When L1 becomes an L3: Do heritage speakers make better L3 learners?

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARIA POLINSKY
Keyword(s):  
Classroom Instruction ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Classroom Setting ◽  
Transfer Effects ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Important Group ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Global Advantage ◽  
The Prestige

Heritage speakers who re-learn their childhood language in adulthood are an important group for the study of L3 acquisition. Such re-learners have selective advantages over other L2/L3 learners in phonetics/phonology, but lack a global advantage at re-learning the prestige variety of their L1. These learners show asymmetrical transfer effects in morphosyntax: transfer occurs only from the dominant language. Two tentative explanations for this asymmetry are suggested. First, re-learners may deploy the skills acquired in a classroom setting, where they have used only their dominant language. Second, re-learners may implicitly strive to increase the typological distance between their childhood language and the language of classroom instruction. These findings have implications for models of L3/Ln learning: the Cumulative Enhancement Model, the Typological Proximity Model, and the L2 Status Factor Model. The data discussed in this paper are most consistent with the latter model, but they also highlight the significance of the typological distance between languages under acquisition.

Language proficiency is only part of the story: Lexical access in heritage and non-heritage bilinguals

2019 ◽  
pp. 026765831987766
Author(s):  
Seth Wiener ◽  
Natasha Tokowicz
Keyword(s):  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Lexical Access ◽  
Classroom Instruction ◽  
Recognition Task ◽  
Age Of Acquisition ◽  
Classroom Setting ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
English Classroom ◽  
Correct Translation ◽  
English Heritage

This study examined how language proficiency and age of acquisition affect a bilingual language user’s reliance on the dominant language during lexical access. Two bilingual groups performed a translation recognition task: Mandarin–English classroom bilinguals who acquired their dominant language (Mandarin) from birth and their non-dominant language (English) post-puberty through formal classroom instruction, and Mandarin–English heritage bilinguals who acquired their non-dominant language (Mandarin) at home from birth but became more dominant in another language (English) through society and peers. Participants decided whether word pairs were correct translations as quickly and accurately as possible. Critical trials involved correct translations (e.g. 房东 – landlord) and incorrect translations that were related to the correct translation in meaning (e.g. 房东 – rent) or form (e.g. 房东 – lantern). When identifying correct translations, lower proficiency heritage bilinguals were slower and less accurate than higher proficiency classroom bilinguals. Yet, when rejecting incorrect translations, heritage bilinguals demonstrated a greater magnitude of semantically-related interference than classroom bilinguals. Heritage bilinguals additionally demonstrated small but measurable amounts of form-related interference whereas the classroom bilinguals did not. Heritage bilinguals thus showed unique patterns of lexical access distinct from bilinguals who acquired their non-dominant language at a later age in a classroom setting.

scholarly journals Metalinguistic Intuitions and Dominant Language Transfer in Heritage Spanish Syllabification

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-307
Author(s):  
Michael Shelton ◽  
David Counselman ◽  
Nicolás Gutiérrez Palma
Keyword(s):  
English Translation ◽  
Language Transfer ◽  
Transfer Effects ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Heritage Speaker ◽  
Paper And Pencil ◽  
Vocalic Sequences ◽  
Heritage Speakers Of Spanish ◽  
English Heritage

While heritage speakers of Spanish have been shown to differ from monolingual speakers along many morphosyntactic lines, comparatively few studies in heritage linguistics have focused on phonology. To test whether the knowledge of English phonotactics would influence Spanish-English heritage speaker syllabification patterns in Spanish, 29 heritage and 29 monolingual speakers of Spanish completed a paper-and-pencil syllabification task in which they divided 80 Spanish words into syllables. Stimuli were controlled for comparisons between Spanish and English phonotactic constraints. Specific attention was placed on the syllabification of vocalic sequences as diphthongs or hiatus. Based on the distribution of diphthongs in English, and the findings of cognate effects in a similar study by Zárate-Sández (2011), heritage speakers were predicted to break diphthongs into hiatus more often in cognates than noncognates, more often when the English translation of a cognate presented hiatus, more in rising diphthongs than in falling diphthongs, and more often when a rising diphthong contained a palatal rather than velar glide. These effects were all present in heritage speaker results. No significant effects were found for monolingual controls. These findings offer new data to the understudied field of heritage phonology and to the ongoing discussion of dominant language transfer effects.

Dominant language transfer in adult second language learners and heritage speakers

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvina Montrul
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Language Transfer ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Transfer Effects ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
L2 Learners

The effects of language transfer have been amply documented in second language (L2) acquisition and, to a lesser extent, in the language contact/loss literature (Cook, 2003). In both cases, the stronger and often dominant language encroaches into the structure of the less dominant language in systematic ways. But are transfer effects in these two situations comparable: is first language (L1) influence in adult L2 learners similar to L2 influence in the L1 of early bilinguals? The current study addresses this question by investigating knowledge of Spanish clitics, clitic left dislocations, and differential object marking (DOM) in 72 L2 learners and 67 Spanish heritage speakers. The contact language, English, is assumed to not instantiate these syntactic properties. Results of an oral production task and a written acceptability judgment task indicated overall advantages for the heritage speakers in some areas, but similar effects of transfer from English in the two groups. Transfer effects were less pronounced with core aspects of grammar (syntax proper in the case of clitics) than with aspects of grammar that lie at the interfaces of syntax and semantics/pragmatics, as in the case of clitic left dislocations and DOM. These findings have implications for current views on the vulnerability of certain linguistic interfaces in language development (Sorace, 2004; Serratrice et al., 2004; Tsimpli and Sorace, 2006; White, 2009) and for theories that stress the role of age in L2 acquisition and permanent transfer effects.

