2016
DOI: 10.1075/sic.13.2.01shi
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Maintenance of Spanish subject pronoun expression patterns among bilingual children of farmworkers in Washington/Montana

Abstract: It has been suggested that contact between Spanish and English results in an increased rate of Spanish subject pronouns and a desensitization to factors that constrain pronoun usage. Yet, evidence for such contact-induced change has been found in some U.S. communities, but not others. In this study we analyze Spanish pronoun expression in interviews with Hispanics in Washington State who do agricultural work in Montana each summer. We compare U.S.-born bilingual children to monolingual adults from this communi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Also consistent with previous studies in general (e.g. Cameron, 1994;Carvalho & Bessett, 2015;Lastra & Martín Butragueño, 2015;Orozco, 2015Orozco, , 2016Shin & Van Buren, 2016;Silva-Corvalán, 1982;Travis, 2007), imperfect verbs favored yo while all other TMAs disfavored yo (fw = .59 vs. .41, respectively). In terms of proportions, verbs in the imperfect appeared with overt SPs 47% of the time and with all other TMAs overall, speakers produced yo 34% of the time.…”
Section: Tmasupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Also consistent with previous studies in general (e.g. Cameron, 1994;Carvalho & Bessett, 2015;Lastra & Martín Butragueño, 2015;Orozco, 2015Orozco, , 2016Shin & Van Buren, 2016;Silva-Corvalán, 1982;Travis, 2007), imperfect verbs favored yo while all other TMAs disfavored yo (fw = .59 vs. .41, respectively). In terms of proportions, verbs in the imperfect appeared with overt SPs 47% of the time and with all other TMAs overall, speakers produced yo 34% of the time.…”
Section: Tmasupporting
confidence: 91%
“…same reference). In addition, the inclusion of the speaker as a random effect in the statistical model is a way of controlling for the individual speaker and ensuring that the results obtained are generalizable to the data set as a whole, and that the patterns are not due to particular speakers skewing the results (Bayley et al, 2013;Michnowicz, 2015;Shin, 2014;Shin & Van Buren, 2016).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%