Second Dialect Acquisition

RUNNING HEAD: SECOND DIALECT ACQUISITION 1

SECOND DIALECT ACQUISITION: FACTORS BEHIND THE ADOPTION OF

REGIONAL AND NATIONAL LINGUISTIC TRAITS

BY ROSS CAIRNS

BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY

SECOND DIALECT ACQUISITION 2

In today's world, emigrating is as accessible as it ever

has been. The ease with which people can travel all over the

world and the collaboration between nations has made it more

possible than ever to start afresh in a new country. This can

be seen, for example, in the vast number of British citizens

who have emigrated to Canada and Australia or the large

presence of Latin Americans in Spain. Those who emigrate

often have to adapt to new cultures and social norms, however,

in the examples stated above, they share at least one thing in

common with those in their new place of residence: the

language. Although they share the same language, each

country, as expected, has certain linguistic traits which are

unique to them.

In many cases, it is possible to note a change in the

speech patterns of migrating individuals after a period of

time whereby they lose characteristics of their native dialect

and adopt traits pertaining to another. The linguistics term

for this process is called second dialect acquisition (SDA or

D2), however, it is also commonly referred to as dialect

levelling or dialect convergence. Much research has been

carried out in the field of second language acquisition (SLA),


however, the same cannot be said for SDA. The study of second

dialect acquisition is a relatively new phenomenon. Some

research has been conducted but it is difficult to come across

a substantial amount of data. The changes that take place in

SDA often occur in the areas of phonetics or syntax. However,

the factors that influence one to change aspects of their

native speech are to be determined. According to Jeff Siegel

(2010):

One important aspect of SDA in naturalistic contexts that

distinguishes it from SLA is that it can be

unintentional. Since migrants to a new dialect can

continue to speak in their original dialect (D1) and

still be able to communicate, they may not try to learn

the dialect of their new home (D2). Nevertheless, they

may unconsciously “pick-up” or acquire some features of

the D2 and use them in their speech. (p. 5)

In this paper, I discuss the acquisition of a second

dialect. Researchers have examined a number of things that

affect it: age, gender, social network and length of

residency. Age, gender and length of residency are factors

that explain themselves. However, an individual’s social


network looks at their interaction (social circles, i.e., work

colleagues, friends outside of work, etc.) with residents

native to the country in which they now reside. The purpose

of including this is to determine whether or not interacting

more frequently with native residents of the target dialect

has a significant impact on the degree of acquisition that is

achieved by the migrant.

My goal is to review these factors as they relate to D2

in Spanish, but I will also examine some results in English.

My second goal is to see if the same factors that

influence dialect acquisition also play a part in SLA.

Reasons for Dialect Acquisition

As highlighted in the introduction, researchers have

considered various factors when attempting to explain second

dialect acquisition. Within this paper, I will focus on three

possible components: age, gender, and social contact with the

host dialect. This final component will include length of

time in new country of residence.

To begin, let’s turn our attention to Otheguy and

Zentella’s (2012) study on dialect levelling in New York. As


previously mentioned, Otheguy and Zentella (2012) have

contributed significantly in this area of study. In their

book, Spanish in New York, they analyse the impact of English

among Spanish bilingual immigrants in New York by increased

subject pronoun usage. To clarify the point of increased

subject pronoun usage, a first-generation immigrant utterance

would typically contain significantly less subject pronouns

(quería trabajar en la oficina con los amigos pero me dijo el jefe que no podía

porque no trabajaba como quería y que tenía que mejorar) than a second or

third-generation immigrant born in New York (yo quería trabajar en

la oficina con los amigos pero me dijo el jefe que yo no podía porque yo no

trabajaba como él quería y que yo tenía que mejorar). Contained within

the study were the factors of age, gender, and length of time

in New York. The results of which shall be included

throughout the investigation.

Age

To start with, we shall examine how old the immigrant was

when they relocated and determine whether or not it was

significant in the process of dialect acquisition.

