Generic reference in adult German bilinguals: how bilinguals deal with variation

Kupisch, Tanja; Barton, Dagmar

doi:10.1111/stul.12006

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, a more neutral way of eliciting judgments, without providing linguistic contexts and based on a more homogeneous speaker population, may shed further light on the speakers' implicit knowledge of article use with generic subject NPs. The same authors have created a truth value judgment task without giving linguistic context, which served as a model for the task we have created below (Kupisch and Barton 2013;Barton 2016). We do not report the detailed results because the tests targeted German-Romance bilinguals and therefore cross-linguistic influence cannot be excluded.…”

Section: Corpus Based and Experimental Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

(The) polar bears are pink. How (the) Germans interpret (the) definite articles in plural subject DPs

Czypionka

Kupisch

2019

J Comp German Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the literature, German optionally allows a definite article with generic nominals, whereas other Germanic languages require a bare nominal (e.g., English Polar bears are white). This optionality makes German different from other Germanic languages and more similar to Romance languages, in which definite articles are obligatory with generic nominals in subject positions. Since article use with generic nominals is seen as indicative of an advanced stage of grammaticalization, the question arises whether German has moved towards a more Romance-like stage of definite article use. We present judgment and reaction time data on generic statements. We ran two experiments monitoring the preferred reading of German definites in a nonlinguistic context, i.e., pictures of items showing either prototypical characteristics (e.g., white polar bears) or nonprototypical characteristics (e.g., pink polar bears). Given this nonlinguistic context, participants judged the truth value of auditorily presented sentences with different articles (i.e., These/Ø/The polar bears are white/pink). Our results show that demonstratives are interpreted as definite and bare nominals as generic. Contrary to claims in the literature, the definite article is largely interpreted as specific, following the pattern described for other Germanic languages. However, reaction times for definite articles are significantly slower than for demonstratives and bare nominals. We interpret these findings as pointing toward an ongoing change in the semantics of definite articles.

show abstract

Section: Corpus Based and Experimental Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

(The) polar bears are pink. How (the) Germans interpret (the) definite articles in plural subject DPs

Czypionka

Kupisch

2019

J Comp German Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, we seek to reorient discussions away from that focus on lack or loss and toward understanding heritage grammars in terms of active reanalysis, in line with some other work on early bilinguals (e.g., Kupisch and Barton, 2013) as well as similar arguments made for non-sequential bilinguals across the lifespan (Putnam and Sánchez, 2013). We reinterpret a classic example of ‘loss’ in a heritage grammar as an innovative reanalysis on the part of heritage speakers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Structural Patterns in Moribund Grammar: Case Marking in Heritage German

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research treats divergences between monolingual and heritage grammars in terms of performance—‘L1 attrition,’ e.g., lexical retrieval—or competence—‘incomplete acquisition’, e.g., lack of overt tense markers (e.g., Polinsky, 1995; Sorace, 2004; Montrul, 2008; Schmid, 2010). One classic difference between monolingual and Heritage German is reduction in morphological case in the latter, especially loss of dative marking. Our evidence from several Heritage German varieties suggests that speakers have not merely lost case, but rather developed innovative structures to mark it. More specifically, Heritage German speakers produce dative forms in line with established patterns of Differential Object Marking (Bossong, 1985, 1991; Aissen, 2003), suggesting a reallocated mapping of case. We take this as evidence for innovative reanalysis in heritage grammars (Putnam and Sánchez, 2013). Following Kamp and Reyle (1993) and Wechsler (2011, 2014), the dative adopts a more indexical discourse function, forging a tighter connection between morphosyntax and semantic properties. Moribund grammars deploy linguistic resources in novel ways, a finding which can help move us beyond simple narratives of ‘attrition’ and ‘incomplete acquisition.’

show abstract

“…and German-Italian) tolerate generic readings with definite subjects in German more often when they are dominant in their Romance language, compared to when they are dominant in German, which points to an influence from Romance (Kupisch and Barton 2013).…”

Section: Individual-level Predicatesmentioning

confidence: 93%

Definite article use with generic reference in German: an empirical study

Barton

Kolb

Kupisch

2015

Zeitschrift Für Sprachwissenschaft

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is concerned with the distribution of the definite article in German with plural nominals that have a generic reading. In Standard German, genericity is typically expressed by bare nouns (Tiger sind gefährlich 'Tigers are dangerous'). Many researchers have claimed that there is variation in article use in the expression of generic reference in German (e.g., Brugger 1993;Longobardi 1994;Krifka et al. 1995;Chierchia 1998;Dayal 2004;Oosterhof 2008), but very little empirical evidence has been provided to support this claim. Besides filling this research gap, we investigate which factors influence the use of articles in plural subjects with generic reference. In doing so, we include linguistic factors (kind-level vs. individual-level predicates) as well as sociolinguistic factors (age and regional background). Results show that with generic plural subjects definite articles are optional but bare subjects are preferred; definite subjects are accepted more often with kind-level predicates than with individuallevel predicates.

show abstract

Generic reference in adult German bilinguals: how bilinguals deal with variation

Cited by 9 publications

References 15 publications

(The) polar bears are pink. How (the) Germans interpret (the) definite articles in plural subject DPs

(The) polar bears are pink. How (the) Germans interpret (the) definite articles in plural subject DPs

New Structural Patterns in Moribund Grammar: Case Marking in Heritage German

Definite article use with generic reference in German: an empirical study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About