1 / 12

Language-mixing and research on bilingual acquisition of prosody a methodological review

Language-mixing and research on bilingual acquisition of prosody a methodological review. Olga Gordeeva Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh. Introduction (1). a longitudinal analysis of speech production of Russian-Scottish English bilingual children (3;0 -- 4;0)

rodd
Télécharger la présentation

Language-mixing and research on bilingual acquisition of prosody a methodological review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Language-mixing and research on bilingual acquisition of prosodya methodological review Olga Gordeeva Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh

  2. Introduction (1) • a longitudinal analysis of speech production of Russian-Scottish English bilingual children (3;0 -- 4;0) • prosodic level of speech • extent of native-like command in relation to the language input • identify research specific language interference phenomena

  3. Introduction (2) • instrumental and statistical analysis of the acoustic correlates of word-stress in close vowels duration / fundamental frequency /intensity • independent research variable extrinsic vowel duration (EVD) • monosyllabic carrier-words in picture-naming tasks repeated in time

  4. Language Mixing Interference Language mixing:definitions (1) Code-switching

  5. Language mixing:definitions (2) • language interference • bidirectional influence LA<==>LB • Mennen 1998 • incidental nature (dynamic) metalinguistic awareness in adults (what about children, it is still to fully develop?) • representational (static) E.g. systematic phonic substitution // for/r/where there is only one phoneme

  6. Bilingual Child Speech Production of Language A "NATIVE” COMMAND OF Language A SPEECH IMMATURITY INTERFERENCE FROM LB Specificity of child’s “native-like” production in Language A

  7. Methodological Issues Three factors may distort the measured amount of language interference in speech production: • lack of language mode control • wrong reference for native-like command • child speech immaturity

  8. LANGUAGE A (base language) MONOLINGUAL LANGUAGE MODE BILINGUAL LANGUAGE MODE 1 2 3 LANGUAGE B Language Mixing and Language Mode Control Interference Code-switching Grosjean(2001), representation of the language mode continuum

  9. Monolingual Language Mode Control: How? • confront subjects with a different experimenter for each language; • ask parents not to be present in the experiment location Lanza,1990: different parental strategies toward language mixing ==> extent of mixing in child speech. • non-use of cognates: Russian // Scottish E. //

  10. Language Interference and Control of the Input HOW? control for the child’s specific linguistic environment • language input to the child may, but should not necessarily mean “standard language” input • input to the child language can be influenced by dialect, idiolect or L2 of caregivers. E.g.: R Scottish English

  11. Language Interference and Speech Immaturity HOW? elicit multiple repetitions of carrier-words to assess incidence • Matthews, 2001: variability and the acquisition of vowels in normally developing Scottish children • Problem: a non-adult like realisation may incidentally coincide with a cross-linguistic difference in focus of bilingual research. E.g.

  12. Summary and Remaining Problems • maximal ruling out of code-switching by language mode may not be guaranteed in child speech • control for linguistic input from immediate sociolinguistic environment of the child • absence of monolingual Russian peers as controls in our research design • use sufficient number of repetitions of carrier words

More Related