Are non-native speakers the drivers of morphological simplification? A Wug experiment on the Dutch past tense system

Isabeau De Smet, Laura Rosseel, Freek Van de Velde

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

It has often been suggested that there is an inverse correlation between the number of adult non-native speakers in a language and its morphological complexity. Secluded languages often show more complex morphology, while high-contact languages go through more severe simplifications throughout the ages. One such simplification linked to language contact is the regularization of the Germanic past tense. Yet, a Wug task on the English past tense system by Cuskley et al. (2015) showed that non-native speakers tend to use the irregular past tense even more than native speakers. In this article, we replicate the Wug experiment for Dutch. Our results show similar evidence for a higher rate of irregularization across non-native speakers. Furthermore, we do not find any other simplification strategies among non-native speakers. Though caution is warranted, these converging results may suggest that non-native speakers are not the drivers of morphological simplification.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)224-245
Number of pages22
JournalJournal of Language Evolution
Volume7
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
I.D.S. is funded by the FWO (Research Foundation Flanders) (grant number at the time of the research: 11ZZN18N, current grant number: 12W5522N). F.V.d.V. is funded by the FWO (Research Foundation Flanders) (grant number G071719N).

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • Dutch
  • language variation and change
  • language learning
  • language contact

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Are non-native speakers the drivers of morphological simplification? A Wug experiment on the Dutch past tense system'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this