This study investigates morphological vulnerability in incomplete bilingual L1 acquisition. It examines the production of L1 inflections by L2-dominant bilingual children, with the aim of exploring causes of difficulty in agreement marking. Spontaneous data (18 hours) from six Hungarian-English bilingual children, aged seven to nine, is used to compare the production of possessive inflections and verbal inflections, which are expressed by identical surface morphology in Hungarian. Drawing on recent analysis of Hungarian (Alberti, 1995; Szabolcsi, 1994), the paper asks where and why agreement morphology is susceptible to variability in bilingual children's weaker L1. Results indicate significant differences in the accuracy of agreement morphology. Inflections are almost error-free in possessive nominals and subject-verb agreement. However, they are frequently omitted in possessive be-clauses, which can be attributed to a combination of factors: (i) influence of semantic-syntactic properties of English have on Hungarian be possessive construction (transfer from L2); (ii) difficulty with long-distance agreement in Hungarian be-possessives (structural complexity of L1); and (iii) influence of Hungarian existential and locative constructions on possessive-be (ambiguity in L1). It is argued that morphological variability is selective, and the main source of vulnerability is the syntax-semantics interface where the weaker L1 is most susceptible to L2 influence.
Alberti, G. (1995). Role assignment in Hungarian possessive constructions . In I. Kenesei (Ed.), Approaches to Hungarian Vol. 5 (pp.13-27). Szeged: JATE.
2.
Babarczy, A. (1997). The order of acquisition of functional categories and movement in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 44, (1-2), 151-174.
3.
Bailey, N., Madden, C., & Krashen, S. (1974). Is there a "natural sequence" in adult second language learning? Language Learning, 24, 235-243.
4.
Bartha, C. (1995/ 1996). Social and linguistic characteristics of immigrant language shift: The case of Hungarian in Detroit. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 43(3-4), 405-431.
5.
Bartos, H. (1997). On "subjective" and "objective" agreement in Hungarian . Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 44, 363-384.
6.
Bartos, H. (2000). Az inflexiós jelenségek szintaktikai háttere. In F. Kiefer (Ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 3 (pp. 653-762). Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
7.
Bolonyai, A. (1998). In-between languages: Language shift/maintenance in childhood bilingualism. International Journal of Bilingualism , 2, 21-43.
8.
Bolonyai, A. (1999). The hidden dimensions of language contact: The case of Hungarian-English bilingual children. Unpublished PhD Dissertation , Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina.
9.
Bolonyai, A. (2000). "Elective affinities": Language contact in the abstract lexicon and its structural consequences. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4(1), 81-106.
10.
Bolonyai, A. (2002). Case systems in contact: Syntactic and lexical case in bilingual child language. Southwest Journal of Linguistics , 21(2), 1-35.
11.
Brody, M. (1995). Focus and checking theory. In I. Kenesei (Ed.), Approaches to Hungarian Vol. 5 (pp.31-43). Szeged: JATE.
12.
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
Clyne, M. (2003). Dynamics of language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Cook, V. (2003). Introduction: The changing L1 in the L2 user's mind. In V. Cook (Ed.), Effects of the second language on the first (pp.1-18). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
15.
De Bot, K. (1992). A bilingual production model: Levelt's "speaking" model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13, 1-24.
16.
De Bot, K., & Clyne, M. (1989). Language reversion revisited. Studies in second language acquisition, 11, 167-177.
17.
Dikken, M. den (1999). On the structural representation of possession and agreement. The case of (anti-)agreement in Hungarian possessed nominal phrases. In I. Kenesei (Ed.), Crossing boundaries (pp. 137-178). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
18.
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1973). Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning, 23(2), 245 - 258.
19.
É. Kiss, K. (1987). Configurationality in Hungarian. Reidel: Dordrecht.
20.
É Kiss,K. (1998). Mondattan. In K. É. Kiss, F. Kiefer & P. Siptár (Eds.), Új magyar nyelvtan (pp. 15-184). Budapest: Osiris.
21.
Fenyvesi, A. (1995). Language contact and language death in an immigrant language: The case of Hungarian. Pitt Working Papers in Linguistics 3, (pp.1-117). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh .
