@article{Schroeder2014, author = {Schroeder, Christoph}, title = {Turkish texts of Turkish-German bilingual pupils in Germany}, series = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik}, volume = {44}, journal = {Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik}, number = {174}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Stuttgart}, issn = {0049-8653}, pages = {24 -- 43}, year = {2014}, abstract = {This article examines and discusses aspects of the acquisition of Turkish literacy in the minority context in Germany. After describing the particular sociolinguistic and language contact situation of Turkish in Germany, the article focuses on two empirical aspects of the acquisition of Turkish literacy within this situation. First, the development of noun phrase complexity is analyzed in a pseudo-longitudinal approach investigating Turkish texts of German-Turkish bilingual pupils of different grades. Second, strategies of literacy are analyzed in the investigation of Turkish texts from bilingual high school pupils of the 12th grade.}, language = {de} } @article{JacobKirkici2016, author = {Jacob, Gunnar and Kirkici, Bilal}, title = {The processing of morphologically complex words in a specific speaker group A masked-priming study with Turkish heritage speakers}, series = {The mental lexicon}, volume = {11}, journal = {The mental lexicon}, publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Co.}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {1871-1340}, doi = {10.1075/ml.11.2.06jac}, pages = {308 -- 328}, year = {2016}, abstract = {The present study investigates to what extent morphological priming varies across different groups of native speakers of a language. In two masked-priming experiments, we investigate the processing of morphologically complex Turkish words in Turkish heritage speakers raised and living in Germany. Materials and experimental design were based on K\&\#305;rk\&\#305;c\&\#305; and Clahsen's (2013) study on morphological processing in Turkish native speakers and L2 learners, allowing for direct comparisons between the three groups. Experiment 1 investigated priming effects for morphologically related prime-target pairs. Heritage speakers showed a similar pattern of results as the L1 comparison group, with significant priming effects for prime-target pairs with inflected primes (e.g. 'sorar-sor' asks-ask) as well as for prime-target pairs with derived primes (e.g. 'sa\&\#287;l\&\#305;k-sa\&\#287;' health-healthy). In Experiment 2, we measured priming effects for prime-target pairs which were semantically and morphologically unrelated, but only related with regard to orthographic overlap (e.g. 'devre-dev' period-giant). Unlike both L1 speakers raised in Turkey and highly proficient L2 learners, heritage speakers also showed significant priming effects in this condition. Our results suggest that heritage speakers differ from both native speakers and L2 learners in that they rely more on (orthographic) surface form properties of the stimulus during early stages of word recognition, at the expense of morphological decomposition.}, language = {en} } @article{Schroeder2020, author = {Schroeder, Christoph}, title = {The advanced acquisition of orthography in heritage Turkish in Germany}, series = {Written language \& literacy}, volume = {23}, journal = {Written language \& literacy}, number = {2}, publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Co.}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {1387-6732}, doi = {10.1075/wll.00043.sch}, pages = {251 -- 271}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The paper investigates Turkish texts from heritage speakers of Turkish in Germany in a pseudo-longitudinal setting, looking at pupils' texts from the 5th, 7th, 10th and 12th grades. Two types of dynamics are identified in the advanced acquisition(1) of Turkish orthography in the heritage context. One is the dynamic of language contact, where in certain areas of the orthography, we find a re-interpretation of Turkish principles according to the German model. However, this changes as the pupils grow up. The second dynamic is the heritage situation. The heritage situation on one side leads to the establishment of new practices, and it also leads to a higher degree of variability of spelling solutions in those areas, where the orthographic system of Turkish poses challenges to every writer, whether monolingual and growing up in Turkey or heritage speaker.}, language = {en} } @article{LagoHuvelleGracaninYuksekSafaketal.2018, author = {Lago Huvelle, Maria Sol and Gracanin-Yuksek, Martina and Safak, Duygu Fatma and Demir, Orhan and Kirkici, Bilal and Felser, Claudia}, title = {Straight from the horse's mouth Agreement attraction effects with Turkish possessors}, series = {Linguistic approaches to bilingualism}, volume = {9}, journal = {Linguistic approaches to bilingualism}, number = {3}, publisher = {John Benjamins Publishing Co.