Otheguy & Zentella’s (2012) study deals with two types of


Latinos living in New York: (1) those who were raised in Latin

America and have subsequently moved to New York and (2) those

who make up the second generation of Latinos living in New

York. Both groups fall under the following two categories:

Latin American raised (LAR) and New York raised (NYR).

Included in their study were participants between the

ages of 15-80. The participants were divided according to the

moment they arrived in New York. The three sections were (1)

arriving as a child (anyone between the age of 3 and 12), (2)

as a teenager (between 13 and 19), and finally (3) as an adult

(anyone over the age of 20). Although reference is made to

the age of those involved in the investigation, it appears

that this is not a pertinent factor for increased pronoun

usage. This is backed up from an analysis used by the authors

as part of their investigation. The process utilised was an

analysis of variance (ANOVA). Using this procedure was useful

in confirming the irrelevance of age as is shown:

With respect to covariation between the pronoun rate and

the four traits under study in this section, none of the

following results is statistically significant: gender

(F= 0.41, p < .66), age (F= 0.65, p < .58), education (F=


0.15, p < .70), social class (F= 0.50, p < .82). The

very low F values indicate that in all four cases

variance between the groups is smaller, or the same, as

variance within the groups; that is, the groups are not

different… From the evidence provided by our sample, it

appears that members of these different groups in the

city’s Latino population, when taken as a whole, are not

distinguishable on the basis of their pronoun rate.

(Otheguy & Zentella, 2012, p.70)

The F value is used to differentiate “whether differences

between the groups (men and women) are greater than

differences within each of the groups (within the men, within

the women)” (p.70). A higher F value signifies greater

diversion between the groups. A higher F value also heightens

the likelihood of the p value being at or below the standard

level (0.5) which would highlight important findings.

Irrespective of age, the main reason for convergence in

terms of pronoun usage appears to be between those who are LAR

and those who are NYR. More detail shall be given to these

results later on.

In SLA, it has been generally accepted that age plays a


pivotal role in the attainment of a native accent (Flege,

Munro, & MacKay, 1995a, Oyama, 1973, Long, 1990) due to the

critical period hypothesis (CPH) for learning a second

language (L2). Chambers (1992) also adds evidence to this

claim in his study of six Canadian youngsters who had

relocated to England. In that study, the six youngsters

ranged in age from 9-17 and, in terms of lexical adoption of

English vocabulary, the youngest had the highest percentage

(71.4%) whereas the oldest at 17 has one of the lowest at 24%.

(p.679). The findings back up the notion that L2 acquisition

is more easily facilitated at a younger age. If this is the

case for L2 learning then it could easily be assumed that it

is also the same for acquiring a second dialect (D2).

Gender

On the subject of gender, Otheguy and Zentella (2012)

highlight that gender does not have a significant bearing on

whether or not dialect levelling occurs when dealing with the

Latino population as a whole. That said, it is interesting to

note the difference when one considers pronoun adoption within

the Latino groups separately and not as a whole. For


simplicity, Latino groups in New York were divided into two

groups: Caribbeans and Mainlanders. Within both groups, age

continues not to have an influence on the rate of pronoun use,

however, gender does amongst the Mainlander Latinos. The

authors’ findings show a statistically significant distinction

in pronoun use between Mainlander males and females (p.118).

Thus, we see that among Mainlander Latinos, women are more

prone to convergence.

In contrast to their findings on New York’s Latino

population as a whole, previous studies have demonstrated that

women are predominantly the driving force in terms of new

language variation and change (Labov, 2010, Otheguy and

Zentella, 2012, Woods, 2007). This is, however, consistent

with Otheguy and Zentella’s (2012) findings that Mainlander

Latino females were more likely to show signs of convergence

than Mainlander males.

