Assessing Heritage Language Vitality: Russian in the United States

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 382-395
Author(s):  
Oksana Laleko
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
The United States ◽  
Comprehensive Assessment ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Level Of Knowledge ◽  
Continued Use

The article offers a comprehensive assessment of the linguistic viability of Russian as a heritage language in the United States, following a framework that provides three factors involved in promoting language vitality (Lo Bianco, 2008a, 2008b): capacity, the level of knowledge that heritage speakers of Russian have in the heritage language and the factors that create conditions for development of such capacity; opportunities for the use of Russian in different domains and contexts; and heritage learner motivations and desire for continued use of Russian and for developing the skills necessary for its maintenance and transmission

The Linguistic Vitality of Chinese in the United States

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-304
Author(s):  
Na Liu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Chinese Immigrants ◽  
The United States ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Future Prospects ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Linguistic Vitality

This article examines the current status of Chinese as a heritage language (CHL) in the United States, referring to the Capacity-Opportunity-Desire (COD) framework (Grin, 1990, 2003; LoBianco, 2008). After briefly describing the linguistic profile of Chinese immigrants in the United States, the current status and future prospects of CHL in the United States are discussed. Thearticle concludes that a wide variety of programs are available to CHLspeakers, compared to those available decades ago. However, heritage speakers’ capacity in Chinese will be developed only when they have opportunities to use thelanguage and a desire to learn it.

scholarly journals Deconstructing the Native Speaker: Further Evidence From Heritage Speakers for Why This Horse Should Be Dead!

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wintai Tsehaye ◽  
Tatiana Pashkova ◽  
Rosemarie Tracy ◽  
Shanley E. M. Allen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Early Childhood ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
The United States ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Subordinate Clauses ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
The Difference

The category “native speaker” is flawed because it fails to consider the diversity between the speaker groups falling under its scope, as highlighted in previous literature. This paper provides further evidence by focusing on the similarities and differences between heritage speakers (HSs) and monolingually-raised speakers (MSs) of their heritage and majority languages. HSs are bilinguals who acquire a family (heritage) language and a societal (majority) language in early childhood. Naturalistic exposure from early childhood qualifies them as native speakers of their heritage language. Some HSs are simultaneous bilinguals, which makes them native speakers of their majority language as well. Others are early second language acquirers who may be indistinguishable from simultaneous bilinguals. Previous research shows that the heritage language productions of German HSs in the United States do not completely overlap with those of German MSs, who are, by default, native speakers. In overall clause type selection (independent main, coordinate main, and subordinate), the HSs differ from German MSs in German but are similar to English MSs in English. The present study examines the distribution of finite subordinate clauses and their types (relative, complement, and adverbial) across registers in 27 adolescent HSs of German in the United States, compared to 32 adolescent MSs of German and 32 MSs of English. All participants described a short video in two settings (formal/informal) and two modes (spoken/written). Results demonstrate that, even with respect to a specific phenomenon (subordinate clauses), HSs show similarities and differences to MSs of both languages. Concerning the distribution of subordinate clause types, HSs behave similarly to both English and German MSs. Concerning subordinate clauses in general, HSs use them less frequently than MSs in German. In English, the difference is more nuanced: HSs differentiate between settings in both modes, while MSs do so only in the written mode. This indicates that the category “native speaker” is not a meaningful descriptor since it covers speakers with varying production patterns. We propose that studies including native speakers should assure transparency and replicability of research by specifying and taking into account speaker characteristics such as bilingualism, proficiency, exposure and dominance.

Asian Immigrant Communities' Civic Participation in Cultivating Bilingualism and Biliteracy in the United States

2019 ◽  
pp. 157-171
Author(s):  
Kwangok Song
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Immigrant Students ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigrant Communities ◽  
Asian Immigrant ◽  
Heritage Languages ◽  
Heritage Language Schools ◽  
Children's Literacy ◽  
Language Schools

This chapter discusses how Asian immigrant communities in the United States cultivate Asian immigrant children's literacy learning in their heritage languages. Although the United States has historically been a linguistically diverse country, bilingualism has not always been valued and acknowledged. Strong social and institutional expectations for immigrants to acquire the socially dominant language have resulted in language shifts among immigrants. Concerned about their descendants' heritage language loss, Asian immigrant communities make organized efforts to establish community-based heritage language schools. Heritage language schools play an important role in immigrant children's learning of their heritage language and culturally appropriate ways of behaving and communicating. It has also been noted that heritage language schools encounter several challenges in motivating heritage language learners. Heritage language schools should be considered as complementary education for immigrant students because they take critical responsibilities to support immigrant students' language and literacy development in their heritage languages.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document