Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T23:35:12.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Uyghur–Chinese early successive adult bilinguals’ construal of caused motion events

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2023

Alimujiang Tusun Open the ORCID record for Alimujiang Tusun [Opens in a new window]
Alimujiang Tusun*
Affiliation:
Pembroke College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
*
Email: at648@cam.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Talmy’s motion event typology has served as a fruitful framework for exploring bilingual cognition and language use. The present study extends this line of research to the bilingualism situation of an underrepresented Turkic language, i.e., Modern Uyghur, and Mandarin Chinese, and it does so by focusing on a relatively understudied type of motion, i.e., caused motion. The two languages are genetically and typologically distinct, and yet they share verb-framing as an important lexicalization pattern in encoding motion. This study, therefore, investigated whether and to what extent this structural overlap contributes to crosslinguistic influence in Uyghur–Chinese adult bilinguals’ construal of caused motion. Thirty Uyghur–Chinese adult bilinguals’ verbalizations were analyzed with respect to the number of semantic components expressed and the way they were syntactically packaged. Results were compared with relevant monolingual data, which showed that Uyghur–Chinese adult bilinguals displayed a strong L1 to L2 influence in syntactic packaging by overusing the verb-framed strategy in Mandarin Chinese. However, further comparisons with previous research on Uyghur–Chinese child and adult bilinguals’ motion construal revealed that, while structural overlap is a key factor motivating crosslinguistic influence, a coherent explanation of this phenomenon must consider more general principles of bilingual language processing and use.

