1887
image of Children’s thinking-for-speaking
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigates how children lexicalize motion events in their first and second languages, L1-Turkish and L2-English. English is a satellite-framed language that conflates motion with manner expressed in the main verb and path in a non-verbal element, whereas Turkish is a verb-framed language that conflates motion with path in the main verb and expresses manner in a subordinated verb. We asked three questions: (1) Does early L2 acquisition in an L1 dominant society affect motion event lexicalization in L1? (2) Is the effect of L2 on L1 subject to change due to decline in L2 exposure? (3) Do L1 vs. L2 lexicalizations differ within the bilingual mind? One hundred and twelve 5- and 7-year-old monolingual and bilingual children watched and described video-clips depicting motion events. For L1 descriptions, 5-year-old bilinguals used more manner structures than monolinguals. No difference was found for 7-year-olds. For L2 descriptions, 7-year-old bilinguals used more manner-only constructions compared to their L1 descriptions. For 5-year-old bilinguals no difference was found. Findings suggest that early exposure to a second language had an impact on how motion events are packaged, while decline in L2 exposure dampened the effects of L2.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lab.19027.akt
2020-03-23
2020-09-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Akhavan, N., Nozari, N., & Göksun, T.
    (2017) Expression of motion events in Farsi. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 32(6), 792–804. 10.1080/23273798.2016.1276607
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2016.1276607 [Google Scholar]
  2. Aksu-Koç, A.
    (1994) Development of linguistic forms: Turkish. InR. Berman & D. Slobin (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study, (pp.329–385). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Aktan-Erciyes, A. & Göksun, T.
    (2019) Early event understanding predicts later verb comprehension and motion event lexicalization. Developmental psychology, 55(11), 2249–2262. doi:  10.1037/dev0000804
    https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000804 [Google Scholar]
  4. Allen, S., Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Brown, A., Furman, R., Ishizuka, T., & Fujii, M.
    (2007) Language-specific and universal influences in children’s syntactic packaging of manner and path: A comparison of English, Japanese, and Turkish. Cognition, 102(1), 16–48. 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.12.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.12.006 [Google Scholar]
  5. Aveledo, F. E.
    (2015) Linguistic relativity in motion events in Spanish and English: a study on monolingual and bilingual children and adults. Unpublished dissertation, Newcastle University.
  6. Aveledo, F., & Athanasopoulos, P.
    (2016) Second language influence on first language motion event encoding and categorization in Spanish-speaking children learning L2 English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20(4), 403–420. 10.1177/1367006915609235
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006915609235 [Google Scholar]
  7. Benazzo, S., Flecken, M., & Soroli, E.
    (2012) Typological perspectives on second language acquisition. InS. Benazzo, Flecken, M., & Soroli, E. (Eds.), Typological perspectives on second language acquisition: “Thinking for Speaking” in L2 (special issue). (pp.163–172). Language, Interaction, and Acquisition, 3(2). 10.1075/lia.3.2.01int
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.3.2.01int [Google Scholar]
  8. Berman, R., & Slobin, D. I.
    (1994) Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Berument, S. K., & Guven, A. G.
    (2010) Turkish Expressive and Receptive Language Test: Receptive Vocabulary Sub-Scale (TİFALDİ-RT). Turkish Psychological Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bowerman, M.
    (1982) Reorganizational processes in lexical and syntactic development. Language acquisition: InE. Wanner & L. R. Gleitman (Eds.), The state of the art (pp.319–346). New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (1994) From universal to language-specific in early grammatical development. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 346(1315), 37–45. 10.1098/rstb.1994.0126
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1994.0126 [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown, A.
    (2007) Crosslinguistic influence in first and second languages: Convergence in speech gesture. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
  13. (2015) Universal development and L1–L2 convergence in bilingual construal of manner in speech and gesture in Mandarin, Japanese, and English. The Modern Language Journal, 99(S1), 66–82. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2015.12179.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2015.12179.x [Google Scholar]
  14. Brown, A., & Gullberg, M.
    (2008) Bidirectional crosslinguistic influence in L1-L2 encoding of manner in speech and gesture: A study of Japanese speakers of English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(2), 225–251. 10.1017/S0272263108080327
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080327 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2011) Bidirectional cross-linguistic influence in event conceptualization? Expressions of Path among Japanese learners of English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14(1), 79–94. 10.1017/S1366728910000064
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728910000064 [Google Scholar]
  16. (2012) Multicompetence and native speaker variation in clausal packaging in Japanese. Second Language Research, 28(4), 415–442. 10.1177/0267658312455822
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658312455822 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2013) L1–L2 convergence in clausal packaging in Japanese and English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(3), 477–494. 10.1017/S1366728912000491
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728912000491 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bylund, E.
