Focus marking in Dutch by heritage speakers of Turkish and Dutch L1 speakers

Rijswijk, Remy Van; Muntendam, Antje; Dijkstra, Ton

doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2017.01.003

Cited by 15 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bullock (2009) reports the transfer of pitch accents from the dominant language, English, into the weak heritage language, French. In contrast, a study on utterances in broad focus (van Rijswijk et al 2017) finds differences in intonation and duration patterns, which are interpreted as evidence of transfer from the weak heritage language, Turkish into Dutch. Additionally, it has been reported that child heritage speakers (Queen 2001(Queen , 1996 show non-normative intonation patterns in both the heritage language, Turkish, as well as German.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Portuguese and German Intonation Contours in a Two-Way Immersion School

Torres

2024

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the intonation contours of neutral yes–no interrogatives produced by simultaneous bilingual children in their two native languages. Previous studies have shown prosodic transfer from one language to another, either from the dominant into the non-dominant language or vice versa, but little is known about what specifically triggers this behaviour. This study explores how bilingual children make use of phonetic–phonological resources while interacting with peers. Three child speakers of German (ambient language) and Portuguese (heritage language) were recorded as they performed a modified version of a map task. Natural and spontaneous data were collected and the speech was analysed. The results indicate that to some degree, bilingual children produce all intonational contours specific to their language variety. When speaking German, they produced the syntax and contour consistent with the structure of yes–no interrogatives in German. When speaking Portuguese, the children displayed variation in their choice of tune, depending on the variety of Portuguese and the language proficiency of their interlocutor. This behaviour is interpreted as prosodic convergence resulting from the high variability of prosodic structures in the different varieties of Portuguese present in the classroom.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Portuguese and German Intonation Contours in a Two-Way Immersion School

Torres

2024

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As far as (2b) is concerned, note that there are not many studies on HSs focusing on the production of intonation patterns. Polinsky (2018) only cites works on the prosody of focus (e.g., Van Rijswijk et al (2017) on heritage Turkish in The Netherlands; Fenyvesi (2005) on heritage Hungarian in the US), which show that speakers tend to use the intonation patterns of their dominant language when producing foci. More in general, studies on the intonation of IHSs (Lloyd-Smith et al 2020) have shown that the majority of them do not sound "native-like", while a minority of them are perceived as native by homeland speakers: in Kupisch et al (2014), less than 33% of the HSs tested were rated as having a native intonation.…”

Section: Previous Studies On the Acquisition Of Anchementioning

confidence: 99%

The Syntax–Pragmatics Interface in Heritage Languages: The Use of anche (“Also”) in German Heritage Speakers of Italian

Casalicchio

Moroni

2023

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper deals with the use of anche (“also”) by German heritage speakers of Italian (“IHSs”). Previous research showed that anche and its German counterpart auch share many features but also display language-specific characteristics. According to previous research on bilingualism, heritage speakers show cross-linguistic influence (“CLI”) when a linguistic phenomenon is at the syntax–pragmatics interface and there is a partial overlap in the two languages at stake. Therefore, we expect the use of anche in IHSs to be influenced by CLI. By analysing data from a semi-spontaneous corpus, we investigate the production of anche in order to understand which factors shape the grammar of the IHSs. Our results indicate that a subset of IHSs uses anche in the same way as in homeland Italian. The other informants display CLI effects of different types: on the one hand, they have two positions in the clausal structure for anche dedicated to different syntactic–pragmatic contexts, as in German, and they overextend the use of anche as a modal particle. On the other hand, the intonational properties of anche are not affected by CLI.

show abstract

“…Turkish Dutch children can thus be considered early sequential bilinguals who acquire Turkish as their L1 from birth and consistently start acquiring Dutch as their L2 in (pre) school. Others have coined Turkish-Dutch-speaking children heritage speakers (Kajouj & Kager, 2019;Van Rijswijk et al, 2017), as both Turkish and Dutch are present from birth and bilinguals often become dominant L2 speakers later in life (see also Meisel, 2004). Notably, for Turkish-Dutch-speaking bilingual children, it has been found that L1 Turkish is the strongest established language until well into primary school (Verhoeven, 2007) and continues to affect L2 processing well into childhood (Kajouj & Kager, 2019;Verhoeven, 2007) and even adulthood (Van Rijswijk et al, 2017).…”

Section: This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Others have coined Turkish-Dutch-speaking children heritage speakers (Kajouj & Kager, 2019;Van Rijswijk et al, 2017), as both Turkish and Dutch are present from birth and bilinguals often become dominant L2 speakers later in life (see also Meisel, 2004). Notably, for Turkish-Dutch-speaking bilingual children, it has been found that L1 Turkish is the strongest established language until well into primary school (Verhoeven, 2007) and continues to affect L2 processing well into childhood (Kajouj & Kager, 2019;Verhoeven, 2007) and even adulthood (Van Rijswijk et al, 2017). Therefore, in this article, we will refer to Turkish-Dutch-speaking children as sequential bilinguals.…”

Section: This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-Language Transfer and Attentional Control in Early Bilingual Speech

Verbeek

Vissers

Blumenthal

2022

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study investigated the roles of cross-language transfer of first language (L1) and attentional control in second-language (L2) speech perception and production of sequential bilinguals, taking phonological overlap into account. Method: Twenty-five monolingual Dutch-speaking and 25 sequential bilingual Turkish–Dutch-speaking 3- and 4-year-olds were tested using picture identification tasks for speech perception in L1 Turkish and L2 Dutch, single-word tasks for speech production in L1 and L2, and a visual search task for attentional control. Phonological overlap was manipulated by dividing the speech tasks into subsets of phonemes that were either shared or unshared between languages. Results: In Dutch speech perception and production, monolingual children obtained higher accuracies than bilingual peers. Bilinguals showed equal performance in L1 and L2 perception but scored higher on L1 than on L2 production. For speech perception of shared phonemes, linear regression analyses revealed no direct effects of attention and L1 on L2. For speech production of shared phonemes, attention and L1 directly affected L2. When exploring unshared phonemes, direct effects of attentional control on L2 were demonstrated not only for speech production but also for speech perception. Conclusions: The roles of attentional control and cross-language transfer on L2 speech are different for shared and unshared phonemes. Whereas L2 speech production of shared phonemes is also supported by cross-language transfer of L1, L2 speech perception and production of unshared phonemes benefit from attentional control only. This underscores the clinical importance of considering phonological overlap and supporting attentional control when assisting young sequential bilinguals' L2 development.

show abstract

Focus marking in Dutch by heritage speakers of Turkish and Dutch L1 speakers

Cited by 15 publications

References 66 publications

Portuguese and German Intonation Contours in a Two-Way Immersion School

Portuguese and German Intonation Contours in a Two-Way Immersion School

The Syntax–Pragmatics Interface in Heritage Languages: The Use of anche (“Also”) in German Heritage Speakers of Italian

Cross-Language Transfer and Attentional Control in Early Bilingual Speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About