Eine Übersicht aller Sessions/Sitzungen dieser Tagung.
Bitte wählen Sie einen Ort oder ein Datum aus, um nur die betreffenden Sitzungen anzuzeigen. Wählen Sie eine Sitzung aus, um zur Detailanzeige zu gelangen.
Ort: J 30/109 |
|Datum: Donnerstag, 28.03.2019|
|9:00 - 10:30||Sesión 01: LING_3: Sitzung|
9:00 - 9:45
Welcome and introduction to the section
Universität Wuppertal, Deutschland
Welcome and introduction to the section
9:45 - 10:30
DOM in Heritage Spanish
Bergische Univeristät Wuppertal, Deutschland
Much work on Spanish Differential Object Marking (DOM) has shown the complexity and the resulting difficulties for its acquisition. Most studies, however, deal with early or late bilinguals with the language combination English-Spanish. The present paper presents data from a pilot study seeking to check whether the reported results also hold for German-Spanish bilinguals. Despite the differences between the systems of German and Spanish, German provides a general morpho-phonological marking which could serve as support. Based on two tasks conducted with L1 Spanish speakers from Spain, German-Spanish bilingual HS and German L2 learners of Spanish, we observe for the obligatory contexts that the HS perform very similar to monolingual L1 speakers, generally outperforming the L2 learners. Furthermore, we will show that L1 and HS show a low variance value, i.e. a high homogeneity within the respective group, whereas the variance value for L2 learners is much higher. Assuming that a low variance value indicates a systematic, rule-based linguistic behavior, we will conclude that HL is an independent linguistic system which can and should be analyzed also without reference to its acquisition.
|11:00 - 12:30||Sesión 02: LING_3: Sitzung|
11:00 - 12:30
Which factors affect the development of a Heritage Language? Empirical findings from Portuguese as Heritage Language in contact with German, French and Spanish.
Universidade do Minho, Portugal
The present talk focusses on bilingual speakers, so called that heritage speakers (HSs), who grow up with a minority language, mainly spoken within the family, and a dominant environmental language. Research on the development of heritage languages has consistently shown that HSs develop a particular language competence, which may differ from monolingual grammars, both in production and comprehension (see Montrul, 2016, for an overview). Differences in the output of heritage bilingual and monolingual speakers have been interpreted in terms of incomplete acquisition (Montrul, 2004) or as differential acquisition (Kupisch & Rothman, 2016) due to several factors, such as cross-linguistic influence, language dominance and reduced input. In this talk I discuss the role of three further aspects: the role of timing of acquisition, of linguistic variation in the target language and the availability of the formal register to HSs. Based on various data from EP as a heritage language in contact with German, French and Spanish, I will provide evidence for the idea that phenomena acquired late in monolingual acquisition may be significantly delayed or differentially pronounced in heritage grammars if input is reduced at a certain age. This has been shown for the acquisition of the subjunctive mood in complement clauses (Flores et al. 2017), the preverbal position of clitic pronouns (Flores & Barbosa 2014) or anaphora resolution (Rinke & Flores, 2018) by HSs of EP. However, differential outcomes in heritage grammars cannot be exclusively explained by timing of acquisition. Other factors come into play such as language internal variation and the availability of the formal register. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that HSs show more variable knowledge in language domains characterized by variation, particularly in colloquial speech. This is the case of clitic placement in oral EP, for instance, where enclisis is often used in contexts which require proclisis. Also the use of clitic allomorphs is characterized by variation in colloquial speech, which is reduced in literate speech. As demonstrated by Rinke & Flores (2014) and Flores, Rinke & Azevedo (2017), these are precisely the structures that impose more challenges to HSs (such as to illiterate monolingual speakers of EP).
|15:00 - 16:30||Sesión 03: LING_3: Sitzung|
15:00 - 15:45
Interface phenomena in heritage Spanish in the Netherlands
University of Amsterdam, Países Bajos
In this talk I will present data from heritage speakers of Spanish. Most of the previous research on heritage Spanish has been carried out in the context of the US (e.g. Montrul, 2015; Silva-Corvalán, 1994). This study is about heritage Spanish in the Netherlands. I will discuss the ways in which differences between countries regarding community type and size and majority language can have differential effects on the heritage language. The main focus will be on interface phenomena, i.e. phenomena that integrate syntactic knowledge with knowledge from other linguistic domains, such as semantics (internal interfaces) or non-linguistic domains such as discourse-pragmatics (external interfaces). Unlike most previous research this study compares different interfaces within a single phenomenon, by looking at phenomena which lie at the crossroads of multiple interfaces, namely the subjunctive and subject verb word order.