According to Woods (2007), women have been at the

forefront of linguistic change in spite of studies showing

their traditionalist standards in terms of language use. Five

instances are included in her study that highlight the degree

to which women have shown higher levels of dialect


convergence. Firstly, is an example in Belfast. Secondly,

another study in Canada. Then, three studies carried out in

California, Salt Lake City and Philadelphia respectively are

mentioned (p.96).

Woods continues to cement the position of women as the

driving force behind linguistic change by drawing attention to

a concept introduced by Milroy and Milroy in 1993:

Milroy and Milroy argue that it is not the case that

women choose to use prestigious forms, but that rather by

using certain linguistics features, women create prestigious

norms. Milroy and Milroy argue that is only once the

prestige of a variable has been established by women’s

usage that the feature displays variation according to

social class. (Wood, 2007, p.97)

The concept of women leading linguistic change was

strengthened in Wood’s investigation. In a study involving

five men and five women in New Zealand in the 1940s, she

highlighted that women in New Zealand in 1940 were leading

changes in vowel articulation of the words mouth, trap and dress.

These changes included “the closing diphthong seen in mouth,

the close pronunciation of trap, and close articulation of


dress” (Woods, 2007, p.98). The original ten participants from

the study in the 1940s were born in New Zealand, however, the

information gathered from Wood’s study is important as it

underlines the importance of women in linguistic variation.

Her research showed that, among second and third-generation

males and females, the difference in the pronunciation of the

vowels in the three words had reduced significantly.

Social networks and LoR

On the theme of an individual’s length of residency in

New York, Otheguy and Zentella (2012) suggest that the

principal reasons attributed to dialect levelling were length

of residency and whether or not someone is a second generation

immigrant. A summary of their results for all Latino

immigrants show (1) an increased usage of pronouns among those

who are considered established immigrants and those who were

born in New York (NYR), (2) a higher rate of pronoun usage

among NYR participants compared with LAR, (3) a distinct

difference of pronoun usage between established immigrants and

immigrant newcomers, (4) that higher proficiency rates in

English among Latinos results in greater implementation of


pronouns in spoken Spanish, and (5) that all variants

representing pronoun usage are consistent with that of the

Latino population throughout the city. (p.103) These results

are based on all Latino groups in New York and, as commented

previously, within this set of findings, factors such as

gender and age do not seem to come into play. What is

relevant though is that pronoun use appears to be influenced

by more exposure to the host culture. This would explain the

higher percentages of pronoun usage among second-generation

Latinos and those considered established immigrants.

Montrul (2004) wrote, in a similar vain to Otheguy and

Zentella (2012), of the influence English has among Spanish

heritage speakers living in the United States. Proposed

within the article is the idea that levelling starts to appear

among first-generation immigrants who are either adolescents

or adults. The reasons for convergence does not necessarily

have any relation to the age of the immigrant but rather the

length of time it takes for the speaker to develop near-native

competence in the L2. It appears that age could be more of a

factor in relation to dialect levelling when examining second

and third generation immigrants. Rather than be the sole


reason, evidence suggests that bilingualism is achieved more

quickly at younger age and, as a result, convergence is more

apparent among younger children (p.126).

Referring to Auer and Hinskens’s (2005) “identity

projection model”, Drummond (2013) suggests that “the desire

to identify with a particular social group is enough for a

person’s speech to adopt or supress relevant language

features, regardless of who the interlocutor might be” (p.67).

In a study on dialect contact by Pesqueira (2008), she

considered the impact of Mexican Spanish on Argentine

immigrants to determine if they adopted the Mexican variant

[j] instead of [ʒ] or [ʃ]. In the cases where the Mexican

variant was found, the main reasons associated with the

adoption had to do with (1) gender, (2) length of time in

Mexico, and (3) social network. The investigation found that

women were more likely than men to implement the Mexican type

backing up the notion that women are typically found to lead

linguistic change. Secondly, the study discovered that it was

not so much age that influenced the change, but rather it was

the length of time the participant had been living Mexico.

