Syntax–pragmatic and morphology–pragmatic interfaces in sequential bilingual language acquisition: The case of Russia-Turkish and English-Turkish bilingual children
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online October, 2019
Syntax–pragmatic and morphology–pragmatic interfaces in sequential bilingual language acquisition: The case of Russia-Turkish and English-Turkish bilingual children
This study examines sequential bilingual language development focusing on the acquisition of two domains that interact with pragmatics, precisely, post-predicate constituents and case marking for direct objects in Turkish, which are cases of syntax–pragmatic and morphology–pragmatic interface, respectively, by Russian-Turkish and English-Turkish sequential bilinguals who had been acquiring Turkish as their child second language (cL2).
Design:
A cross-sectional design was adopted in the study.
Methods:
Narratives were used as a method of data collection. The use of post-predicate constituents and case markers for direct objects produced by the sequential bilinguals in their cL2 Turkish was compared with that of Turkish monolingual and simultaneous bilingual children.
Conclusions:
The study provides evidence that cL2 may be similar to monolingual and bilingual first language acquisition in some domains, while the other domains may be affected by age of onset and cross-linguistic influence from the other language that has developed to a certain extent.
Aksu-KoçA.KetrezF. N. (2003). Early syntactic combinations: Emergence of argument structures in Turkish. Paper presented at SRCD 2003 Biennial Meeting, Florida, 24–27 April 2003.
2.
Aksu-KoçA.SlobinD. (1985). The acquisition of Turkish. In SlobinD. I. (Ed.), The cross linguistic study of language acquisition (Vol. 1, pp. 839–80). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3.
Antonova-ÜnlüE.WeiL. (2016). Aspect acquisition in Russian as the weaker language: Evidence from a Turkish–Russian child. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20(2), 210–228.
4.
Antonova-ÜnlüE.WeiL. (2017). The acquisition of the weaker language. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism (in press). doi:10.1075/lab.16029.ant.
5.
BermanR. A. (1999). Bilingual proficiency/proficient bilingualism. Insights from narrative texts. In ExtraG.VerhoevenL. (Eds.), Bilingualism and migration (pp. 187–208). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
6.
BermanR. A.SlobinD. I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7.
BlomE. (2008). Testing the domain-by-age model: Inflection and placement of Dutch verbs. In HaznedarB.GavrusevaE. (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition (pp. 271–300). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
8.
ComrieB. (1987). The World’s Major Languages.London: Rutledge.
9.
ComrieB. (1989). Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
10.
De HouwerA. (1990). Two at a time: An exploration of how children acquire two languages from birth. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11.
De HouwerA. (1995). Bilingual language acquisition. In FletcherP.MacWhinneyB. (Eds.), The handbook of child language (pp. 219–250). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
De HouwerA. (2009). Bilingual first language acquisition. Bristol, Buffalo, Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
14.
DoğruözA. S.BackusA. (2007). Postverbal elements in immigrant Turkish: Evidence of change?International Journal of Bilingualism, 11(2), 185–220.
15.
EkmekciÖ. (1979). Acquisition of Turkish: A longitudinal study on early language development of a Turkish child (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Texas, Austin, TX.
16.
EkmekçiÖ. (1986). Significance of word order in the acquisition of Turkish. In SlobinD.ZimmerK. (Eds.), Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 265–272). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
17.
EnçM. (1991). The semantics of specificity. Linguistic Inquiry, 22, 1–25.
18.
ErküF. (1983). Discourse pragmatics and word order in Turkish (Ph.D. Thesis). University of Minnesota, MN.
19.
ErguvanlıE. (1984). The function of word order in Turkish grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
20.
GökselA. (1993). Levels of representation and argument structure in Turkish (Doctoral dissertation). Department of Linguistics, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, UK.
21.
GökselA.KerslakeC. (2005). Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. London, UK: Routledge.
22.
GreenbergJ. H. (1966). Universals of language. Oxford, UK: MIT Press.
23.
HouseH. C.HarmanS. (1950). Descriptive English grammar. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
24.
HulkA.CornipsL. (2006). Neuter gender and interface vulnerability in child L2/2L1 Dutch. In UnsworthS.ParodiT.SoraceA.Young-ScholtenM. (Eds.), Paths of development in L1 and L2 acquisition (pp. 107–135). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
25.
HulkA.MuellerN. (2000). Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3(3), 227–244.
26.
IoninT.WexlerK. (2002). Why is “is” easier than “s”? Acquisition of tense/agreement morphology by child L2-English learners. Second Language Research, 18(2), 95–136.
27.
İşseverS. (2003). Information structure in Turkish: Word order-prosody interface. Lingua, 113(11), 1025–1053.
28.
JohansonL.CsatóÉ. (1998). The Turkic languages. London, UK: Routledge.
29.
KetrezN. F. (2005). Children’s scope of indefinite objects (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA.
30.
KılıçaslanY. (1994). Information packaging in Turkish (Unpublished MSc dissertation). University of Edinburgh, UK.
KuntayA.SlobinD. I. (1996). Listening to a Turkish Mother: Some Puzzles for Acquisition. In SlobinD. I.GerhardtJ.KyratzisA.GuoJ. (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language: Essays in honor of susan ervin-tripp (pp. 265–286). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33.
KupersmittJ.BermanR. (2001). Linguistic features of Spanish-Hebrew children’s narratives. In VerhoevenL.StrömqvistS. (Eds.), Narrative development in a multilingual context (pp. 277–319). Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
34.
LakshmananU. (1994). Universal grammar in child second language acquisition. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
35.
LanzaE. (2001). Temporality and language contact in narratives by children bilingual in Norwegian and English. In VerhoevenL.StrömqvistS. (Eds.), Narrative development in a multilingual context (pp. 15–55). Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
36.
Larsen-FreemanD.Celce-MurciaM. (2015). The Grammar book. Boston, MA: National Geographic Learning.
37.
MacWhinneyB. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk: Transcription format and programs (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
38.
MayerM. (1969). Frog, where are you?New York: Dial press.
39.
MeiselJ. (1990). Two first languages: Early grammatical development in bilingual children. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.
40.
MeiselJ. (2008). Child second language acquisition or successive first language acquisition? In HaznedarB.GavrusevaE. (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition (pp. 55–82). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
41.
MeiselJ. (2011). First and second language acquisition. Parallels and differences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42.
MöhringA. (2001). The acquisition of French by German pre-school children: An empirical investigation of gender assignment and gender agreement. In Foster-CohenS.NizegorodcewA. (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook (Vol. 1, pp. 171–193). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins
43.
MuellerN.HulkA. (2001). Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual language acquisition: Italian and French as recipient languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(1), 1–21.
44.
NakipoğluM. (2009). The semantics of the Turkish accusative marked definites and the relation between prosodic structure and information structure. Lingua, 119(9), 1253–1280.
45.
ParadisJ. (2007). Second language acquisition in childhood. In HoffE.ShatzM. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of language development (pp. 387–405). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
46.
PavlenkoA. (2003). I Feel Clumsy Speaking Russian’: L2 Influence on L1 in Narratives of Russian L2 Users of English. In CookVivian (Ed.), Effects of the second language on the first (pp. 32–60). Multilingual Matters.
47.
PavlenkoA. (2008). Narrative analysis in the study of bi- and multilingualism. In MoyerM.WeiL. (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to research methods in bilingualism (pp. 311–325). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
48.
PolinskyM. (2008). Heritage language narratives. In BrintonD. D.KaganO.BauckusS. (Eds.), Heritage language education: A new field emerging. New York, NY: Routledge.
49.
RothweilerM. (2006). The acquisition of V2 and subordinate clauses in early successive acquisition of German. Interfaces in Multilingualism, 91–113.
50.
Sağın-ŞimşekÇ. (2016). Acquisition of canonical and non-canonical word orders in L1 Turkish. In HaznedarB.KetrezF. N. (Eds.), The acquisition of Turkish in childhood (Vol. 20, pp. 79–98). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
51.
SankoffG. (2001). Linguisitic outcomes of language contact. In TrudgillP.ChambersJ.Schilling-EstesN. (Eds.), Handbook of sociolinguistics (pp. 638–668). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
52.
SchwartzB. D. (1992). Testing between UG-based and problem-solving models of L2A: Developmental sequence data. Language Acquisition, 2(1), 1–19.
53.
SchwartzB. D. (2003). Child L2 acquisition: Paving the way. In BeachleyB.BrownA.ConlinF. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 26–50). Somerville MA: Cascadilla.
54.
SchwartzB. D. (2004). Why child L2 acquisition? In van KampenJ.BaauwS. (Eds.), Proceedings of GALA (Vol. 1, pp. 47–66). Utrecht, The Netherlands: LOT.
55.
SlobinD. I. (1980). The repeated path between transparency and opacity in language. In BellugiU.Studdert-KennedyM. (Eds.), Signed and spoken language: Biological constraints on linguistic form. Weinheim, Germany: Verlag Chemie GmbH.
56.
SlobinD. I.BeverT. G. (1982). Children use canonical sentence schemas: A crosslinguistic study of word order and inflections. Cognition, 12, 229–65.
57.
SopataA. (2008). Finiteness in child second language acquisition. Paper presented at the colloquium on language acquisition and change: Across the lifespan and across generations. University of Hamburg, Germany.
58.
SoraceA.FiliaciF. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22(3), 339–368.
59.
TimberlakeA. (1993). Russian. In ComrieB.CorbettG. G. (Eds.), The slavonic languages (pp. 827–887). London: Routledge.
60.
UnsworthS. (2005). Child L1, child L2 and adult L2 acquisition: Differences and similarities. In BrugosA.MicciullaL.SmithC. E. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 633–644). Somerville MA: Cascadilla.
61.
VibergA. (2001). Age-related and L2-related features in bilingual narrative development in Sweden. In VerhoevenL.StrömqvistS. (Eds.), Narrative development in a multilingual context (pp. 15–55). Amsterdam, The Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
62.
WeiL. (2011). The early acquisition of English as a second language. The case of young Chinese learners of English in Britain. In De HouwerA.WiltonA. (Eds.), English in Europe today: Sociocultural and educational perspectives (pp. 95–112). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
63.
WhiteL.WhiteL. (2003). Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
