1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Variation in Second and Heritage Languages
  4. Chapter

Chapter 5. What can Cantonese heritage speakers tell us about age of acquisition, linguistic dominance, and sociophonetic variation?

image of Chapter 5. What can Cantonese heritage speakers tell us about age of acquisition, linguistic dominance, and sociophonetic variation?

For many individuals, the first acquired language is also the linguistically dominant language, but what are the implications for sociophonetic variation if the linguistically dominant language is a second acquired childhood language, as is the case for many heritage speakers? This chapter addresses two correlates of linguistic dominance on the production of L2-influenced vowels in heritage Cantonese sociolinguistic interview data. Results show that Cantonese Production Score (CPS), an externally measured proficiency proxy, is consistently a better predictor than Ethnic Orientation (a self-reported identity metric) in accounting for speakers who are most likely to produce English influenced vowels. While a distinction between child vs. adult language acquisition remains important, these results highlight linguistic dominance as an interacting factor in sociophonetic variation.

e-Book ISBN 9789027257727
  • Affiliations: 1: Saint Catherine University

References

  1. Bauer, Robert S. & Paul K. Benedict
    1997 Modern Cantonese phonology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110823707
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110823707 [Google Scholar]
  2. Boersma, Paul & David Weenink
    2016 Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer Program](version 6.0.15). www.praat.org/.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
    Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region 2016 Thematic household survey report No. 59. Hong Kong. https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B11302592016XXXXB0100.pdf.
  4. Chan, Arlene
    2011 The Chinese in Toronto from 1878: From outside to inside the circle. Toronto: Dundurn Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Coetsem, Frans van
    1988 Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris. 10.1515/9783110884869
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110884869 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2000 A general and unified theory of the transmission process in language contact. Heidelberg: Winter.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Cui, Naomi , Minyi Zhu , Vina Law , Holman Tse & Naomi Nagy
    2014 Exploring automated formant analysis for comparative variationist study of heritage Cantonese and English. InPresentation at change and variation in Canada/Changement et Variation au Canada (CVC 8). Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada. d-scholarship.pitt.edu/26261/.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Eberhard, David M. , Gary F. Simons & Charles D. Fennig
    (eds.) 2020 Ethnologue: Languages of the world. 23rd ed. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. www.ethnologue.com.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Gorman, Kyle , Jonathan Howell & Michael Wagner
    2011 Prosodylab-Aligner: A tool for forced alignment of laboratory speech. Canadian Acoustics39(3). 192–193.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Guy, Gregory R.
    1990 The sociolinguistic types of language change. Diachronica7(1). 47–67. 10.1075/dia.7.1.04guy.
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.7.1.04guy [Google Scholar]
  11. Hoffman, Michol F. & James A. Walker
    2010 Ethnolects and the city: Ethnic orientation and linguistic variation in Toronto English. Language Variation and Change22(1). 37–67. 10.1017/S0954394509990238.
