Language Transfer and Beyond: Pro-Drop, Code Switching, and Acquisition Milestones in Bilingual Polish-English Children
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LANGUAGE TRANSFER AND BEYOND: PRO-DROP, CODE SWITCHING, AND ACQUISITION MILESTONES IN BILINGUAL POLISH-ENGLISH CHILDREN DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Magdalena Gruszczynska-Harrison, M.A. Graduate Program in Slavic and East European Languages and Literatures The Ohio State University 2010 Dissertation Committee: Ludmila Isurin, Ph.D. Advisor Laura Wagner, Ph.D. Committee Member Daniel Collins, Ph.D. Committee Member Copyright by Magdalena Gruszczynska-Harrison 2010 ABSTRACT The current study analyzes application and omission of pro-drop feature in the speech of bilingual Polish-English children. The aim of the study is to discern whether simultaneous bilingualism affects the use of the said feature in children’s language and whether there is a possibility of its transfer from Polish (pro-drop) to English (non-pro- drop) and vice versa. Most of the existing research on the topic of pro-drop was conducted within Universal Grammar confines. It focused predominantly on monolingual children and bilingual adults. The research presented here, however, is unique in its approach in that it departs from the UG position and applies the theory of language transfer to account for its findings. In addition, it looks at other instances of transfer in children’s speech, explores the instances of code switching, as well as gives an in-depth look into the developmental errors registered in the speech of bilingual children. The data for the study is based on speech samples from ten bilingual children who are simultaneous Polish-English bilinguals. The data was collected by means of three language tasks: a spontaneous conversation, a preplanned psycholinguistic task of story elicitation, and an elicitation of autobiographical narratives. Each set of the tasks was carried out first in Polish and then in English and recorded. The recordings were ii transcribed and coded for occurrences of null and overt subjects, code switches, language transfer, as well as other lexical, syntactic, and grammatical errors. The data analysis is quantitative and qualitative. It is unique in that it departs from Universal Grammar confines and uses the framework of multicompetence as well as the existing research and theory of language transfer as a basis for the discussion of its results. The findings do not support the notion of one common pro-drop or non-pro-drop feature for both languages. Rather, they suggest that the feature is different in each of the languages, and that the inaccuracy in its application or omission in the respective languages is a result of crosslinguistic influence – language transfer. Moreover, observed transfer is bidirectional – L1 affects L2 and L2 affects L1. In terms of their character and type, the instances of code switches found in the children’s speech were not deviant from those observed in bilingual adult speakers and can be attributed to the children’s exposure to both languages. As far as their language development is considered, the participants produced grammatical errors that pointed to an ongoing language acquisition process in English but showed a possible incomplete acquisition in Polish. iii To my beloved parents Zofia and Zbigniew iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS While this dissertation is an individual work, its completion would not have been possible without the help, support, guidance, and efforts of many people. I owe my deepest gratitude to my esteemed advisor, Dr. Ludmila Isurin. I have been extremely fortunate to have an advisor who encouraged and inspired me to work. It is because of her that I was able to complete my journey as a doctoral student and to write this dissertation. She believed in me even when I doubted my own abilities. Dr. Isurin has been patient, supportive, and exceptionally generous with her time and advice. Not only was she readily available for me, but also always read and responded to the drafts of each chapter of my work quicker than I could have wished. She is one of the rare advisors students hope to find. I wish to thank Dr. Laura Wagner, who encouraged my dissertation project from its inception. Incidentally, it was by working on a project for her class when the idea of this study first developed. She shared her expertise and experience in working with children and instructed me how to conduct my own research. I am indebted to her for her guidance as well as help in providing me with the necessary equipment for the study, and for her enthusiasm about my scholarly work. Without encouragement from Dr. Leonid Livak (University of Toronto), I would not have dared to think about pursuing a doctoral degree. Dr. Livak’s support and v practical advice in the past years of my academic journey