Terminology choice in generative acquisition research: the case of “incomplete acquisition” in heritage language grammars
Terminology choice in generative acquisition research: the case of “incomplete acquisition” in heritage language grammars
Pascual y Cabo & Rothman (2012) and Kupisch & Rothman (2018) argue against the use of term ‘incomplete’ to characterise the grammars of heritage speakers claiming that it reflects a negative evaluation of the linguistic knowledge of these bilingual speakers. We examine the reasons for and against the use of ‘incomplete’ across acquisition contexts and argue that its use is legitimate on both theoretical and empirical grounds. Our goal is to present arguments for using the term, not to evaluate the scientific validity of incomplete acquisition over other possible accounts. Although our conclusion is that the term should not be abandoned, we advocate a position whereby researchers consider the possible negative impact of the terminology they use and how they use it. This position aims to resolve the tension between the need to prioritise scientific effectiveness and the necessity to avoid terminology which can be negatively misconstrued by the general public.
241-255
Dominguez, Laura
9c1bf2b4-b582-429b-9e8a-5264c4b7e63f
Hicks, Glyn
1f3753b1-1224-4cd3-8af3-5bf708062831
Slabakova, Roumyana
1bda11ce-ce3d-4146-8ae3-4a486b6f5bde
Dominguez, Laura
9c1bf2b4-b582-429b-9e8a-5264c4b7e63f
Hicks, Glyn
1f3753b1-1224-4cd3-8af3-5bf708062831
Slabakova, Roumyana
1bda11ce-ce3d-4146-8ae3-4a486b6f5bde
Dominguez, Laura, Hicks, Glyn and Slabakova, Roumyana
(2019)
Terminology choice in generative acquisition research: the case of “incomplete acquisition” in heritage language grammars.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41 (2), .
(doi:10.1017/S0272263119000160).
Abstract
Pascual y Cabo & Rothman (2012) and Kupisch & Rothman (2018) argue against the use of term ‘incomplete’ to characterise the grammars of heritage speakers claiming that it reflects a negative evaluation of the linguistic knowledge of these bilingual speakers. We examine the reasons for and against the use of ‘incomplete’ across acquisition contexts and argue that its use is legitimate on both theoretical and empirical grounds. Our goal is to present arguments for using the term, not to evaluate the scientific validity of incomplete acquisition over other possible accounts. Although our conclusion is that the term should not be abandoned, we advocate a position whereby researchers consider the possible negative impact of the terminology they use and how they use it. This position aims to resolve the tension between the need to prioritise scientific effectiveness and the necessity to avoid terminology which can be negatively misconstrued by the general public.
Text
Dominguez Hicks Slabakova terminology SSLA
- Accepted Manuscript
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 21 January 2019
e-pub ahead of print date: 4 July 2019
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 427787
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/427787
ISSN: 0272-2631
PURE UUID: bd42a5ac-b440-42d1-a0ec-5b762441e4b5
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 29 Jan 2019 17:30
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 07:32
Export record
Altmetrics
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
Loading...
View more statistics