15:45 - 16:30
The effect of crosslinguistic differences onto the acquisition of Spanish as heritage language. A case study on tense and aspect.
1Universität Mannheim & Bergische Universität Wuppertal; 2Bergische Universität Wuppertal; 3Universitat de les Illes Balears
Following Valdés’s definition (2000, 2005), heritage speakers are to some degree bilingual in the majority language of the country they live in and the heritage language. Concerning their linguistic competence, two positions can be distinguished: Incomplete acquisition (e.g. Bennamoun et al. 2013, Montrul 2008,2012,2016) and complete acquisition of a contact variety (e.g. Pires & Rothman 2009, Kupisch & Rothman 2016). Previous studies in the first branch have identified that certain grammatical domains are particularly vulnerable in HS grammars which include also tense-aspect phenomena (Montrul 2002,2009). In an elicitation study on tense/aspect and mood interpretation, Montrul & Perpiñán (2011) even find that HS perform below advanced L2 speakers (L1=English, L2=Spanish), maybe due to different metalinguistic competences. Research suggests that generally a great difference between the L1 and L2 feature configuration may hinder quick acquisition (Comajoan 2014, Salaberry 2008). According to the Feature Reassembly Hypothesis (Lardiere 2009, Hwang & Lardiere 2013), a full acquisition of the target system is generally possible, but the process is considerably slowed down if L1 and L2 differ in how features are organized.
In this talk, we apply the idea of comparing feature configurations to HS (Putnam & Sánchez 2013), using different language combinations: English/Spanish and German/Spanish.
In Spanish, past tenses are marked for (im)perfectivity (Zagona 2007). Following Domínguez et al. (2017), the Imperfect dormía is used for progressive, habitual and continuous events, i.e. bundling three features together, whereas the Preterit durmió is reserved for the perfective context. The English verb system involves a basic aspectual contrast found in the progressive form (Salaberry & Ayoun 2005), whereas German does not mark grammatical aspect at all (Heinold 2015). While both systems differ significantly from Spanish, the feature configuration of English resembles the Spanish one in the fact that it also presents two feature bundles, as opposed to German where all four aspectual notions (perfectivity, habituality, continuity, progressivity) can be expressed with the same underspecified verb forms.
We present data from three groups: (1) 20 HS in the USA, (2) 20 HS in Germany and (3) native Spanish speakers (N=15). Data were collected using oral interviews and an Aural Grammaticality Judgment Task (18 items). Based on statistical analyses, we find evidence for complete acquisition in both groups. In contrast to the performance of L2 speakers reported elsewhere (Diaubalick & Guijarro-Fuentes 2016,2017), we neither find a target-deviant convergence of lexical and grammatical aspect, nor an unexpected concentration of non-grammatical elements. Groups differ slightly in terms of their accuracy rates; Anglophone Spanish HS are almost native-like, German-speaking Spanish HS produce some occasional target-deviations. Generally, the accuracy rates on grammatical aspect were higher in oral production than the ones in the aural grammatical judgement task. None of these results, however, have reached significance.
