1887
Volume 34, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0774-5141
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9676
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

When communicating across closely related languages or varieties (e.g. in interdialectal communication or in regions such as Mainland Scandinavia), speakers have to learn how to decode words that show partial phonological differences from the equivalents in their L1. Although contact situations like these are rather common, interlingual decoding has scarcely been addressed in the CxG literature. As a contribution to this field of research, the paper discusses how (a particular stage in) emerging receptive multilingualism can be modelled from a CxG perspective. Specifically, it deals with the idea that repeated interlingual decoding generates partially schematic cross-linguistic constructions mirroring the speaker’s knowledge about sound correspondences, as suggested by Diasystematic Construction Grammar (Höder 2019).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00040.hag
2020-12-31
2021-12-09
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bannert, Robert
    1981 “Referat av diskussionen i sektionen Talperceptionsforskning och nordisk hörförståelse [Report on the discussion in the section Spoken Language Perception and Nordic listening comprehension].” InInternordisk språkförståelse: Föredrag och diskussioner vid ett symposium på Rungstedgaard utanför Köpenhamn den 24–26 mars 1980, anordnat av Sekretariatet för Nordiskt Kulturellt Samarbete vid Nordiska Ministerrådet [Internordic speech comprehension: Presentations and discussions at a symposium at Rungstedgaard outside Copenhagen on March 24–26, 1980, commissioned by Sekretariatet för Nordiskt Kulturellt Samarbete at Nordiska Ministerrådet], ed. by Claes-Christian Elert , 37–45. Umeå: Universitetet i Umeå.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Braunmüller, Kurt
    1995 “Semikommunikation und semiotische Strategien. Bausteine zu einem Modell für die Verständigung im Norden zur Zeit der Hanse.” InNiederdeutsch und die skandinavischen Sprachen, vol.2, ed. by Kurt Braunmüller , 35–70. Heidelberg: Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 2008On the Relevance of Receptive Multilingualism in a Globalised World: Theory, History and Evidence from Today’s Scandinavia. Hamburg: Universität Hamburg, Sonderforschungsgebiet Mehrsprachigkeit.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bybee, Joan L.
    2010Language, Usage, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511750526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511750526 [Google Scholar]
  5. Delsing, Lars-Olof , and Katarina Lundin Åkesson
    2005Håller språket ihop Norden? En forskningsrapport om ungdomars förståelse av danska, svenska och norska [Does language hold the North together? A research report on adolescents’ comprehension skills in Danish, Swedish and Norwegian]. Copenhagen: Nordiska Ministerrådet. 10.6027/tn2005‑573
    https://doi.org/10.6027/tn2005-573 [Google Scholar]
  6. Ellis, Nick C. , and Stefanie Wulff
    2019 “Cognitive Approaches to L2 Acquisition.” InThe Cambridge Handbook of Language Learning, ed. by John W. Schwieter , and Alessandro G. Benati , 41–61. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108333603.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333603.003 [Google Scholar]
  7. Goldberg, Adele
    2019Explain Me This. Creativity, Competition, and the Partial Productivity of Constructions. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Gooskens, Charlotte , and Renée van Bezooijen
    2013 “Explaining Danish-Swedish Asymmetric Word Intelligibility. An Error Analysis.” InPhonetics in Europe: Perception and Production, ed. by Charlotte Gooskens , and Renée van Bezooijen , 59–82. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Hilpert, Martin
    2019 “Higher-order Schemas in Morphology: What They Are, How They Work, and Where to Find Them.” Word Structure12 (3): 261–273. 10.3366/word.2019.0149
    https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2019.0149 [Google Scholar]
  10. Höder, Steffen
    2018 “Grammar is Community-specific: Background and Basic Concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar.” InConstructions in Contact: Constructional Perspectives on Contact Phenomena in Germanic Languages, ed. by Hans C. Boas , and Steffen Höder , 37–70. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.24.02hod
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.24.02hod [Google Scholar]
  11. 2019 “Phonological Schematicity in Multilingual Constructions: A Diasystematic Perspective on Lexical Form.” Word Structure12 (3): 334–352. 10.3366/word.2019.0152
    https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2019.0152 [Google Scholar]
  12. Höder, Steffen , Julia Prentice , and Sofia Tingsell
    . Forthc. “Acquisition of Additional Languages as Reorganization in the Multilingual Constructicon.” InConstructions in Contact 2. Language Change, Multilingual Practices, and Additional Language Acquisition ed. by Hans C. Boas , and Steffen Höder . Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cal.30.10hod
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.30.10hod [Google Scholar]
  13. Klein, Horst G. , and Tilbert D. Stegmann
    2000EuroComRom – Die sieben Siebe. Romanische Sprachen sofort lesen können. 2nd ed.Aachen: Shaker.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Möller, Robert , and Ludger Zeevaert
    2015 “Investigating Word Recognition in Intercomprehension: Methods and Findings.” Linguistics53 (2): 313–352. 10.1515/ling‑2015‑0006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2015-0006 [Google Scholar]
  15. Pulvermüller, Friedemann
    1996 “Hebb’s Concept of Cell Assemblies and the Psychophysiology of Word Processing.” Psychophysiology33 (4): 317–333. 10.1111/j.1469‑8986.1996.tb01057.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1996.tb01057.x [Google Scholar]
  16. Sandøy, Helge
    2005 “The Typological Development of the Nordic Languages I: Phonology.” InThe Nordic Languages. An International Handbook of the North Germanic Languages, vol.2, ed. by Oskar Bandle , Kurt Braunmüller , Ernst Håkon Jahr , Allan Karker , Hans-Peter Naumann , and Ulf Teleman , 1852–1871. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. van Heuven, Vincent J.
    2008 “Making Sense of Strange Sounds: (Mutual) Intelligibility of Related Language Varieties. A Review.” International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing2 (1–2): 39–62. 10.3366/E1753854809000305
    https://doi.org/10.3366/E1753854809000305 [Google Scholar]
  18. Vanhove, Jan
    2016 “The Early Learning of Interlingual Correspondence Rules in Receptive Multilingualism.” International Journal of Bilingualism20 (5): 580–593. 10.1177/1367006915573338
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006915573338 [Google Scholar]
  19. Vihman, Marilyn , and William Croft
    2007 “Phonological Development: Toward a ‘Radical’ Templatic Phonology.” Linguistics45 (4): 683–725. 10.1515/LING.2007.021
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2007.021 [Google Scholar]
  20. Weinreich, Uriel
    1954 “Is a Structural Dialectology Possible?” Word10: 388–400. 10.1080/00437956.1954.11659535
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1954.11659535 [Google Scholar]
  21. 1964Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems. 3rd ed.London: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Zeldes, Amir
    2012Productivity in Argument Selection: From Morphology to Syntax. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110303919
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110303919 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00040.hag
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/bjl.00040.hag
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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