Finally, it uncovered what is most relevant to this section:


the social network that each individual had and how that

related to the frequency of dialect convergence. Firstly, it

showed that Argentine migrants that had a Mexican partner had

higher rates of assimilating. Following that, the study

concluded that it was more favourable to find the Mexican

variant among the Argentines who spent the majority of their

time in contact with other Mexicans instead of their own

countrymen.

Now that the three main components central to this paper

(age, gender and social contact with host culture) have been

defined, we shall now look at various case studies with the

intention of confirming the importance of each component in

relation to dialect levelling.

Case Studies

Canadians in Alabama.

Although age did not prove an underlining element to

dialect acquisition in Otheguy and Zentella’s (2012) study,

Munro, Derwing and Flege’s (1999) account of Canadians in

Alabama showed a degree of dialect acquisition among adults.

The study consisted of interviewing and recording 30


Canadians living in Alabama. All were at least 18 years of

age and half of the participants were female. The

participants were divided into three groups: (1) Canadians

living in Canada, (2) Canadians living in Alabama, and (3)

native residents of Alabama. The purpose of the study was to

identify whether or not dialect acquisition had taken place

amongst the Canadians in Alabama and to what extent.

The research process consisted of three parts: (1)

Canadians living in Canada were asked to listen to the

interviews of the participants involved in the study and

designate each individual on a scale of 1-9 (with 1 being

‘Very Canadian’ and 9 being ‘Very American’), (2) The second

exercise was similar to the first except this time it was

native residents of Alabama listening to the interviews and

designating each interviewee on the same scale of 1-9

(however, this time 1 was defined as ‘definitely from Alabama’

and 9 as ‘definitely from Canada’). The interesting thing to

note from this experiment is that, while both sets of native

listeners were able to distinguish three different types of

speaker (Canadians living in Canada, Canadians living in

Alabama and Alabamans living in Alabama), the Canadians


living in Alabama were more evenly distributed across the

spectrum, that is, whilst the Canadians living in Canada were

very easily identified and vice versa for Alabamans living in

Alabama, it was more difficult to identify the Canadians

living in Alabama as being from either Canada or Alabama. In

other words, they showed that they had attained a level of

dialect acquisition.

The third part of the project involved asking two expert

phoneticians to listen to the excerpts and assign each

participant on a scale of being “(1) Very American to (5) Very

Canadian”. Again, the results showed that it was more

problematic to designate with ease where the immigrant

Canadians were from. However, those Canadians living in

Canada and Alabamans in Alabama were very easily identified.

Results from this case study prove to be useful with the

current investigation under scrutiny. It can be claimed that

age does have an effect on dialect acquisition in that the

older one becomes, the less likely we are to witness a loss of

a native dialect in favour of a second one. Tagliamonte and

Molfenter (2007) strengthen this claim:

People who move into a new community where the same


language but a different dialect is spoken must adapt a

new set of linguistic rules in order to sound like their

peers. However, children appear to be the only sector of

the population capable of doing this successfully.

(p.650)

Although some conclusions can be made regarding the

impact of age, the influence of both gender and host culture

contact in dialect acquisition is inconclusive. The reason

for this regarding gender being that the study contained an

equal number of male and female participants. No mention was

given in relation to the gender of the participants and the

level of acquisition achieved, therefore, making gender

classification redundant. The situation is similar when

dealing with host culture contact. The average length of time

in the U.S was 7 years, however, the correlation between those

that displayed a greater/lesser degree of acquisition and the

time spent living in the U.S is unclear.

Appalachian migrants in Ypsilanti, Michigan.

Evans (2004) undertook the study of determining if

Appalachian migrants in Ypsilanti, Michigan had integrated any


elements of the Northern Cities Shift (NCS) into their speech.

She refers to work conducted by Fasold, in which he

distinguished the NCS for “the raised position of /æ/, the

fronted position of /a/, and fronted and lowered position

of /ɔ/” (2004, p.154). As well as the NCS, it is highlighted

that the southern part of the United States was also

experiencing phonetic alterations (p.156).

