@article{ArslanDeKokBastiaanse2017,
  author    = {Arslan, Seckin and De Kok, D{\"o}rte and Bastiaanse, Roelien},
  title     = {Processing grammatical evidentiality and time reference in Turkish heritage and monolingual speakers},
  series = {Bilingualism : language and cognition.},
  volume    = {20},
  journal   = {Bilingualism : language and cognition.},
  publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {1366-7289},
  doi       = {10.1017/S136672891500084X},
  pages     = {457 -- 472},
  year      = {2017},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ArslanBastiaanseFelser2015,
  author    = {Arslan, Se{\c{c}}kin and Bastiaanse, Roelien and Felser, Claudia},
  title     = {Looking at the evidence in visual world: eye-movements reveal how bilingual and monolingual Turkish speakers process grammatical evidentiality},
  series = {Frontiers in psychology},
  volume    = {6},
  journal   = {Frontiers in psychology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01387},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {This study presents pioneering data on how adult early bilinguals (heritage speakers) and late bilingual speakers of Turkish and German process grammatical evidentiality in a visual world setting in comparison to monolingual speakers of Turkish. Turkish marks evidentiality, the linguistic reference to information source, through inflectional affixes signaling either direct (-DI) or indirect (-mls) evidentiality. We conducted an eyetracking-during-listening experiment where participants were given access to visual 'evidence' supporting the use of either a direct or indirect evidential form. The behavioral results indicate that the monolingual Turkish speakers comprehended direct and indirect evidential scenarios equally well. In contrast, both late and early bilinguals were less accurate and slower to respond to direct than to indirect evidentials. The behavioral results were also reflected in the proportions of looks data. That is, both late and early bilinguals fixated less frequently on the target picture in the direct than in the indirect evidential condition while the monolinguals showed no difference between these conditions. Taken together, our results indicate reduced sensitivity to the semantic and pragmatic function of direct evidential forms in both late and early bilingual speakers, suggesting a simplification of the Turkish evidentiality system in Turkish heritage grammars. We discuss our findings with regard to theories of incomplete acquisition and first language attrition.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Hassler2015,
  author    = {Haßler, Gerda},
  title     = {Evidentiality and the expression of speaker's stance in Romance languages and German},
  series = {Discourse studies : an interdisciplinary journal for the study of text and talk},
  volume    = {17},
  journal   = {Discourse studies : an interdisciplinary journal for the study of text and talk},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {1461-4456},
  doi       = {10.1177/1461445614564522},
  pages     = {182 -- 209},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {In recent years, the category of evidentiality has also come into use for the description of Romance languages and of German. This has been contingent on a change in its interpretation from a typological category to a semantic-pragmatic category, which allows an application to languages lacking specialised morphemes for the expression of evidentiality. We consider evidentiality to be a structural dimension of grammar, the values of which are expressed by types of constructions that code the source of information which a speaker imparts. If we look at the situation in Romance languages and in German, drawing a boundary between epistemic modality and evidentiality presents problems that are difficult to solve. Adding markers of the source of the speaker's knowledge often limits the degree of responsibility of the speaker for the content of the utterance. Evidential adverbs are a frequently used means of marking the source of the speaker's knowledge. The evidential meaning is generalised to marking any source of knowledge, what can be regarded as a result of a process of pragmaticalisation. The use of certain means which also carry out evidential markings can even contribute to the blurring of the different kinds of evidentiality. German also has modal verbs which in conjunction with the perfect tense of the verb have a predominantly evidential use (sollen and wollen). But even here the evidential marking is not without influence on the modality of the utterance. The Romance languages, however, do not have such specialised verbs for expressing evidentiality in certain contexts. To do this, they mark evidentiality - often context bound - by verb forms such as the conditional and the imperfect tense. This article shall contrast the different architectures used in expressing evidentiality in German and in the Romance languages.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ArslanBamyaciBastiaanse2016,
  author    = {Arslan, Se{\c{c}}kin and Bamyaci, Elif and Bastiaanse, Roelien},
  title     = {A characterization of verb use in Turkish agrammatic narrative speech},
  series = {Philosophische Rundschau},
  volume    = {30},
  journal   = {Philosophische Rundschau},
  publisher = {J. C. B. Mohr},
  address   = {Philadelphia},
  issn      = {0269-9206},
  doi       = {10.3109/02699206.2016.1144224},
  pages     = {449 -- 469},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {This study investigates the characteristics of narrative-speech production and the use of verbs in Turkish agrammatic speakers (n = 10) compared to non-brain-damaged controls (n = 10). To elicit narrative-speech samples, personal interviews and storytelling tasks were conducted. Turkish has a large and regular verb inflection paradigm where verbs are inflected for evidentiality (i.e. direct versus indirect evidence available to the speaker). Particularly, we explored the general characteristics of the speech samples (e.g. utterance length) and the uses of lexical, finite and non-finite verbs and direct and indirect evidentials. The results show that speech rate is slow, verbs per utterance are lower than normal and the verb diversity is reduced in the agrammatic speakers. Verb inflection is relatively intact; however, a trade-off pattern between inflection for direct evidentials and verb diversity is found. The implications of the data are discussed in connection with narrative-speech production studies on other languages.},
  language  = {en}
}