    (2009) Maturational constraints and first language attrition. Language Learning, 59(3), 687–715. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00521.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00521.x [Google Scholar]
  19. Bylund, E., & Jarvis, S.
    (2011) L2 effects on L1 event conceptualization. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14(1), 47–59. 10.1017/S1366728910000180
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728910000180 [Google Scholar]
  20. Cadierno, T.
    (2004) Expressing motion events in a second language: A cognitive typological perspective. InM. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching, (pp.13–49). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199857.13
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199857.13 [Google Scholar]
  21. Cadierno, T., & Ruiz, L.
    (2006) Motion events in Spanish L2 acquisition. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 183–216. 10.1075/arcl.4.08cad
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.4.08cad [Google Scholar]
  22. Chen, L., & Guo, J.
    (2009) Motion events in Chinese novels: Evidence for an equipollently-framed language. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(9), 1749–1766. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.10.015 [Google Scholar]
  23. Choi, S., & Bowerman, M.
    (1991) Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns. Cognition, 41(1–3), 83–121. 10.1016/0010‑0277(91)90033‑Z
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90033-Z [Google Scholar]
  24. Choi, S., McDonough, L., Bowerman, M., & Mandler, J. M.
    (1999) Early sensitivity to language-specific spatial categories in English and Korean. Cognitive Development, 14(2), 241–268. 10.1016/S0885‑2014(99)00004‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2014(99)00004-0 [Google Scholar]
  25. Cook, V.
    (2016) Transfer and the relationships between the languages of multicompetence. InR. Alonso (Ed.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition (pp.24–37). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, D. M.
    (2015) Peabody picture vocabulary test: PPVT 4. Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Filipović, L.
    (2011) Speaking and remembering in one or two languages: Bilingual vs. monolingual lexicalization and memory for motion events. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15(4), 466–485. 10.1177/1367006911403062
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911403062 [Google Scholar]
  28. Filipović, L., & Vidakovic, I.
    (2010) Typology in the L2 classroom: Acquisition from a typological perspective. InM. Pütz & L. Sicola (Eds.), Inside the learner’s mind: Cognitive processing in second language acquisition (pp.269–291). Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.13.19fil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.13.19fil [Google Scholar]
  29. Gentner, D., & Bowerman, M.
    (2009) Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The typological prevalence hypothesis. InJ. Guo, E. Lieven, S. Ervin-Tripp, N. Budwig, S. Özcaliskan, & К. Nakamura (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp.465–480). New York: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Göksun, T., Lehet, M., Malykhina, K., & Chatterjee, A.
    (2015) Spontaneous gesture and spatial language: Evidence from focal brain injury. Brain and Language, 150, 1–13. 10.1016/j.bandl.2015.07.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2015.07.012 [Google Scholar]
  31. Göksun, T., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Michnick Golinkoff, R.
    (2010) Trading spaces: Carving up events for learning language. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(1), 33–42. 10.1177/1745691609356783
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691609356783 [Google Scholar]
  32. Gullberg, M., Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M.
    (2008) Learning to talk and gesture about motion in French. First Language, 28(2), 200–236. 10.1177/0142723707088074
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723707088074 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hasko, V.
    (2010) The role of thinking for speaking in adult L2 speech: The case of (non)unidirectionality encoding by American learners of Russian. InZ-H. Han & T. Cadierno (Eds.), Linguistic relativity in second language acquisition: Thinking-for-speaking (pp.34–58). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847692788‑004
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692788-004 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hohenstein, J., Eisenberg, A., & Naigles, L.
    (2006) Is he floating across or crossing afloat? Cross-influence of L1 and L2 in Spanish–English bilingual adults. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9(3), 249–261. 10.1017/S1366728906002616
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002616 [Google Scholar]
  35. Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A.
    (2008) Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203935927
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203935927 [Google Scholar]
  36. Ji, Y., Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M.
    (2011) How children express caused motion events in Chinese and English: Universal and language-specific influences. Lingua, 121(12), 1796–1819. 10.1016/j.lingua.2011.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lai, V. T., Rodríguez, G. G., & Narasimhan, B.
    (2014) Thinking-for-Speaking in early and late bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(1), 139–152. 10.1017/S1366728913000151
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728913000151 [Google Scholar]
  38. Mayer, M.
    (1969) Frog, where are you?. New York: Dial Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Montrul, S.
    (2001) Agentive verbs of manner of motion in Spanish and English as second languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(2), 171–206. 10.1017/S0272263101002030
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263101002030 [Google Scholar]
  40. Naigles, L. R., Eisenberg, A. R., Kako, E. T., Highter, M., & McGraw, N.
    (1998) Speaking of motion: Verb use in English and Spanish. Language and cognitive processes, 13(5), 521–549. 10.1080/016909698386429
    https://doi.org/10.1080/016909698386429 [Google Scholar]
  41. Negueruela, E., Lantolf, J. P., Jordan, S. R., & Gelabert, J.
    (2004) The “private function” of gesture in second language speaking activity: A study of motion verbs and gesturing in English and Spanish. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 113–147. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.2004.00056.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2004.00056.x [Google Scholar]
  42. Nicoladis, E. & Brisard, F.
    (2002) Encoding motion in gestures and speech: Are there differences in bilingual children’s French and English?InE. V. Clark (Ed.), Space in language. Location, motion, path, and manner. The Proceedings of the 31st Stanford Child Language Research Forum (pp.60–68). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Oh, K. J.
