In:The Acquisition of Differential Object Marking
Edited by Alexandru Mardale and Silvina Montrul
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 26] 2020
► pp. 237–260
Chapter 9The processing of Differential Object Marking by heritage speakers of
Spanish
Published online: 18 June 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.26.09are
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.26.09are
Abstract
This study examines the online processing of Differential Object
Marking by heritage speakers of Spanish living in the U.S. Previous research
has found that even heritage speakers with high proficiency in Spanish omit
DOM with animate objects in oral production and find omitted DOM acceptable
in judgment tasks. Therefore, this study investigated whether heritage
speakers’ acceptability of DOM omission is reflected in their language
processing. Twenty monolingual-raised native speakers and 20 heritage
speakers participated in an eye-tracking reading experiment. Sentences
varied in DOM marking (use vs. omission) and word order (SVO vs. VSO).
Overall, reading time data indicated that heritage speakers behaved more
similarly to monolingual-raised native speakers than predicted. The
potential effects of language variation and language attrition are
discussed.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Heritage speakers and the heritage language
- 3.Differential Object Marking in Spanish
- 4.Acquisition of Differential Object Marking by monolingual and heritage speakers
- 5.Methodology
- 5.1Participants
- 5.2Materials
- 5.3Procedure
- 5.4Data analysis
- 6.Results
- Summary of the results
- 7.Discussion
Notes References
References (41)
Aissen, J. (2003). Differential
Object Marking: Iconicity
vs. economy. Natural Language and
Linguistic
Theory, 21, 435–83.
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition,
variation and language
learning. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms
of language
acquisition (pp. 157–194). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bates, D., Machler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting
linear mixed-effects models using
lme4. Journal of Statistical
Software, 67(1).
Bolger, P., & Zapata, G. (2011). Semantic categories and context in L2 vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 61, 614–646..
Burgo, C. (2016). Perceptions
of L2 Spanish learners in the mixed
classroom. Revista Nebrija de
Lingüística Aplicada, 20. <[URL]> (21 January, 2020).
Chamorro, G., Sorace, A., & Sturt, P. (2016). What
is the source of L1 attrition? The effect of recent L1 reexposure on
Spanish speakers under L1
attrition. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 19(3), 520–532.
Grosjean, F. (1982). Life
with two languages: An introduction to
bilingualism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Heusinger, K. von. & Kaiser, G. A. (2005). The
evolution of Differential Object Marking in
Spanish. In K. von Heusinger, G. A. Kaiser, & E. Stark (Eds.), Proceedings
of the Workshop “Specificity and the Evolution/ Emergence of Nominal
Determination in Romance” (Arbeitspapier
119, pp. 33–69). Konstanz: University of Konstanz.
Hopp, H., & León Arriaga, M. E. (2016). Structural
and inherent case in the non-native processing of Spanish:
Constraints on inflectional
variability. Second Language
Research, 32, 75–108.
Instituto Cervantes. (2007). Diploma de Español como Lengua Extranjera (DELE): Nivel Superior [Spanish Proficiency Exam]. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: [URL].
Jegerski, J. (2014). On-line
sensitivity to case marking among heritage Spanish bilinguals in the
U.S. Study presented at the Workshop on Heritage Language Speakers in Society and Education, Stockholm.
Jegerski, J., & VanPatten, B. (2014). Research
methods in second language
psycholinguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.
Kilborn, K. (1994). Learning
a language late: Second language acquisition in
adults. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook
of
psycholinguistics (pp. 917–944). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Liu, H., Bates, E., & Li, P. (1992). Sentence
interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and
Chinese. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 13, 451–484.
Lunn, P. (2002). Tout
se tient in Dominican
Spanish. In J. Lee, K. Geeslin, & J. C. Clements (Eds.), Structure,
meaning, and acquisition in
Spanish (pp. 65–72). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (Eds.). (1989). The
crosslinguistic study of sentence
processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MacWhinney, B. 2000. Perspective-taking
and grammar. Japanese Society for the
Language
Sciences, 1, 1–25.
Montrul, S. (2002). Incomplete
acquisition and attrition of Spanish tense/aspect distinctions in
adult bilinguals. Bilingualism:
Language and
Cognition, 5, 39–68.
(2004). Subject
and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers. A case of
morpho-syntactic
convergence. Bilingualism: Language
and
Cognition, 7, 125–142.
Montrul, S., & Bowles, M. (2010). Is
grammar instruction beneficial for heritage language learners?
Dative case marking in Spanish. The
Heritage Language
Journal, 7(1), 47–73.
Montrul, S., Foote, R., & Perpiñán, S. (2008). Gender
agreement in adult second language learners and Spanish heritage
speakers: The effects of age and context of
acquisition. Language
Learning, 58, 503–553.
Montrul, S., & Bowles, M. (2009). Back
to basics: Differential Object Marking under incomplete acquisition
in Spanish heritage
speakers. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 12(3), 363–383.
Montrul, S., & Sánchez-Walker, N. (2013). Differential
Object Marking in child and adult Spanish heritage
speakers. Language
Acquisition, 20, 109–132.
Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191–201.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye
movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of
research. Psychological
Bulletin, 124, 372–422.
Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, M. (2008). The
acquisition of Differential Object Marking in
Spanish. Probus, 20(1), 111–145.
Schwartz, B. (2004). Why
child L2
acquisition? In J. van Kampen & S. Baauw (Eds.), Proceedings
of GALA 2003 (Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition) held at
Utrecht University 4–6
September (pp. 47–66). Utrecht: LOT.
Sekerina, I. A., & Trueswell, J. C. 2011. Processing
of contrastiveness by heritage Russian
bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language
and
Cognition, 14(3), 280–300.
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1991). Spanish
language attrition in a contact situation with
English. In H. Seliger & R. Vago (Eds.), First
language
attrition (pp. 151–171). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Su, I-Ru. (2001). Transfer
of sentence processing strategies: A comparison of L2 learners of
Chinese and English. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 22, 83–112.
Ticio, E. (2015). The
acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish-English early
bilinguals. Linguist Approaches to
Bilingualism, 5, 62–90.
Ticio, E., & Avram, L. (2015). The
acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish and Romanian:
Semantic scales or semantic
features? Revue Roumaine de
Linguistique, 60(4), 383–402.
Vaid, J., & Pandit, R. (1991). Sentence
interpretation in normal and aphasic Hindi
speakers. Brain and
Language, 41, 250–274.
Valdés, G. (2001). Heritage
language students: Profiles and
possibilities. In J. Peyton, D. Ranard, & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Heritage
languages in America: Preserving a national
resource (pp. 37–80). McHenry, IL: Center for Applied Linguistics.
VanPatten, B. (2005). Processing
instruction. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind
and context in adult second language
acquisition (pp. 267–281). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Puig-Mayenco, Eloi & Tiffany Judy
Bhatia, Archna & Silvina Montrul
2020. Comprehension of Differential Object Marking by Hindi heritage
speakers. In The Acquisition of Differential Object Marking [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 26], ► pp. 261 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
