Chapter published in:
The Acquisition of Differential Object Marking
Edited by Alexandru Mardale and Silvina Montrul
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 26] 2020
► pp. 237–260

Chapter 9
The processing of Differential Object Marking by heritage speakers of Spanish

| University of Chicago

This study examines the online processing of Differential Object Marking by heritage speakers of Spanish living in the U.S. Previous research has found that even heritage speakers with high proficiency in Spanish omit DOM with animate objects in oral production and find omitted DOM acceptable in judgment tasks. Therefore, this study investigated whether heritage speakers’ acceptability of DOM omission is reflected in their language processing. Twenty monolingual-raised native speakers and 20 heritage speakers participated in an eye-tracking reading experiment. Sentences varied in DOM marking (use vs. omission) and word order (SVO vs. VSO). Overall, reading time data indicated that heritage speakers behaved more similarly to monolingual-raised native speakers than predicted. The potential effects of language variation and language attrition are discussed.

Keywords: Differential Object Marking, heritage speakers, language processing, eyetracking, Spanish
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Heritage speakers and the heritage language
  • 3.Differential Object Marking in Spanish
  • 4.Acquisition of Differential Object Marking by monolingual and heritage speakers
  • 5.Methodology
    • 5.1Participants
    • 5.2Materials
    • 5.3Procedure
    • 5.4Data analysis
  • 6.Results
    • Summary of the results
  • 7.Discussion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 18 June 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.26.09are
References
Aissen, J.
(2003) Differential Object Marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21, 435–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B.
(1987) Competition, variation and language learning. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157–194). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bates, D., Machler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
(2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1). DOI logo
Bolger, P., & Zapata, G.
(2011) Semantic categories and context in L2 vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 61, 614–646.. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burgo, C.
(2016) Perceptions of L2 Spanish learners in the mixed classroom. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada, 20. https://​www​.nebrija​.com​/revista​-linguistica​/files​/articulosPDF​/articulo​_56ec50017dcb7​.pdf> (21 January 2020).
Chamorro, G., Sorace, A., & Sturt, P.
(2016) What is the source of L1 attrition? The effect of recent L1 reexposure on Spanish speakers under L1 attrition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(3), 520–532. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F.
(1982) Life with two languages: An introduction to bilingualism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Heusinger, K. von. & Kaiser, G. A.
(2005) The evolution of Differential Object Marking in Spanish. In K. von Heusinger, G. A. Kaiser, & E. Stark (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop “Specificity and the Evolution/ Emergence of Nominal Determination in Romance” (Arbeitspapier 119, pp. 33–69). Konstanz: University of Konstanz.Google Scholar
Hopp, H., & León Arriaga, M. E.
(2016) Structural and inherent case in the non-native processing of Spanish: Constraints on inflectional variability. Second Language Research, 32, 75–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Instituto Cervantes
(2007)  Diploma de Español como Lengua Extranjera (DELE): Nivel Superior [Spanish Proficiency Exam]. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: http://​diplomas​.cer​- vantes​.es​/en​/information​/sample​_examination​_papers​_audios​.html.Google Scholar
Jegerski, J.
(2014) On-line sensitivity to case marking among heritage Spanish bilinguals in the U.S. Study presented at the Workshop on Heritage Language Speakers in Society and Education, Stockholm.Google Scholar
Jegerski, J., & VanPatten, B.
(2014) Research methods in second language psycholinguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kilborn, K.
(1994) Learning a language late: Second language acquisition in adults. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 917–944). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Liu, H., Bates, E., & Li, P.
(1992) Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Chinese. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13, 451–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lunn, P.
(2002) Tout se tient in Dominican Spanish. In J. Lee, K. Geeslin, & J. C. Clements (Eds.), Structure, meaning, and acquisition in Spanish (pp. 65–72). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E.
(Eds.) (1989) The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B.
2000 Perspective-taking and grammar. Japanese Society for the Language Sciences, 1, 1–25.Google Scholar
2005 The emergence of linguistic form in time. Connection Science, 17, 191–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S.
(2002) Incomplete acquisition and attrition of Spanish tense/aspect distinctions in adult bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5, 39–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers. A case of morpho-syntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 125–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., & Bowles, M.
(2010) Is grammar instruction beneficial for heritage language learners? Dative case marking in Spanish. The Heritage Language Journal, 7(1), 47–73.Google Scholar
Montrul, S.
(2016) Heritage language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., Foote, R., & Perpiñán, S.
(2008) Gender agreement in adult second language learners and Spanish heritage speakers: The effects of age and context of acquisition. Language Learning, 58, 503–553. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., & Bowles, M.
(2009) Back to basics: Differential Object Marking under incomplete acquisition in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(3), 363–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., & Sánchez-Walker, N.
(2013) Differential Object Marking in child and adult Spanish heritage speakers. Language Acquisition, 20, 109–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K., & Bertera, J. H.
(1979) Reading without a fovea. Science, 206, 468–469. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A.
(1986) Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayner, K.
(1998) Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, M.
(2008) The acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish. Probus, 20(1), 111–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B.
(2004) Why child L2 acquisition? In J. van Kampen & S. Baauw (Eds.), Proceedings of GALA 2003 (Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition) held at Utrecht University 4–6 September (pp. 47–66). Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Sekerina, I. A., & Trueswell, J. C.
2011 Processing of contrastiveness by heritage Russian bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14(3), 280–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C.
(1991) Spanish language attrition in a contact situation with English. In H. Seliger & R. Vago (Eds.), First language attrition (pp. 151–171). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Su, I-Ru
(2001) Transfer of sentence processing strategies: A comparison of L2 learners of Chinese and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 83–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ticio, E.
(2015) The acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish-English early bilinguals. Linguist Approaches to Bilingualism, 5, 62–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ticio, E., & Avram, L.
(2015) The acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish and Romanian: Semantic scales or semantic features? Revue Roumaine de Linguistique, 60(4), 383–402.Google Scholar
Torrego, E.
(1998) The dependencies of objects. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vaid, J., & Pandit, R.
(1991) Sentence interpretation in normal and aphasic Hindi speakers. Brain and Language, 41, 250–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Valdés, G.
(2001) Heritage language students: Profiles and possibilities. In J. Peyton, D. Ranard, & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Heritage languages in America: Preserving a national resource (pp. 37–80). McHenry, IL: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(2005) Processing instruction. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition (pp. 267–281). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Wulfeck, B., Juarez, L., Bates, E., & Kilborn, K.
(1986) Sentence interpretation strategies in healthy and aphasic bilingual adults. In J. Vaid (Ed.), Language processing in bilinguals: Psycholinguistic and neurological perspectives (pp. 199–220). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Zdrojewski, P.
(2013) Spanish DOM as a case of lacking case. Presentation at Differential Object Marking Workshop, University of Tromsø 23–24 May.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Arechabaleta Regulez, Begoña & Silvina Montrul
2021. Psycholinguistic Evidence for Incipient Language Change in Mexican Spanish: The Extension of Differential Object Marking. Languages 6:3 ► pp. 131 ff. DOI logo
Bhatia, Archna & Silvina Montrul
2020. Chapter 10. Comprehension of Differential Object Marking by Hindi heritage speakers. In The Acquisition of Differential Object Marking [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 26], ► pp. 261 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 06 january 2023. 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.