22.
Gavruseva, E. (2000). On the syntax of possessor extraction. Lingua, 110, 743-772.
23.
Goad, H.,White, L., & Steele, J. (2003). Missing surface inflection in L2 acquisition: A prosodic account. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp.264-275). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
24.
Gürel, A. (2004). Selectivity in L2-induced L1 attrition: A psycholinguistic account. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17, 53-78.
25.
Håkansson, G. (2001). Tense morphology and verb-second in Swedish L1 children and children with SLI. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(1), 85-99.
26.
Hawkins, R., & Liszka, S. (2002). Locating the source of defective past tense marking in advanced L2 English speakers. In R. van Hout, A. Hulk, F. Kuiken, & R. Towell (Eds.), The lexicon-syntax interface in second language acquisition (pp.21-44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27.
Hulk, A. & Müller, N. (2000). Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3(3), 227-244.
28.
Hulk,A., & Müller, N. (2004). Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3(3), 227-244.
29.
Ionin, T., & Wexler, K. (2002). Why is `is' easier than `-s'?: Acquisition of tense/agreement morphology by child second language learners of English. Second Language Research, 18, 95 - 136.
30.
Jia, G., & Aaronson, D. (1999). Age differences in second language acquisition: The Dominant Language Switch and Maintenance hypothesis. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 301-312). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
31.
Kaufman, D., & Aronoff, M. (1991). Morphological disintegration and reconstruction in first language attrition. In H. Seliger & R. Vago (Eds.), First language attrition. (pp.175-188). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Kayne, R. (1993). Toward a modular theory of auxiliary selection . Studia Linguistica, 47(1), 3 - 31.
33.
Kontra, M. (1990). Fejezetek a South Bend-i magyar nyelvhasználatból. [Chapters on Hungarian as spoken in South Bend, Indiana.]Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Nyelvtudományi Intézete.
34.
Kovács, M. (2001). Code-switching and language shift in Australian Finnish in comparison with Australian Hungarian. Åbo, Finland: Åbo Akademi University Press.
35.
Köpke, B., & Schmid, M. (2004). Language attrition: The next phase. In M. Schmid, B. Köpke, M. Keijzer & L. Weilemar (Eds.), First language attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues (pp. 1-43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins
36.
Lardiere, D. (1998). Case and tense in the "fossilized" steady state . Second Language Research, 14,1-26.
37.
Lardiere, D. (2000). Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition . In J. Archibald (Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 102-129). Oxford: Blackwell.
38.
Lengyel, Z. (1981). A gyermeknyelv. Budapest: Gondolat.
39.
MacWhinney, B. (1976). Hungarian research on the acquisition of morphology and syntax. Journal of Child Language, 3, 397-410.
40.
MacWhinney, B. (1985). Hungarian language acquisition as an exemplification of general rules of language acquisition. In D. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, Vol. 2 (pp. 1069-1155). Hillsdale: Erlbaum .
41.
MacWhinney, B., & Pleh, C. (1997). Double agreement: Role identification in Hungarian . Language and Cognitive Processes, 12(1), 67-102.
42.
Meisel, J. (1991). Principles of Universal Grammar and strategies of language learning: Some similarities and differences between first and second language acquisition. In L. Eubank (Ed.), Point counterpoint: Universal Grammar in the second language (pp. 231-276). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
43.
Meisel, J. (1997). The acquisition of syntax of negation in French and German. Second Language Research, 13, 227-263.
44.
Montrul, S. (2002). Incomplete acquisition and attrition of Spanish tense/aspect distinctions in adult bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5(1), 39-68.
45.
Montrul, S. (2004). Convergent outcomes in L2 acquisition and L1 loss . In M. Schmid, B. Köpke, M. Keijzer & L. Weilemar (Eds.), First language attrition: interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues (pp. 259-280). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
46.
Müller, N. (1998). Transfer in bilingual first language acquisition . Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1(3), 151-171.
47.
Müller, N., & Hulk,A. (2001). Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual language acquisition: Italian and French as recipient languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 1-21.
48.
Myers-Scotton, C. (2002). Contact linguistics: Bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49.
