1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
  4. Volume 15, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 15, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1879-9264
  • E-ISSN: 1879-9272
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

Abstract

In this study, we investigate the contact effects of stability, convergence, and divergence regarding the use of the same linguistic construction in the same contact situation. To do that, we collected experimental production and judgment data by native German speakers living in the Netherlands regarding their usage of the complementizer ‘to’ in German and compared those data to those of a control group of German speakers not in contact with Dutch. The results show that most speakers show evidence for some contact-induced language change in their German. At the same time, speakers seem to experience different contact effects, demonstrating that it is not the structural properties of the construction that result in one effect over the other, but rather factors that pertain to the individual speakers. In particular, we argue that speakers can either focus on the similarities or on the differences between their languages, to some extent driven by their attitudes towards their languages and language change, and then over-generalize these similarities or differences to new contexts. Overall, this result clearly underlines the importance of focusing on individual speakers as the initiators of language change, which is in line with a usage-based approach.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lab.22067.bar
2024-03-01
2025-06-20

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lab.22067.bar
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lab.22067.bar.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/lab.22067.bar&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aikhenvald, A. Y.
    (2003) Mechanisms of change in areal diffusion: New morphology and language contact. Journal of Linguistics, 39(1), 1–29. 10.1017/S0022226702001937
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226702001937 [Google Scholar]
  2. Barking, M., Backus, A., & Mos, M.
    (2022) Similarity in Language Transfer  Investigating Transfer of Light Verb Constructions From Dutch to German. Journal of Language Contact, 151, 198–239. 10.1163/19552629‑15010005
     https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-15010005 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barking, M., Mos, M., & Backus, A.
    (2023) Investigating Language Transfer from a Usage-Based Perspective. International Journal of Bilingualism, 1–24.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Brons-Albert, R.
    (1992) Verlust der Muttersprache in fremdsprachiger Umgebung. Info DaF, 19(3), 315–325. 10.1515/infodaf‑1992‑190302
     https://doi.org/10.1515/infodaf-1992-190302 [Google Scholar]
  5. (1994) Interferenzfehler in der Muttersprache von in den Niederlanden lebenden Deutschen. InB. Spillner (Ed.), Nachbarsprachen in Europa (pp.96–104). Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bybee, J. L.
    (2006) From Usage to Grammar: The Mind’s Response to Repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
  7. (2011) Language, usage, and cognition. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Dąbrowska, E.
    (2004) Rules or schemas? Evidence from Polish. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(2), 225–271. 10.1080/01690960344000170
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960344000170 [Google Scholar]
  9. (2012) Different speakers , different grammars – Individual differences in native language attainment. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2(3), 219–253. 10.1075/lab.2.3.01dab
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.2.3.01dab [Google Scholar]
  10. (2020) Language as a phenomenon of the third kind. Cognitive Linguistics, 31(2), 213–229. 10.1515/cog‑2019‑0029
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2019-0029 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dąbrowska, E., Pascual, E., Macías-Gómez-Estern, B., & Llompart, M.
    (2023) Literacy-related differences in morphological knowledge: A nonce-word study, Frontiers in Psychology, 141. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1136337
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1136337 [Google Scholar]
  12. De Smet, H.
    (2016) Entrenchment effects in language change. InH.-J. Schmid (Ed.) Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge (pp.75–99). 10.1515/9783110341423‑005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110341423-005 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dijk, C. van, Dijkstra, T., & Unsworth, S.
    (2022) Cross-linguistic influence during online sentence processing in bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 251, 691–704. 10.1017/S1366728922000050
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728922000050 [Google Scholar]
  14. Franke, K.
    (2008) “We call it Springbok-German!”: Language Contact in the German Communities in South Africa. Monash University.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Friðriksson, F.
    (2008) Language change vs. stability in conservative language communities: A case study of IcelandicAcademic Dissertation in Linguistics, University of Gothenburg.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Gertken, L. M., Amengual, M., & Birdsong, D.
    (2014) Assessing language dominance with the Bilingual Language Profile. InP. Leclercq, A. Edmonds, & H. Hilton (Eds.), Measuring L2 proficiency: Perspectives from SLA (1st ed., pp.208–225). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783092291‑014
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783092291-014 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hartsuiker, R. J., & Bernolet, S.
    (2017) The development of shared syntax in second language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(2), 219–234. 10.1017/S1366728915000164
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000164 [Google Scholar]
  18. Höder, S.
    (2012) Multilingual constructions: a diasystematic approach to common structures. InK. Braunmüller & C. Gabriel (Eds.), Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (pp.241–257). John Benjamins. 10.1075/hsm.13.17hod
     https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.13.17hod [Google Scholar]
  19. (2014a) Constructing diasystems: Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. InT. A. Åfarli & B. Maehlum (Eds.), The Sociolinguistics of Grammar (pp.137–152). John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.154.07hod
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.154.07hod [Google Scholar]
  20. (2014b) Convergence vs. divergence from a diasystematic perspective. InK. Braunmüller, S. Höder, & K. Kühl (Eds.), Stability and Divergence in Language Contact: Factors and Mechanisms (pp.39–62). John Benjamins. 10.1075/silv.16.03hod