We conclude that feature differences are less significant than the age of onset for Spanish HLA. Attested differences between the groups will be discussed in the light of the role of input, language activation and language combination, considering also the distinction between explicit and implicit knowledge (Rothman 2008).
|17:00 - 18:30||Sesión 04: LING_3: Sitzung|
|Datum: Freitag, 29.03.2019|
|9:00 - 10:30||Sesión 05: LING_3: Sitzung|
9:00 - 10:30
Differential Object Marking (DOM) in monolingual and bilingual speakers: comparing competences
Universidad de las Islas Baleares, España
The purpose of this presentation is to contribute a more nuanced understanding of the acquisition of the Spanish Differential Object Marking, especially concerning morpho-phonological a marking in Sequential and Simultaneous child heritage speakers of English and Brazilian Portuguese in adulthood. Much work on Spanish Differential Object Marking (DOM) has shown the complexity and the resulting difficulties of its acquisition in multiple language scenarios and language combinations. Most studies, however, deal with early or late bilinguals with the language combination English-Spanish. Existing HS and SLA literature on DOM has focused on speciﬁc language combinations (i.e., those with differing syntactic conﬁgurations) in an attempt to answer questions regarding adult accessibility to Universal Grammar (UG) and/or “complete” (Kupisch and Rothman, 2016) and “non-complete” (Montrul, 2016) accounts.
Based on the findings from several experimental studies in which the same linguistic tasks (i.e., a grammaticality judgment and completion task) were conducted with L1 Spanish monolingual speakers from Spain, English-Spanish bilingual HS living in the UK and Brazilian Portuguese-Spanish bilingual HS of Spanish living in Brazil, all matched for their socioeconomic and education factors with the help of a detailed ethnolinguistic questionnaire, I observed for all the semantic features related to DOM that contrary to current research in HAS (i.e., non-complete accounts), the children and adult heritage speakers perform like monolingual L1 speakers regardless of the language pair and/or realization (or non-realization) of DOM in one of the languages, generally outperforming the L2 learners (Guijarro-Fuentes, 2012).
|11:00 - 12:30||Sesión 06: LING_3: Sitzung|
11:00 - 11:45
Identity and Heritage Language Education of Chinese Learners in Spain. A Case Study.
University of Malaga, España
Related to the recent global migration phenomena, the heritage language education, second language studies and plurilinguism represent an increased area of studies around the globe (Trifonas and Aravossitas 2014). This qualitative research paper is part of a larger study on inclusion, identity and affiliation of Chinese Heritage Learners in Spain and provides insights into their experiences and personal views on the HL education, use and maintenance in a nonformal system in relation to their diverse and hybrid identity, all inserted in a specific local social context.
Multiple biographical and in-depth interviews with students, teachers and other stakeholders, as well as artifacts and observation in classroom settings were performed in order to investigate in detail key factors, relationships and conditions involved in the HL learning, use and negotiation and the significance of this process in relation to their cultural identity. This paper also discusses the attitudes and practices of teachers, parents and the wider community concerning the use, teaching and learning of the HL and culture and concludes with limitations of the study and some suggestions for future research and practice.
11:45 - 12:30
Transformaciones sintácticas en la constelación español-ruso
Universidad de Salamanca, España
El mantenimiento de la lengua de herencia está fuertemente vinculado a los factores de afectividad hacia la misma en la primera generación. En este sentido, muchos inmigrantes rusohablantes en España – en su predominante mayoría, mujeres – a menudo deciden reducir el uso de su lengua materna en su entorno y, particularmente, con sus hijos. Como consecuencia, acaban empleando una interlengua fosilizada que emplean horizontalmente en la red social de inmigrantes rusohablantes, y transmiten, junto al ruso, verticalmente a las siguientes generaciones.
Los princiaples objetivos de esta investigación son (1.) estudiar los principales patrones sintácticos de la interlengua formada en la primera generación de inmigrantes rusohablantes en la ciudad de Salamanca, y (2.) analizar el grado de transmisión de dichos patrones sintácticos en el ruso como lengua de herencia y en el español como lengua del entorno de la segunda generación. Para ello, el presente estudio se basa en una serie de entrevistas semi-dirigidas grabadas con la primera generación de inmigrantes rusohablantes en Salamanca que forman una red social, y que evalúan los principales aspectos cognitivos y afectivos que establecen los criterios del grado de desplazamiento de la primera generación hacia el español. Las entrevistas se complementan con una serie de grabaciones del discurso oral en español y en ruso, emitido de forma espontánea por los representantes de la primera y de la segunda generación de inmigrantes, que sirve como base para el análisis de las transformaciones sintácticas en ambas lenguas.
