scholarly journals Heritage Language Learners and Automaticity: The Use of "por" and "para"

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie J. Trujillo
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Procedural Knowledge ◽  
Explicit Instruction ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Declarative Knowledge ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
Growing Body

The purpose of this study is to investigate the use of the Spanish prepositions por and para (P&P) by heritage-language (HL) learners to analyze whether they demonstrate automaticity in their application, as is common with L1 Spanish speakers (i.e. “it just sounds right”), or if they rely on the conscious, declarative knowledge of the prescriptive uses of these prepositions, as is common with speakers for whom Spanish is an L2. Upper and lower HL learners and upper and lower FL learners (non-HL learners) were asked to complete a cloze test and a grammaticality judgment task and were asked to explain their judgments. The explanations given by students provide a glimpse into the type of knowledge, whether declarative or procedural, that students tap into when using P&P. This study found that while FL learners relied on declarative knowledge in the application of P&P, HL learners demonstrated a level of automaticity and procedural knowledge in their use of these prepositions. This suggests that HL learners have internalized the uses of P&P though communicative exposure throughout their childhood, which may be more effective than the explicit instruction FL learners have received on these structures. This study aims to add to the growing body of literature on heritage language processes and development.

THE CONTRIBUTION OF PSYCHOSOCIAL AND BIOGRAPHICAL VARIABLES TO HERITAGE LANGUAGE LEARNERS’ LINGUISTIC KNOWLEDGE OF SPANISH

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (04) ◽  
pp. 695-719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julio Torres ◽  
Ricardo Estremera ◽  
Sherez Mohamed
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Willingness To Communicate ◽  
Linguistic Knowledge ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Elicited Imitation ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
Specific Contribution

AbstractIndividual differences (IDs) largely contribute to success in adult second language attainment (e.g., Dörnyei, 2006). Heritage language (HL) studies have also explored the role of IDs, namely psychosocial variables, and biographical factors with an adult HL learner population. However, the specific contribution of these variables to HL learners' performance on linguistic tests that differ in degree of explicitness and modality remains unknown. Therefore, the current study tested 103 adult HL learners of Spanish who completed a spoken elicited imitation task (EIT) and a written untimed grammaticality judgment task (UGJT) that elicited their knowledge of vulnerable morphosyntactic structures in HL bilingual acquisition. To investigate the contribution of individual learner factors on their performance, participants completed a few questionnaires. Mixed-effects regression models revealed that sequential bilingual status, willingness to communicate, generation and motivation contributed significantly, but yet differentially to participants' performance on grammatical and ungrammatical items of the EIT and UGJT.

College Chinese Heritage Language Learners’ Implicit Knowledge of Compound Sentences

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lihua Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Implicit Knowledge ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Foreign Language Learners ◽  
Overall Performance ◽  
Preliminary Study ◽  
Chinese Heritage Language

This preliminary study investigates beginning college Chinese heritage language learners (CHLLs)’ implicit knowledge of compound sentences with pairs of correlatives. Drawing on Valdés’s (2005) categorization of HLLs as L1 speakers and HLLs as L1/L2 users, the study examines CHLLs’ ability to comprehend compound sentences with pairs of correlatives, as well as their comprehension level as compared to native Chinese language speakers and Chinese foreign language learners (CFLLs). The study also examines the characteristics of CHLLs’ implicit knowledge of compound sentences. The data was collected using an acceptability judgment task. The CHL subjects’ overall performance was somewhere between that of native speakers and CFLLs who had studied Chinese for two years. Their performance shows that their comprehension of compound sentences acquired before the onset of learning English at the age of 4 or 5 was retained and even somewhat developed. This is because CHL subjects still received some amount of input from home and community Chinese schools even though they favored English over Chinese. The findings on CHLLs’ linguistic habitus can inform and frame CHLLappropriate pedagogies that exploit their implicit knowledge and systematically build on it.

scholarly journals Variable Future-Time Expression in Spanish: A Comparison between Heritage and Second Language Learners

Languages ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 206
Author(s):  
Ana de Prada Pérez ◽  
Inmaculada Gómez Soler ◽  
Nick Feroce
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Temporal Distance ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Future Time ◽  
L2 Learners

This paper examines the expression of futurity in Spanish, specifically the periphrastic future (PF), the morphological future (MF), and the present indicative (PI) in heritage language learners (HLLs) and second language learners (L2 learners), a comparison that allowed us to explore whether linguistic experience provides HLLs an advantage over L2 learners in the domain of morphosyntax. These forms (PF, MF, and PI) are regulated by certainty, temporal distance, and the presence of temporal adverbials. Previous research showed that L2 learners acquire some of these linguistic constraints and that HLLs tend to reduce the MF to modal uses. Data from a contextualized acceptability judgment task completed by 46 HLLs and 42 L2ers manipulated for verb form, certainty, temporal distance, and adverb and revealed that (i) the PF and the MF were generally rated higher than the PI, (ii) HLLs were sensitive to the three linguistic factors examined, while the L2ers’ sensitivity was modulated by proficiency, and, relatedly, (iii) the two groups differed in the effect of proficiency. For the L2 learners, an increase in proficiency led to a closer pattern to that of monolingual native speakers (only for temporal distance). Differences in exposure to and instruction in Spanish are discussed as possible sources of these differences.

"There is no space for being German": Portraits of Willing and Reluctant Heritage Language Learners of German

2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roswita Dressler
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Secondary Level ◽  
Significant Part ◽  
Heritage Language Learners ◽  
Post Secondary ◽  
Language Identity ◽  
German Speaking ◽  
German Speaking Country

Some heritage language learners (HLLs) are comfortable identifying themselves as such, while others are decidedly reluctant to adopt this term (Piño & Piño, 2000). HLLs in this paper are defined as those students having a parent or grandparent who speaks German or those who have spent a significant part of their childhood in a German-speaking country (as suggested in Beaudrie & Ducar, 2005, p. 13). This paper highlights case studies of six HLLs of German at the post-secondary level who are participants in a motivation study (Dressler, 2008). Three students are ‘willing’ HLLs. The additional three case studies are of students that I will call ‘reluctant’ HLLs of German, and this paper explores the reasons behind their reluctance and the components of self-identification, which include language identity (Block, 2007; Pierce, 1995); language expertise; affiliation and inheritance (Leung, Harris, & Rampton, 1997); cultural artifacts (Bartlett, 2007) and positioning (Block, 2007).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document