The investigation had twenty-eight participants between

the ages of 28-81. Of those involved in the experiment, 17

were female, 11 were male and eight had been born in Michigan.

Unlike the case study of Canadians in Alabama, respondents in

this project had relocated to Ypsilanti at different stages in

their life and not specifically after the age of 18. Not all

of the participants were adults when they arrived in Michigan.

Recordings of the research subjects aimed to identify, if any,

traits pertaining to the NCS in the migrants’ speech.

One significant result of the experiment was that 47% of

the women, compared with 10% of the men, were found to be

raising the /æ/, that is, more women were displaying signs of

NCS than men in their speech.

Another finding worthy of mention is degree to which


dialect convergence occurred among immigrant Appalachains

according to their social network. The investigation proved

that Appalachains whose social network consisted mainly of

other Appalachain migrants were less likely to exhibit

features of NCS. On the other hand, linguistic

characteristics familiar to the NCS were more common among

migrants whose social networks were more varied. This is

another indication that dialect change is more prevalent among

migrants that have more social interaction with those of the

host dialect.

With respect to the factor of age, results of the study

of Appalachain immigrants in Ypsilanti underlined that, unlike

gender or social contact, age was less likely to influence

dialect levelling (pp.163-164).

Overall, this case study provided important information

for this project. It augmented the importance of gender and

social networks in respect to dialect convergence. In

addition, more evidence was given to suggest that age is not

one of the underlying factors behind dialect variation.

Polish Immigrants in Manchester, United Kingdom.


Having drawn attention to reasons for the occurrence of

SDA, the next part of the paper will look at SLA and try to

identify similarities relating to its success.

It is generally considered that the younger somebody is,

the more likely they are to achieve a native-like level of D2.

Acquiring D2 is definitely not outwith the reach of adults as

has been witnessed throughout this paper and is supported in

SLA studies (Hawkins and Tomohiko, 2005, Ioup, Boustagui, El

Tigi and Moselle, 1994), however, the likelihood that the

level achieved be akin to that of a native speaker is

dramatically lower the older one becomes.

In his study of Polish migrants in Manchester, Drummond

(2013) focuses on how the people in question cope with

different varieties of the L2 other than the standard one of

which they have most knowledge. He concentrates on a phonetic

trait pertinent in native residents of Manchester: the STRUT

vowel /ʌ/ which is prevalent in words like bus, luck and Monday

(p.66). In order to gain a better understand the nature of

the study, defining a STRUT vowel is imperative. According to

Wells (1982) in his book Accents of English, it is “a relatively

short, half-open or slightly opener, centralized-back or


central, unrounded vocoid.” (p.131).

Drummond’s intention is to ascertain (1) the degree to

which Poles in Manchester develop that characteristic and (2)

any underlying social factors connected with the

implementation of the new trait and how much of an influence

they had in the adoption.

The study consisted of forty Polish individuals, 20 male

and 20 female, who had relocated to the UK as adults, and all

except three, had only resided in Manchester. Individual

length of residence varied between zero to six years, each

participant was aged between 18 and 40 and everyone involved

had a minimum basic proficiency level in English before

relocating.

Accumulating information consisted primarily in meeting

each individual and holding an informal conversation. The

intent of meeting each participant was to encourage as natural

a conversation as possible in order to identify whether or not

they demonstrated the STRUT vowel variant in their speech.

To summarise, the results proved that, while 31 out of

the 40 people involved highlighted at least one variant of the

STRUT vowel, no one continually showed characteristics


consistent with native residents. That said, of the changes

that were noted, all suggested that, with time, the

participants were heading towards a more native-like

pronunciation of the variant.

Of the 40 people involved, six had native English

partners and, unsurprisingly, independent of whether the

partner was from Manchester or not, those six participants

displayed a higher degree of the STRUT variant than the other

participants. This relationship appears to open the door for

more exposure in the local Mancunian dialect, therefore,

heightening the chance of acquisition.