La principal contribución de este trabajo consiste en determinar si las transformaciones sintácticas en la interlengua fosilizada de la primera generación son adquiridas por la segunda generación y se manifiestan tanto en la lengua de herencia (ruso) como en la lengua de entorno (español).
|15:00 - 16:30||Sesión 07: LING_3: Sitzung|
15:00 - 15:45
Object clitics in Portuguese heritage bilinguals
Goethe Universität Frankfurt, Deutschland
In this talk, I will discuss the results of several studies on the acquisition of pronominal clitics of European Portuguese (EP) by Portuguese-German bilingual speakers living in Germany (Rinke & Flores 2014; Flores, Rinke & Azevedo 2017; Rinke, Flores & Barbosa2018). On the basis of these studies, I will show that heritage bilinguals do not have an incomplete grammatical knowledge of the pronominal system of EP, although some differences between monolingual and bilingual speakers can be observed. I will argue that the observed differences are the result of input differences.
Studies focusing on the acquisition of Romance pronominal clitics by bilingual speakers acquiring a Germanic and a Romance language has yielded varying results. On the one hand, cross-linguistic influence has been attested during the acquisition process. Müller & Hulk (2001) attribute higher rates of object omissions in their Romance language French or Italian and to the influence of the Germanic contact language Dutch or German providing evidence for Topic-Drop. On the other hand, Montrul’s (2010) study on Spanish-English bilingual’s knowledge of Spanish clitics shows that, in comparison to other grammatical phenomena, object clitics seem to represent no major problem for heritage speakers even with low proficiency. However, these speakers show more robust knowledge of core aspects of grammar than of aspects related to the syntax–semantics / discourse interface.
The pronominal system of European Portuguese is of special interest in this context because it includes grammatical null object constructions (Raposo 1986) and shows a high degree of complexity and variability. For instance, variability is found with respect to the position of clitics in the sentence, their morphological shape, their realization in dislocation structures and their use in different registers. This variability allows to compare the knowledge of monolingual and bilingual speakers of EP with respect to the following aspects: core grammatical properties of the clitics (enclisis and proclisis), morphology (allomorphy), interface properties (dislocation structures), and different registers (clitic climbing in colloquial vs. formal registers). Given that the pronominal system of German diverges in many respects, the question of cross-linguistic influence can also be addressed. Combining different methodologies and experimental evidence as well as evidence from spontaneous speech corpora, our studies show that EP heritage bilinguals have successfully acquired the core properties of the pronominal system of Portuguese and that differences between monolingual and bilingual speakers can be explained on the basis of differential input conditions.
|Datum: Samstag, 30.03.2019|
|9:00 - 10:30||Sesión 08: LING_3: Sitzung|
9:00 - 9:45
The Role of the Language Combination in the Acquisition of Grammatical Gender in Spanish: Evidence from Heritage and Non-Heritage Bilinguals
Bergische Universität Wuppertal, Deutschland
Bilinguals i.e. second language learners (L2 learners) and heritage speakers (HSs) often fail to achieve full linguistic competence in gender assignment and agreement compared to their monolingual peers (Montrul et al. 2008). The most prevalent explanation for the divergent results in L2 learners’ knowledge of gender compared to monolinguals is attributed to maturational constraints, whereas the divergent results attested in the heritage language speakers have mostly been explained in terms of either language attrition (Polinsky 2011) or incomplete acquisition (Montrul 2008). This study attempts to cover this gap in the literature and takes a new approach by examining the knowledge of gender in Spanish of both adult English-Spanish and German-Spanish HSs and German/English-speaking L2 learners of Spanish in the USA and Germany to that of controls. The research questions are: (1) Does the language combination (Romance two gender systems in combination with English, a system without gender, or with German, a three gender system) have an effect on the subjects’ knowledge of gender and (2) Are there possible differences between HL speakers and L2 learners in the knowledge of gender. The data were collected using a multi-method approach: (1) a detailed language background questionnaire to assess bilinguals’ language profiles (2) a language proficiency test i.e. DELE, (3) a grammaticality judgment task (GJT) and (4) an oral production task (OPT). Results from the GJT and OPT revealed that German-Spanish HSs and L2 learners produce higher accuracy rates in contexts when the German noun and its translation into Spanish have the same gender value, suggesting positive language transfer (see ex.1). In contexts, in which the German noun and its translation into Spanish have the different gender value, German-Spanish HL speakers and L2 learners transfer the gender value from German to the Spanish noun, especially with nouns ending in –e. This is an indication of negative transfer from the native to the target language (see ex. 2). Contrary to the German-speaking L2 learners of Spanish, the results show that the English-speaking L2 learners produce more gender errors mainly due to overgeneralizations (see ex. 3). Preliminary results on the two groups of bilinguals show that native-like attainment is possible in Spanish HLA and SLA. I will discuss the results in the light of information about home language use, quality and quantity of input and other variables.
