Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
- bilingualism (4) (remove)
Institute
For several decades, researchers have tried to explain how speakers of more than one language (multilinguals) manage to keep their languages separate and to switch from one language to the other depending on the context. This ability of multilingual speakers to use the intended language, while avoiding interference from the other language(s) has recently been termed “language control”.
A multitude of studies showed that when bilinguals process one language, the other language is also activated and might compete for selection. According to the most influential model of language control developed over the last two decades, competition from the non-intended language is solved via inhibition. In particular, the Inhibitory Control (IC) model proposed by Green (1998) puts forward that the amount of inhibition applied to the non-relevant language depends on its dominance, in that the stronger the language the greater the strength of inhibition applied to it. Within this account, the cost required to reactivate a previously inhibited language depends on the amount of inhibition previously exerted on it, that is, reactivation costs are greater for a stronger compared to a weaker language. In a nutshell, according to the IC model, language control is determined by language dominance.
The goal of the present dissertation is to investigate the extent to which language control in multilinguals is affected by language dominance and whether and how other factors might influence this process. Three main factors are considered in this work: (i) the time speakers have to prepare for a certain language or PREPARATION TIME, (ii) the type of languages involved in the interactional context or LANGUAGE TYPOLOGY, and (iii) the PROCESSING MODALITY, that is, whether the way languages are controlled differs between reception and production.
The results obtained in the four manuscripts, either published or in revision, indicate that language dominance alone does not suffice to explain language switching patterns. In particular, the present thesis shows that language control is profoundly affected by each of the three variables described above. More generally, the findings obtained in the present dissertation indicate that language control in multilingual speakers is a much more dynamic system than previously believed and is not exclusively determined by language dominance, as predicted by the IC model (Green, 1998).
Since the 1960ies, Germany has been host to a large Turkish immigrant community. While migrant communities often shift to the majority language over the course of time, Turkish is a very vital minority language in Germany and bilingualism in this community is an obvious fact which has been subject to several studies. The main focus usually is on German, the second language (L2) of these speakers (e.g. Hinnenkamp 2000, Keim 2001, Auer 2003, Cindark & Aslan (2004), Kern & Selting 2006, Selting 2009, Kern 2013). Research on the Turkish spoken by Turkish bilinguals has also attracted attention although to a lesser extend mainly in the framework of so called heritage language research (cf. Polinski 2011). Bilingual Turkish has been investigated under the perspective of code-switching and codemixing (e.g. Kallmeyer & Keim 2003, Keim 2003, 2004, Keim & Cindark 2003, Hinnenkamp 2003, 2005, 2008, Dirim & Auer 2004), and with respect to changes in the morphologic, the syntactic and the orthographic system (e.g. Rehbein & Karakoç 2004, Schroeder 2007). Attention to the changes in the prosodic system of bilingual Turkish on the other side has been exceptional so far (Queen 2001, 2006).
With the present dissertation, I provide a study on contact induced linguistic changes on the prosodic level in the Turkish heritage language of adult early German-Turkish bilinguals. It describes structural changes in the L1 Turkish intonation of yes/no questions of a representative sample of bilingual Turkish speakers. All speakers share a similar sociolinguistic background. All acquired Turkish as their first language from their families and the majority language German as an early L2 at latest in the kinder garden by the age of 3.
A study of changes in bilingual varieties requires a previous cross-linguistic comparison of both of the involved languages in language contact in order to draw conclusions on the contact-induced language change in delimitation to language-internal development.
While German is one of the best investigated languages with respect to its prosodic system, research on Turkish intonational phonology is not as progressed. To this effect, the analysis of bilingual Turkish, as elicited for the present dissertation, is preceded by an experimental study on monolingual Turkish. In this regard an additional experiment with 11 monolingual university students of non-linguistic subjects was conducted at the Ege University in Izmir in 2013. On these grounds the present dissertation additionally contributes new insights with respect to Turkish intonational phonology and typology. The results of the contrastive analysis of German and Turkish bring to light that the prosodic systems of both languages differ with respect to the use of prosodic cues in the marking of information structure (IS) and sentence type. Whereas German distinguishes in the prosodic marking between explicit categories for focus and givenness, Turkish uses only one prosodic cue to mark IS. Furthermore it is shown that Turkish in contrast to German does not use a prosodic correlate to mark yes/no questions, but a morphological question marker.
To elicit Turkish yes/no questions in a bilingual context which differ with respect to their information structure in a further step the methodology of Xu (1999) to elicit in-situ focus on different constituents was adapted in the experimental study. A data set of 400 Turkish yes/no questions of 20 bilingual Turkish speakers was compiled at the Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft (ZAS) in Berlin and at the University of Potsdam in 2013. The prosodic structure of the yes/no questions was phonologically and phonetically analyzed with respect to changes in the f0 contour according to IS modifications and the use of prosodic cues to indicate sentence type.
The results of the analyses contribute surprising observations to the research of bilingual prosody. Studies on bilingual language change and language acquisition have repeatedly shown that the use of prosodic features that are considered as marked by means of lower and implicational use across and within a language cause difficulties in language contact and second language acquisition. Especially, they are not expected to pass from one language to another through language contact. However, this structurally determined expectation on language development is refuted by the results of the present study. Functionally related prosody, such as the cues to indicate IS, are transferred from German L2 to the Turkish L1 of German-Turkish bilingual speakers. This astonishing observation provides the base for an approach to language change centered on functional motivation. Based on Matras’ (2007, 2010) assumption of functionality in language change, Paradis’ (1993, 2004, 2008) approach of Language Activation and the Subsystem Theory and the Theory of Language as a Dynamic System (Heredina & Jessner 2002), it will be shown that prosodic features which are absent in one of the languages of bilingual speech communities are transferred from the respective language to the other when they contribute to the contextualization of a pragmatic concept which is not expressed by other linguistic means in the target language. To this effect language interaction is based on language activation and inhibition mechanisms dealing with differences in the implicit pragmatic knowledge between bilinguals and monolinguals. The motivator for this process of language change is the contextualization of the message itself and not the structure of the respective feature on the surface. It is shown that structural consideration may influence language change but that bilingual language change does not depend on structural restrictions nor does the structure cause a change. The conclusions drawn on the basis of empirical facts can especially contribute to a better understanding of the processes of bilingual language development as it combines methodologies and theoretical aspects of different linguistic subfields.
Previous studies on native language (L1) anaphor resolution have found that monolingual native speakers are sensitive to syntactic, pragmatic, and semantic constraints on pronouns and reflexive resolution. However, most studies have focused on English and other Germanic languages, and little is currently known about the online (i.e., real-time) processing of anaphors in languages with syntactically less restricted anaphors, such as Turkish. We also know relatively little about how 'non-standard' populations such as non-native (L2) speakers and heritage speakers (HSs) resolve anaphors.
This thesis investigates the interpretation and real-time processing of anaphors in German and in a typologically different and as yet understudied language, Turkish. It compares hypotheses about differences between native speakers' (L1ers) and L2 speakers' (L2ers) sentence processing, looking into differences in processing mechanisms as well as the possibility of cross-linguistic influence. To help fill the current research gap regarding HS sentence comprehension, it compares findings for this group with those for L2ers.
To investigate the representation and processing of anaphors in these three populations, I carried out a series of offline questionnaires and Visual-World eye-tracking experiments on the resolution of reflexives and pronouns in both German and Turkish. In the German experiments, native German speakers as well as L2ers of German were tested, while in the Turkish experiments, non-bilingual native Turkish speakers as well as HSs of Turkish with L2 German were tested. This allowed me to observe both cross-linguistic differences as well as population differences between monolinguals' and different types of bilinguals' resolution of anaphors.
