scholarly journals Acquisizione e apprendimento linguistico degli heritage speakers russofoni della scuola N. Gogol’ di Roma: ultimi sviluppi dell’indagine

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Perotto
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Formal Learning ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Heritage Languages ◽  
Language Competence ◽  
Saturday School ◽  
Migrant People

In the last few decades the study of the so called ‘heritage languages’ has become an emerging field in the research of bilingualism, because migrant people often try to maintain their identities and minority languages. This work resumes a new testing experience, which has been conducted four years after the last one (2013), with some Russian heritage speakers (HS) living in Italy and attending a Russian Saturday school in Rome. It will focus on the difficulties of language acquisition and the possibility for the HS to develop a better language competence through formal learning.

Current Issues in Heritage Language Acquisition

2010 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 3-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvina Montrul
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Heritage Language Acquisition

An increasing trend in many postsecondary foreign language classes in North America is the presence of heritage language learners. Heritage language learners are speakers of ethnolinguistically minority languages who were exposed to the language in the family since childhood and as adults wish to learn, relearn, or improve their current level of linguistic proficiency in their family language. This article discusses the development of the linguistic and grammatical knowledge of heritage language speakers from childhood to adulthood and the conditions under which language learning does or does not occur. Placing heritage language acquisition within current and viable cognitive and linguistic theories of acquisition, I discuss what most recent basic research has so far uncovered about heritage speakers of different languages and their language learning process. I conclude with directions for future research.

scholarly journals The problem of developing multilingualism skills in the European educational context

2020 ◽  
pp. 109-117
Author(s):  
Mariya Vynarchyk
Keyword(s):  
Personal Development ◽  
Mother Tongue ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Educational Context ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Scientific Cooperation ◽  
Language Competence ◽  
Regional Or Minority Languages

The scientific article explores the problem of developing multilingualism skills in the European educational context. For this purpose, the task was to analyze the conditions and ways of realizing the problem of multilingualism in the modern educational field and to study the features of European multilingualism in the context of cultural diversity. The methodology of the study is based on the coverage and analysis of cognitive and practical multilingualism skills. European education policy is analyzed. Addressing the issue of multilingualism is one of the most important activities of the Council of Europe, the European Commission and is covered by the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages and in numerous resolutions of international conferences and symposia. It is established that one of the main goals of education in a democratic society is not only respect for human rights, but also the development of knowledge, skills and abilities of students, their preparation for life in civil society. Research has shown that multilingual people in Europe have advantages over monolinguals. More than half of all Europeans say they speak at least one language other than their mother tongue. The study showed that multilingualism is beneficial for people who are supporters of intercultural and linguistic interaction based on tolerance and humanism. Modern European educational policy is aimed at developing multilingual skills. This demonstrates the importance and timeliness of solving the problem in the educational environment with the active support of students and teachers, the financial capacity of European educational programs and projects of governments of leading European countries. As part of this task, it is important to actively support the mobility of students and teachers, to develop scientific cooperation, cultural interaction. Thanks to the intensive development of multilingual skills, it is possible to achieve the required level of language competence of students as a basis for their further learning and self-improvement. Since the modern educational community is focused on the highest human values, the personal development of schoolchildren and students is considered a priority for the functioning of European educational institutions.

Introduction: Vitality of Heritage Languages in the United States: The Role of Capacity, Opportunity, and Desire

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. i-viii
Author(s):  
Joseph Lo Bianco ◽  
Joy Kreeft Peyton
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
National Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Specific Context ◽  
Heritage Languages ◽  
Development Opportunity ◽  
Intergenerational Connections

A framework to examine vitality of languages in a specific context, developed by Francois Grin and elaborated by Joseph Lo Bianco, specifies that three conditions are necessary for language vitality and revitalization: Capacity Development, Opportunity Creation, and Desire (COD). This framework was developed as a tool to help communities and governments support regional and minority languages and to promote policy development at the national level related to language revitalization and use. The framework is used in this issue as a guide for examining the vitality of languages spoken in the United States as “heritage” languages, which are spoken by individuals who have home, community, and intergenerational connections with the languages as well as some proficiency in them.