(1) Sp. la (Sg.,Fem.) fuente (Sg.,Fem.)
Dt. die (Sg.,Fem.) Quelle (Sg., Fem.)
Engl. the source
(2) Sp. *la (Sg.,Mask.) puente
Dt. die (Sg., Fem.) Brücke
Engl. the bridge
(3) Sp. *el (Sg.,Mask.) mano (Sg.,Fem.)
Dt. die(Sg.,Fem.) Hand(Sg.,Fem.)
Engl. the hand
9:45 - 10:30
Fonética y fonología de las oclusivas en tres grupos de bilingües castellano y alemán
1University of Hamburg, Germany / CAU Kiel, Germany; 2JGU Mainz, Germany
Las oclusivas en castellano y alemán presentan diferentes reglas fonológicas y realizaciones fonéticas. En posición inicial absoluta, el castellano opone /bdɡ/ y /ptk/ mediante el rasgo [±sonoridad], mientras que el alemán mediante [±aspiración]. El presente trabajo tiene como objetivo estudiar si la producción de las oclusivas en tres grupos de bilingües castellano y alemán presenta diferencias entre sus dos lenguas, así como con las respectivas comunidades de hablantes monolingües. Se investigaron cinco grupos de hablantes: uno monolingüe en castellano (SM); otro en alemán (GM); uno de late bilinguals (L1 castellano, L2 alemán; SLB); y finalmente dos grupos de early bilinguals (SEB y GEB) para quienes se han criado en sociedades de habla castellana y alemana, respectivamente, y teniendo el otro idioma como lengua de herencia. Tanto el rasgo de [±aspiración] como el de [±sonoridad] han sido medidos en términos de Voice Onset Time (VOT). Tales mediciones revelan que en todos los grupos hay realizaciones no canónicas, es decir /ptk/ claramente aspiradas en castellano o con escasa aspiración en alemán, y /bdɡ/ sin vibración (pre-voicing) en castellano o con ella en alemán. No obstante, los early bilinguals (SEB y GEB) las efectúan en mayor proporción que los monolingües de cada idioma, en especial cuando la desviación afecta a un parámetro fonético que no es el principal rasgo fonológico distintivo (las desviaciones en [±sonoridad] son más frecuentes en alemán que en castellano). Asimismo, el grupo de SLB presenta un número incluso mayor de realizaciones no canónicas que los early bilinguals y presenta una aspiración media en alemán menor que el margen inferior de los GM. En general, los resultados muestran efectos de influencia interlingüística en el nivel tanto fonético como fonológico que, respecto a los late bilinguals, pueden interpretarse como signos de language attrition.
|11:00 - 12:30||Sesión 09: LING_3: Sitzung|
11:00 - 11:45
Subject positions in Heritage Spanish and Italian spoken in Germany
1Stiftung Universität Hildesheim; 2Universität Wuppertal, Deutschland; 3Universität Duisburg-Essen
Recent years have seen an enormous increase of investigation of heritage languages (HL) and their acquisition in various grammatical domains and language combinations. The answers to important questions on the nature of heritage language acquisition (HLA), however, still diverge largely. While subject expression has been studied intensely in the HLs Spanish and Italian with diverging results in terms of (in)complete acquisition, the position of overt subjects has become a focus of investigation only more recently. Studies on postverbal subjects in the HL Spanish in the US (de Prada Pérez & Pascual y Cabo 2012, Pascual y Cabo 2013) as well as in the Netherlands (VanOsch et al. 2016) investigated the knowledge of the HS with respect to the interplay of subject position, unaccusativity of the verb and information structure (information focus). The position of subjects thus involves the semantics/syntax and the pragmatics/syntax interface. De Prada Pérez (2012) and VanOsch et al. (2016) observe a general move towards more preverbal subjects and a less sharp distinction of predicate types. For unaccusative psych verbs (gustar/piacere-type ‘to like’ verbs), Pascual y Cabo (2013) observes an innovation of structures towards (ungrammatical) preverbal subjects and invariable gusta (Yo me gusta la pizza instead of Me gusta la pizza) due to transfer from English.
These observations as well as the general aim to understand of interlanguage processes and features possibly transferred from the majority language German motivate our study. Unlike the two Romance languages, German is a non-null subject language like English and Dutch, but allows for post-verbal subjects in a strict V2 order in main clauses (like Dutch) and a verb end order in subordinate clauses. Based on semi-structured interview data with different types of focus in overt subjects from monolingual Italians (n=10) and Spaniards (n=7) as well as Italian HS (n=16) and Spanish HS (n=7) living in Germany, we will answer the following research questions:
RQ1: Do we find more preverbal subjects and a loss of the distinction of the predicate type in HS when compared to monolinguals?
RQ2: Do potential divergences between monolinguals and HS differ between Italian and Spanish?
Results on pre- and post-verbal subjects with different verb types in Spanish and Italian as HL in Germany will also be discussed with respect to the role of the language combination and the applicability of the (revised) IH to HL acquisition.
11:45 - 12:30
Comprehension and production of Italian postverbal subjects: evidence from Italian heritage speakers in Turkey
Sapienza Università di Roma, Italia
The study reports the result of an experiment targeting use and preference for postverbal subjects in Italian by 8 multilingual heritage speakers whose dominant language is Turkish. All participants belong to the old Italian Levantine community of Istanbul, whose members have so far maintained a multilingual linguistic repertoire that include Italian, French and Greek, as well as Turkish.
The theoretical background of the study is the Interface Hypothesis (IH), according to which linguistic phenomena at the interface between syntax and discourse are particularly vulnerable in the acquisition of heritage languages due to a variety of factors that are often difficult to disentangle, including underspecification of interpretable features, processing costs of bilingualism itself, and input effects.
The aim of the study was to assess the role of these factors in the HS’ grammars compared to those of a control group of 10 Italian monolingual. A two-parts timed, computer-assisted test was carried out: the first part consisted in combining given words to formulate an appropriate answer to a given question, in wide or narrow focus conditions (e.g. Perché Giovanni è felice? Ieri/suo fratello/tornare). The second part consisted in choosing the most appropriate answer to a given question between two options, in wide focus conditions (e.g. Chi era prima al telefono? Non lo so: Mario ha risposto/Non lo so: ha risposto Mario).
Collected data illustrate an internal distinction in the experimental group depending on the role of Turkish as language of primary and secondary education. More specifically, subjects of the experimental group who had not attended eight consecutive years of education in Turkish differ from their monolingual counterpart only in the use of postverbal subjects [W(18) = 55.5, Z = -3.535, p = .001], whereas those who had continuously attended Turkish schools from the age of 6 to the age of 14 show vulnerability both in use [Z2 = 57.9, p =.001] and preference [Z2 = 11.27, p = .010] of the same interface.
The proposal is put forward that for the former the source of non-target behaviour is instability in linguistic performance that emerges only in production due to its higher cognitive burden; in the latter, instead, the exposition to a Turkish input in critical years may have affected the linguistic representation, thus emerging both in production and interpretation of postverbal subjects. Effects of cross-linguistic influence, then, appears to emerge only under particular input conditions related to the speaker’s educational development and life choices.
|15:00 - 16:30||Sesión 10: LING_3: Sitzung|
15:00 - 16:30
Final discussion and farewell
Universität Wuppertal, Deutschland
Final discussion and farewell