Keywords

caused motionChinesecrosslinguistic influenceearly successive bilingualUyghur
Type
Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , September 2023 , pp. 427 - 452
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aktan-Erciyes, A., Göksun, T., Tekcan, A. I., & Aksu-Koç, A. (2021). Children’s thinking-for-speaking: Birectional effects of L1 Turkish and L2 English for motion events. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 11(5), 669–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aveledo, F., & Athanasopoulos, P. (2016). Second language influence on first language motion event encoding and categorization in Spanish-speaking children learning L2 English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 4, 403–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernolet, S., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2018). Syntactic representation in late learners of a second language. In Miller, D., Bayram, F., Rothman, J., & Serratrice, L. (Eds.), Bilingual cognition and language: The state of the science across its subfields (pp. 205–223). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeschoten, H. (2022). Chaghatay. In Johanson, L. & Csató, É. Á. (Eds.), The Turkic languages (pp. 160–173). Routledge.Google Scholar
Bosch, J. E., & Unsworth, S. (2021). Cross-linguistic influence in word order: Effects of age, dominance and surface overlap. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 11(6), 783–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, A., & Gullberg, M. (2012). Multicompetence and native speaker variation in clausal packaging in Japanese. Second Language Research, 28(4), 415–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., Barðdal, J., Hollmann, W., Sotirova, V. & Taoka, C.. (2010). Revising Talmy’s typological classification of complex event constructions. In Boas, Hans C. (Ed.), Contrastive studies in construction grammar (pp. 201–235). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cal.10.09croCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daller, M. H., Treffers-Daller, J., & Furman, R. (2011). Transfer of conceptualization patterns in bilinguals: The construal of motion events in Turkish and German. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 95–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delage, A., & Frauenfelder, U. (2019). Syntax and working memory in typically-developing children. Language, Interaction and Acquisition, 10(2), 141–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engemann, H. (2016). Learning to think for speaking about space in child bilingualism. Revue française de linguistique appliquée, 2, 49–64.10.3917/rfla.212.0049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engemann, H. (2022a). How (not) to cross a boundary: Crosslinguistic influence in simultaneous bilingual children’s event construal. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 25(1), 42–54.10.1017/S1366728921000298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engemann, H. (2022b). Entropy convergence in early bilinguals’ syntactic packaging. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1010002. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1010002 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Filipović, L. (2019). Bilingualism in action: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filipović, L. (2022). A multi-factor approach to the study of L2 acquisition of motion verbs and motion constructions: Integration of typological, psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic aspects. Frontiers in Communication, 7, 822517.10.3389/fcomm.2022.822517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filipović, L., & Hawkins, J. (2019). The complex adaptive system principles model for bilingualism: Language interactions within and across bilingual minds. International Journal of Bilingualism, 23(6), 1223–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foroodi-Nejad, F., & Paradis, J. (2009). Crosslinguistic transfer in the acquisition of compound words in Persian-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14, 411–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fu, X., Vanek, N., & Roberts, L. (in press). Matched or moved? Asymmetry in high and low-level visual processing of motion events. Language & Cognition https://osf.io/54gse/ Google Scholar
Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M. (2011). Space in second language acquisition. In Cook, V. & Bassetti, B. (Eds.), Language and bilingual cognition (pp. 315–339). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M., & Demagny, A. C. (2008). How English native speakers learn to express caused motion in English and French. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Étrangère, 27, 15–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, H. & Hickmann, M. (2015). Finding one’s path into another language: On the expression of boundary crossing by English learners of French. The Modern Language Journal, 99, Supplement, 15, 14–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M., & Pastorino-Campos, C. (2022). Running or crossing? Children’s expression of voluntary motion in English, German, and French. Journal of Child Language, 49, 578–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hervé, C., Serratrice, L., & Corley, M. (2016). Dislocations in French–English bilingual children: An elicitation study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(5), 987–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hervé, C. & Serratrice, L. (2018). The development of determiners in the context of French-English bilingualism: a study of crosslinguistic influence. Journal of Child Language, 45, 767–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickmann, M., Bonnet, P. and Taranne, P. (2009). Motion in first language acquisition: manner and path in French and English. Journal of Child Language, 36(4), 705– 741.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hickmann, M., Hendriks, H., & Harr, A. (2018). Caused motion across child languages: A comparison of English, German and French. Journal of Child Language, 45, 1247–1274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hijazo-Gascón, A. (2021). Moving Across Languages:Motion events in Spanish as a Second Language. Berlin: DeGruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hohenstein, J., Eisenberg, A., & Naigles, L. (2006). Is he floating across or crossing afloat? Cross-influence of L1 and L2 in Spanish–English bilingual adults. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3, 249–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulk, A. (2017). Note on cross-linguistic influence: Back to “MULK”. In Blom, E., Cornips, L., & Schaeffer, J. (Eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in bilingualism: In honor of Aafke (pp. 15–24). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulk, A., & Müller, N. (2000). Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3, 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide. (2009). Path salience in motion events. In Guo, J., Lieven, E., Budwig, N., Ervin-Tripp, S., Nakamura, K. & Özcaliskan, S. (eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin, 403–414. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Ji, Y., Hendriks, H., & Hickmann, M. (2011). The expression of caused motion events in Chinese and in English: Some typological issues. Linguistics, 5, 1041–1077.Google Scholar
Ji, Y., & Hohenstein, J. (2014). The syntactic packaging of caused motion components in a second language: English learners of Chinese. Lingua, 140, 100–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ji, Y., & Hohenstein, J. (2018). English and Chinese children’s motion event similarity judgments. Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 45–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, L. (1995). On Turkic converb clauses. In Haspelmath, M. & König, E. (Eds.), Converbs in cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 313–348). Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, L. & Csató, É. Á (Eds.) (2022). The Turkic languages. Routledge.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2020). Bi/multilingual education, translation and social mobility in Xinjiang, China. In Shei, C., Zikpi, M. E. M., & Chao, D. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of Chinese language teaching (pp. 593–612). Routledge.Google Scholar