Metalinguistic Intuitions and Dominant Language Transfer in Heritage Spanish Syllabification

2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-306
Author(s):  
Michael Shelton ◽  
David Counselman ◽  
Nicolás Gutiérrez Palma
Keyword(s):  
English Translation ◽  
Language Transfer ◽  
Transfer Effects ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Heritage Speaker ◽  
Paper And Pencil ◽  
Vocalic Sequences ◽  
Heritage Speakers Of Spanish

While heritage speakers of Spanish have been shown to differ from monolingual speakers along many morphosyntactic lines, comparatively few studies in heritage linguistics have focused on phonology. To test whether the knowledge of English phonotactics would influence SpanishEnglish heritage speaker syllabification patterns in Spanish, 29 heritage and 29 monolingual speakers of Spanish completed a paper-and-pencil syllabification task in which they divided 80 Spanish words into syllables. Stimuli were controlled for comparisons between Spanish and English phonotactic constraints. Specific attention was placed on the syllabification of vocalic sequences as diphthongs or hiatus. Based on the distribution of diphthongs in English, and the findings of cognate effects in a similar study by Zárate-Sández (2011), heritage speakers were predicted to break diphthongs into hiatus more often in cognates than noncognates, more often when the English translation of a cognate presented hiatus, more in rising diphthongs than in falling diphthongs, and more often when a rising diphthong contained a palatal rather than velar glide. These effects were all present in heritage speaker results. No significant effects were found for monolingual controls. These findings offer new data to the understudied field of heritage phonology and to the ongoing discussion of dominant language transfer effects.

scholarly journals VOICE ONSET TIME IN MULTILINGUAL SPEAKERS: ITALIAN HERITAGE SPEAKERS IN GERMANY WITH L3 ENGLISH

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Miriam Geiss ◽  
Sonja Gumbsheimer ◽  
Anika Lloyd-Smith ◽  
Svenja Schmid ◽  
Tanja Kupisch
Keyword(s):  
Heritage Language ◽  
Voice Onset Time ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Bilingual Advantage ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence

Abstract This study brings together two previously largely independent fields of multilingual language acquisition: heritage language and third language (L3) acquisition. We investigate the production of fortis and lenis stops in semi-naturalistic speech in the three languages of 20 heritage speakers (HSs) of Italian with German as a majority language and English as L3. The study aims to identify the extent to which the HSs produce distinct values across all three languages, or whether crosslinguistic influence (CLI) occurs. To this end, we compare the HSs’ voice onset time (VOT) values with those of L2 English speakers from Italy and Germany. The language triad exhibits overlapping and distinct VOT realizations, making VOT a potentially vulnerable category. Results indicate CLI from German into Italian, although a systemic difference is maintained. When speaking English, the HSs show an advantage over the Italian L2 control group, with less prevoicing and longer fortis stops, indicating a specific bilingual advantage.

Sentence comprehension in heritage language: Isomorphism, word order, and language transfer

2021 ◽  
pp. 026765832199790
Author(s):  
Anna Chrabaszcz ◽  
Elena Onischik ◽  
Olga Dragoy
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Language Transfer ◽  
Processing Strategy ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Sequence Of Events ◽  
Linguistic Transfer

This study examines the role of cross-linguistic transfer versus general processing strategy in two groups of heritage speakers ( n = 28 per group) with the same heritage language – Russian – and typologically different dominant languages: English and Estonian. A group of homeland Russian speakers ( n = 36) is tested to provide baseline comparison. Within the framework of the Competition model (MacWhinney, 2012), cross-linguistic transfer is defined as reliance on the processing cue prevalent in the heritage speaker’s dominant language (e.g. word order in English) for comprehension of heritage language. In accordance with the Isomorphic Mapping Hypothesis (O’Grady and Lee, 2005), the general processing strategy is defined in terms of isomorphism as a linear alignment between the order of the sentence constituents and the temporal sequence of events. Participants were asked to match pictures on the computer screen with auditorily presented sentences. Sentences included locative or instrumental constructions, in which two cues – word order (basic vs. inverted) and isomorphism mapping (isomorphic vs. nonisomorphic) – were fully crossed. The results revealed that (1) Russian native speakers are sensitive to isomorphism in sentence processing; (2) English-dominant heritage speakers experience dominant language transfer, as evidenced by their reliance primarily on the word order cue; (3) Estonian-dominant heritage speakers do not show significant effects of isomorphism or word order but experience significant processing costs in all conditions.

