subject position in heritage spanish in the netherlands

Brechje van Osch, Elisabet García González, Suzanne Aalberse, Aafke Hulk, Petra Sleeman.

Universitetet i Tromsø, The Arctic University of Norway, 20-09-2016

Subject position in Spanish adult and child heritage speakers in the Netherlands

1

Heritage Language Acquisition: Breaking New Ground in Methodology and Domains of Inquiry

http://www.stonybrook.edu/commcms/lsrl/LSRL46%20VanOsch-Aalberse-Hulk-Sleeman.PDF

http://www.stonybrook.edu/commcms/lsrl/LSRL46%20VanOsch-Aalberse-Hulk-Sleeman.PDF

Heritage speakers

2

Specific type of bilingual

Drop in input in the heritage language

Variability in ultimate attainment

Focus on the end-state

What about the developmental path?

3

Subject Position in Spanish

Theory

4

Spanish has flexible word order:

S V V S Un chico llegó Llegó un chico

A boy arrived Arrived a boy

Theory

5

Subject position with intransitives in Spanish is constrained by:

1. Predicate type

2. Focus

Asd

Asd

Asd

Asd

Theory

6


1. Predicate type

Unergative verbs Unaccusative verbs

Un chico silbó Llegó un chico A boy whistled Arrived a boy S V V S

Theory

7


1. Predicate type

2. Focus

Broad focus Narrow focus

¿Qué pasó? ¿Quién silbó? What happened? Who whistled? Un chico silbó Silbó un chico A boy Whistled Whistled a boy S V V S

Theory

8

Broad focus

Narrow focus

Unaccusative predicates V S V S

Unergative predicates S V V S

Previous research – adult HS

9

Most studies with heritage speakers of Spanish in the US:

Heritage speakers do not have monolingual-like knowledge of verb type and focus constraints on word order (Zapata et al.,2005; De Prada-Pérez & Pascual y Cabo, 2012)

Heritage speakers overgeneralize preverbal subjects compared to monolingual speakers (i.a. Hinch Nava, 2007).

10

The Present study

11

1. ADULT heritage speakers

2. CHILD heritage speakers

12

Acceptability Judgment Task

Unaccusative & Unergative verbs

Broad & Narrow focus. Context ending in:

¿Qué pasó?(What happened?) introducing broad focus ¿Quién + V? (Who V-ed?) introducing narrow focus

Definite & Indefinite subjects. As a control factor

Method

13

Acceptability Judgment Task

2 sentences:

SV - Un chico silbó o o o o o -2 -1 0 1 2

VS - Silbó un chico o o o o o -2 -1 0 1 2

Written and aural

Untimed

Method

14

EXAMPLE: Unaccusative - Narrow focus Es mi cumpleaños y hay mucha gente de visita en mi casa. De repente suena el timbre pero como justo estoy recibiendo un regalo de mi tío, no puedo abrir la puerta. Va mi esposa. Cuando regresa, le pregunto: '¿Quién llegó?' Mi esposa me dice: It’s my birthday and there are many guests in my house. Suddenly the doorbell rings, but since I’m just receiving a gift from my uncle, I cannot open the door. My wife goes. When she gets back, I ask her: “Who arrived?”. My wife tells me: Unos primos llegaron. SV Some cousins arrived. They are in the kitchen o o o o

-2 -1 0 1 2

Llegaron unos primos. VS Arrived some cousins. They are in the kitchen o o o o

-2 -1 0 1 2

Method

Broad Narrow

Unaccusative V S V S

Unergative S V V S

15

17 heritage speakers of Spanish in the Netherlands Age: 19-36 Educational level: university – No students of Spanish! High-intermediate to advanced proficiency level (as measured by

means of self-reports, the DELE and a lexical decision task) Simultaneous bilinguals from birth 2nd generation HS Mixed families Variety of Spanish: Spain, Mexico, Colombia, Uruguay, Argentina

Participants

16

Control group: 18 Spanish monolinguals Similar to the heritage speakers in terms of: Age Educational level Variety of Spanish (Spain, Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Nicaragua,

Venezuela)

Participants

Results

17

Broad Narrow


Unergative S V V S

Expected pattern:

18

EXPECTED Broad Narrow


Unergative S V V S

Results - Monolinguals

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

broad narrow broad narrow

unaccusative unergative

SV

VS

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

definite indefinite definite indefinite definite indefinite definite indefinite



Monolinguals

SV

VS

19


Mixed effects model: Independent variables: Predicate type Focus Definiteness

20

Monolinguals

(t=5.81, p=8.79*10^-7)

(t=-2.56, p=0.01)

(t=-3.61, p=8.34*10^-4)

21

Monolinguals rate VS relatively higher for: Unaccusative predicates


00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2


SV

VS

22

Monolinguals rate VS relatively higher for: Unaccusative predicates Narrow focus

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

broad narrow

SV

VS


23

Monolinguals rate VS relatively higher for: Unaccusative predicates Narrow focus Indefinite subjects

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

definite indefinite

SV

VS


24

EXPECTED Broad Narrow


Unergative S V V S

Results – Adult HS

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2



SV

VS

25

Results – Adult heritage speakers

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

definite indefinite definite indefinite definite indefinite definite indefinite



SV

VS

Mixed effects model: Independent variables: Focus Predicate type Definiteness

26

(t=-2.79, p=0.008)

(t=2.83, p=0.007)

Not significant (t=-1.04, p=0.30)

Results – Adult HS


27

Heritage speakers rate VS relatively higher for: Unaccusative predicates

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2


SV

VS


28

Heritage speakers rate VS relatively higher for: Unaccusative predicates Narrow focus

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

broad narrow

SV

VS


29

Heritage speakers rate VS relatively higher for: Unaccusative predicates Narrow focus Indefinite subjects

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

definite indefinite

SV

VS

Heritage speakers give lower ratings to SV orders (t=-3.06, p=0.003)

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

Monolinguals Heritage speakers

SV

VS

30

*


31

Adult monolinguals

Adult heritage speakers

Accept both orders √ √

Verb type √ √

Focus √ √

Definiteness √ X

Overgeneralize - VS

Summary – Adult HS

32

Why overgeneralization of VS?

