1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
  4. Volume 9, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 9, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1879-9264
  • E-ISSN: 1879-9272
GBP
Buy:£15.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Early heritage bilinguals have been repeatedly found to differ from late bilinguals and from monolinguals (e.g., Montrul, 20082011). In the realm of Spanish Differential Object Marking (DOM), both early heritage bilinguals (Montrul et al., 2015) and late bilinguals (e.g., Bowles & Montrul, 2008Guijarro-Fuentes, 2012) exhibit difficulties. DOM in a complex structure such as relative clauses (RCs) provides an ideal setting to differentiate early from late bilinguals, but it has only been explored offline (Perpiñán & Moreno-Villar, 2013). This study fills this gap by examining the role of word order (SVO, OSV, OVS), optionality (obligatory vs. optional contexts), and saliency (bound vs. unbound morphology) on the processing of DOM in embedded RCs in Spanish, by Spanish monolinguals, and advanced early heritage and late bilinguals of Spanish. The results of a word-by-word non-cumulative self-paced reading task revealed that all participants were more accurate but were slower in subject than object RCs, and in OSV than OVS RCs. Slower RTs in subject RCs were due to the presence of DOM, and in OSV to interpreting OVS as SVO. Also, all participants were both more accurate as well as faster in obligatory than optional DOM, unbound than bound morphology, and masculine than feminine RC NPs. These findings reveal that processing difficulties in RCs result from the interaction of word order and DOM, and that processing DOM depends on both salience and, to a lesser extent, gender. Finally, this study shows that early heritage bilinguals are closer to monolinguals than late bilinguals in terms of morphosyntactic processing patterns.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lab.16020.sag
2017-07-31
2024-04-19

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lab.16020.sag
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aissen, J.
    (2003) Differential Object marking: Iconicity vs. Economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory21, 435–83. doi:  10.1023/A:1024109008573
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024109008573 [Google Scholar]
  2. Antón-Méndez, M. I.
    (1999) Gender and Number Agreement Processing in Spanish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona.
  3. Beck, S.
    (1998) NP dependent readings of different, Proceedings of the Eighth Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT 8), Cornell University. doi:  10.3765/salt.v8i0.2809
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v8i0.2809 [Google Scholar]
  4. Benmamoun, E., Montrul, S., & Polinsky, M.
    (2013) Defining an “ideal” heritage speaker: Theoretical and methodological challenges Reply to peer commentaries. Theoretical linguistics, 39(3–4), 259–294.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Betancort, M., Carreiras, M., & Sturt, P.
    (2009) The processing of subject and object relative clauses in Spanish: An eye-tracking study. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(10), 1915–1929. doi:  10.1080/17470210902866672
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902866672 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bleam, T.
    (2005) The role of semantic type in differential object marking. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 19(1), 3–27. 10.1075/bjl.19.03ble
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.19.03ble [Google Scholar]
  7. Bonnet, G.
    (2002) The assessment of pupils’ skills in English in eight European countries. Paris, European Network of policy makers for the evaluation of education systems.
  8. Bornkessel, I., & Schlesewsky, M.
    (2006) The extended argument dependency model: a neurocognitive approach to sentence comprehension across languages. Psychological Review, 113(4), 787. doi:  10.1037/0033‑295X.113.4.787
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.787 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bossong, G.
    (1991) Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. New analyses in Romance linguistics, 143–170. doi:  10.1075/cilt.69.14bos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.69.14bos [Google Scholar]
  10. Bowles, M., & Montrul, S.
    (2008) The role of explicit instruction in the L2 acquisition of the a-personal. Proceedings of the 2006 Hispanic Linguistics Symposium. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. 25–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Carreiras, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., Vergara, M., de la Cruz-Pavía, I., & Laka, I.
    (2010) Subject relative clauses are not universally easier to process: Evidence from Basque. Cognition, 115(1), 79–92. doi:  10.1016/j.cognition.2009.11.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.11.012 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cuza, A., Pérez-Leroux, A. T., & Sánchez, L.
    (2013) The role of semantic transfer in clitic drop among simultaneous and sequential Chinese-Spanish bilinguals. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(01), 93–125. doi:  10.1017/S0272263112000691
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000691 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cuza, A., Pérez-Tattam, R., Barajas, E., Miller, L., & Sadowski, C.