have been immeasurable. Without him, I could not have accomplished what I was ultimately able to do. I am indebted to Dr. Daniel Collins for his steadfast moral and intellectual support. His patient instruction and coaching are truly appreciated. I would like to acknowledge Dr. Charles Gribble for his selfless commitment to his graduate students, of whom I was one. As my first advisor, he helped me conceptualize my ideas and find my academic focus. My studies would not have been the same without the social and academic support of my dear colleagues and friends. I am particularly grateful to Lauren Ressue, Susan Vdovichenko, Daria Safronova, Marcela Michalkova, Larysa Stepanova, and Matt Curtis. It was a pleasure to share life and doctoral studies with them. Most importantly, I want to thank my parents, Zofia and Zbigniew, and sister Dorota for their infinite love and patience. They have always supported my passion for learning and my idea of pursing a life of a scholar. Words alone cannot express the thanks I owe to my husband Lonny for his love and unswerving faith in me, for the benefit of his proofreading and editing skill, and for being an indispensable interlocutor throughout the process. Finally, I wish to thank my young study participants and their parents, who made this project possible. To all the above individuals, and to friends and colleagues too numerous to mention who have assisted me in this process, I feel very much indebted. vi VITA 2004................................................................Hon. B.A., Linguistics, University of Toronto, Canada 2005................................................................M.A. Slavic Languages and Literatures University of Toronto, Canada 2007 to present ..............................................Graduate Teaching Associate, Department Slavic and East European Languages and Literatures, The Ohio State University FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Slavic and East European Languages and Literatures vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT………………………………………………….……………………….…..ii DEDICATION………………………………..…………………………………………..iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………...…………………………………...…………….v VITA………………………………...…………………………………...………………vii LIST OF TABLES………………….…………………………………………………..xiii INTRODUCTION……………….………………………………………………………..1 CHAPTER 1: LANGUAGE ...……………………………………...…………………….9 1. Introduction……………………..………………………………………………………9 2. Language Typology………………………..………………………………………….12 3. Markedness and Typology ……………………………………………………………13 4. Forms and Role of Language Typology………………………………………………13 5. Language Typology in Second Language Acquisition and Bilingualism…….………16 6. Typology of Polish and English…………………………………………………….…18 6.1. Word Order……………………………………………..…………………18 6.1.1. Word Order in Polish……………………………...………………18 6.1.2. Word Order in English…………………………...………………..21 6.2. Null and Overt Pronominal Subjects – Pro-drop versus Non-pro-drop Feature………………………………….…22 6.2.1. Pro-drop in Polish………………………………………………...23 6.2.2. Non-pro-drop in English……………………..……………………24 7. Implications for Studies on Crosslinguistic Influences……………………………….25 CHAPTER 2: MARKEDNESS THEORY AND UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR……..…..27 1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………..………..27 2. Markedness………………………………………………….………………………...27 3. Markedness and Universal Grammar……………………………..…………………...29 4. First Language Acquisition and Markedness………………………..………………...30 4.1. UG-Based Approach…………………………..…………………………….30 4.2 Alternative Approaches…………………..………………………………….33 viii 5. Second Language Acquisition…………………………………………………….…..41 5.1. SLA, UG, and Markedness………………….………………………………41 5.2. SLA and Markedness – Exploring Reasons for Transfer………………..….44 CHAPTER 3: LANGUAGE TRANSFER....……………………………….……...…....53 1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………....53 2. Second Language Acquisition…………………………….………………………......54 2.1 Code Switching………………………………………………..……………..55 2.2 Transfer and Code Switching Debate……………………………….……….56 3. Transfer…………………………………………………………………….………….62 4. Approaches to Transfer…………………………………………….………………….68 4.1.1. Contrastive Analysis………………………………………………………68 4.1.2. Shortcomings of Contrastive Analysis…………………….………………70 4.2.1. Markedness Theory……………………………………………………….72 4.2.2. Shortcomings of Markedness……………………………………………..72 4.3.1. Language Typology……………………………………………………….74 4.3.2. Advantages of Language Typology……………………………………….79 4.3.3. Typology and Prediction of Transfer Directionality and Simplification through Transfer………………...…………………….80 4.3.4. Directionality of Transfer – Bidirectional Transfer……………………….85 4.4 Psycholinguistic Approaches………………………………………………...87 5. Transfer in Bilingual Adults……………………………………...…………….……..89 6. Transfer in Bilingual Children…………………………………………….………...95 7. Discussion of Findings on Bilingual Adult and Children