    (2003) Language, cognition, and development: Motion events in English and Korean. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
  44. Özçalışkan, Ş.
    (2016) Do gestures follow speech in bilinguals’ description of motion. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(3), 644–653. 10.1017/S1366728915000796
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000796 [Google Scholar]
  45. Özçalışkan, ¸ S., & Slobin, D. I.
    (1999) Learning how to search for the frog: Expressions of manner of motion in English, Spanish, and Turkish. InH. L. A. Greenhill, H. Littlefield, & C. Tano (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Vol.2 (pp.541–552). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Özçalışkan, Ş., & Slobin, D. I.
    (2003) Codability effects on the expression of manner of motion in Turkish and English. InA. S. Özsoy, D. Akar, M. Nakipoglu-Demiralp, E. Erguvanli-Taylan, & A. Aksu- Koç (Eds.), Studies in Turkish Linguistics (pp.259–270). Istanbul, Turkey: Boğaziçi University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Pavlenko, A.
    (1999) New approaches to concepts in bilingual memory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2(3), 209–230. 10.1017/S1366728999000322
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728999000322 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2005) Bilingualism and thought. InA. M. B. De Groot & J. F. Kroll (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp.433–453). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. (2010) Verbs of motion in L1 Russian of Russian–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(1), 49–62. 10.1017/S1366728909990198
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990198 [Google Scholar]
  50. (2011) Thinking and speaking in two languages. Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847693389
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847693389 [Google Scholar]
  51. Pavlenko, A., & Volynsky, M.
    (2015) Motion encoding in Russian and English: Moving beyond Talmy’s typology. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 32–48. 10.1111/modl.12177
    https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12177 [Google Scholar]
  52. Slobin, D. I.
    (1996) From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking.” InJ. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp.70–114). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. (2000) Verbalized events: A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and determinism. InS. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.), Evidence for linguistic relativity (pp.107–138). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.198.10slo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.198.10slo [Google Scholar]
  54. (2003) Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. InD. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the investigation of language and thought (pp.157–191). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]
  55. (2004) The many ways to search for a frog. Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. InS. Stromqvist & L. Verhoeven (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp.219–257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. (2005) Relating narrative events in transladtion. InD. Ravid & H. B. Shyldkrot, (Eds.), Perspectives on Language and Language Development: Essays in Honor of Ruth A. Berman (pp.115–129). Kluwer, Dordrecht: Springer US. 10.1007/1‑4020‑7911‑7_10
    https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7911-7_10 [Google Scholar]
  57. (2006) What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse and cognition. InM. Hickman & S. Robert (Eds.), Space in languages: Linguistic systems and cognitive categories (pp.59–81). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.66.05slo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.66.05slo [Google Scholar]
  58. Stromqvist & L. Verhoeven
    (2004) Narrative development in a multilingual context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Stam, G.
    (2006) Thinking for speaking about motion: L1 and L2 speech and gesture. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 44(2), 143–169. 10.1515/IRAL.2006.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/IRAL.2006.006 [Google Scholar]
  60. (2010) Can a L2 speaker’s patterns of thinking for speaking change?InZ. Han & T. Cadierno (Eds.), Linguistic relativity in L2 Acquisition: Evidence of L1 thinking for speaking (pp.59–83). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847692788‑005
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692788-005 [Google Scholar]
  61. Soroli, E., Sahraoui, H., & Sacchet, C.
    (2012) Linguistic encoding of motion events in English and French: Typological constraints on second language acquisition and agrammatic aphasia. Language, Interaction and Acquisition, 3(2), 261–287. 10.1075/lia.3.2.05sor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.3.2.05sor [Google Scholar]
  62. Talmy, L.
    (1985) Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. InT. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (Vol.III). New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. (2000) Toward a cognitive semantics. Volume 1: Concept Structuring Systems, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Tomasello, M.
    (1995) Language is not an instinct. Cognitive Development, 10, 131–56. 10.1016/0885‑2014(95)90021‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2014(95)90021-7 [Google Scholar]
  65. von Stutterheim, C., Nüse, R., & Murcia-Serra, J.
    (2002) Cross-linguistic differences in the conceptualisation of events. InH. Hasselgård, S. Johansson, B. Behrens & C. Fabricius–Hansen (Eds.), Information structure in a cross-linguistic perspective (pp.179–198). Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004334250_012
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004334250_012 [Google Scholar]
  66. Whorf, B. L.
    (1956) Language, thought and reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Wolff, P., & Holmes, K.
    (2011) Linguistic relativity. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2,253–2,265.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Zacks, J. M., & Tversky, B.
    (2001) Event structure in perception and conception. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 3–11. 10.1037/0033‑2909.127.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.3 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lab.19027.akt
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.19027.akt
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: motion events; Turkish-English; bilingualism; thinking-for-speaking
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