Heritage%20Language%20Institute%20Urbana%20Champaign - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Heritage%20Language%20Institute%20Urbana%20Champaign

Description:

Title: Heritage Language Institute Urbana Champaign Last modified by: Matthew Giangrande Created Date: 6/14/2009 9:53:53 PM Document presentation format – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:27
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 61
Provided by: ucl78
Learn more at: http://nhlrc.ucla.edu
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Heritage%20Language%20Institute%20Urbana%20Champaign


1
(No Transcript)
2
Third Annual Heritage Language Research Institute
  • Introductory remarks
  • Maria Polinsky

3
WELCOME
  • Third annual event
  • More participation by graduate students and
    educators
  • More languages represented

4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
  • DOE and UCLA Russian Flagship Program
  • Olga Kagan
  • Kathleen Dillon
  • Abbas Benmamoun and Silvina Montrul
  • Kathryn Paul, Susie Bauckus, Agazit Abate,
    Matthew Giangrande
  • Local organizers

5
THIS PRESENTATION
  • Research challenges posed by heritage languages
  • WHERE WE HAVE BEEN
  • WHERE WE MIGHT WANT TO GO NEXT
  • Goals of this Institute (and beyond)

6
RESEARCH CHALLENGES POSED BY HERITAGE LANGUAGES
7
HERITAGE LANGUAGE RESEARCH A QUICK LOOK BACK
  • Early steps general understanding of the
    phenomenon and critical differentiation of
    categories
  • Heritage language in the narrow sense of the word
  • Variance among heritage speakers, different
    subtypes of speakers
  • Structural and developmental parallels across
    different heritage languages
  • Data collection (still neededwill return to this
    later)

8
HERITAGE LANGUAGE RESEARCH A QUICK LOOK BACK
  • Early steps general understanding of the
    phenomenon and critical differentiation of
    categories
  • Next steps what is there and what is missing in
    a typical heritage language?

On the positive side On the negative side
Phonetic competence Impressive comprehension Reasonable pragmatics Age-appropriate grammar Ambiguity resolution Complexity vocabulary
9
RESEARCH CHALLENGES
  • Early steps general understanding of the
    phenomenon and critical differentiation of
    categories
  • Next step what is there and what is missing?
  • Moving forward why are certain things missing?
  • Once we know why certain things are missing it
    becomes easier to put them back in place, for
    example, in the classroom

10
SOME THOUGHTS ON WHAT MAY BE MISSING AND WHY
11
BY WAY OF EXERCISE
  • The woman who was seen by my neighbor that
    stopped by last night speaks Spanish
  • The woman stopped by
  • The neighbor stopped by

12
BY WAY OF EXERCISE
  • The woman who was seen by my neighbor that
    stopped by last night speaks Spanish
  • The woman stopped by
  • The neighbor stopped by
  • La donna fermata dalla vicina che e' venuta a
    farmi visita ieri parla spagnolo
  • The woman stopped by
  • The neighbor stopped by

13
BY WAY OF EXERCISE
  • The woman who was seen by my neighbor that
    stopped by last night speaks Spanish
  • The woman stopped by
  • The neighbor stopped by
  • La donna fermata dal vicino che e' venuto a farmi
    visita ieri parla spagnolo
  • The woman stopped by
  • The neighbor stopped by

14
BY WAY OF EXERCISE
  • La donna fermata dal vicino che e' venuto a farmi
    visita ieri parla spagnolo
  • The neighbor stopped by

15
BY WAY OF EXERCISE
  • The woman who was seen by my neighbor that
    stopped by last night speaks Spanish
  • The woman stopped by
  • The neighbor stopped by
  • La donna fermata dal vicino che e' venuta a farmi
    visita ieri parla spagnolo
  • The woman stopped by
  • The neighbor stopped by

16
BY WAY OF EXERCISE
  • La donna fermata dal vicino che e' venuta a farmi
    visita ieri parla spagnolo
  • The woman stopped by