}, address = {Amsterdam}, issn = {1879-9264}, doi = {10.1075/lab.17019.lag}, pages = {398 -- 426}, year = {2018}, abstract = {We investigated the comprehension of subject-verb agreement in Turkish-German bilinguals using two tasks. The first task elicited speeded judgments to verb number violations in sentences that contained plural genitive modifiers. We addressed whether these modifiers elicited attraction errors, which have supported the use of a memory retrieval mechanism in monolingual comprehension studies. The second task examined the comprehension of a language-specific constraint of Turkish against plural-marked verbs with overt plural subjects. Bilinguals showed a reduced application of this constraint, as compared to Turkish monolinguals. Critically, both groups showed similar rates of attraction, but the bilingual group accepted ungrammatical sentences more often. We propose that the similarity in attraction rates supports the use of the same retrieval mechanism, but that bilinguals have more problems than monolinguals in the mapping of morphological to abstract agreement features during speeded comprehension, which results in increased acceptability of ungrammatical sentences.}, language = {en} } @phdthesis{Atasoy2022, author = {Atasoy, Atilla}, title = {Production, perception, and processing of focus in Turkish}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-54815}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-548156}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xxiii, 267}, year = {2022}, abstract = {The main goal of this dissertation is to experimentally investigate how focus is realised, perceived, and processed by native Turkish speakers, independent of preconceived notions of positional restrictions. Crucially, there are various issues and scientific debates surrounding focus in the Turkish language in the existing literature (chapter 1). It is argued in this dissertation that two factors led to the stagnant literature on focus in Turkish: the lack of clearly defined, modern understandings of information structure and its fundamental notion of focus, and the ongoing and ill-defined debate surrounding the question of whether there is an immediately preverbal focus position in Turkish. These issues gave rise to specific research questions addressed across this dissertation. Specifically, we were interested in how the focus dimensions such as focus size (comparing narrow constituent and broad sentence focus), focus target (comparing narrow subject and narrow object focus), and focus type (comparing new-information and contrastive focus) affect Turkish focus realisation and, in turn, focus comprehension when speakers are provided syntactic freedom to position focus as they see fit. To provide data on these core goals, we presented three behavioural experiments based on a systematic framework of information structure and its notions (chapter 2): (i) a production task with trigger wh-questions and contextual animations manipulated to elicit the focus dimensions of interest (chapter 3), (ii) a timed acceptability judgment task in listening to the recorded answers in our production task (chapter 4), and (iii) a self-paced reading task to gather on-line processing data (chapter 5). Based on the results of the conducted experiments, multiple conclusions are made in this dissertation (chapter 6). Firstly, this dissertation demonstrated empirically that there is no focus position in Turkish, neither in the sense of a strict focus position language nor as a focally loaded position facilitating focus perception and/or processing. While focus is, in fact, syntactically variable in the Turkish preverbal area, this is a consequence of movement triggered by other IS aspects like topicalisation and backgrounding, and the observational markedness of narrow subject focus compared to narrow object focus. As for focus type in Turkish, this dimension is not associated with word order in production, perception, or processing. Significant acoustic correlates of focus size (broad sentence focus vs narrow constituent focus) and focus target (narrow subject focus vs narrow object focus) were observed in fundamental frequency and intensity, representing focal boost, (postfocal) deaccentuation, and the presence or absence of a phrase-final rise in the prenucleus, while the perceivability of these effects remains to be investigated. In contrast, no acoustic correlates of focus type in simple, three-word transitive structures were observed, with focus types being interchangeable in mismatched question-answer pairs. Overall, the findings of this dissertation highlight the need for experimental investigations regarding focus in Turkish, as theoretical predictions do not necessarily align with experimental data. As such, the fallacy of implying causation from correlation should be strictly kept in mind, especially when constructions coincide with canonical structures, such as the immediately preverbal position in narrow object foci. Finally, numerous open questions remain to be explored, especially as focus and word order in Turkish are multifaceted. As shown, givenness is a confounding factor when investigating focus types, while thematic role assignment potentially confounds word order preferences. Further research based on established, modern information structure frameworks is needed, with chapter 5 concluding with specific recommendations for such future research.