Liceras, J. M., Fuertes, R. F., & de la Fuente, A. A. (2012). Overt subjects and copula omission in the Spanish and the English grammar of English–Spanish bilinguals: On the locus and directionality of interlinguistic influence. First Language, 32(1–2), 88–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Memtimin, A. (2016). Language contact in modern Uyghur. Harrassowitz.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, E. B., & Gollan, R. H. (2005). Being and becoming bilingual: Individual differences and consequences for language production. In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A. M. B. (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism (pp. 389–406). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, N., Furman, R., & Nicoladis, E. (2018). French-English bilingual children’s motion event communication shows crosslinguistic influence in speech but not gesture. Language, Interaction and Acquisition/Langage, Interaction et Acquisition, 1, 69–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montero-Melis, G. (2021). Consistency in motion event encoding across languages. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 625153. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.625153 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Müller, N., & Hulk, A. (2001). Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual language acquisition: Italian and French as recipient languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicoladis, E. (2006). Cross-linguistic transfer in adjective–noun strings by preschool bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9(1), 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicoladis, E., & Gavrila, A. (2015). Cross-linguistic influence in Welsh-English bilingual children’s adjective constructions. Journal of Child Language, 42, 903–916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicoladis, E., Rose, A., & Foursha-Stevenson, C. (2010). Thinking for speaking and cross-linguistic transfer in preschool bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13(3), 345–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Özçalışkan, Ş. (2015). Ways of crossing a spatial boundary in typologically distinct languages. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 485–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.r-project.org/ Google Scholar
Runnqvist, E., Fitzpatrick, I., Strijkers, K., & Costa, A. (2018). An appraisal of the bilingual language production system: Quantitatively or qualitatively different from monolinguals? In Bhatia, T. K. & Ritchie, W. C. (Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism and multilingualism (pp. 244–265). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., Filiaci, F., & Baldo, M. (2009). Bilingual children’s sensitivity to specificity and genericity: Evidence from metalinguistic awareness. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(2), 239–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serratrice, L. (2016). Cross-linguistic influence, cross-linguistic priming and the nature of shared syntactic structures. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 6(6), 822–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serratrice, L. (2022). What can syntactic priming tell us about crosslinguistic influence? In Messenger, K. (Eds.), Syntactic Priming in Language Acquisition: Representations, mechanisms and applications (pp. 129–156). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (2014). Bilingual language acquisition: Spanish and English in the first six years. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In Strömqvist, S. & Verhoven, L. (Eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (pp. 219–257). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (2006). What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition. In Hickmann, M. & Robert, S. (eds.), Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories, pp. 59–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.66.05sloCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajima, Y., & Duffield, N. (2012). Linguistic versus cultural relativity: On Japanese-Chinese differences in picture description and recall. Cognitive Linguistics, 23(4), 675–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics: Typology and process in concept structuring. The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2016). Properties of main verbs. Cognitive Semantics, 2, 133–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tusun, A. (2019). The acquisition of motion event expressions by Uyghur–Chinese early successive bilinguals [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Tusun, A. (2022a). Uyghur–Chinese adult bilinguals’ construal of voluntary motion events. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 892346. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.892346 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tusun, A. (2022b). Motion events in modern Uyghur narrative discourse. In Shei, C. & Li, S. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of Asian linguistics (pp. 93–109). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tusun, A., & Hendriks, H. (2019). Voluntary motion events in Uyghur: A typological perspective. Lingua, 226, 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tusun, A., & Hendriks, H. (2022). Caused motion events in Uyghur: A typological perspective. Linguistics, 60(5), 1663–1705. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0098 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, C., van Wonderen, E., Koutamanis, E., Kootstra, G. J., Dijkstra, T., & Unsworth, S. (2022). Cross-linguistic influence in simultaneous and early sequential bilingual children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Child Language, 49, 897–929.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Gompel, R. P. G., & Arai, M. (2018). Structural priming in bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21, 448–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanek, N., & Fu, X. (2023). Low-level visual processing of motion events as a window into language-specific effects on perception. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. 61, 61–78. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., & Wei, L. (2019). Cognitive restructuring in the bilingual mind: Motion event construal in early Cantonese-English bilinguals. Language and Cognition, 11, 527–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., & Wei, L. (2021). Cognitive restructuring in the multilingual mind: Language-specific effects on processing efficiency of caused motion events in Cantonese-English-Japanese speakers (pp. 1–16). Language and Cognition.Google Scholar
Wang, Y., & Wei, L. (2022). Multilingual learning and cognitive restructuring: The role of audiovisual media exposure in Cantonese-English-Japanese multilinguals’ motion event cognition. International Journal of Bilingualism, 1–18.Google Scholar
Woerfel, T. (2018). Encoding motion events: The impact of language-specific patterns and language dominance in bilingual children. De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yakup, A. (2020). Uyghur and Uzbek, the Southeastern Turkic languages. In Robbeets, M. M. & Savelyev, A. (Eds.), The Oxford guide to the transeuroasian languages (pp. 411–429). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yip, V., & Matthews, S. (2022). Language diversity and bilingual first language acquisition: A commentary on Kidd and Garcia. First Language, 42, 832–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Tusun supplementary material

Appendices 1-2

Download Tusun supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 77.8 KB