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394509990238 [Google Scholar]
  12. Johnson, Daniel Ezra
    2009 Getting off the GoldVarb standard: Introducing Rbrul for mixed-effects variable rule analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass3(1). 359–383. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2008.00108.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00108.x [Google Scholar]
  13. Keefe, Susan Emley & Amado M. Padilla
    1987 Chicano ethnicity. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Labov, William
    1994 Principles of linguistic change, Volume1. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 2007 Transmission and diffusion. Language83(2). 344–87. 10.1353/lan.2007.0082
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2007.0082 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2011 Principles of linguistic change, Vol. 3: Cognitive and cultural factors. Malden, Mass.: Wiley Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Labov, William , Sharon Ash & Charles Boberg
    2006 The atlas of North American English: Phonetics, phonology and sound change. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Lyskawa, Paulina , Ruth Maddeaux , Emilia Melara & Naomi Nagy
    2016 Heritage speakers follow all the rules: Language contact and convergence in Polish devoicing. Heritage Language Journal13(2). 219. 10.46538/hlj.13.2.7
     https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.13.2.7 [Google Scholar]
  19. Montrul, Silvina
    2015 The acquisition of heritage languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139030502
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139030502 [Google Scholar]
  20. Nagy, Naomi
    2011 A multilingual corpus to explore variation in language contact situations. Rassegna Italiana Di Linguistica Applicata43(1/2). 65–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Nagy, Naomi , Joanna Chociej & Michol F. Hoffman
    2014 Analyzing ethnic orientation in the quantitative sociolinguistic paradigm. Language & Communication35. 9–26. 10.1016/j.langcom.2013.11.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2013.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  22. Nagy, Naomi & Miriam Meyerhoff
    2008 Introduction: Social lives in language. In Gillian Sankoff , Miriam Meyerhoff & Naomi Nagy (Eds.), Social lives in language–Sociolinguistics and multilingual speech communities: Celebrating the work of Gillian Sankoff, 1–17. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/impact.24.02nag
     https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.24.02nag [Google Scholar]
  23. Payne, Arvilla Chapin
    1976 The acquisition of the phonological system of a second dialect. University of Pennsylvania dissertation. https://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI7710204/.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Polinsky, Maria
    2018 Heritage languages and their speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781107252349
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107252349 [Google Scholar]
  25. Sankoff, Gillian
    2013 Linguistic outcomes of bilingualism. In J. K Chambers & Natalie Schilling (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change, 501–518. Maldon, Mass.: Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118335598.ch23
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch23 [Google Scholar]
  26. Scovel, Thomas
    2000 A critical review of the critical period research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics20. 213–23. 10.1017/S0267190500200135
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500200135 [Google Scholar]
  27. Smits, Caroline
    1998 Two models for the study of language contact: A Psycho-linguistic perspective versus a socio-cultural perspective. In Monika S. Schmid , Jennifer R. Austin & Dieter Stein (eds.), Historical linguistics 1997: Selected papers from the 13th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Düsseldorf, 377–390. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.164.24smi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.164.24smi [Google Scholar]
  28. Statistics Canada
    Statistics Canada 2017 Toronto, C [Census Subdivision], Ontario and Canada [Country] (Table). Census Profile. 2016 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 98-316-X2016001. Ottawa. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E.
  29. Thomas, Erik & Tyler Kendall
    2007 NORM: The vowel normalization and plotting suite. lingtools.uoregon.edu/norm/norm1.php.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terrence Kaufman
    1988 Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520912793
     https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520912793 [Google Scholar]
  31. Trudgill, Peter
    2013 Sociolinguistic typology social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Tsang, Chui-Lim
    1984 Sociolinguistic considerations in selecting the language of instruction in a bilingual programme. In Beverly Hong (ed.), New papers on Chinese language use, 45–58. Canberra: Contemporary China Centre, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Tse, Holman
    2019 Vowel shifts in Cantonese?Asia-Pacific Language Variation5(1). 67–83. 10.1075/aplv.19001.tse
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aplv.19001.tse [Google Scholar]
  34. Walker, James A.
    2015 Canadian English: A sociolinguistic perspective. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203551431
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203551431 [Google Scholar]
  35. Weinreich, Uriel
    1953 Languages in contact, findings and problems. New York: Linguistic Circle of New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Winford, Donald
    2007 Some issues in the study of language contact. Journal of Language Contact1(1). 22–40. 10.1163/000000007792548288.
     https://doi.org/10.1163/000000007792548288 [Google Scholar]
  37. Winford, Donald
    2013 On the unity of contact phenomena: The case for imposition. In Carole de Féral (ed.), In and out of Africa: Languages in question. In honour of Robert Nicolaï, 43–71. Louvain: Peeters.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 2017 The ecology of language and the New Englishes: Toward an integrative framework. In Markku Filppula , Juhani Klemola , Anna Mauranen & Svetlana Vetchinnikova (eds.), Changing English: Global and local perspectives, 25–55. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Yip, Moira
    1996 Lexicon optimization in languages without alternations. In J. Durand & B. Laks (Eds.), Current trends in phonology: Models and methods, 354–385. Salford, Manchester: European Studies Research Institute, University of Salford. . CitetononCRdoi:10.7282/T33X84P0
     https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.7282/T33X84P0 [Google Scholar]
  40. Yue-Hashimoto, Anne Oi-kan
    1972 Phonology of Cantonese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Zee, Eric
    1999 Change and variation in the syllable-initial and syllable-final consonants in Hong Kong Cantonese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics27(1). 120–67.
