Viswanath A, Polinsky M. A look at Heritage English, in Formal Approaches to Heritage Languages. Amherst, MA: UMass Amherst; 2012. posterhandout_april_12.pdf
Sturgeon A, Harizanov B, Polinsky M. Revisiting the Person Case Constraint in Czech. FASL 19. 2012:116-130. sturgeon_harizanov_et_al_pcc_fasl19.final_.pdf
Polinsky M, Gomez-Gallo C, Graff P, Kravtchenko E. Subject preference and ergativity. Lingua. 2012;122(3):267-277. lingua_offprint.pdf
Potsdam E, Polinsky M. Backward raising. Syntax. 2012;15(1):75-108.
Polinsky M. Annotated bibliography of research in heritage languages. In: Oxford Bibliographies, Linguistics. Oxford University Press; 2011. Website obo.2-1.pdf
Xiang M, Harizanov B, Polinsky M, Kravtchenko E. Processing morphological ambiguity: An experimental investigation of Russian numerical phrases. Lingua. 2011. offprint.pdf
Montrul S, Polinsky M. Why not heritage speakers?. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism. 2011;1(1). LAB_commentary_Montrul_Polinsky_102410.pdf
Polinsky M, Potsdam E. Against covert A-movement in Russian unaccusatives. Linguistic Inquiry. 2011;42(2). Russian_unaccusatives.revised_and_cut.070810.pdf
Heestand D, Xiang M, Polinsky M. Resumption still does not rescue islands. Linguistic Inquiry. 2011;42:138-152. RP-revised-final.pdf
Polinsky M. Reanalysis in adult heritage language: A case for attrition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2011;33:305-328. polinsky_relative_clauses.pdf
Caponigro I, Polinsky M. Relative embeddings: A Circassian puzzle for the syntax/semantics interface. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 2011. adyghe_nllt_revised_12_16_09_submitted.final_.pdf
Potsdam E, Polinsky M. Questions and word order in Polynesian. In: Morphological and Syntactic Aspects of Oceanic Languages. ; 2011. COOL_paper.revised.pdf
Polinsky M, Zhang B, Gallo CG. Eliciting heritage speakers' production, in MIMS. Hamburg, Germany: Hamburg University; 2010. mims.presentation_oct_10.pdf
Polinsky M, Zhang B, Gallo CG. Heritage Chinese: A new view from production, in Fourth Heritage Language Institute. Manoa, HI: Nat'l Heritage Language Resource Center; 2010. hl_4_chinese.pdf
Polinsky M. Asymmetries in nominal and verbal morphology, in Second Language Research Forum. Maryland; 2010. SLRF_2010_MP.pdf
Polinsky M. Why Bother with Heritage Speakers?, in First International Conference on Heritage and Community Languages. UCLA; 2010. Publisher's Version UCLA_Feb_2010.Polinsky_final_pres.pdf
Polinsky M. What would Humboldt have done about ergativity in 2010?, in DGfS--200th Anniversary of the Humboldt University.; 2010. Berlin_slides.1.pdf
Bhatia A, Benmamoun A, Polinsky M. Closest Conjunct Agreement in Head-Final Languages. Linguistic Variation Yearbook . 2010;10. offprint.pdf
Polinsky M. Russkij jazyk pervogo i vtorogo pokolenija emigrantov, zhivuschix v SShA. Slavica Helsingiensia. 2010;40:336-352. slavica_helsingiensia14.2010.pdf
Benmamoun E, Montrul S, Polinsky M. White Paper: Prolegomena to Heritage Linguistics. Harvard University. 2010.Abstract
Linguistic theory and experimental studies of language development rest heavily on the notion of the adult, perhaps linguistically stable, native speaker. Native speaker competence and performance are typically the result of normal first language acquisition in a predominantly monolingual environment, with optimal and continuous exposure to the language. The question we pose in this article is what happens when access to input and opportunities to use that native language are less than optimal during language development. We present and discuss the case of heritage speakers, i.e., bilingual speakers of an ethnic or immigrant minority language whose first language does not typically reach native-like attainment in adulthood. By examining the linguistic knowledge of these individuals, we question long-held ideas about the stability of language before the so-called critical period for language development, and the nature of the linguistic system as it develops under reduced input conditions. We present an overview of heritage speakers’ linguistic system and discuss several competing factors that shape this system in adulthood. We also call attention to the tremendous potential this population offers for linguistic research, the language teaching profession, and for society in general.