Interestingly, the four individuals that had a low level

of the variant were amongst those that had the least

favourable attitude towards Manchester whereas, the four that

displayed the highest degree of the variant demonstrated a

more positive attitude towards the city.

The study also discovered that no real changes were found

among those who had been there less than two years. It does

appear generally, however, that as the participant’s length of

time in Manchester increases, a greater degree of the dialect

convergence is noticed.


SLA versus SDA

Having looked at a couple of examples regarding same-

language dialect acquisition and one of acquisition from an

SLA perspective, the following step is to analyse factors that

are important to attain a high level a SLA and determine

whether or not they can be linked to SDA.

As touched upon earlier in the current study, the

Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) is a hotly debated issue in

SLA. The CPH is a term invented by psycho-biologist Eric

Lenneberg in 1967 and is summed up by Han (2004) in that

“there is a period during the human life span from infancy to

puberty (age 2 to 13) that is critical to language learning,

during which learning is successful and after which it is

marginal.” (p.44). This hypothesis has generally been the

fall back excuse for lack of native level attainment of L2 for

decades. Some of the main reasons that hinder/aid L2

attainment according to Montrul (2008) are age, motivation,

input and previous linguistic knowledge (p.27).

One noticeable difference between SLA success and SDA

attainment is motivation. For the purpose of this study,


motivation is defined as the reasons for which the individual

has undertaken the task of learning a new language.

Motivation plays a vital part in one’s ability to gain a high

level of proficiency in a second language (Tragant, 2006,

Gardner, 1979, Gardner and Smythe, 1975 Dixon et al, 2012)

whereas, Siegel (2010) has outlined that SDA is not an

endeavour based on motivation but, as is often the case, the

result of unconscious effort.

Both SLA success and SDA attainment are similar in that

age plays a pivotal role in determining their degree of

success or attainment, however, it is difficult to account for

age as a main factor given that children learn languages

instinctively without any training. The same can be said for

SDA: it is apparent that the younger the individual is will

have a significant bearing on the level of dialect acquisition

they develop, however, this is not to say that SDA cannot

occur the older one becomes as has been shown in the case

studies presented in this study as well as by other

researchers (Bowie, 2010; Escure, 1997).

Another element that SLA and SDA have in common is that

of exposure to the host language/culture. The current study


has found that a greater degree of dialect acquisition is

expected in cases of increased exposure to the target dialect

as well as LoR (Otheguy and Zentella, 2012, and Evans, 2004).

The same can also be said of second language acquisition

(Montrul, 2008, and Drummond, 2013).

In summary then, it is evident that second language

acquisition and second dialect acquisition share certain

factors when talking about the success of one or the

attainment of the other.

Conclusion

On concluding this paper it is necessary to state the

principal purpose for the study. The objective of this

research was to study reasons for second dialect acquisition.

Given the numerous possible factors that could influence SDA,

three areas were identified for this study: (1) age, (2)

gender, and (3) social network with and length of residency in

the host country. The information presented in this study

leads to the following conclusions:

(1) That although age is clearly relevant in terms of

attaining a more complete level of dialect acquisition, it did


not produce significant results in the investigations and

examples that have been presented in this paper. All examples

showed that, although the change may have been minimal, SDA

could be seen in people from all ages. It is evident,

however, in both SLA and SDA, that the younger one is exposed

to a new language or dialect, the greater chance of native-

level acquisition they will have.

(2) Gender is an important indicator of the level of

second dialect convergence. It had previously been thought

that women adopted a more traditionalist way of utilising

language, however, studies included in this paper have

indicated that women are often at the forefront of linguistic

change.

(3) Finally, the most important factor for attaining a

second dialect comes from the social network that the migrant

constructs and the length of time that they have spent in the

host country. SDA was typically higher among individuals who

had a partner from the host country, had spent a significant

amount of time in the new country, and had a social network

which included few people from the same country as themselves.

In addition, the same was true of SLA success.