scholarly journals Acquisition of Object Pronouns in EFL in Germany by Heritage Speakers of Turkish

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-84
Author(s):  
Gulumser Efeoglu ◽  
Christoph Schroeder
Keyword(s):  
English Proficiency ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Pronoun Use ◽  
Significant Factors ◽  
Object Pronouns

Summary L3 acquisition has begun to attract the attention of many scholars in recent years. Heritage contexts are especially fruitful areas to understand how linguistic and nonlinguistic mechanisms interact with one another. The current study focuses on L3 English acquisition of object pronouns with L1 Turkish, L2 German speakers. We seek to find out whether the speakers could produce object pronouns accurately, whether L3 English proficiency has any effects on their acquisition, and finally, whether all object pronouns are acquired in the same way. Data for this study come from a corpus consisting of written and oral productions of 167 participants, who were students in four distinct grades, namely 5th, 7th, 10th and 12th graders at different schools in Berlin, Germany. The results reveal that participants were highly meticulous in their object pronoun use. Also, no clear L1 effect was observed, while L2 impact is implied. Lastly, proficiency and linguistic features are noted as significant factors that have an impact on L3 acquisition.

scholarly journals The interpretation of syntactically unconstrained anaphors in Turkish heritage speakers

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martina Gračanin-Yuksek ◽  
Sol Lago ◽  
Duygu Fatma Şafak ◽  
Orhan Demir ◽  
Bilal Kırkıcı
Keyword(s):  
Heritage Language ◽  
Selection Task ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Online Measures

Previous work has shown that heritage grammars are often simplified compared to their monolingual counterparts, especially in domains in which the societally-dominant language makes fewer distinctions than the heritage language. We investigated whether linguistic simplification extended to the anaphoric system of Turkish heritage speakers living in Germany. Whereas the Turkish monolingual grammar features a three-way distinction between reflexives (kendi), pronouns (o), and syntactically-unconstrained anaphors (kendisi), German only distinguishes between two categories, pronouns and reflexives. We examined whether heritage speakers simplified the Turkish anaphor system by assimilating the syntactically unconstrained anaphor kendisi to either of the two categories attested in the societally-dominant language, German. Speakers’ sensitivity to grammatical distinctions in comprehension was assessed using an offline antecedent selection task and an online self-paced reading task. Our results showed that heritage speakers retain the three-way anaphoric distinctions of the monolingual grammar but there were also differences between the results of the offline and the online tasks. We suggest that processing paradigms are a useful complement to judgment tasks when studying how heritage speakers use grammatical distinctions involving optionality, as online measures can reveal distinctions that are allowed, even if dispreferred by comprehenders.

Selective vulnerability and dominant language transfer in the acquisition of the Chinese cleft construction by heritage speakers

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-227
Author(s):  
Ziyin Mai ◽  
Xiangjun Deng
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Selective Vulnerability ◽  
Language Transfer ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Different Types

Abstract This study investigates effects of selective vulnerability and dominant language transfer in heritage grammar. Mandarin Chinese has a shì…de cleft construction, which, despite its superficial similarities with the it-cleft in English, is subject to additional conditions. Four experimental tasks elicited eighteen adult heritage speakers’ implicit knowledge of the word order and the temporal, telicity and discourse conditions associated with the Chinese cleft. The heritage speakers demonstrated target-like representation of the conditions. Meanwhile, their sensitivity to the telicity and discourse conditions is weaker than that of native speakers in Beijing, suggesting selective vulnerability in the heritage grammar. By comparing the heritage speakers with adult second language learners of Chinese, we concluded that the vulnerability of the heritage grammar in the discourse domain did not result from cross-linguistic influence from English. In different types of Chinese-English bilinguals, the dominant language affects the weaker language in different ways.

Variable V2 in Norwegian heritage language

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marit Westergaard ◽  
Terje Lohndal ◽  
Björn Lundquist
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Spontaneous Speech ◽  
The Other ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence

Abstract This paper discusses possible attrition of verb second (V2) word order in Norwegian heritage language by investigating a corpus of spontaneous speech produced by 50 2nd–4th generation heritage speakers in North America. The study confirms previous findings that V2 word order is generally stable in heritage situations, but nevertheless finds approximately 10% V2 violations. The cases of non-V2 word order are argued to be due to lack of activation of the heritage language grammar, making it vulnerable to crosslinguistic influence from the speakers’ dominant language. This crosslinguistic influence does not simply replace V2 by non-V2, but is argued to operate more indirectly, affecting (a) the distribution of contexts for V2 word order, and (b) introducing two new distinctions into the heritage language, one (indirectly) based on a similar distinction in the dominant language (a difference between adverbs and negation with respect to verb movement), the other based on frequency of initial elements triggering V2 in non-subject-initial declaratives. Together, these findings also indicate that crosslinguistic influence affects different contexts of V2 differently, providing support for analyses that treat V2 word order as the result of many smaller rules.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document