Now they accept it, now they don’t: Acceptability judgements of nontypical multiword units in Russian as a native and a heritage language

Abstract

Aims/objectives/research questions: Heritage speakers have been shown to use multiword units, which merge structural elements of both their languages, which do not conform to the combinability patterns of the monolingual variety. However, it is not clear to what extent heritage speakers actually have the knowledge of the corresponding monolingual sequences. The present study on Russian heritage speakers in Germany addresses the question of whether heritage speakers have receptive knowledge of monolingual multiword units that they do not command in production. Design/methodology/approach: The study followes a mixed methods design by combining corpus and experimental methodology. Data/analyses: First, language production data of heritage speakers from two corpora were analysed for nontypical multiword units with prepositional phrases. In the second step, these nontypical multiword units as well as their typical monolingual equivalents served as test items in an acceptability judgement task performed by 53 Russian-German heritage speakers and 56 Russian native speakers. Findings/conclusions: The results show that heritage and native speakers rate nontypical multiword units as less acceptable than their monolingual equivalents. However, the acceptability of typical and the unacceptability of nontypical expressions were more salient for native speakers, whereas heritage speakers in many cases tended to equally accept typical and nontypical items. Acceptability ratings varied according to test items in both groups, but there was no overlap between nontypical multiword units most acceptable to monolinguals and those most acceptable to heritage speakers. Originality: Our paper applies an innovative mixed method approach in investigating the receptive knowledge of monoloigual multiword units in heritage speakers. Additionally, it is one of the first studies looking at the reactions of native spekaers to novel multiword units produced by heritage speakers. Implications: The findings support the idea of a unified multilingual construction, suggesting that heritage speakers do have some receptive knowledge of monolingual multiword units but this knowledge differs from that of monolingual speakers.