17
WHAT WAS THIS ABOUT?
  • Maintaining a long-distance dependency
  • Structure recognizing an antecedentgap
    relationship
  • Memory holding the antecedent in working memory
  • Admitting ambiguity and complexity
  • Resolving the ambiguity with the help from small
    details

18
WHAT IS MISSING AND WHY
  • What Heritage speakers show recurrent deficits
    with complex and/or ambiguous structures
  • Why These deficits may appear as heritage
    speakers overlook small details

19
SMALL DETAILS
  • Small things have a big rolethe ending on the
    Italian participle was all that one needed to
    resolve the ambiguity
  • Small things are functional elements that tie big
    things together

20
PROPOSAL
  • Heritage speakers dont sweat the small stuff
  • and pay dearly for that
  • they have a relatively poor control of morphology
  • which cascades and escalates into a series of
    greater apparent deficits
  • such as problems with long-distance dependencies,
    binding, or agreement

21
  • Heritage speakers have difficulty noticing and
    producing light functional elements,
  • which in turn leads to the appearance of
    significant deficits in the syntactic design of
    their language
  • The deficits are both in production and
    comprehension

22
DO HERITAGE SPEAKERS PRODUCE MORPHOLOGY?
  • Montrul and Bowles 2008, Montrul 2008 heritage
    speakers of Spanish have a problem with a
    personal
  • They do not seem to have a problem with bigger
    prepositions and particles

23
DO HERITAGE SPEAKERS HEAR MORPHOLOGY?
Sekerina 2005 eye-tracking study of structural
ambiguities in Russian monolinguals and heritage
speakers

24
DO HERITAGE SPEAKERS HEAR MORPHOLOGY?
  • Put the horse thats on the plate in the box
  • Put the horse on the plate in the box

25
DO HERITAGE SPEAKERS HEAR MORPHOLOGY?
Položite lošadku na tarelku i v korobku
put horsey. ACC on to the plate and Into the box
Položite lošadku na tarelke v korobku
put horsey. ACC on the plate Into the box
26
DO HERITAGE SPEAKERS HEAR MORPHOLOGY?
  • Heritage speakers adversaries
  • Inflectional endings
  • Light connectors such as i, a, etc.

27
DO HERITAGE SPEAKERS HEAR MORPHOLOGY?
  • Polinsky 2007 heritage speakers of Russian do
    not recognize gender agreement endings in
    adjective and ignore word-final gender cues on
    nouns
  • the sensitivity deteriorates when the endings are
    unstressed
  • end-stressed neuter nouns are preserved at about
    70, end-unstressed neuter nouns are reanalyzed
    as feminines

28
BELOW THE MORPHOLOGICAL BOTTLENECK
  • Korean double nominative
  • Russian and Tongan relative clauses
  • Russian count forms

29
Korean double nominative
  • Cascading effects Korean double nominative
  • Minswu-ka chinku-ka khu-ta
  • Minswu-NOM friend-NOM big-DEC
  • Minswus friends are tall.
  • The structure requires semantic (and syntactic)
    subordination
  • Minswu-uy chinku-ka khu-ta
  • M-GEN friend-NOM big-DEC

30
Korean double nominative
  • Instead of interpreting the structure as
    subordinating, the subjects interpret it as
    coordinate (Minswu and friends are tall), thus
  • X-ka Y-ka ? X-uy Y-ka
  • X-ka Y-ka ? X-kwa Y
  • Similar reanalysis with the true genitive (less
    common)

31
Russian relative clauses
  • Despite the appearance of overt morphology
    heritage speakers reanalyze relative clauses as
    subject relatives (Polinsky 2008)
  • the people that my neighbor saw ? the people
    that saw my neighbor
  • But maybe they just assimilate this to the most
    common word order (SV) and treat the first noun
    as subject?

