Discourse-sensitive clitic-doubled dislocations in heritage Spanish

This experimental study tests the predictions of the Interface Hypothesis (Sorace, 2011, 2012) using two constructions whose appropriateness depends on monitoring discourse information: Clitic Left Dislocation and Fronted Focus. Clitic Left Dislocation relates a dislocated and clitic-doubled object to an antecedent activated in previous discourse, while Fronted Focus does not relate the fronted constituent to a discourse antecedent. The Interface Hypothesis argues that speakers in language contact situations experience difficulties when they have to integrate syntactic with discourse information. We tested four groups of native speakers on these constructions: Spanish monolinguals, bilinguals with more than 7 years residence in the US, intermediate and advanced proficiency heritage speakers. Our findings suggest that attrition has not set in the adult L2 bilingual speakers, and that the heritage speakers perform similarly to the monolingual and the adult sequential bilingual natives.

A rare structure at the syntax-discourse interface: heritage and Spanish-dominant native speakers weigh in

The present study examines knowledge of the discourse-appropriateness of Clitic Right Dislocation (CLRD) in a population of Heritage (HS) and Spanish-dominant Native Speakers in order to test the predictions of the Interface Hypothesis (IH; Sorace 2011). The IH predicts that speakers in language contact situations will experience difficulties with integrating information involving the interface of syntax and discourse modules. CLRD relates a dislocated constituent to a discourse antecedent, requiring integration of syntax and pragmatics. Results from an acceptability judgment task did not support the predictions of the IH. No statistical differences between the HSs’ performance and that of L1-dominant native speakers were evidenced when participants were presented with an offline task. Thus, our study did not find any evidence of “incomplete acquisition” (Montrul 2008) as it pertains to this specific linguistic structure.

Eventive and stative passives and copula selection in Canadian and American heritage speaker Spanish

Spanish captures the difference between eventive and stative passives via an obligatory choice between two copula; verbal passives take the copula ser and adjectival passives take the copula estar. In this study, we compare and contrast US and Canadian heritage speakers of Spanish on their knowledge of this difference in relation to copula choice in Spanish. The backgrounds of the target groups differ significantly from each other in that only one of them, the Canadian group, has grown up in a societal multilingual environment. We discuss the results as being supportive of two non-mutually exclusive explanation factors: (a) French facilitates (bootstraps) the acquisition of eventive and stative passives and/or (b) the US/Canadian HS differences (e.g. status of bilingualism and the languages at stake) is a reflection of the uniqueness of the language contact situations and the effects this has on the input HSS receive.

Ultimate attainment in the use of lexical collocations among heritage speakers of Turkish in Germany and Turkish-German returnees

In this paper we show that heritage speakers and returnees are fundamentally different from the majority of adult second language learners with respect to their use of collocations (Laufer & Waldman, 2011). We compare the use of lexical collocations involving yap- “do” and et- “do” among heritage speakers of Turkish in Germany (n=45) with those found among Turkish returnees (n=65) and Turkish monolinguals (n=69). Language use by returnees is an understudied resource although this group can provide crucial insights into the specific language ability of heritage speakers. Results show that returnees who had been back for one year avoid collocations with yap- and use some hypercorrect forms in et-, whilst returnees who had been back for seven years upon recording produce collocations that are quantitatively and qualitatively similar to those of monolingual speakers of Turkish. We discuss implications for theories of ultimate attainment and incomplete acquisition in heritage speakers.

Concepts for a geostationary-like polar missions

An evidence-led scientific case for development of a space-based polar remote sensing platform at geostationary-like (GEO-like) altitudes is developed through methods including a data user survey. Whilst a GEO platform provides a nearstatic perspective, multiple platforms are required to provide circumferential coverage. Systems for achieving GEO-like polar observation likewise require multiple platforms however the perspective is non-stationery. A key choice is between designs that provide complete polar view from a single platform at any given instant, and designs where this is obtained by compositing partial views from multiple sensors. Users foresee an increased challenge in extracting geophysical information from composite images and consider the use of non-composited images advantageous. Users also find the placement of apogee over the pole to be preferable to the alternative scenarios. Thus, a clear majority of data users find the “Taranis” orbit concept to be better than a critical inclination orbit, due to the improved perspective offered. The geophysical products that would benefit from a GEO-like polar platform are mainly estimated from radiances in the visible/near infrared and thermal parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is consistent with currently proven technologies from GEO. Based on the survey results, needs analysis, and current technology proven from GEO, scientific and observation requirements are developed along with two instrument concepts with eight and four channels, based on Flexible Combined Imager heritage. It is found that an operational system could, mostly likely, be deployed from an Ariane 5 ES to a 16-hour orbit, while a proof-of-concept system could be deployed from a Soyuz launch to the same orbit.

Ultimate attainment in the use of collocations among heritage speakers of Turkish in Germany and Turkish-German returnees

In this paper we show that heritage speakers and returnees are fundamentally different from the majority of adult second language learners with respect to their use of collocations (Laufer & Waldman, 2011). We compare the use of lexical collocations involving yap- “do” and et- “do” among heritage speakers of Turkish in Germany (n=45) with those found among Turkish returnees (n=65) and Turkish monolinguals (n=69). Language use by returnees is an understudied resource although this group can provide crucial insights into the specific language ability of heritage speakers. Results show that returnees who had been back for one year avoid collocations with yap- and use some hypercorrect forms in et-, whilst returnees who had been back for seven years upon recording produce collocations that are quantitatively and qualitatively similar to those of monolingual speakers of Turkish. We discuss implications for theories of ultimate attainment and incomplete acquisition in heritage speakers.

Terminology matters! Why difference is not incompleteness and how early child bilinguals are heritage speakers

This paper integrates research on child simultaneous bilingual (2L1) acquisition more directly into the heritage language (HL) acquisition literature. The 2L1 literature mostly focuses on development in childhood, whereas heritage speakers (HSs) are often tested at an endstate in adulthood. However, insights from child 2L1 acquisition must be considered in HL acquisition theorizing precisely because many HSs are the adult outcomes of child 2L1 acquisition. Data from 2L1 acquisition raises serious questions for the construct of incomplete acquisition, a term broadly used in HL acquisition studies to describe almost any difference HSs display from baseline controls (usually monolinguals). We offer an epistemological discussion related to incomplete acquisition, highlighting the descriptive and theoretical inaccuracy of the term. We focus our discussion on two of several possible causal factors that contribute to variable competence outcomes in adult HSs, input (e.g., Sorace, 2004; Rothman, 2007; Pascual y Cabo & Rothman, 2012) and formal instruction (e.g., Kupisch, 2013; Kupisch et al., 2014) in the HL. We conclude by offering alternative terminology for HS outcomes.

Formal linguistic approaches to heritage language acquisition: bridges for pedagogically oriented research

The goal of this chapter is to lay out the central themes of heritage language acquisition research adopting a formal/theoretical linguistic perspective.  Specifically, we aim to provide a detailed discussion of the nature of heritage language grammars. In doing so, we will address the debates on how to explain heritage speaker competence differences from monolingual baselines and more. This chapter will not be limited to discussions of Spanish as a heritage language, but rather will highlight the important role that Spanish has played and will continue to play in the development of heritage language acquisition studies. Finally, we will offer some comments/insights on how the information covered regarding the formal linguistic properties of heritage speaker knowledge should be considered for and implemented in heritage language pedagogies and thus dealing with heritage speakers in the classroom setting.