Having looked at both SDA and SLA, it is clear that,

although they differ quite substantially, similarities can be

found when comparing factors that influence the two.

As stated at the outset of this study, more research is

needed in the field of SDA. Future studies could place more

emphasis on factors such as two contained in this paper

(gender and social networks) along with social status.

Bibliography

Chambers, J. (1992). Dialect Acquisition. Language, 68(4),

673-705.

Dixon, L, Q., Zhao, J., Shin, J., Wu, S., Su, J., Burgess-

Brigham, R., Gezer, M. U. & Snow, C. (2012). What We Know

About Second Language Acquisition: A Synthesis From Four

Perspectives. Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 5-60.

Drummond, R. (2013). The Manchester Polish STRUT: Dialect

Acquisition in a Second Language. Journal of English Linguistics, 41(1),

65-93.


Escure, G. (1997). Creole and dialect continua standard acquisition processes

in Belize and China (PRC). Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.

Evans, B. (2004). The role of social network in the

acquisition of local dialect norms by Appalachian migrants

in Ypsilanti, Michigan. Language Variation and Change, 16(02), 153-

167.

Flege, J. E., Munro, M. J., & MacKay, I. R. A. (1995a).

Factors affecting degree of perceived foreign accent in a

second language. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3125–

3134.

Gardner, R. C. (1979). Social psychological aspects of second

language acquisition. In H. Giles and S. Clair (eds) Language

and Social Psychology. 193-220. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Gardner, R. C & Smythe, P. C. (1975). Second Language Acquisition: A

Social Psychological Approach.

Han, Z. (2004). Fossilization in Adult Second Language Acquisition.

Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Hawkins, R., & Tomohiko, S. (2005). Explaining Full and

Partial Success in the Acquisition of Second Language

Grammatical Properties. Second Language, 4, 3-26.

Ioup, G., Boustagui, E., El Tigi, M & Moselle, M. (1994).


Reexamining the critical period hypothesis: a case study of

successful adult SLA in a naturalistic environment. Studies in

Second Language Acquisition, 16, 73-98.

Labov, W. (2010). Principles of Linguistic Change. Retrieved from

http://onlinelibrary.wil

ey.com.erl.lib.byu.edu/doi/10.1002/9781444327496.ch9/pdf.

Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational Constraints on Language

Development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(3), 251-

285.

Munro, M. J., Derwing, T. M., & Flege, J. E. (1999). Canadians

in Alabama: a perceptual study of dialect acquisition in

adults. Journal of Phonetics, 27(4), 385-403.

Montrul, S. (2004). Subject and object expression in Spanish

heritage speakers: A case of morphosyntactic convergence.

Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(2), 125- 142.

Montrul, S. (2008). Incomplete Acquisition in Bilingualism: Re-examining

the Age Factor. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins.

Otheguy, R. & Zentella, A. C. (2012). Spanish in New York: language

contact, dialect leveling, and structural continuity. New York: Oxford

University Press.


Oyama, S. (1973). A sensitive period for the acquisition of a

second language. [unpublished Harvard Univ. Ph.D.

dissertation].

Pesqueira, D. (2008). Cambio fónico en situaciones de

contacto dialectal: El caso de los inmigrantes

bonaerenses en la ciudad de México. In Herrera, E &

Butragueño, P. M (Eds.), Fonología instumental: patrones fónicos y

variación (pp.171-189). México D.F: Colegio de México.

Siegel, J. (2010). Second Dialect Acquisition. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Tagliamonte, S. A. & Molfenter, S. (2007). How’d You Get That

Accent?: Acquiring a Second Dialect of the Same Language.

Language in Society, 36(5), 649-675.

Wells, J. (1982). Accents of English. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Woods, N. J. (2007). The formation and development of New

Zealand English: Interaction of gender-related variation and

linguistic change. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 1(1), 95-125.

Second Dialect Acquisition

Documents

Transcript of Second Dialect Acquisition