     [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Bauer, Robert S. & Paul K. Benedict
    1997 Modern Cantonese phonology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110823707
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110823707 [Google Scholar]
  2. Boersma, Paul & David Weenink
    2016 Praat: Doing phonetics by computer [Computer Program](version 6.0.15). www.praat.org/.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
    Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region 2016 Thematic household survey report No. 59. Hong Kong. https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B11302592016XXXXB0100.pdf.
  4. Chan, Arlene
    2011 The Chinese in Toronto from 1878: From outside to inside the circle. Toronto: Dundurn Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Coetsem, Frans van
    1988 Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris. 10.1515/9783110884869
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110884869 [Google Scholar]
  6. 2000 A general and unified theory of the transmission process in language contact. Heidelberg: Winter.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Cui, Naomi , Minyi Zhu , Vina Law , Holman Tse & Naomi Nagy
    2014 Exploring automated formant analysis for comparative variationist study of heritage Cantonese and English. InPresentation at change and variation in Canada/Changement et Variation au Canada (CVC 8). Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada. d-scholarship.pitt.edu/26261/.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Eberhard, David M. , Gary F. Simons & Charles D. Fennig
    (eds.) 2020 Ethnologue: Languages of the world. 23rd ed. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. www.ethnologue.com.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Gorman, Kyle , Jonathan Howell & Michael Wagner
    2011 Prosodylab-Aligner: A tool for forced alignment of laboratory speech. Canadian Acoustics39(3). 192–193.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Guy, Gregory R.
    1990 The sociolinguistic types of language change. Diachronica7(1). 47–67. 10.1075/dia.7.1.04guy.
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.7.1.04guy [Google Scholar]
  11. Hoffman, Michol F. & James A. Walker
    2010 Ethnolects and the city: Ethnic orientation and linguistic variation in Toronto English. Language Variation and Change22(1). 37–67. 10.1017/S0954394509990238.
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394509990238 [Google Scholar]
  12. Johnson, Daniel Ezra
    2009 Getting off the GoldVarb standard: Introducing Rbrul for mixed-effects variable rule analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass3(1). 359–383. 10.1111/j.1749‑818X.2008.00108.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00108.x [Google Scholar]
  13. Keefe, Susan Emley & Amado M. Padilla
    1987 Chicano ethnicity. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Labov, William
    1994 Principles of linguistic change, Volume1. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 2007 Transmission and diffusion. Language83(2). 344–87. 10.1353/lan.2007.0082
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2007.0082 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2011 Principles of linguistic change, Vol. 3: Cognitive and cultural factors. Malden, Mass.: Wiley Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Labov, William , Sharon Ash & Charles Boberg
    2006 The atlas of North American English: Phonetics, phonology and sound change. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Lyskawa, Paulina , Ruth Maddeaux , Emilia Melara & Naomi Nagy
    2016 Heritage speakers follow all the rules: Language contact and convergence in Polish devoicing. Heritage Language Journal13(2). 219. 10.46538/hlj.13.2.7
     https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.13.2.7 [Google Scholar]
  19. Montrul, Silvina
    2015 The acquisition of heritage languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139030502
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139030502 [Google Scholar]
  20. Nagy, Naomi
    2011 A multilingual corpus to explore variation in language contact situations. Rassegna Italiana Di Linguistica Applicata43(1/2). 65–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Nagy, Naomi , Joanna Chociej & Michol F. Hoffman
    2014 Analyzing ethnic orientation in the quantitative sociolinguistic paradigm. Language & Communication35. 9–26. 10.1016/j.langcom.2013.11.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2013.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  22. Nagy, Naomi & Miriam Meyerhoff
    2008 Introduction: Social lives in language. In Gillian Sankoff , Miriam Meyerhoff & Naomi Nagy (Eds.), Social lives in language–Sociolinguistics and multilingual speech communities: Celebrating the work of Gillian Sankoff, 1–17. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/impact.24.02nag
     https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.24.02nag [Google Scholar]
  23. Payne, Arvilla Chapin