32
Tongan relative clauses
  • Tongan (Austronesian), VSO (alternative VOS)

Oku ui e faiako a e tamasii
PRES call ERG teacher ABS DET boy
predicate predicate subject subject object object object
The teacher is calling the boy.
33
Tongan relative clauses
Subject relative

a e faiako oku ne ui a e tamasii
ABS DET teacher PRES RP call ABS DET boy
the teacher who is calling the boy the teacher who is calling the boy the teacher who is calling the boy the teacher who is calling the boy the teacher who is calling the boy the teacher who is calling the boy the teacher who is calling the boy the teacher who is calling the boy the teacher who is calling the boy
Object relative
a e tamasii oku ui e faiako
ABS DET boy PRES call ABS teacher
the boy whom the teacher is calling the boy whom the teacher is calling the boy whom the teacher is calling the boy whom the teacher is calling the boy whom the teacher is calling the boy whom the teacher is calling the boy whom the teacher is calling the boy whom the teacher is calling
34
Preliminary results for Tongan
  • Adult speakers distinguish subject and object
    relatives easily subject relatives are faster
  • Heritage speakers (N5) make errors favoring the
    subject relative interpretation however,
  • subject relative clause is morphologically more
    complex
  • word order differences should be a cue relative
    clauses look like SVO, they are not verb-initial

35
Morphology of counting
  • Russian count form In Russian, the form of the
    noun used with numerals 2-4 looks like genitive
    singularbut is it?
  • Native speakers Gen.sg. is a special form
    which does not map to the underlying
    representation of gen. sg. (Xiang et al.
    submitted)
  • Advanced heritage speakers simplification of
    morphological distinctions, Gen.sg. is gen.
    sg.? morphology is more shallow

36
Losing small stuff
  • Inflectional morphology (small stuff) is
    difficult across a number of populations
    including heritage speakers
  • Why?
  • Salience they just dont notice it
  • Lack of automatic access they have no time to
    process it and therefore ignore it

37
Consequences
  • Inflectional morphology (small stuff) is
    difficult because it is not automatic
  • Morphological deficit forces speakers into the
    easiest parsing available
  • Default parsing (pragmatically plausible)
  • Usually works but breaks down under ambiguity.
  • First pass parsing (subject and predicate
    division without further subdivisions)

38
First pass parsing
..
Subject t
VP t
DONE!
39
Consequences
  • Morphological deficit forces speakers into the
    easier parsing available
  • Default parsing
  • First pass parsing
  • This shallow parsing leads to the appearance of
    greater deficits in syntax
  • Outstanding question are some deficits syntactic
    in nature or can they all be attributed to
    morphology?

40
  • ARE HERITAGE LANGUAGES WITHOUT MORPHOLOGY SAFE?

Tamarine (Tammy) Tamasugarn
41
Free production high fluency
  • Okay, everybody always thought like I grown up
    in States, but actually no. I was born in States,
    and when I was four I moved back to Thailand with
    parents and I grown up in Thailand. So I
    definitely am Thai. Everything, the culture,
    everything Thai. But I also know also American
    culture also because part of my family also in
    L.A.

42
Free production high fluency
  • So I learn language and, you know, how, maybe
    you can tell from my speak. But I think it's
    great to know both of culture and, you know,
    adjust in your life and bring all the good stuff
    on each culture to improve your life and make
    your life happy. So I think that's a very good to
    learn for both culture, yeah.

43
A reporter asks
  • Q. As someone who has been on the tour for quite
    a long time and been at Wimbledon for so many
    years in a row, what sense of appreciation do you
    have at this sometimes seemingly inevitable march
    to a Williams sisters final, and what are your
    thoughts on when they play each other?

44
Tammy replies
  • I think they been in many Grand Slam final
    against each other. You know, they're, both of
    them, you know, they're great players. They're
    working hard. You know, I admire their so much
    because they're working on the tour like really
    hard and very serious on their career. And, um,
    you know, for them to be in the final is like
    probably bored, huh? I don't know. Not really
    bored. But good for them anyway. So it's gonna be
    maybe, I don't know, I don't know, I couldn't
    say. But they're good players, yeah.