    (2013) The development of tense and aspect morphology in child and adult heritage speakers. Innovative Research and Practices in Second Language Acquisition and Bilingualism, 38, 193–220. doi:  10.1075/lllt.38.12cuz
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.38.12cuz [Google Scholar]
  14. del Río, D., López-Higes, R., & Martín-Aragoneses, M. T.
    (2012) Canonical word order and interference-based integration costs during sentence comprehension: The case of Spanish subject-and object-relative clauses. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(11), 2108–2128. doi:  10.1080/17470218.2012.674951
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.674951 [Google Scholar]
  15. Eberhard, K. M.
    (1997) The marked effect of number on subject-verb agreement. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 147–164. doi:  10.1006/jmla.1996.2484
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.2484 [Google Scholar]
  16. Farley, A., & McCollam, K.
    (2004) Learner Readiness and L2 Production in Spanish: Processability Theory on Trial. Estudios de linguistica aplicada, 40, 47–69.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C.
    (1986) The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language25, 348–368. doi:  10.1016/0749‑596X(86)90006‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(86)90006-9 [Google Scholar]
  18. Franceschina, F.
    (2001) Morphological or syntactic deficits in near – native speakers? An assessment of some current proposals. Second Language Research, 17, 213–247. doi:  10.1177/026765830101700301
     https://doi.org/10.1177/026765830101700301 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gibson, E.
    (1998) Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68(1), 1–76. doi:  10.1016/S0010‑0277(98)00034‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1 [Google Scholar]
  20. Goldschneider, J. M., & DeKeyser, R. M.
    (2001) Explaining the “Natural Order of L2 Morpheme Acquisition” in English: A Meta-analysis of Multiple Determinants. Language Learning, 51(1), 1–50. doi:  10.1111/1467‑9922.00147
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00147 [Google Scholar]
  21. Guijarro-Fuentes, P.
    (2011) Feature composition in differential object marking. EuroSLA Yearbook, 11(1), 138–164. doi:  10.1075/eurosla.11.09gui
     https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.11.09gui [Google Scholar]
  22. (2012) The acquisition of interpretable features in L2 Spanish: Personal a. Bilingualism: Language and cognition, 15(04), 701–720. doi:  10.1017/S1366728912000144
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728912000144 [Google Scholar]
  23. Guijarro-Fuentes, P. & Marinis
    (2007) Acquiring interface phenomena in L2 Spanish: the personal preposition a. InL. Robertgs, A. Guerel, S. Tatar, & L. Marti (Eds.), Eurosla Yearbook, 7. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 67–88.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Guijarro-Fuentes, P. & Marinis, T.
    (2011) Voicing language dominance: the acquisition of the Spanish by British English/Spanish bilingual children. InK. Potowski & J. Rothman (Eds.), Bilingual Youth. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 227–248. doi:  10.1075/sibil.42.14gui
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.42.14gui [Google Scholar]
  25. Gutiérrez-Bravo, R.
    (2005) Subject inversion in Spanish relative clauses. InT. Geerts, I. Ginneken & H. Jacobs (Eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2003. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/cilt.270pp.150–166.
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.270 [Google Scholar]
  26. Harris, J.
    (1991) The exponence of gender in Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry, 22, 27–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Havik, E., Roberts, L., Van Hout, R., Schreuder, R., & Haverkort, M.
    (2009) Processing subject-object Ambiguities in the l2: a self-paced reading study with German L2 learners of Dutch. Language Learning, 59(1), 73–112. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00501.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00501.x [Google Scholar]
  28. Hawkins, R.
    (1998) Explaining the difficulty of French gender attribution for speakers of English. Paper presented at the8th annual EUROSLA conference, Paris.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Hawkins, R. & Franceschina, F.
    (2004) Explaining the acquisition and non-acquisition of determiner-noun gender concord in French and Spanish. Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 32, 175–206. doi:  10.1075/lald.32.10haw
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.32.10haw [Google Scholar]
  30. Heese, H. W.
    (1997) Counterbalancing and other uses of repeated-measures Latin-Square designs: Interpretations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64, 137–158. doi:  10.1006/jecp.1996.2333
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1996.2333 [Google Scholar]
  31. Hopp, H.
    (2010) Ultimate attainment in L2 inflectional morphology: Performance similarities between non-native and native speakers. Lingua, 120, 901–931. doi:  10.1016/j.lingua.2009.06.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2009.06.004 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2014) Working memory effects in the L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses, Language Acquisition, 21(3), 250–278. doi:  10.1080/10489223.2014.892943
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.892943 [Google Scholar]
  33. Keenan, E. L., & Comrie, B.
    (1977) Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8 (1), 63–99.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Leonetti, M.
