Early heritage bilinguals have been repeatedly found to differ from late bilinguals and from monolinguals (e.g., Montrul, 2008, 2011). In the realm of Spanish Differential Object Marking (DOM), both early heritage bilinguals (Montrul et al., 2015) and late bilinguals (e.g., Bowles & Montrul, 2008; Guijarro-Fuentes, 2012) exhibit difficulties. DOM in a complex structure such as relative clauses (RCs) provides an ideal setting to differentiate early from late bilinguals, but it has only been explored offline (Perpiñán & Moreno-Villar, 2013). This study fills this gap by examining the role of word order (SVO, OSV, OVS), optionality (obligatory vs. optional contexts), and saliency (bound vs. unbound morphology) on the processing of DOM in embedded RCs in Spanish, by Spanish monolinguals, and advanced early heritage and late bilinguals of Spanish. The results of a word-by-word non-cumulative self-paced reading task revealed that all participants were more accurate but were slower in subject than object RCs, and in OSV than OVS RCs. Slower RTs in subject RCs were due to the presence of DOM, and in OSV to interpreting OVS as SVO. Also, all participants were both more accurate as well as faster in obligatory than optional DOM, unbound than bound morphology, and masculine than feminine RC NPs. These findings reveal that processing difficulties in RCs result from the interaction of word order and DOM, and that processing DOM depends on both salience and, to a lesser extent, gender. Finally, this study shows that early heritage bilinguals are closer to monolinguals than late bilinguals in terms of morphosyntactic processing patterns.
del Río, D., López-Higes, R., & Martín-Aragoneses, M. T.
(2012) Canonical word order and interference-based integration costs during sentence comprehension: The case of Spanish subject-and object-relative clauses. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(11), 2108–2128.
Eberhard, K. M.
(1997) The marked effect of number on subject-verb agreement. Journal of Memory and Language, 361, 147–164.
Farley, A., & McCollam, K.
(2004) Learner Readiness and L2 Production in Spanish: Processability Theory on Trial. Estudios de linguistica aplicada, 401, 47–69.
Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C.
(1986) The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language 251, 348–368.
(2001) Morphological or syntactic deficits in near – native speakers? An assessment of some current proposals. Second Language Research, 171, 213–247.
(1998) Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68(1), 1–76.
Goldschneider, J. M., & DeKeyser, R. M.
(2001) Explaining the “Natural Order of L2 Morpheme Acquisition” in English: A Meta-analysis of Multiple Determinants. Language Learning, 51(1), 1–50.
(1994) Toward a lexical framework of constraint-based syntactic ambiguity resolution. Perspectives on sentence processing, 155–179.
(2000) Introduction. Spanish for native speakers, vol. 11. (AATSP) professional development series handbook for teachers K-16.) New York: Harcourt College.
(1996) Input processing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Greenwood Publishing Group.
von Heusinger, K., & Kaiser, G.
(2005) The evolution of differential object marking in Spanish. In Klaus von Heusinger, Georg A. Kaiser and Elisabeth Stark (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop “Specificity and the Evolution / Emergence of Nominal Determination Systems in Romance”. 33–69. Universität Konstanz: Fachbereich Sprachwissenschaft.
Wechsler, D. A.
(1997) WAIS-III, WMS-III technical manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Zobl, H., & Liceras, J.
(1994) Functional categories and acquisition orders. Language Learning, 44(1), 159–180.
Pettibone, Erin, Ana Teresa Pérez-Leroux & Gabrielle Klassen
2021. Old Grammars New (?) Scope: Adjective Placement in Native and Non-Native Spanish. Languages 6:1 ► pp. 22 ff.
2021. The effects of aging on bilingual language: What changes, what doesn't, and why. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 24:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 april 2022. 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.