    1976 The acquisition of the phonological system of a second dialect. University of Pennsylvania dissertation. https://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI7710204/.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Polinsky, Maria
    2018 Heritage languages and their speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781107252349
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107252349 [Google Scholar]
  25. Sankoff, Gillian
    2013 Linguistic outcomes of bilingualism. In J. K Chambers & Natalie Schilling (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change, 501–518. Maldon, Mass.: Wiley Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118335598.ch23
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch23 [Google Scholar]
  26. Scovel, Thomas
    2000 A critical review of the critical period research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics20. 213–23. 10.1017/S0267190500200135
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500200135 [Google Scholar]
  27. Smits, Caroline
    1998 Two models for the study of language contact: A Psycho-linguistic perspective versus a socio-cultural perspective. In Monika S. Schmid , Jennifer R. Austin & Dieter Stein (eds.), Historical linguistics 1997: Selected papers from the 13th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Düsseldorf, 377–390. John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.164.24smi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.164.24smi [Google Scholar]
  28. Statistics Canada
    Statistics Canada 2017 Toronto, C [Census Subdivision], Ontario and Canada [Country] (Table). Census Profile. 2016 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue No. 98-316-X2016001. Ottawa. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/index.cfm?Lang=E.
  29. Thomas, Erik & Tyler Kendall
    2007 NORM: The vowel normalization and plotting suite. lingtools.uoregon.edu/norm/norm1.php.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Thomason, Sarah Grey & Terrence Kaufman
    1988 Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520912793
     https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520912793 [Google Scholar]
  31. Trudgill, Peter
    2013 Sociolinguistic typology social determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Tsang, Chui-Lim
    1984 Sociolinguistic considerations in selecting the language of instruction in a bilingual programme. In Beverly Hong (ed.), New papers on Chinese language use, 45–58. Canberra: Contemporary China Centre, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Tse, Holman
    2019 Vowel shifts in Cantonese?Asia-Pacific Language Variation5(1). 67–83. 10.1075/aplv.19001.tse
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aplv.19001.tse [Google Scholar]
  34. Walker, James A.
    2015 Canadian English: A sociolinguistic perspective. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203551431
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203551431 [Google Scholar]
  35. Weinreich, Uriel
    1953 Languages in contact, findings and problems. New York: Linguistic Circle of New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Winford, Donald
    2007 Some issues in the study of language contact. Journal of Language Contact1(1). 22–40. 10.1163/000000007792548288.
     https://doi.org/10.1163/000000007792548288 [Google Scholar]
  37. Winford, Donald
    2013 On the unity of contact phenomena: The case for imposition. In Carole de Féral (ed.), In and out of Africa: Languages in question. In honour of Robert Nicolaï, 43–71. Louvain: Peeters.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 2017 The ecology of language and the New Englishes: Toward an integrative framework. In Markku Filppula , Juhani Klemola , Anna Mauranen & Svetlana Vetchinnikova (eds.), Changing English: Global and local perspectives, 25–55. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Yip, Moira
    1996 Lexicon optimization in languages without alternations. In J. Durand & B. Laks (Eds.), Current trends in phonology: Models and methods, 354–385. Salford, Manchester: European Studies Research Institute, University of Salford. . CitetononCRdoi:10.7282/T33X84P0
     https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.7282/T33X84P0 [Google Scholar]
  40. Yue-Hashimoto, Anne Oi-kan
    1972 Phonology of Cantonese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Zee, Eric
    1999 Change and variation in the syllable-initial and syllable-final consonants in Hong Kong Cantonese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics27(1). 120–67.
     [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027257727-silv.28.05tse
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Figure -contentType:Table -contentType:SupplementaryData
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027257727-silv.28.05tse
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal -contentType:Figure -contentType:Table -contentType:SupplementaryData
10
5
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