2007). Zaretsky and Bar-Shalom (2007), for instance, tested whether age at onset and frequency of L1 use would prevent attrition of morphosyntactic categories in L1 Russian in children and adults.…”

Section: Background Literature L1 Development Among Heritage Speakersmentioning

confidence: 99%

First Language Attrition as a Function of Age at Onset of Bilingualism: First Language Attainment of Turkish–English Bilinguals in the United Kingdom

Karayayla

Schmid

2018

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This investigation aimed to provide insights into the controversial debate on the role that age at onset of bilingualism plays in human language capacity with a focus on what it entails for first language (L1) attrition. L1 performance of Turkish immigrants (n = 57) in the United Kingdom with age at onset ranging between 7 and 34 years was compared to that of Turkish monolingual controls (n = 29) across two linguistic properties: structural complexity and accent. Findings generally showed that although the immigrants achieved nativelike proficiency with respect to the overall structural complexity of their L1, this was not the case for accent as those with an earlier age of onset were less likely to sound like native Turkish speakers. We discuss these findings in relation to two competing theoretical models of age effects and suggest that attrition data need to be better accommodated within these models. Open Practices This article has been awarded an Open Materials badge. All materials are publicly accessible via the IRIS Repository at https://www.iris-database.org. Learn more about the Open Practices badges from the Center for Open Science: https://osf.io/tvyxz/wiki.

show abstract

Section: Background Literature L1 Development Among Heritage Speakersmentioning

confidence: 99%

First Language Attrition as a Function of Age at Onset of Bilingualism: First Language Attainment of Turkish–English Bilinguals in the United Kingdom

Karayayla

Schmid

2018

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies on attrition suggest that even such central properties of grammar can be subject to processes of language loss. Subject-verb agreement and case marking are often affected to various degrees, more in incomplete acquisition (Polinsky, 2006a(Polinsky, , 2007a(Polinsky, , 2008 and child language attrition (Anderson, 2001;Bolonyai, 2000Bolonyai, , 2002, less in adult attrition (Levine, 2000;Pelc, 2002;Schmid, 2002;Schmitt, 2004), with patterns of omission and use of incorrect markers. Allen et al (2006) show that case and agreement can be affected even in highproficiency incomplete acquisition in Inuktitut.…”

Section: Core Features Of Labrador Inuttitut Grammarmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grammar without speech production: The case of Labrador Inuttitut heritage receptive bilinguals

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine morphosyntactic knowledge of Labrador Inuttitut by Inuit receptive bilinguals (RBs) – heritage speakers who are capable of comprehension, but produce little or no speech. A grammaticality judgment study suggests that RBs possess sensitivity to morphosyntactic violations, though to a lesser degree than fluent bilinguals. Low-proficiency RBs are sensitive only to the most basic grammatical properties. Case omission is most difficult to detect, but morphemes bearing incorrect features (case oversuppliance, number agreement mismatch) or ordered incorrectly (tense and agreement, tense and negation) are easier, and performance on incorrect ordering of morphemes is near target with the core agreement morpheme for all RBs. While receptive bilinguals show patterns of grammatical deficits, they also demonstrate clear knowledge of the basic properties of word structure in Inuttitut. This has implications both for the psycholinguistics of bilingualism and for language revitalization efforts.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, it is striking that studies about early bilinguals (mostly case studies) frequently focus on morphology or syntax (e.g. Håkansson 1995;Kaufman & Aronoff 1991;Levine 1996;Schmitt 2004;Seliger 1991;Turian & Altenberg 1991;Vago 1991), compared to studies with late bilinguals, which are mainly concerned with more general features (e.g. Ben Rafael 2004;Gross 2004;Köpke 1999;Yagmur 1997) or focus on the lexicon only (e.g.…”

Section: Declarative and Procedural Memorymentioning

confidence: 99%