PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Languages· 2026Q1

Resultativity as a Marker of Nativeness in Kazakh: Evidence from the Homeland and Diaspora

Vladislava Warditz, Aimgul Kazkenova, Zhanar Bekturganova

Short summary

Resultative auxiliary verb constructions in Kazakh are a sensitive marker of nativeness, with diaspora speakers showing high maintenance despite societal pressures, and homeland speakers exhibiting varying degrees of proficiency influenced by language revitalization and shift.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Resultative auxiliary verb constructions serve as a sensitive diagnostic for nativeness in Kazakh.
  • Kazakh diaspora speakers demonstrate substantial maintenance of resultative constructions despite external linguistic pressures.
  • Homeland speakers in Kazakhstan show varying levels of resultativity use, reflecting language revitalization and shift dynamics.
  • Russian–Kazakh bilinguals in Kazakhstan show variability influenced by Russian but outperform L2 Kazakh learners in resultativity marking.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

This study examines resultativity in Kazakh as a linguistic marker of nativeness by comparing diasporic speakers exposed to the social pressures of dominant languages with speakers in Kazakhstan, where the ongoing revitalization of Kazakh is reshaping its use. Nativeness is conceptualised as a linguistic construct referring to speakers’ command of a salient and typologically distinctive grammatical feature of Kazakh, namely resultative auxiliary verb constructions. As a gradient phenomenon shaped by intergenerational language transmission, nativeness is relevant both to migrant communities and to the multilingual homeland. During the Soviet era, many Kazakh speakers experienced a shift to Russian as their first language, resulting in a broad spectrum of proficiency in Kazakh, including gradual attrition of core grammatical domains. This development makes homeland speakers affected by language shift comparable to diasporic speakers. When adopting this innovative research perspective, we investigate how these divergent sociolinguistic trajectories are reflected in the use of resultative auxiliary verb constructions, a salient and structurally sensitive domain. To address the two multilingual settings—the diaspora and the homeland—we adopt a quantitative, cross-sectional design comparing four groups: L1 Kazakh speakers (n = 32), L1 Russian speakers with L2 Kazakh (n = 30), Russian–Kazakh speakers in Kazakhstan, whose L1 Kazakh was replaced by Russian during socialisation (n = 33), and Kazakh diaspora speakers across different countries (n = 30), the latter constituting the central analytical focus. The results based on a multiple-choice sentence-completion task demonstrate that the use of resultative auxiliary verb constructions reflects varying degrees of nativeness across contexts. In Kazakhstan, L1 Kazakh speakers exhibit the highest stability, while Russian–Kazakh bilinguals display variability consistent with Russian influence yet outperform L2 learners. In the diaspora, speakers show comparatively high stability in resultative marking, pointing to substantial maintenance despite pressure from dominant societal languages. At the same time, subtle variability points to localised contact-induced optionality in specific grammatical contexts rather than widespread restructuring. Overall, the findings identify resultativity as a sensitive diagnostic of language maintenance and change, capturing both revitalization dynamics in the homeland and adaptive processes in diaspora settings.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Languages, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Linguistics and Language

Linguistics and LanguageSocial Sciences