Cover not available
Part of
Theoretical Approaches to Linguistic Variation
Edited by Ermenegildo Bidese, Federica Cognola and Manuela Caterina Moroni
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 234] 2016
► pp. 295–316

Attrition at the interfaces in bilectal acquisition (Italian/Gallipolino)

| Lund University
ORCID logo | Lund University
The aim of this study is to investigate whether native speakers of Gallipolino, bilectals who have acquired Gallipolino as L1 (together with standard Italian) in their childhood, who have left Gallipoli after puberty and currently use standard Italian as their primary language, display effects of attrition with respect to subordinate clauses embedded under the complementizers ku and ka. Our hypothesis is that complementizer selection in Gallipolino exhibits emergent optionality (that leads to ungrammaticality) due to influence of standard Italian. To test this hypothesis, a grammaticality judgment task has been designed and administered to 14 participants.
Keywords: Gallipolino, L1 attrition, post-puberty migration, the complementizer system in Gallipolino, the Interface Hypothesis
Published online: 1 December 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.234.11col
References (43)
References
Bertocci, Davide & Damonte, Federico. 2007. Distribuzione e morfologia dei congiuntivi in alcune varietà salentine. In Studi sui dialetti della Puglia, Federico Damonte & Jacopo Garzonio (eds), 3-28. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Calabrese, Andrea. 1993. The sentential complementation of Salentino: A study of a language without infinitival clauses. In Syntactic Theory and the Dialects of Italy, Adriana Belletti (ed.), 28-98. Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.Google Scholar
Chamorro, Gloria, Sorace, Antonella & Sturt, Patrick. 2015. What is the source of L1 attrition? The effect of recent L1 re-exposure on Spanish speakers under L1 attrition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Chini, Marina (ed.). 2004. Plurilinguismo e immigrazione in Italia. Un’indagine sociolinguistica a Pavia e Torino. Milano: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
Colonna Dahlman, Roberta. 2011. Il sistema di doppia complementazione nel dialetto di Gallipoli (Lecce). Un’analisi semantica. Arena Romanistica 8: 177-197.Google Scholar
Egerland, Verner. 2004. Standardizzazione, acquisizione e bilinguismo. In Intorno all’Italiano Contemporaneo. Tra Linguistica e Didattica, Anna Cardinaletti & Fabrizio Frasnedi (eds), 111-127. Milano: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
Freed, Barbara F. 1982. Language loss: current thoughts and future directions. In The Loss of Language Skills, Richard D. Lambert & Barbara F. Freed (eds), 1-5. Rowley MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Gürel, Ayse. 2004. Selectivity in L2-induced L1 attrition: A psycholinguistic account. Journal of Neurolinguistics 17: 53-78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. (Psycho)linguistic determinants of L1 attrition. In Language Attrition: Theoretical Perspectives [Studies in Bilingualism 33], Barbara Köpke, Monika Schmid, Merel Keijzer & Susan Dostert (eds), 99-119. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulk, Aafke & Müller, Natascha. 2000. Cross-linguistic influence at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3: 227–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Köpke, Barbara. 2004. Neurolinguistic aspects of attrition. Journal of Neurolinguistics 17: 3-30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Language attrition at the crossroads of brain, mind, and society. In Language Attrition: Theoretical Perspectives [Studies in Bilingualism 33], Barbara Köpke, Monika Schmid, Merel Keijzer & Susan Dostert (eds), 9-37. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kupisch, Tanja. 2014. Adjective placement in simultaneous bilinguals (German-Italian) and the concept of cross-linguistic overcorrection. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 17(1): 222-233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ledgeway, Adam. 2000. A Comparative Syntax of the Dialects of Southern Italy: A Minimalist Approach. Oxford: The Philological Society.Google Scholar
. 2003. Il sistema completivo dei dialetti meridionali: La doppia serie di complementatori. Rivista Italiana di Dialettologia XXVII: 89-147.Google Scholar
. 2005. Moving through the Left Periphery: The dual complementiser system in the dialects of Southern Italy. Transactions of the Philological Society 103(3): 339-396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. The dual complementizer system in Southern Italy: Spirito greco, materia romanza? In Rethinking Languages in Contact. The Case of Italian, Anna Laura Lepschy & Arturo Tosi (eds), 112-126. Oxford: Legenda.Google Scholar
. 2010. The clausal domain: CP structure and left periphery. In Syntactic Variation. The Dialects of Italy, Roberta D’Alessandro, Adam Ledgeway & Ian Roberts (eds), 38-51. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 2011. Syntactic and morphosyntactic typology and change in Latin and Romance. In The Cambridge History of the Romance Language, Vol. 1: Structures, Martin Maiden, John Charles Smith & Adam Ledgeway (eds), 382-471; 724-734. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Loporcaro, Michele. 2009. Profilo Linguistico dei Dialetti Italiani. Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Meisel, Jürgen M. 2011. First and Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, Silvina. 2008. Incomplete Acquisition in Bilingualism. Re-examining the Age Factor [Studies in Bilingualism 39]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paradis, Michel. 2004. A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism [Studies in Bilingualism 18]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pellegrini, Givan Battista. 1975. Saggi di Linguistica Italiana. Storia. Struttura. Società. Torino: Boringhieri.Google Scholar
Platzack, Christer. 2001. The vulnerable C-domain. Brain and Language 77: 364-377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polinsky, Maria. 1995. American Russian: Language loss meets language acquisition. In Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics. Cornell Meeting, E. Wayles Browne (ed.), 370-406. Ann Arbor MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Google Scholar
Rohlfs, Gerhard. 1937. La struttura linguistica dell’Italia. Leipzig: Keller.Google Scholar
. 1969. Grammatica storica della lingua italiana e dei suoi dialetti. Sintassi e formazione delle parole. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
. 1972. Studi e ricerche su lingua e dialetti d’Italia. Firenze: Sansoni.Google Scholar
Rothman, Jason. 2009. Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage languages. International Journal of Bilingualism 13(2): 155-163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Monika. 2011. Language Attrition. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, Mike A. 1983. On first language loss in the second language acquirer: Problems of transfer. In Language Transfer in Language Learning, Susan Gass & Larry Selinker (eds), 222-231. Rowley MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Seliger, Herbert. 1991. Language attrition, reduced redundancy, and creativity. In First Language Attrition, Herbert W. Seliger & Robert M. Vago (eds), 227-240. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simone, Raffaele. 2002. Dual complementizer in a language without infinitive. In L’infinito & oltre. Omaggio a Gunver Skytte, Hanne Jansen, Paola Polito, Lene Schøsler & Erling Strudsholm (eds), 439-462. Odense: Odense University Press.Google Scholar
Sorace, Antonella. 2000a. Differential effects of attrition in the L1 syntax of near native L2 speakers. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, S. Catherine Howell, Sarah A. Fish & Thea Keith-Lucas (eds), 719-725. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
. 2000b. Syntactic optionality in non-native grammars. Second Language Research 16(2): 93-102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Native language attrition and developmental instability at the syntax-discourse interface: Data, interpretations and methods. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7: 143-145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Selective optionality in language development. In Syntax and Variation. Reconciling the Biological and the Social [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 265], Leonie Cornips & Karen P. Corrigan (eds), 55-80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1(1): 1-33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi, Sorace Antonella, Heycock, Caroline, Filiaci, Francesca & Bouba, Maria. 2003. Subjects in L1 attrition: Evidence from Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English. In In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Barbara Beachley, Amanda Brown & Frances Conlin (eds), 787-797. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi, Sorace Antonella, Heycock, Caroline & Filiaci, Francesca 2004. First language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism 8(3): 257-277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weltens, Bert, de Bot, Kees & van Els, Theo (eds). 1986. Language Attrition in Progress. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
White, Lydia. 2011. Second language acquisition at the interfaces. Lingua 121: 577-590. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Perpiñán, Sílvia & Silvina Montrul
2023. Does your regional variety help you acquire an additional language?. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 13:5 ► pp. 663 ff. DOI logo
Yılmaz, Gülsen & Monika S. Schmid
2018. Chapter 11. First language attrition and bilingualism. In Bilingual Cognition and Language [Studies in Bilingualism, 54], ► pp. 225 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.