    (2004) Specificity and Differential Object Marking in Spanish. Catalan Journal of Linguistics3, 75–114. 10.5565/rev/catjl.106
     https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.106 [Google Scholar]
  35. (2008) Specificity in Clitic doubling and in Differential Object marking. Probus, 20(1), 33–66. doi:  10.1515/PROBUS.2008.002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2008.002 [Google Scholar]
  36. Levy, R.
    (2008) Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106(3), 1126–1177. doi:  10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lewis, R. L., & Vasishth, S.
    (2005) An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cognitive Science, 29(3), 375–419. doi:  10.1207/s15516709cog0000_25
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_25 [Google Scholar]
  38. MacDonald, M. C., & Christiansen, M. H.
    (2002) Reassessing working memory: comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). Psychological Review, 109(1), 66–74. doi:  10.1037/0033‑295X.109.1.35
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.1.35 [Google Scholar]
  39. MacWhinney, B., & Pleh, C.
    (1988) The processing of restrictive relative clauses in Hungarian. Cognition, 29(2), 95–141. doi:  10.1016/0010‑0277(88)90034‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90034-0 [Google Scholar]
  40. Martoccio, A.
    (2012) The acquisition of differential object marking in L2 Spanish learners (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).
     [Google Scholar]
  41. McCarthy, C.
    (2008) Morphological variability in the comprehension of agreement: An argument for representation over computation. Second Language Research, 24, 459–486. doi:  10.1177/0267658308095737
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658308095737 [Google Scholar]
  42. Montrul, S.
    (2002) Incomplete acquisition and attrition of Spanish tense/aspect distinctions in adult bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition5.39–68. doi:  10.1017/S1366728902000135
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728902000135 [Google Scholar]
  43. (2004) Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morphosyntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(02), 125–142. doi:  10.1017/S1366728904001464
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001464 [Google Scholar]
  44. (2008) Incomplete acquisition in bilingualism: Re-examining the age factor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/sibil.39
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.39 [Google Scholar]
  45. (2009) Knowledge of tense-aspect and mood in Spanish heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 239–269. doi:  10.1177/1367006909339816
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006909339816 [Google Scholar]
  46. (2010) How similar are adult second language learners and Spanish heritage speakers? Spanish clitics and word order. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31(01), 167–207. doi:  10.1017/S014271640999021X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271640999021X [Google Scholar]
  47. (2011) Morphological errors in Spanish second language learners and heritage speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition33.155–61. doi:  10.1017/S0272263110000719
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263110000719 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2014) Structural changes in Spanish in the United States: Differential object marking in Spanish heritage speakers across generations. Lingua151. 177–96. doi:  10.1016/j.lingua.2014.05.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.05.007 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2016) The Acquisition of Heritage Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9781139030502
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139030502 [Google Scholar]
  50. Montrul, S., Bhatt, R. & Bhatia, A.
    (2012) Erosion of case and agreement in Hindi heritage speakers. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism2.141–76. doi:  10.1075/lab.2.2.02mon
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.2.2.02mon [Google Scholar]
  51. Montrul, S., Bhatt, R., & Girju, R.
    (2015) Differential object marking in Spanish, Hindi, and Romanian as heritage languages. Language, 91(3), 564–610. doi:  10.1353/lan.2015.0035
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0035 [Google Scholar]
  52. Montrul, S., & Bowles, M.
    (2009) Back to basics: Differential object marking under incomplete acquisition in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition12.363–83. doi:  10.1017/S1366728909990071
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990071 [Google Scholar]
  53. Montrul, S., Foote, R., & Perpiñán, S.
    (2008) Gender agreement in adult second language learners and Spanish heritage speakers: The effects of age and context of acquisition. Language Learning58.3–53. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2008.00449.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00449.x [Google Scholar]
  54. Montrul, S., & Sánchez-Walker, N.
    (2013) Incomplete acquisition of differential object marking in child and adult Spanish heritage speakers. Language Acquisition20.109–32. doi:  10.1080/10489223.2013.766741
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2013.766741 [Google Scholar]
  55. O'Grady, W., Lee, M., & Choo, M.
    (2003) A subject-object asymmetry in the acquisition of relative clauses in Korean as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(03), 433–448. doi:  10.1017/S0272263103000172
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263103000172 [Google Scholar]
  56. Pascual y Cabo, D., & Rothman, J.
    (2012) The (Ill)logical problem of heritage speaker bilingualism and incomplete acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 33, 1–7. doi:  10.1093/applin/ams037
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams037 [Google Scholar]
  57. Perpiñán, S.
    (2015) L2 Grammar and L2 Processing in the Acquisition of Spanish Prepositional Relative Clauses. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(04), 577–596. doi:  10.1017/S1366728914000583
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728914000583 [Google Scholar]
  58. Perpiñán, S. & Moreno Villamar, I.
    (2013) Inversion and Case Assignment in the Language of Spanish Heritage Speakers. Proceedings of the annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Pires, A., & Rothman, J.
