Shifting and Expanding Clause Combining Strategies in Heritage Turkish Varieties

Abstract

Turkish is a language described as relying predominantly on non-finite subordination in the domain of clause combining. However, there are also strategies of finite subordination, as well as means of syndetic and asyndetic paratactic clause combining, especially in the informal settings. Clause combining is and has been one of the focal points of research on heritage Turkish (h-Turkish). One point is particularly clear: In comparison with the monolingual setting, finite means of clause combining are more frequent in h-Turkish in Germany, the U.S., and the Netherlands, while non-finite means of clause combining are less frequent. Overall, our results confirm the findings of earlier studies: heritage speakers in Germany and the U.S. prefer paratactic means of clause combining using connectors, as opposed to monolingual speakers. Our results also reveal that age (adolescents vs. adults) and register (informal vs. formal) significantly modulate the use of connectors. Moreover, we find that the shift in preferences in means of clause combining triggers an expansion in the system of connectors and leads to the development of new narrative connectors, such as o zaman and derken. The system of syndetic paratactic clause combining is expanding in heritage Turkish. This expansion calls for multifaceted modeling of change in heritage languages, which integrates language-internal factors (register), dynamics of convergence with the contact languages, and extra-linguistic factors (age and language use).

Exploring individual variation in Turkish heritage speakers’ complex linguistic productions: Evidence from discourse markers

“…We can ask which different grammatical means speakers can use to express the same or similar meanings. For example, in our own research on clause combining in majority monolingual and heritage bilingual Turkishes, we confirmed previous observations that majority speakers seem to prefer subordination over coordination whereas this pattern is reversed in heritage bilingual populations (Özsoy et al, 2022). Both subordination and coordination are means of combining clauses which are equally valid and are guided by factors such as register and modality among other factors.…”

“…For our analysis of DMs, this means that a large portion of them will produce as many discourse and FMs as monolingual speakers. We based this prediction on other studies that were able to attribute changes in heritage grammars to certain individuals in the groups (Goschler et al, 2020; Iefremenko et al, 2021; Özsoy et al, 2022). Our careful analysis of individual variation will be able to locate these speakers and adequately allocate between-group differences to those speakers.…”

Turkish-German heritage speakers' predictive use of case: webcam-based vs. in-lab eye-tracking

“…The community we have worked with is Turkish HSs who live in Berlin, Germany. It is a highly cohesive and vital speech community where Turkish is used on an everyday basis in many informal settings (Özsoy et al, 2022 ). However, many HSs are the third and fourth generation and they often do not use a strictly monolingual mode when speaking Turkish.…”