}, language = {en} } @article{JacobSafakDemiretal.2018, author = {Jacob, Gunnar and Safak, Duygu Fatma and Demir, Orhan and Kirkici, Bilal}, title = {Preserved morphological processing in heritage speakers}, series = {Second language research}, volume = {35}, journal = {Second language research}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {0267-6583}, doi = {10.1177/0267658318764535}, pages = {173 -- 194}, year = {2018}, abstract = {In a masked morphological priming experiment, we compared the processing of derived and inflected morphologically complex Turkish words in heritage speakers of Turkish living in Berlin and in native speakers of Turkish raised and living in Turkey. The results show significant derivational and inflectional priming effects of a similar magnitude in the heritage group and the control group. For both participant groups, semantic and orthographic control conditions indicate that these priming effects are genuinely morphological in nature, and cannot be due to semantic or orthographic similarity between prime and target. These results suggest that morphological processing in heritage speakers is based on the same fundamental processing mechanisms as in prototypical native speakers. We conclude that heritage speakers, despite the fact that they have acquired the language in a particular setting and were exposed to a relatively limited amount of input, can nevertheless develop native-like processing mechanisms for complex words.}, language = {en} } @book{SchroederSchellhardtAkincietal.2015, author = {Schroeder, Christoph and Schellhardt, Christin and Akinci, Mehmet-Ali and Dollnick, Meral and Dux, Ginesa and G{\"u}lbeyaz, Esin I{\c{s}}{\i}l and J{\"a}hnert, Anne and Ko{\c{c}}-G{\"u}lt{\"u}rk, Ceren and K{\"u}hmstedt, Patrick and Kuhn, Florian and Mezger, Verena and Pfaff, Carol and {\"U}rkmez, Bet{\"u}l Sena}, title = {MULTILIT}, editor = {Schroeder, Christoph and Schellhardt, Christin}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-80390}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2015}, abstract = {This paper presents an overview of the linguistic analyses developed in the MULTILIT project and the processing of the oral and written texts collected. The project investigates the language abilities of multilingual children and adolescents, in particular, those who have Turkish and/or Kurdish as a mother tongue. A further aim of the project is to examine from a psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspective the extent to which competence in academic registers is achieved on the basis of the languages spoken by the children, including the language(s) spoken at the home, the language of the country of residence and the first foreign language. To be able to examine these questions using corpus linguistic parameters, we created categories of analysis in MULTILIT. The data collection comprises texts from bilingual and monolingual children and adolescents in Germany in their first language Turkish, their second language German und their foreign language English. Pupils aged between nine and twenty years of age produced monologue oral and written texts in the two genres of narrative and discursive. On the basis of these samples, we examine linguistic features such as lexical expression (lexical density, lexical diversity), syntactic complexity (syntactic and discursive packaging) as well as phonology in the oral texts and orthography in the written texts, with the aim of investigating the pupils' growing mastery of these features in academic and informal registers. To this end the raw data have been transcribed by the use of transcription conventions developed especially for the needs of the MULTILIT data. They are based on the commonly used HIAT and GAT transcription conventions and supplemented with conventions that provide additional information such as features at the graphic level. The categories of analysis comprise a large number of linguistic categories such as word classes, syntax, noun phrase complexity, complex verbal morphology, direct speech and text structures. We also annotate errors and norm deviations at a wide range of levels (orthographic, morphological, lexical, syntactic and textual). In view of the different language systems, these criteria are considered separately for all languages investigated in the project.