Neisser, U. (1984). Interpreting Harry Bahrick's discovery: What confers immunity against forgetting? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 32-35.
50.
Pfaff, C. (1991). Turkish in contact with German: Language maintenance and loss among immigrant children in Berlin (West). International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 90,97-129.
51.
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
52.
Platzack, C. (1996). The initial hypothesis of syntax. A minimalist perspective on language acquisition and attrition. In H. Clahsen (Ed.), Generative perspectives on language acquisition (pp. 369-414). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
53.
Platzack, C. (2001). The vulnerable C-domain. Brain and Language, 77, 364- 377.
54.
Polinsky, M. (1995). Cross-linguistic parallels in language loss. Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 14(1-2), 87-123.
55.
Prévost, P., & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 16,103-133.
56.
Roeper, T. (1999). Universal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2(3), 169-186.
57.
Sánchez, L. (2004). Functional convergence in the tense, evidentiality, and aspectual systems of Quechua-Spanish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(2), 147-162.
58.
Schlyter, S. (1993). The weaker language in bilingual Swedish-French children. In K. Hyltenstam & Å. Viberg (Eds.), Progression and regression in language (pp.289-308). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
59.
Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40-72.
60.
Seliger, H.W., & Vago, R. (1991). The study of first language attrition: An overview . In H. W. Seliger & R. Vago (Eds.), First language attrition (pp. 3 -15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
61.
Sharwood Smith, M.A. (1989). Crosslinguistic influence in language loss. In K. Hyltenstam & L. Obler (Eds.), Bilingualism across the lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity, and loss (pp. 185-201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
62.
Silva-Corvalàn, C. (1991). Spanish language attrition in a language contact situation with English. In H. W. Seliger & R. Vago (Eds.), First language attrition. (pp.151-171). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63.
Silva-Corvalan, C. (1994). Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles . Oxford: Clarendon.
64.
Silva-Corvalàn, C. (2003). Linguistic consequences of reduced input in bilingual first language acquisition. In S. Montrul & F. Ordónez (Eds.), Linguistic theory and language development in Hispanic languages. Papers from the Fifth Hispanic Linguistics Symposium and the 4th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese (pp. 375-397). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
65.
Sorace, A. (2000). Differential effects of attrition in the L1 syntax of near-native L2 speakers. In C. Howell, S. Fish, & T. Keith-Lucas (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 719-725). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
66.
Sorace, A. (2004). Native language attrition and developmental instability at the syntax-discourse interface: Data, interpretations and methods. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 143-145.
67.
Szabolcsi, A. (1983). The possessor that ran away from home. The Linguistic Review, 3, 89 -102.
68.
Szabolcsi, A. (1992). A birtokos szerkezet és az egzisztenciális mondat . Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
69.
Szabolcsi, A. (1994). The noun phrase. In F. Kiefer & K. É. Kiss (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 27: The syntactic structure of Hungarian (pp.179-274). New York: Academic Press.
70.
Tsimpli, I., Sorace, A., Heycock, C., & Filiaci, F. (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.
71.
Vinkler, Z., & Pléh, C. (1995). A case of a specific language impaired child in Hungarian. In M. Kovacevic (Ed.), Language, and language communication barriers (pp. 131-158). Zagreb: Hrvatska Sveucilisna Naklada.
72.
Wei, L. ( 2000). Types of morphemes and their implications for second language morpheme acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism , 4(1), 29-43.
73.
Wexler, K. (1994). Optional infinitives, head movement and the economy of derivations. In D. Lightfoot & N. Horstein (Eds.), Verb movement (pp. 305 -350). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
74.
White, L. (2002). Morphological variability in endstate L2 grammars: The question of L1 influence. In B. Skarabel et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 758-768). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
75.
White, L. (2003). Fossilization in steady state L2 grammars: Persistent problems with inflectional morphology. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6(2), 129-141.
76.
Wong-Filmore, L. (1991). When learning a second language means losing the first. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6, 323-346.
77.
Zobl, H., & Liceras, J. (1994). Functional categories and acquisition orders. Language Learning, 44, 159-180.