Regarding the comprehension of Turkish anaphors by L1ers, contrary to what has been previously assumed, I found that Turkish has no reflexive that follows Condition A of Binding theory (Chomsky, 1981). Furthermore, I propose more general cross-linguistic differences between Turkish and German, in the form of a stronger reliance on pragmatic information in anaphor resolution overall in Turkish compared to German.
As for the processing differences between L1ers and L2ers of a language, I found evidence in support of hypotheses which propose that L2ers of German rely more strongly on non-syntactic information compared to L1ers (Clahsen & Felser, 2006, 2017; Cunnings, 2016, 2017) independent of a potential influence of their L1. HSs, on the other hand, showed a tendency to overemphasize interpretational contrasts between different Turkish anaphors compared to monolingual native speakers. However, lower-proficiency HSs were likely to merge different forms for simplified representation and processing. Overall, L2ers and HSs showed differences from monolingual native speakers both in their final interpretation of anaphors and during online processing. However, these differences were not parallel between the two types of bilingual and thus do not support a unified model of L2 and HS processing (cf. Montrul, 2012).
The findings of this thesis contribute to the field of anaphor resolution by providing data from a previously unexplored language, Turkish, as well as contributing to research on native and non-native processing differences. My results also illustrate the importance of considering individual differences in the acquisition process when studying bilingual language comprehension. Factors such as age of acquisition, language proficiency and the type of input a language learner receives may influence the processing mechanisms they develop and employ, both between and within different bilingual populations.
It is a common finding that preschoolers have difficulties in identifying who is doing what to whom in non-canonical sentences, such as (object-verb-subject) OVS and passive sentences in German. This dissertation investigates how German monolingual and German-Italian simultaneous bilingual children process German OVS sentences in Study 1 and German passives in Study 2. Offline data (i.e., accuracy data) and online data (i.e., eye-gaze and pupillometry data) were analyzed to explore whether children can assign thematic roles during sentence comprehension and processing. Executive functions, language-internal and -external factors were investigated as potential predictors for children’s sentence comprehension and processing.
Throughout the literature, there are contradicting findings on the relation between language and executive functions. While some results show a bilingual cognitive advantage over monolingual speakers, others suggest there is no relationship between bilingualism and executive functions. If bilingual children possess more advanced executive function abilities than monolingual children, then this might also be reflected in a better performance on linguistic tasks. In the current studies monolingual and bilingual children were tested by means of two executive function tasks: the Flanker task and the task-switching paradigm. However, these findings showed no bilingual cognitive advantages and no better performance by bilingual children in the linguistic tasks. The performance was rather comparable between bilingual and monolingual children, or even better for the monolingual group. This may be due to cross-linguistic influences and language experience (i.e., language input and output). Italian was used because it does not syntactically overlap with the structure of German OVS sentences, and it only overlapped with one of the two types of sentence condition used for the passive study - considering the subject-(finite)verb alignment. The findings showed a better performance of bilingual children in the passive sentence structure that syntactically overlapped in the two languages, providing evidence for cross-linguistic influences.
Further factors for children’s sentence comprehension were considered. The parents’ education, the number of older siblings and language experience variables were derived from a language background questionnaire completed by parents. Scores of receptive vocabulary and grammar, visual and short-term memory and reasoning ability were measured by means of standardized tests. It was shown that higher German language experience by bilinguals correlates with better accuracy in German OVS sentences but not in passive sentences. Memory capacity had a positive effect on the comprehension of OVS and passive sentences in the bilingual group. Additionally, a role was played by executive function abilities in the comprehension of OVS sentences and not of passive sentences. It is suggested that executive function abilities might help children in the sentence comprehension task when the linguistic structures are not yet fully mastered.
Altogether, these findings show that bilinguals’ poorer performance in the comprehension and processing of German OVS is mainly due to reduced language experience in German, and that the different performance of bilingual children with the two types of passives is mainly due to cross-linguistic influences.