     https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.16.03hod [Google Scholar]
  21. (2018) Grammar is community-specific: Background and basic concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar. InH. C. Boas & S. Höder (Eds.), Constructions in Contact – Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages, 37–70.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Hubers, F., Trompenaars, T., Collin, S., Schepper, K. D. E., & De Hoop, H.
    (2020) Hypercorrection as a By-product of Education. Applied Linguistics, 41(4), 552–574. 10.1093/applin/amz001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amz001 [Google Scholar]
  23. Ibbotson, P.
    (2013) The scope of usage-based theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 41(MAY), 1–15. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00255
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00255 [Google Scholar]
  24. Inagaki, S.
    (2002) Japanese learners ’ acquisition of English manner-of-motion verbs with locational / directional PPs. Second Language Research, 18(1), 3–27. 10.1191/0267658302sr196oa
     https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658302sr196oa [Google Scholar]
  25. Janda, R. D., & Auger, J.
    (1992) Quantitative evidence, qualitative hypercorrection, sociolinguistic variables-And French speakers’ ’eadhaches with english h/Ø. Language and Communication, 12(3–4), 195–236. 10.1016/0271‑5309(92)90015‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(92)90015-2 [Google Scholar]
  26. Kootstra, G. J., Van Hell, J. G., & Dijkstra, T.
    (2010) Syntactic alignment and shared word order in code-switched sentence production: Evidence from bilingual monologue and dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 63(2), 210–231. 10.1016/j.jml.2010.03.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.03.006 [Google Scholar]
  27. Kühl, K., & Braunmüller, K.
    (2014) Linguistic stability and divergence : an extended perspective on language contact. InK. Braunmüller, S. Höder, & K. Kühl (Eds.), Stability and Divergence in Language Contact: Factors and Mechanisms (pp.1–38). John Benjamins. 10.1075/silv.16.02kuh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.16.02kuh [Google Scholar]
  28. Kupisch, T.
    (2014) Adjective placement in simultaneous bilinguals (German – Italian) and the concept of cross-linguistic overcorrection. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(1), 222–233. 10.1017/S1366728913000382
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728913000382 [Google Scholar]
  29. Langacker, R. W.
    (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar (1st ed.). Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. (2016) Entrenchment in cognitive Grammar. InH.-J. Schmid (Ed.) Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge (pp.39–56). 10.1515/9783110341423‑003
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110341423-003 [Google Scholar]
  31. Meara, P.
    (2005) LLAMA Language Aptitude Tests. Lognostics.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Mougeon, R., Nadasdi, T., & Rehner, K.
    (2005) Contact-induced linguistic innovations on the continuum of language use: The case of French in Ontario. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8(2), 99–115. 10.1017/S1366728905002142
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728905002142 [Google Scholar]
  33. Müller, N., & Hulk, A.
    (2001) Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual language acquisition : Italian and French as recipient languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(1), 1–21. 10.1017/S1366728901000116
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728901000116 [Google Scholar]
  34. Ribbert, A., & Kuiken, F.
    (2010) L2-induced changes in the L1 of Germans living in the Netherlands. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(1), 41–48. 10.1017/S1366728909990320
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990320 [Google Scholar]
  35. Schmid, H. J.
    (2020) The dynamics of the linguistic system. Usage , conventionalization , and entrenchment. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. (2016) A Framework for Understanding Linguistic Entrenchment and Its Psychological Foundations. InH. J. Schmid (Ed.), Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge (1st ed., pp.9–36). De Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. (2015) A blueprint of the Entrenchment-and-Conventionalization Model. InP. Uhrig & Th. Herbst (Eds.), Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association (pp.3–25). De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/gcla‑2015‑0002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2015-0002 [Google Scholar]
  38. Treffers-Daller, J.
    (2012) Grammatical collocations and verb-particle constructions in Brussels French: A corpus-linguistic approach to transfer. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16(1), 53–82. 10.1177/1367006911403213
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911403213 [Google Scholar]
  39. Treffers-Daller, J., & Mougeon, R.
    (2005) The role of transfer in language variation and change: Evidence from contact varieties of French. Bilingualism, 8(2), 93–98. 10.1017/S1366728905002191
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728905002191 [Google Scholar]
  40. Treffers-Daller, J., & Sakel, J.
    (2012) Why transfer is a key aspect of language use and processing in bilinguals and L2-users. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16(1), 3–10. 10.1177/1367006911403206
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911403206 [Google Scholar]
  41. Unsworth, S.
    (2023) Shared syntax and cross-linguistic influence in bilingual children. Evidence from between-and within-language priming. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, online first: 10 October 2023. 10.1075/lab.22093.uns
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.22093.uns [Google Scholar]
  42. Xu, L., & Yuan, B.
    (2023) What looks native-like may not necessarily be native-like. Evidence from L2 Chinese covert objects. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, online first: 14 September 2023. 10.1075/lab.22090.xu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.22090.xu [Google Scholar]
  43. Zimmer, C.
    (2021) Sprachliche Charakteristika des Deutschen in Namibia – ein korpusbasierter Überblick. Sprachwissenschaft, 46(2), 227–266.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.22067.bar
Loading
Individual variation in contact effects – stability, convergence, and divergence
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 15, 370 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.22067.bar
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.22067.bar
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.22067.bar
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): convergence; divergence; individual variation; language contact; stability

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