}, language = {en} } @article{UygunClahsen2021, author = {Uygun, Serkan and Clahsen, Harald}, title = {Morphological processing in heritage speakers}, series = {Bilingualism : language and cognition}, volume = {24}, journal = {Bilingualism : language and cognition}, number = {3}, publisher = {Cambridge Univ. Press}, address = {Cambridge}, issn = {1366-7289}, doi = {10.1017/S1366728920000577}, pages = {415 -- 426}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Previous research has shown that heritage speakers struggle with inflectional morphology. 'Limitations of online resources' for processing a non-dominant language has been claimed as one possible reason for these difficulties. To date, however, there is very little experimental evidence on real-time language processing in heritage speakers. Here we report results from a masked priming experiment with 97 bilingual (Turkish/German) heritage speakers and a control group of 40 non-heritage speakers of Turkish examining regular and irregular forms of the Turkish aorist. We found that, for the regular aorist, heritage speakers use the same morphological decomposition mechanism ('affix stripping') as control speakers, whereas for processing irregularly inflected forms they exhibited more variability (i.e., less homogeneous performance) than the control group. Heritage speakers also demonstrated semantic priming effects. At a more general level, these results indicate that heritage speakers draw on multiple sources of information for recognizing morphologically complex words.}, language = {en} } @techreport{BommesOlfertŞimşeketal.2020, author = {Bommes, Michael and Olfert, Helena and Şim{\c{s}}ek, Yazg{\"u}l and Mehlem, Ulrich and Boneß, Anja and Ayan, M{\"u}ge and Ko{\c{c}}ba{\c{s}}, Dilara}, title = {Literacy acquisition in schools in the context of migration and multilingualism}, editor = {Schroeder, Christoph and S{\"u}rig, Inken}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-47179}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-471793}, pages = {579}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Literacy acquisition is one of the primary goals of school education, and usually it takes place in the national language of the respective country. At the same time, schools accommodate pupils with different home languages who might or might not be fluent in the national language and who start from other linguistic backgrounds in their acquisition of literacy. While it is safe to say that schools with a monolingual policy are not prepared to deal with the factual multilingualism in their classrooms in a systematic way, bilingual pupils have to deal with it nonetheless. The interdisciplinary and comparative research project "Literacy Acquisition in Schools in the Context of Migration and Multilingualism" (LAS) investigated the practical processes of literacy acquisition in two countries, Germany and Turkey, where the monolingual orientation of schools is as much a reality as are the multilingual backgrounds of many of their pupils. The basic assumption was that pupils cope with the ways they are engaged by the school - both socially and academically - based on their cultural and linguistic repertoires acquired biographically, providing them with more or less productive options regarding the acquisition of literary skills. By comparing the literary development of bilingual children with that of their monolingual classmates throughout one school year in the first and the seventh grade in Germany and Turkey, respectively, we found out that the restricting potential of multilingualism is located rather on the part of the schools than on the part of the pupils. While the individual bilingual pupil almost naturally uses his/her home language as a resource for literacy acquisition in the school language, schools still tend to regard the multilingual backgrounds of their pupils as irrelevant or even as an impediment to adequate schooling. We argue that by ignoring or even suppressing the specific linguistic potentials of bilingualism, bilingual pupils are put at a structural disadvantage. This research report is the slightly revised but full version of the final study project report from 2011 that was until now not available as a quotable publication. While several years have passed since the primary research was finalized, the addressed issues have lost none of their relevance. The report is accompanied by numerous publications in the frame of the LAS project, as well as by a web page (https://www.uni-potsdam.de/de/daf/projekte/las), which also contains the presentations from the final LAS-Conference, including valuable discussions of the report from renowed experts in the field.}, language = {en} } @article{ClahsenRothweilerSterneretal.2014, author = {Clahsen, Harald and Rothweiler, Monika and Sterner, Franziska and Chilla, Solveig}, title = {Linguistic markers of specific language impairment in bilingual children: the case of verb morphology}, series = {Clinical linguistics \& phonetics}, volume = {28}, journal = {Clinical linguistics \& phonetics}, number = {9}, publisher = {Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {London}, issn = {0269-9206}, doi = {10.3109/02699206.2014.886726}, pages = {709 -- 721}, year = {2014}, language = {en} }