Who did what to whom, and what did we already know?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tania Ionin ◽  
Maria Goldshtein ◽  
Tatiana Luchkina ◽  
Sofya Styrina
Keyword(s):  
Information Structure ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Heritage Languages ◽  
Heritage Speaker ◽  
Narrow Focus ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Speakers Of Other Languages ◽  
Prior Literature

Abstract This paper reports on an experimental investigation of what second language (L2) learners and heritage speakers of Russian know about the relationship between word order and information structure in Russian. The participants completed a bimodal acceptability judgment task, rating the acceptability of SVO and OVS word orders in narrow-focus contexts, under neutral prosody. Heritage speakers behaved like the control group of baseline speakers, preferring SVO order in answer to object questions, and OVS order in answer to subject questions. In contrast, L2 learners preferred SVO order regardless of the context. While the heritage speaker group was more proficient than the L2 group, proficiency alone cannot account for differences in performance: specifically, with regard to acceptance of OVS order for subject narrow focus, heritage speakers improved with proficiency, but L2 learners did not. It is proposed that heritage speakers have an advantage in this domain due to early age of acquisition (cf. Montrul, 2008). This finding is consistent with prior literature on narrow focus with heritage speakers of other languages, and suggests that this phenomenon is not particularly vulnerable in heritage languages.

Directions in Research: Intergenerational Transmission of Heritage Languages

2003 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-134
Keyword(s):  
Native American ◽  
Los Angeles ◽  
Language Ideologies ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
University Of California ◽  
Baltimore County ◽  
Heritage Languages ◽  
Saturday School ◽  
Role Of Parents

A collection of 10 papers preceded by an introduction and a section on Clusters of Research Areas by Joseph LoBianco (Language Australia), pp. 93-96). Papers as follows: #1: Learning from History, by Terence Wiley, Arizona State University (pp. 96-99); #2: External Pressures on Families, by Lily Wong Fillmore, University of California, Berkeley (pp. 99-102); #3: The Role of Schools in Language Maintenance and Shift, by Reynaldo Macias, University of California, Los Angeles (pp. 102-104); #4: Saturday-School Participation, Ethnic Identity and Japanese Language Development by Kiyomi Chinen and G. Richard Tucker, Carnegie Mellon University (pp. 104-106); #5: The Role of Parents’ Knowledge about Bilingualism in the Transmission of Heritage Languages, by Sarah J. Shin, University of Maryland, Baltimore County (pp. 107-109); #6: Native American Heritage Languages, by Christine P. Sims, University of New Mexico (pp. 109-113); #7: Language Ideologies, by Norma González, University of Utah (pp. 113-115); #8: Language Ideologies and the Teaching of Heritage Languages, by Guadalupe Valdés, Stanford University (pp. 116-118); #9: Research Priorities: Heritage Languages in Policy Texts, by Joseph Lo Bianco, Language Australia (pp. 118-121); #10: Biliteracy and Heritage Languages, by Nancy H. Hornberger, University of Pennsylvania (pp. 121-124)

scholarly journals Stability and Change in Grammatical Gender: Pronouns in Heritage Scandinavian

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janne Bondi Johannessen ◽  
Ida Larsson
Keyword(s):  
Noun Phrase ◽  
Grammatical Gender ◽  
Gender Agreement ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Heritage Languages ◽  
Stability And Change ◽  
Pronominal Gender ◽  
Gender System ◽  
Internal Agreement

Previous studies on gender in Scandinavian heritage languages in America have looked at noun-phrase internal agreement. It has been shown that some heritage speakers have non-target gender agreement, but this has been interpreted in different ways by different researchers. This paper presents a study of pronominal gender in Heritage Norwegian and Swedish, using existing recordings and a small experiment that elicits pronouns. It is shown that the use of pronominal forms is largely target-like, and that the heritage speakers make gender distinctions. There is, however, some evidence of two competing systems in the data, and there is a shift towards a two-gender system, arguably due to koinéization.

