Children’s acquisition of word order variation: A study of subject placement in embedded clauses in Norwegian

Norwegian embedded clauses give children two options for subject placement: preceding or following negation (S-Neg/Neg-S). In the adult language, S-Neg is the ‘default’ and highly frequent option, and Neg-S is infrequent in children’s input. However, Neg-S may be argued to be the structurally less complex. We investigate whether children are aware of the existence of both subject positions, and if they prefer the more frequent or the less complex position. Through an elicited production task with monolingual Norwegian children (N=33, age 3;1-6;1) we find that children in general overuse the Neg-S option, and we suggest that children have an inherent preference for the less complex position, due to a principle of structural economy. We also find that a group of children display U-shaped development, first using only S-Neg, then only Neg-S and finally S-Neg again, and we relate this to structure building and economy of movement

Structural similarity in third language acquisition

Language learners typically experience cross-linguistic influence (CLI) from one or several previously acquired languages when acquiring an additional language. Learners of a second language (L2) are influenced by their native languages in all language domains ranging from phonology, lexicon, and morphosyntax, to semantics, discourse, and pragmatics. In third (and subsequent) language (L3/Ln) acquisition, however, there is more than one potential source of influence, as the learner already knows at least two languages, which both have the potential to influence subsequent language acquisition. This is the reason why existing models of L3/Ln language acquisition have mainly focused on issues related to CLI: (i) the source of CLI (L1, L2, both languages, typologically closest language, language of communication), (ii) the type of CLI (only facilitative or both facilitative and non-facilitative), and (iii) the extent of CLI (wholesale or property-by-property or hybrid). Different models attribute CLI to different factors, and there is still no consensus in multilingual acquisition research. According to existing models of L3 acquisition, the following factors may be the source of CLI: Order and/or manner of acquisition (The L2 Status Factor, e.g., Bardel & Falk 2007; L1 Transfer, e.g., Jin 2009), language use (The Language of Communication Model, e.g., Fallah et al., 2016; Fallah & Jabbari 2018) or some kind of structural similarity (The Typological Primacy Model, Rothman, 2015; The Linguistic Proximity Model, Westergaard et al., 2017; Westergaard 2021a, b; The Scalpel Model, Slabakova, 2017). The five articles in this issue zoom in on this last factor, structural similarity, specifically in phonology and morphosyntax, which are examined at early stages of L3 acquisition as well as in L3 development.publishedVersio

Russian heritage language development in narrative contexts: Evidence from pre- and primary-school children in Norway, Germany, and the UK

The present study aims at obtaining a comprehensive picture of language development in Russian heritage language (RHL) by bringing together evidence from previous investigations focusing on morphosyntax and global accent as well as from a newly conducted analysis of a less-studied domain–lexical development. Our investigation is based on a narrative sample of 143 pre- and primary-school bilinguals acquiring RHL in Norway, Germany, and the United Kingdom. We performed a multiple-way analysis of lexical production in RHL across the different national contexts, across both languages (heritage and societal), also comparing bilinguals and monolinguals. The results revealed a clear and steady increase with age in narrative length and lexical diversity for all bilingual groups in both of their languages. The variation in lexical productivity as well as the differences between the bilingual groups and between bilinguals and monolinguals were attributed to input factors with language exposure in the home and age of starting preschool as the major predictors. We conclude that, overall, the results from lexical, grammatical, and phonological acquisition in RHL support the view that having longer exclusive or uninterrupted exposure to a heritage language in early childhood is beneficial for its development across domains

Phonological influence in bilectal speakers of Brazilian and European Portuguese

Aims and objectives: This article investigates naturalistic acquisition of a second dialect (D2), comparing the global accent of speakers of Brazilian Portuguese (BP) exposed to European Portuguese (EP), either as children or as adults (early vs late bilectals). The focus is on the predicted advantage of an early age of onset of the D2, as well as possible crosslinguistic influence from the D2 onto the first dialect (D1). Design and methodology: The study is an Accent Rating Task, where 50 raters judged the global accent of 30 BP speakers living in Portugal (15 early + 15 late bilectals), who were recorded in both BP and EP modes. Using a 6-point Likert-type scale, the raters judged whether the speakers sounded Brazilian or Portuguese and also indicated how certain they were about their judgment. Data and analysis: The data consisted of two 10-second audio snippets from each speaker, one in BP and the other in EP mode (altogether 60 items). In addition, there were 10 control items produced by native BP and EP speakers. Several mixed-effects models compared the target groups to each other and to the monolectal controls. Findings and conclusions: Both the early and late bilectals were rated as Brazilian in BP mode, but the degree of rater certainty was significantly lower for early than for late bilectals, which was again lower than for BP monolectals. In EP mode, early bilectals were perceived as Portuguese (though the raters were less certain than when rating EP monolectals), while late bilectals were judged as Brazilian

Minnetale over Janne Margrethe Bondi Johannessen i Det norske videnskapsakademi

Source at https://dnva.no/om-akademiet/arsrapportering.Janne Bondi Johannessen ble medlem av DNVA så sent som i 2019. Hun rakk altså bare å være medlem i litt over et år før hun gikk bort 15. juni 2020, bare 59 år gammel. Hun forlot en aktiv og produktiv forskergjerning som ble brått avbrutt – og hennes utallige aktiviteter ble rett og slett hengende i luften: en konferanse, flere publikasjoner, et bokprosjekt, en redaktørgjerning, prosjektsøknader og mye annet. Mange i det norske språkvitenskapsmiljøet har vært nødt til å steppe inn for å fylle alle tomrommene Janne etterlater seg, noe som til fulle illustrerer hvor betydningsfull hun var for dette miljøet. Janne var energisk og initiativrik, alltid med planer om nye prosjekter og aktiviteter. Derfor hadde hun mye ugjort da livet tok slutt. Likevel fikk hun utrettet mer i løpet av karrieren enn de fleste andre

Crosslinguistic influence in L3 acquisition: Evidence from artificial language learning

This study investigates the role of lexical vs structural similarity in L3 acquisition. We designed a mini-artificial language learning task where the novel L3 was lexically based on Norwegian but included a property that was present in Russian and Greek yet absent in Norwegian (grammatical case). The participants were Norwegian-Russian and Norwegian-Greek bilinguals as well as a group of Norwegian L1 speakers. All participants also knew some English. The morphological expression of the L3 target property was more like Russian than Greek in that case was marked on the noun itself, not on articles. The results of our study indicate that previous experience with a language that is structurally like the L3 (Russian) is facilitative, even when the L3 lexically resembles a language that lacks this grammatical property (Norwegian). Our results suggest overt that the morphological expression of the target property also plays a role: previous experience with Greek that marks the target contrast on determiners did not seem to be facilitative at early stages of acquisition. Overall, our results are in line with models of L3/Ln acquisition which assume that both previously acquired languages influence the development of the L3 and that structural, morphological and lexical similarity play a role