    (2009) Disentangling sources of incomplete acquisition: An explanation for competence divergence across heritage grammars. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 211–238. doi:  10.1177/1367006909339806
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006909339806 [Google Scholar]
  60. Polinsky, M.
    (2008a) Without aspect. Case and grammatical relations, 263–282. doi:  10.1075/tsl.81.13pol
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.81.13pol [Google Scholar]
  61. (2008b) Gender under incomplete acquisition: Heritage speakers’ knowledge of noun categorization. Heritage Language Journal, 6(1), 40–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. (2011) Reanalysis in adult heritage language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33(02), 305–328. doi:  10.1017/S027226311000077X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311000077X [Google Scholar]
  63. Polinsky, M., & Kagan, O.
    (2007) Heritage languages: In the ‘wild’ and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(5), 368–395. doi:  10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2007.00022.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00022.x [Google Scholar]
  64. Putnam, M. & Sánchez, L.
    (2013) What's so incomplete about incomplete acquisition? A prolegomenon to modeling heritage language grammars. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 3(4), 476–506. doi:  10.1075/lab.3.4.04put
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.3.4.04put [Google Scholar]
  65. Rothman, J.
    (2007) Heritage speaker competence differences, language change, and input type: Inflected infinitives in Heritage Brazilian Portuguese. International Journal of Bilingualism, 11(4), 359–389. doi:  10.1177/13670069070110040201
     https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069070110040201 [Google Scholar]
  66. Sánchez-Walker, Noelia, and Silvina Montrul
    (2016) Comprehension of subject and object relative clauses by second language learners of Spanish. InAnahí Alba de la Fuente, Elena Valenzuela, and Cristina Martínez Sanz (Eds.), Language Acquisition Beyond Parameters: Studies in honour of Juana M. Liceras, 149–185. Amsterdam: John Benjamins doi:  10.1075/sibil.51.07san
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.51.07san [Google Scholar]
  67. Slabakova, R.
    (2013) What is easy and what is hard in second language acquisition: A generative perspective. InMaría del Pilar García Mayo, M. Junkal Gutierrez-Mangado & María Martínez Adrián (eds.), Contemporary Approaches to Second Language Acquisition, 5–28. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/aals.9.04ch1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.9.04ch1 [Google Scholar]
  68. Torrego, E.
    (1998) The dependencies of objects. Cambridge: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. (2002) Aspect in the prepositional system of Romance. InTeresa Satterfield, Christina Tortora and Diana Cresti (Eds.), Current Issues in Romance Languages, 337–357. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/cilt.220.23tor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.220.23tor [Google Scholar]
  70. Trueswell, J., & Tanenhaus, M.
    (1994) Toward a lexical framework of constraint-based syntactic ambiguity resolution. Perspectives on sentence processing, 155–179.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Valdés, G.
    (2000) Introduction. Spanish for native speakers, vol.1. (AATSP) professional development series handbook for teachers K-16.) New York: Harcourt College.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. VanPatten, B.
    (1996) Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Greenwood Publishing Group.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. von Heusinger, K., & Kaiser, G.
    (2005) The evolution of differential object marking in Spanish. InKlaus von Heusinger, Georg A. Kaiser and Elisabeth Stark (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop “Specificity and the Evolution / Emergence of Nominal Determination Systems in Romance”. 33–69. Universität Konstanz: Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Wechsler, D. A.
    (1997) WAIS-III, WMS-III technical manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
  75. Zobl, H., & Liceras, J.
    (1994) Functional categories and acquisition orders. Language Learning, 44(1), 159–180. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1994.tb01452.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01452.x [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lab.16020.sag
Loading
Processing DOM in relative clauses
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 9, 120 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.16020.sag
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.16020.sag
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.16020.sag
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): age of acquisition; DOM; heritage speakers; relative clauses

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error