Introduction to Heritage Language Development

2019 ◽  
pp. 417-433
Author(s):  
Silvina Montrul ◽  
Maria Polinsky
Keyword(s):  
Heritage Language ◽  
First Generation ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Age Of Onset ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Heritage Languages ◽  
First Generation Immigrants ◽  
Heritage Language Development

This chapter presents and analyses main factors that contribute to attrition in heritage languages. It shows that heritage speakers are a highly heterogeneous population from both a psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic point of view. In principle, their language can differ from the language of their input (baseline language, usually that of first-generation immigrants to a new country). The differences can be due to how the heritage language developed under reduced input conditions, interference from the dominant language (transfer) and innovations in the grammar, potential changes incipient in the input, and attrition proper. The latter is particularly apparent when the language of adult heritage speakers is compared with the language of bilingual children; such children outperform heritage speakers on a variety of linguistic properties. The critical factors that affect language change in heritage speakers include the age of onset of bilingualism and quantity/quality of input.

Emergent communicative norms in a contact language: Indirect requests in heritage Russian

Linguistics ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Irina Y. Dubinina ◽  
Sophia A. Malamud
Keyword(s):  
Language Contact ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
American English ◽  
Pragmatic Competence ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Heritage Languages ◽  
Communicative Strategies ◽  
Contact Language ◽  
Indirect Requests ◽  
Research Questions

AbstractThe present paper contributes to the study of speech act pragmatics, language contact, bilingualism, and heritage languages by bringing attention to the pragmatics of a contact language, heritage Russian (HR). The current study has a descriptive orientation, its main goal being to create a baseline for the pragmatic competence of speakers with incomplete acquisition of L1, which characterizes language contact in immigrant populations. We focus on communicative strategies and the choice of linguistic forms in requests made by heritage speakers of Russian, native speakers of full Russian, and native speakers of American English. The specific research questions explored in this study are: Is the linguistic variable – the form of polite requests – correlated with the population (speakers of HR vs. speakers of full Russian)? How do the differences play out? Do HR speakers have their own communicative norms? If yes, did these new norms develop under the influence of English or as a result of language-internal restructuring? We report that HR exhibits evidence of developing its own conventions for expressing polite requests which differ from the corresponding conventions in full Russian. Specifically, HR speakers use significantly more impersonal modals than monolingual native speakers of Russian in informal scenarios and rely on increased syntactic complexity to mark polite requests in formal scenarios. In indirect requests produced in both types of scenarios, HR speakers overuse the downgrader

scholarly journals Input effects across domains: The case of Greek subjects in child heritage language

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evangelia Daskalaki ◽  
Vasiliki Chondrogianni ◽  
Elma Blom ◽  
Froso Argyri ◽  
Johanne Paradis
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
North America ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Heritage Language Acquisition ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Interface Hypothesis

A recurring question in the literature of heritage language acquisition, and more generally of bilingual acquisition, is whether all linguistic domains are sensitive to input reduction and to cross-linguistic influence and to what extent. According to the Interface Hypothesis, morphosyntactic phenomena regulated by discourse–pragmatic conditions are more likely to lead to non-native outcomes than strictly syntactic aspects of the language (Sorace, 2011). To test this hypothesis, we examined subject realization and placement in Greek–English bilingual children learning Greek as a heritage language in North America and investigated whether the amount of heritage language use can predict their performance in syntax–discourse and narrow syntactic contexts. Results indicated two deviations from the Interface Hypothesis: First, subject realization (a syntax–discourse phenomenon) was found to be largely unproblematic. Second, subject placement was affected not only in syntax–discourse structures but also in narrow syntactic structures, though to a lesser degree, suggesting that the association between the interface status of subject placement and its sensitivity to heritage language use among children heritage speakers is gradient rather than categorical.

MORPHOLOGICAL ERRORS IN SPANISH SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS AND HERITAGE SPEAKERS

2011 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvina Montrul
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Morphological Variability ◽  
Minority Languages ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Oral Production ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Age Appropriate ◽  
Family Language

Morphological variability and the source of these errors have been intensely debated in SLA. A recurrent finding is that postpuberty second language (L2) learners often omit or use the wrong affix for nominal and verbal inflections in oral production but less so in written tasks. According to the missing surface inflection hypothesis, L2 learners have intact functional projections, but errors stem from problems during production only (a mapping or processing deficit). This article shows that morphological variability is also characteristic of heritage speakers (early bilinguals of ethnic minority languages) who were exposed to the family language naturalistically in early childhood but failed to acquire age-appropriate linguistic competence in the language. However, because errors in heritage speakers are more frequent in written than in oral tasks, the missing surface inflection hypothesis does not apply to them. The discussion considers how morphological errors in the two populations seem to be related to the type of experience.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document