Cross-linguistic influence from Dutch. Much evidence for VS in Dutch due to V2 in root clauses:

Gisteren vertrok Jan Yesterday left John Adv V S

Questions

33

Developmental path: When do child heritage speakers start overgeneralizing VS? When are verb type and focus constraints on word order

acquired?

Questions

34

1. ADULT heritage speakers

2. CHILD heritage speakers

Previous research – L1 acquisition

35

Monolingual children acquiring Spanish seem to have knowledge of the distinction between unergative and unaccusative verbs early on. (Snyder et al., 1995; Bel, 2005, but see Pladevall Ballester, 2010)

No studies have looked at focus constraints

Previous research – child HS

36

………

Oral preference judgement task:

Unaccusative & Unergative verbs Broad & Narrow focus (contextualized in a story)

Only definite subjects Same verbs as adult study

Method

37

38

Three dogs are playing at the beach and having a lot of fun. While they play,

their friend the cat comes and sees them and he gets very sad because they

had not asked him to join them.’

39

¿Qué pasó?(What happened?) introducing broad focus

¿Quién + V? (Who V-ed?) introducing narrow focus

El gato llegó

40

Llegó el gato

41

13 child heritage children Age: 5-6 Born in The Netherlands 1 Spanish-speaking parent, 1 Dutch-speaking parent Mostly Argentina, Spain and Peru

Some of them went to a Spanish Saturday-school

Participants

42

4 child heritage children Age: 9 Born in The Netherlands 1 Spanish-speaking parent, 1 Dutch-speaking parent Mostly Argentina, Spain and Peru

Some of them went to a Spanish Saturday-school

Participants (2)

43

Results – 5 year olds

0

5

10

15

20

25

30



SV

VS

44

EXPECTED

Broad Narrow


Unergative S V V S

45

Child heritage speakers prefer SV overall regardless of Verb type

0

10

20

30

40

50


SV

VS

Results – 5-year olds

0

0.5

1

1.5

2


Adults Children

46

Child heritage speakers prefer SV overall regardless of Verb type or Focus


05

101520253035404550

broad narrow

SV

VS

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

Broad Narrow

Adults Children

47

Child heritage speakers prefer SV overall, unlike adult HS


00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

Adult HS0

102030405060708090

100

5-year-olds

SV

VS

Results – 9 year olds

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9



SV

VS

48

EXPECTED

Broad Narrow


Unergative S V V S

49

The older child heritage speakers prefer SV with Unergative predicates


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16


SV

VS

50

But no clear preferences established for: Focus


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

broad narrow

SV

VS

51

Results - overgeneralization

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

Monolinguals Heritage speakers0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

5-year-olds 9-year-olds

SV VS

Summary – child HS

5 yo 9 yo

Accept both orders √ √

Verb type X √

Focus X X

Definiteness ? ?

Overgeneralize SV -

52

Discussion

53

5 yo 9 yo Adult HS

Accept both orders √ √ √

Verb type X √ √

Focus X X √

Definiteness ? ? X

Overgeneralize SV - VS

Discussion

54

5 yo 9 yo ??? Adult HS

Accept both orders √ √ ??? √

Verb type X √ ??? √

Focus X X ??? √

Definiteness ? ? ??? X

Overgeneralize SV - ??? VS

References

55

Bel, A. (2005). Aspectos de la adquisición del orden de palabras: la posición del sujeto en castellano y catalán. RAEL: revista electrónica de lingüística aplicada, (4), 36-48. de Prada Pérez, A., & Pascual y Cabo, D. (2012). Interface heritage speech across proficiencies:

unaccusativity, focus, and subject position in Spanish. In K. Geeslin, & M. Díaz-Campos (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 14th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 308-318). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Friedmann, N., & Costa, J. (2011). Acquisition of sv and vs order in hebrew, European portuguese,

palestinian arabic, and spanish. Language Acquisition,18(1), 1-38. Hinch Nava, E. (2007). Word order in bilingual Spanish: convergence and intonation strategy. In

Selected Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Spanish Sociolinguistics (pp. 129-139). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Pladevall Ballester, E. (2010). Child L2 development of syntactic and discourse properties of Spanish

subjects. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(02), 185-216. Rothman, J. (2009). Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages

as heritage languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 155-163. Snyder, W., Hyams, N., & Crisma, P. (1995). Romance auxiliary selection with reflexive clitics:

Evidence for early knowledge of unaccusativity. InProceedings of the 26th annual child language research forum (pp. 127-136). Stanford: Centre for the Study of Language and Information. Zapata, G. C., Sanchez, L., & Toribio, A. J. (2005). Contact and contracting Spanish. International

Journal of Bilingualism, 9(3-4), 377-395.

56

THANK YOU!

[email protected] & [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

subject position in heritage spanish in the netherlands

Documents