Comparing forward and reverse transfer from Dutch to German

Barking, Marie; Mos, Maria; Backus, Ad

doi:10.1177/13670069211052517

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This included so-called light verb constructions (e.g., to set an alarm, to give a presentation; N = 45) and word order patterns (N = 45) that differed in the extent to which they are similar in Dutch and German. The results regarding these constructions are discussed in Barking et al (2022) and Barking et al (2023).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual variation in contact effects – stability, convergence, and divergence

Barking,

Mos,

Backus

2024

LAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we investigate the contact effects of stability, convergence, and divergence regarding the use of the same linguistic construction in the same contact situation. To do that, we collected experimental production and judgment data by native German speakers living in the Netherlands regarding their usage of the complementizer um ‘to’ in German and compared those data to those of a control group of German speakers not in contact with Dutch. The results show that most speakers show evidence for some contact-induced language change in their German. At the same time, speakers seem to experience different contact effects, demonstrating that it is not the structural properties of the construction that result in one effect over the other, but rather factors that pertain to the individual speakers. In particular, we argue that speakers can either focus on the similarities or on the differences between their languages, to some extent driven by their attitudes towards their languages and language change, and then over-generalize these similarities or differences to new contexts. Overall, this result clearly underlines the importance of focusing on individual speakers as the initiators of language change, which is in line with a usage-based approach.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual variation in contact effects – stability, convergence, and divergence

Barking,

Mos,

Backus

2024

LAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Problems of Adaptation of Borrowings and Excessive Use of Borrowed Words in the Civil Codes of Post-Soviet Countries (on the Example of Kazakhstan)

Toxanbayeva,

Kenzhekanova,

Yerzhanova

2024

Int J Semiot Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bilingual clause combining: A Variable Equivalence hypothesis for conjunction choice

Torres Cacoullos,

LaCasse

2024

International Journal of Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Bringing linguistic experience into code-switching (CS) constraints, a new hypothesis considers cross-language variable equivalence, which arises from within-language variability. Bilingual choices are assessed for Spanish-English CS between clauses, where subordinating conjunctions may not be consistently equivalent. Methodology: Equivalence exists at the main-and-adverbial clause junction, inasmuch as the conjunctions are consistently present and placed the same way in the two languages. Equivalence is variable with main-and-complement clauses, because English complementizer that is mostly absent. Tokens of clause combining were extracted from the prosodically transcribed speech of members of a long-standing community in northern New Mexico who use both languages in their everyday interactions. Bilingual clause combinations were compared with their unilingual counterparts produced by the same speakers, as benchmarks. Data and Analysis: Over 2,000 tokens of clause combining were coded for conjunction, subordinate clause type, prosodic connection, and CS direction for bilingual instances ( n = 189). Findings: Bilinguals treat CS with complement and adverbial clauses differently. With complement clauses, the rate of CS is lower, prosodic separation is greater and, most notably, conjunction language choice is more asymmetrical. Spanish complementizer que is overwhelmingly selected over English that. In contrast, choice between causal conjunctions porque and (be)cause is affected by CS direction. Originality: The Variable Equivalence hypothesis states that bilinguals favor CS with the equivalent option from one of the languages that is more frequent and predictable in their combined linguistic experience, considering both languages. Significance: CS constraints are probabilistic (preferred CS sites) rather than categorical (permissible CS sites). The Variable Equivalence hypothesis accommodates variation in actual language use. Methodologically, comparing spontaneous CS with the same speakers’ unilingual production allows discovery of CS asymmetries. These asymmetries reveal quantitative bilingual preferences to switch at particular sites.

show abstract

Comparing forward and reverse transfer from Dutch to German

Cited by 5 publications

References 38 publications

Individual variation in contact effects – stability, convergence, and divergence

Individual variation in contact effects – stability, convergence, and divergence

Problems of Adaptation of Borrowings and Excessive Use of Borrowed Words in the Civil Codes of Post-Soviet Countries (on the Example of Kazakhstan)

Bilingual clause combining: A Variable Equivalence hypothesis for conjunction choice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About