Heritage Speakers as Part of the Native Language Continuum.

Autor:	Wiese H; Department of German Language and Linguistics, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Alexiadou A; Department of English and American Studies, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.; Leibniz-Zentrum Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin, Germany., Allen S; Center for Cognitive Science, Technische Universität Kaiserslautern, Kaiserslautern, Germany., Bunk O; Department of German Language and Linguistics, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Gagarina N; Department of German Language and Linguistics, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.; Leibniz-Zentrum Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Berlin, Germany., Iefremenko K; Department of German, Universität Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany., Martynova M; Department of Slavic and Hungarian Studies, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Pashkova T; Center for Cognitive Science, Technische Universität Kaiserslautern, Kaiserslautern, Germany., Rizou V; Department of English and American Studies, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Schroeder C; Department of German, Universität Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany., Shadrova A; Department of German Language and Linguistics, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Szucsich L; Department of Slavic and Hungarian Studies, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany., Tracy R; Department of English, Universität Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany., Tsehaye W; Department of English, Universität Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany., Zerbian S; Department of Linguistics, Universität Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany., Zuban Y; Department of Linguistics, Universität Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Frontiers in psychology [Front Psychol] 2022 Feb 09; Vol. 12, pp. 717973. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Feb 09 (Print Publication: 2021).
DOI:	10.3389/fpsyg.2021.717973
Abstrakt:	We argue for a perspective on bilingual heritage speakers as native speakers of both their languages and present results from a large-scale, cross-linguistic study that took such a perspective and approached bilinguals and monolinguals on equal grounds. We targeted comparable language use in bilingual and monolingual speakers, crucially covering broader repertoires than just formal language. A main database was the open-access RUEG corpus, which covers comparable informal vs. formal and spoken vs. written productions by adolescent and adult bilinguals with heritage-Greek, -Russian, and -Turkish in Germany and the United States and with heritage-German in the United States, and matching data from monolinguals in Germany, the United States, Greece, Russia, and Turkey. Our main results lie in three areas. (1) We found non-canonical patterns not only in bilingual, but also in monolingual speakers, including patterns that have so far been considered absent from native grammars, in domains of morphology, syntax, intonation, and pragmatics. (2) We found a degree of lexical and morphosyntactic inter-speaker variability in monolinguals that was sometimes higher than that of bilinguals, further challenging the model of the streamlined native speaker. (3) In majority language use, non-canonical patterns were dominant in spoken and/or informal registers, and this was true for monolinguals and bilinguals. In some cases, bilingual speakers were leading quantitatively. In heritage settings where the language was not part of formal schooling, we found tendencies of register leveling, presumably due to the fact that speakers had limited access to formal registers of the heritage language. Our findings thus indicate possible quantitative differences and different register distributions rather than distinct grammatical patterns in bilingual and monolingual speakers. This supports the integration of heritage speakers into the native-speaker continuum. Approaching heritage speakers from this perspective helps us to better understand the empirical data and can shed light on language variation and change in native grammars. Furthermore, our findings for monolinguals lead us to reconsider the state-of-the art on majority languages, given recurring evidence for non-canonical patterns that deviate from what has been assumed in the literature so far, and might have been attributed to bilingualism had we not included informal and spoken registers in monolinguals and bilinguals alike. Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. (Copyright © 2022 Wiese, Alexiadou, Allen, Bunk, Gagarina, Iefremenko, Martynova, Pashkova, Rizou, Schroeder, Shadrova, Szucsich, Tracy, Tsehaye, Zerbian and Zuban.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu