Cover not available
Part of
Studies in Turkish as a Heritage Language
Edited by Fatih Bayram
[Studies in Bilingualism 60] 2020
► pp. 127–154

Chapter 7
Investigating the effects of L1 proficiency and CLI

RT data from speakers of heritage L1 Turkish with dominant German L2

 | University of Cologne
 | University of Freiburg
 | Konstanz University
This paper investigates the effects of cross-linguistic influence (CLI) in L1 Turkish of Turkish-German bilingual speakers. The study examines whether overlapping structures in the two languages result in influences of the dominant L2 German on the weaker L1 Turkish in morphosyntactic processing. Plural-marking on noun phrases was chosen for investigation since it provides an ideal test case and it constitutes partial overlap in German and Turkish. Since various definitions of CLI describe effects of this phenomenon that relate to language processing, behavioral measures are utilized in this research. The analyses of accuracy rates reveal that the two languages are clearly differentiated from each other. However, the bilingual speakers perform better with respect to the construction, which is only available in Turkish, compared to the overlapping structure between the languages. This indicates that the speakers separate the two languages from each other. However, interlanguage cue competition is at play in morphosyntactic processing in the L1 heritage language. The effects of heritage language proficiency are also examined by means of comparing high- and low-to-intermediate heritage speakers. The proficiency effects on L1 processing can be found in processing speed but not in accuracy rates. High-to-intermediate speakers do not differ from monolinguals in their processing speed, whereas the low-to-intermediate speakers perform slower than both the monolinguals and the high-to-intermediate heritage speakers. We discuss these findings within Modular Online Growth and Use of Language (MOGUL), which is a processing-based linguistic framework that accounts for the interaction of the two languages in the bilingual mind.
Keywords: heritage bilingualism, cross linguistic influence, L1 proficiency, reaction time study
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Goals of the study
  • 3.Experimental design
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Materials
    • 3.3Procedure
    • 3.4Data analysis
    • 3.5Results
      • 3.5.1Results of the accuracy scores
        • 3.5.1.1Analysis of the accuracy scores in monolingual and bilingual groups
        • 3.5.1.2Accuracy results for high- and low-intermediate groups
        • 3.5.1.3Conclusions on the accuracy scores
      • 3.5.2Results of the reaction time analysis
        • 3.5.2.1Reaction time results for monolingual and bilingual groups
        • 3.5.2.2Reaction time results for the high and low-intermediate bilingual groups
        • 3.5.2.3Conclusions on the reaction times
  • 4.Conclusion and discussion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 November 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.60.07kra
References (80)
References
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bamyacı, E. (2016). Competing structures in the bilingual mind: A psycholinguistic investigation of optional verb number agreement. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D. M., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0.Google Scholar
Bayram, F., Rothman, J., Iverson, M., Kupisch, T., Miller, D., Puig-Mayenco, E., & Westergaard, M. (2017). Differences in use without deficiencies in competence: Passives in the Turkish and German of Turkish heritage speakers in Germany. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(8), 919–939. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernardini, P. (2003). Child and adult acquisition of word order in the Italian DP. In N. Müller (Ed.), (In)vulnerable domains in multilingualism (pp. 41–81). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bohman, T. M., Bedore, L. M., Pena, E. D., Mendez-Perez, A., & Gillam, R. B. (2010). What you hear and what you say: Language performance in Spanish-English bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13, 325–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowles, M. A. (2011). Measuring implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge: What can heritage language learners contribute? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33(2), 247–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carlson, S. M., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2008). Bilingual experience and executive functioning in young children. Developmental Science, 11, 282–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chan, A. (2010). The Cantonese double object construction with bei2 ‘give’ in bilingual children: The role of input. International Journal of Bilingualism, 14, 65–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, V. (2003). Effects of the second language on the first. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Core Team, R. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Cuza, A., & Frank, J. (2011). Transfer effects at the syntax-semantics interface: The case of double-“que” questions in heritage Spanish. Heritage Language Journal, 8(2), 66–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dąbrowska, E. (2012). Different speakers, different grammars: Individual differences in native language attainment. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2(3), 219–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Bot, K. (1992). A bilingual production model: Levelt’s ‘speaking’ model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13 (1), 1–24.Google Scholar
De Houwer, A. (1990). The acquisition of two languages from birth: A case study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). Early bilingual acquisition: Focus on morphosyntax and the separate development hypothesis. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism (pp. 30–48). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Deuchar, M., & Quay, S. (2000). Bilingual acquisition: Theoretical implications of a case study. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Döpke, S. (1999). Cross-linguistic influences on the placement of negation and modal particles in simultaneous bilingualism. Language Sciences, 21(2), 143–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flores, C. (2015). Understanding heritage language acquisition. Some contributions from the research on heritage speakers of European Portuguese. Lingua, 164, 25–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foroodi-Nejad, F., & Paradis, J. (2009). Crosslinguistic transfer in the acquisition of compound words in Persian-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 411–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genesee, F. (1989). Early bilingual development: One language or two? Journal of Child Language, 16(1), 161–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Bilingual first language acquisition: Exploring the limits of the language faculty. In M. McGroarty (Ed.), 21st annual review of applied linguistics (pp. 153–168). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Genesee, F., Nicoladis, E., & Paradis, J. (1995). Language differentiation in early bilingual development. Journal of Child Language, 22, 611–631. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1982). Life with two languages: An introduction to Bilingualism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
(2011). An attempt to isolate, and then differentiate, transfer and interference. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16(1), 11–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulk, A., & Van der Linden, E. (1996). Language mixing in a French-Dutch bilingual child. In E. Kellerman, B. Weltens & T. Borgaerts (Eds.), EUROSLA 6- A selection of papers. Toegepaste Taalwetenschap, 55, 89–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulk, A., & Müller, N. (2000). Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3(3), 227–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janda, R. D. (1990). Frequency, markedness and morphological change: On predicting the spread of noun-plural -s in Modern High German and West Germanic. In Proceedings of the 7th Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (pp. 136–153).Google Scholar
Jarvis, S. (2000). Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence in the interlanguage lexicon. Language Learning, 50, 245–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jegerski, J., Keating, G. D., & van Patten, B. (2016). On-line relative clause attachment strategy in heritage speakers of Spanish. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20(3), 254–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaltsa, M., Tsimpli, I. M., & Rothman, J. (2015). Exploring the source of differences and similarities in L1 attrition and heritage speaker competence: Evidence from pronominal resolution. Lingua, 164, 266–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1977). Towards a characterization of the strategy of transfer in second language learning. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 2, 58–146.Google Scholar
(1979). Transfer and non-transfer: Where we are now. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2, 37–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983). Now you see it, now you don’t. In S. Gass & L. Selinker (Eds.), Language Transfer in Language Learning (pp. 112–134). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Kornfilt, J. (1997). Turkish. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kupisch, T. (2007). Determiners in bilingual German-Italian children: What they tell us about the relation between language influence and language dominance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 57–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(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
Kupisch, T., Bayram, F., & Rothman, J. (2018). Terminology matters II! Early bilinguals show cross-linguistic influence but are not attriters. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 7(6), 719–724. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kupisch, T., & Rothman, J. (2018). Terminology matters! Why difference is not incompleteness and how early child bilinguals are heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 22(5), 564–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Küppers, A., Schroeder, H., & Gülbeyaz, E. I. (2015). Languages in transition. Turkish in formal education in Germany. Analysis and perspectives, 27. Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Center.Google Scholar
Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times. Their role in inferring elementary mental organization. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marinis, T. (2010). Using on-line processing methods in language acquisition research. In E. Blom & S. Unsworth (Eds.), Experimental methods in language acquisition research (pp. 139–162). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meisel, J. (1989). Early differentiation of language in bilingual children. In K. Hyltenstam & L. Obler (Eds.) Bilingualism across a lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity and loss (pp. 13–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1994). Codeswitching in young bilingual children: The acquisition of grammatical constraints. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 413–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). The simultaneous acquisition of two first languages: Early differentiation and subsequent development of grammars. In J. Cenoz & F. Genesee (Eds.) Trends in bilingual acquisition (pp. 11–41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Méndez, T. L., Rothman, J., & Slabakova, R. (2015). Discourse-sensitive clitic-doubled dislocations in heritage Spanish. Lingua, 155, 85–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. A. (2010). Dominant language transfer in adult second language learners and heritage speakers. Second Language Research, 26(3), 293–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. A., Davidson, J., De La Fuente, I., & Foote, R. (2014). Early language experience facilitates the processing of gender agreement in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(1), 118–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., & Ionin, T. (2010). Transfer effects in the interpretation of definite articles by Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(4), 449–473. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Müller, N. (1998). Transfer in bilingual first language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 151–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicoladis, E. (2002). What’s the difference between toilet paper and paper toilet? French- English bilingual children’s crosslinguistic transfer in compound nouns. Journal of Child Language, 29, 843–863. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). Cross-linguistic transfer in deverbal compounds of preschool bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6, 17–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poulisse, N. (1990). The use of compensatory strategies by Dutch leamers of English. Dordrecht, NL: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A., & Jarvis, S. (2002). Bidirectional transfer. Applied Linguistics, 23, 190–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polinsky, M., & Kagan, O. (2007). Heritage languages: In the ‘wild’ and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(5), 368–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Porte, G. (2003). English from a distance: Code-mixing and blending in the L1 output of long-term resident overseas EFL teachers. In V. Cook (Ed.), Effects of the second language on the first (pp. 103–19). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Putnam, M., Carlson, M., & Reitter, D. (2018). Integrated, not isolated: Defining typological proximity in an integrated multilingual architecture. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ratcliff, R. (1993). Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 510–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rinker, T., Budde, N., Bamyacı, E., Winter, V. (2011). Einblicke in die sprachlichen Leistungen türkischer Kinder mit Deutsch als Zweitsprache. Diskurs Kindheits- und Jugendforschung, 6(4), 471–478Google Scholar
Rothman, J. (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
Rothman, J., & Treffers-Daller, J. (2014). A prolegomenon to the construct of the native speaker: Heritage speaker bilinguals are natives too! Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 93–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sabourin, L., Stowe, L. A., & de Haan, G. J. (2006). Transfer effects in learning a second language grammatical gender system. Second Language Research, 22(1), 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L. (1966). A psycholinguistic study of language transfer (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Georgetown University.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., Filiaci, F. & Baldo, M. (2009). Bilingual children’s sensitivity to specificity and genericity: Evidence from metalinguistic awareness. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 239–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. & Truscott, J. (2008). MOGUL and crosslinguistic influence. In D. Gabrys (Ed.) Morphosyntactic issues in second language acquisition studies (pp. 63–85). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M., & Truscott, J. (2014). The multilingual mind: A modular processing perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22(3), 339–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Serratrice, L. (2009). Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: Beyond structural overlap. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 195–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unsworth, S. (2010). Review of Herschensohn’s Language Development and Age. Journal of Linguistics, 46, 235–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Assessing the role of current and cumulative exposure in simultaneous bilingual acquisition: The case of Dutch gender. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16(1), 86–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Unsworth, S., Argyri, F., Cornips, L., Hulk, A., Sorace, A. & Tsimpli, I. (2011). Bilingual acquisition of Greek voice morphology and Dutch gender: What do they have in common? In N. Danis, K. Mesh, & H. Sung (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 590–602). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Volterra, V. & Taeschner, T. (1978). The acquisition and development of language by bilingual children. Journal of Child Language, 5(2), 311–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weber-Fox, C. M., & Neville, H. J. (1996). Maturational constraints on functional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioural evidence in bilingual speakers. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8(3), 231–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westfall, P., Tobias, R., & Wolfinger, R. (2011). Multiple comparisons and multiple tests using SAS (2nd ed.). Cary, NC: SAS Publishing.Google Scholar
Wiese, R. (2009). The grammar and typology of plural noun inflection in varieties of German. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics, 12, 137–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yip, V., & Matthews, S. (2007). The bilingual child: Early development and language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000). Syntactic transfer in a Cantonese-English bilingual child. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3, 193–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar