Cover not available
Part of
Foreign Language Education in Multilingual Classrooms
Edited by Andreas Bonnet and Peter Siemund
[Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity 7] 2018
► pp. 381–405

Learning English demonstrative pronouns on bilingual substrate

Evidence from German heritage speakers of Russian, Turkish, and Vietnamese

 | University of Hamburg
 | University of Hamburg
 | University of Hamburg, Germany
An eminent question in current discussions of cross-linguistic transfer concerns the role of previously acquired languages for the learning and acquisition of subsequent languages. While for monolinguals learning a second language it seems obvious that all cross-linguistic influence must be traceable to the first language, the source of cross-linguistic influence is much harder to pin down in bilingual and multilingual constellations, as all previously acquired languages can in principle interact in the acquisition process of a further language. Which language is selected for cross-linguistic influence and under what conditions is a matter of much debate. The present study explores a sample of 172 learners of English as an additional language who had acquired German in combination with a heritage language (Russian, Turkish, Vietnamese) before they started to learn English. The students were 12 and 16 years old when they were recorded on the basis of picture stories, interviews, and questionnaires. The grammatical phenomenon we are interested in here concerns demonstrative pronouns, which function differently in the languages under consideration in the present context. We consider determinative and identificational uses of demonstratives, but also the subordinating function of the demonstrative that. Our results show important differences in the usage of demonstratives among the two different age groups and among the three heritage languages involved. We argue that these differences can be interpreted in different ways, cross-linguistic influence being one of them, though this is not necessarily the most important factor. Additional factors include academic performance, register differences (oral versus written), and the age of the students.
Keywords: cross-linguistic influence, demonstrative pronouns, English as an additional language, heritage languages, multilingualism, subordination
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Demonstrative pronouns in English, German, and the heritage languages
  • 3.Data and methodology
  • 4.Data analysis
    • 4.1The function of demonstrative pronouns
    • 4.2The form of demonstrative pronouns
  • 5.Results and discussion
    • 5.1Total word count and academic performance
    • 5.2Transfer from German and the heritage languages
    • 5.3Oral versus written performance
    • 5.4Age of the students
  • 6.Summary and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 24 October 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hsld.7.17sie
References (38)
References
Bardel, C. & Falk, Y. 2007. The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research 23(4): 459–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bui, L. T. 2014. Vietnamese Demonstratives: A Spatially-based Polysemy Network. PhD dissertation, University of Queensland.
De Angelis, G. 2007. Third or Additional Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Diessel, H. 1999. The morphosyntax of demonstratives in synchrony and diachrony. Linguistic Typology 3: 1–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. Is there a deictic frame of reference? In Space in Language and Linguistics: Geographical, Interactional, and Cognitive Perspectives, P. Auer, M. Hilpert, A. Stuckenbrock & B. Szmrecsanyi (eds), 687–692. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Falk, Y. & Bardel, C. 2010. The study of the role of the background languages in third language acquisition. The state of the art. IRAL 48: 185–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011. Object pronouns in German L3 syntax. Evidence for the L2 status factor. Second Language Research 27(1): 59–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S., Foley, C. & Vinnitskaya, I. 2004. The Cumulative-Enhancement Model for language acquisition: Comparing adults’ and children’s patterns of development in first, second and third language acquisition of relative clauses. International Journal of Multilingualism 1(1): 3–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gagarina, N., Klop, D., Kunnari, S., Tantele, K., Välimaa, T., Balciuniene, I., Bohnacker, U. & Walters, J. 2012. MAIN – Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 56.Google Scholar
Gogolin, I., Siemund, P., Schulz, M. & Davydova, J. 2013. Multilingualism, language contact, and urban areas. An introduction. In Multilingualism and Language Contact in Urban Areas. Acquisition – Identities – Space – Education [Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diverstiy 1], P. Siemund, I. Gogolin, M. Schulz & J. Davydova (eds), 1–15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Göksel, A. & Kerslake, C. 2005. Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. New York NY: Rouledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammarberg, B. 2001. Roles of L1 and L2 in L3 production and acquisition. In Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psychological Perspectives. J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen, U. Jessner (eds), 21–42. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Herdina, P. & Jessner, U. 2002. A Dynamic Model of Multilingualism. Perspectives of Changes Psycholinguistics. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. J. & Traugott, E. C. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, R. & Pullum, G. K. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: CUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hufeisen, B. 1998: L3: Stand der Forschung: Was bleibt zu tun? (L3: Status of current research: what remains to be done?) . In Tertiärsprachen: Theorien, Modelle, Methoden, B. Hufeisen & B. Lindemann (eds), 169–184. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Johanson, L. 2002. Structural Factors in Turkic Language Contacts. London: Curzon.Google Scholar
Kerslake, C. 1999. Alternative subordination strategies in Turkish. In Connectivity in Grammar and Discourse [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 5], J. Rehbein, C. Hohenstein & L. Pietsch (eds), 231–258. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Küntay, A. & Özyürek, A. 2006. Learning to use demonstratives in conversation: What do language specific strategies in Turkish reveal? Journal of Child Language 33(2): 303–320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maltzoff, N. 1994. Essentials of Russian Grammar. A Complete Guide for Students and Professionals. Lincolnwood IL: Passport Books/National Textbook Company.Google Scholar
Matras, Y. 2009. Language Contact. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nguyễn, P. P. 1992. Vietnamese demonstratives revisited. The Mon-Khmer Studies Journal 20: 127–136.Google Scholar
Ohser, E., 2000. Vater und Sohn, Band 2. Konstanz: Südverlag.Google Scholar
Peukert, H. 2015. Transfer effects in multilingual language development. In Transfer Effects in Multilingual Language Development [Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity 4], H. Peukert (ed.), 1–18. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. 1984. Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Languages Acquisition 6(2): 186–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998. Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory [Studies in Bilingualism 15]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pohlmann-Rother, S., Schoreit, E. & Kürzinger, A. 2016. Schreibkompetenzen von Erstklässlern quantitativ-empirisch erfassen – Herausforderungen und Zugewinn eines analytisch-kriterialen Vorgehens gegenüber einer holistischen Bewertung. Journal for Educational Research Online 8(2): 107–135. URN: urn:nbn:de:0111-pedocs-124293Google Scholar
Reich, H., Roth H. -J. & Döll M. 2009. Fast catch bumerang. deutsche Sprachversion. In Auswertungsbögen und Auswertungshinweise [FÖRMIG Edition Band 5], D. Lengyel, H. H. Reich, H. J. Roth & M. Döll (eds), 209–241. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
Rothman, J. 2011. L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy. The typological primacy model. Second Language Research 27(2): 107–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J. & Cabrelli Amaro, J. 2010. What variables condition syntactic transfer? A look at the L3 initial state. Second Language Research 26(2): 189–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. & Sprouse, Rex A. 1996. L2 cognitive status and the Full Transfer/Full Access Model. Second Language Research 12(1): 40–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siemund, P. 2008. Language contact: Constraints and common paths of contact induced change. In Language Contact and Contact Languages [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 7], P. Siemund & N. Kintana (eds), 3–11. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018. Englisch als weitere Sprache im Kontext herkunftsbedingter Mehrsprachigkeit. In Sprachentwicklung im Kontext von Mehrsprachigkeit – Hypothesen, Methoden, Forschungsperspektiven, J. Duarte, I. Gogolin, T. Klinger, B. Schnoor & M. Trebbels (eds). Wiesdaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
Tauscher, E. & Kirschbaum, E. -G. 1974. Grammatik der russischen Sprache, 10th edn. Düsseldorf: Brücken-Verlag.Google Scholar
Thomason, S. G. 2001. Language Contact: An Introduction. Edinburgh: EUP.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, L. C. 1965. A Vietnamese Grammar. Seattle WA: The University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Westergaard, M., Mitrofanova, N., Mykhaylyk, R., Rodina, Y. 2016. Crosslinguistic influence in the acquisition of a third language: The Linguistic Proximity Model. International Journal of Bilingualism 21(6): 666–682. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
William, S. & Hammarberg, B. 1998. Languages switches in L3 production: Implication for a Polyglot Speaking Model. Applied Linguistics 19(3): 295–333. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Siemund, Peter & Eliane Lorenz
2024. Multilingual advantages. In Multifaceted Multilingualism [Studies in Bilingualism, 66], ► pp. 123 ff. DOI logo
Lorenz, Eliane, Kathrin Feindt, Sharareh Rahbari & Peter Siemund
2022. The Influence of Extralinguistic Variables on Cross-Linguistic Influence in Contexts of Bilingual Heritage Speakers: A Summary of Topical Research Findings. In Language Development in Diverse Settings [Edition ZfE, 11], ► pp. 305 ff. DOI logo
Rothman, Jason, Jorge González Alonso & Eloi Puig-Mayenco
2019. Third Language Acquisition and Linguistic Transfer, DOI logo
Siemund, Peter
2018. Modeling World Englishes from a cross-linguistic perspective. In Modeling World Englishes [Varieties of English Around the World, G61], ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 january 2025. 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.