45
  • Q. Do you feel you competed well in that match?
  • Um, yes, I, I think I'm, you know, go out there
    and, and try the best I cant. And, um, I think
    I, I was joking myself, I have so many
    breakpoints in the first set.
  • But, you know, Venus, in, you know, that kind of
    top players, you know, like defending champion,
    she don't give you any easy chance to use, so you
    have to make it. And, um, she served very well
    during the, during the breakpoints, sowhat can I
    do? I, I play veryyou know, I try the best I can
    today.

46
  • Q. Did you approach it any differently than your
    other matches against Venus?
  • Well, her, her game and her style is really hard
    because she have a very, very hard weapon, you
    know, big serve and big groundstrokes.
  • And, you know, today I try to be aggressive and
    step up, you know, and I think, um, part of the
    couple, many points that I, I tried, you know,
    tried to do in the good way.
  • But, um, only thing today, is like, it's her
    serve. I really, she served very well today,
    and... You know, like, I was like when she's
    acing me many times, I was like, can I probably
    next life I want to be tall as her, please, or
    something like that.
  • But it's just, yeah, its, its, she's, shes
    serve very well today, yeah.

47
Some observations
  • Damaged morphology
  • Missing functional elements
  • Multiple redundancies and repetitions
  • Short segments, no embeddings
  • Word order different from the baseline
  • If Tammy is any indication, languages with
    little or no morphology also show attrition
    effects

48
IMMEDIATE NEEDS
  • Needed Studies of comprehension in
    morphologically poor languages
  • Needed Inventory of errors made by HL speakers
    of Vietnamese, Cantonese, Mandarin, etc.

49
QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
  • The morphology-syntax interface seems
    particularly fragile. What is the equivalent of
    this interface in languages without inflectional
    morphology?
  • Are other interfaces fragile too?
  • If yes, which ones?
  • If no, what makes morphology special?

50
QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
  • What happens to morphology in the grammar of
    heritage languages
  • Does it go unnoticed? (the salience
    hypothesis)
  • Does it get sacrificed to minimize processing
    costs? (the automation hypothesis)
  • How to separate memory effects from language
    effects?

51
PEDAGOGICAL CONSEQUENCES
  • Heritage speakers can benefit from enhanced
    morphological awareness
  • Morphology without moans
  • Lexical development without rote learning
  • Practicing ambiguities
  • Practicing linguistic awareness and possibly word
    play

52
Sneaking morphology through the lexicon
  • Linguistic rationale
  • vocabulary knowledge correlates with grammatical
    knowledge
  • L1 learners (size of lexicon and MLU correlate
    between ages 16 and 30 (Bates et al. 2003)
  • heritage speakers (Polinsky 1995, 2006)

53
Lexical proficiency, Russian HS
Correlation between lexical knowledge and
control of grammatical agreement (r .882)
54
Sneaking morphology through the lexicon
  • Pedagogical rationale
  • more wordsmore fun interaction
  • more wordsmore perception and language
    awareness (more in Olgas presentation this
    afternoon)

55
GOALS OF THIS INSTITUTE
56
GENERAL GOALS FOR THIS WEEK
  • Educating researchers what is missing in HL
    research?
  • Educating educators what works and what does not
    work in HL relearning?

57
BUZZWORDS FOR THIS WEEK
  • Heritage speakers relearn SMALL things by
    learning BIGGER things
  • My heritage speakers are

NOT
like your heritage speakers
58
DISCUSSION POINTS FOR THIS WEEK
  • Commonalities across different heritage languages
  • Comparison between L2 learners and heritage
    speakers
  • Research and teaching methodologies for specific
    levels of heritage classrooms
  • Development of appropriate instructional
    materials for heritage speakers
  • Development of proficiency measures for heritage
    learners

59
BEYOND THIS WEEK
  • Connecting linguistic research and pedagogical
    practice
  • Building bridges across heritage languages
  • Creating a viable network of HL researchers and
    educators

Blogs? Tweets? Online classrooms? Online lab
meetings?
Coming soon a blog on HL at the Polinsky Lab
website http//www.fas.harvard.edu/herpro/index.
htm
60
THANK YOU! ENJOY YOUR WEEK AT UIUC!
About PowerShow.com