Search

Since the earliest studies on multilingual advantages, it has proved difficult to disentangle language development from general cognition. It remains unclear whether language interdependence is an independent variable or whether observable effects are mediated by cognitive ability. Measurable effects of one language on another typically go hand in hand with differences in cognitive ability. We hypothesise that high cognitive ability produces stronger language interdependence effects than low cognitive ability. We consider this problem in the context of heritage bilingualism in Germany comparing a linguistically mixed cohort of bilingual students (n = 557; i.e. Russian-German, n = 237; Turkish-German, n = 320) with a monolingual German control (n = 852) regarding their proficiencies in the foreign language English. We ask whether the bilingual students manifest an English development that is different from their monolingually socialised peers. We place the students in three different groups depending on their performance in a visual-spatial cognitive ability test. We fit structural equation models to test whether heritage language and German proficiency impact English proficiency differently across these groups while additionally controlling for language background and socio-economic status. Results reveal differences between the high cognitive ability groups, here interpreted as a conditioned bilingualism effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Foreign language learners frequently use words from their previously acquired language(s) in the target language, especially if these languages are related (Ringbom, Håkan. 2001. Lexical transfer in L3 production. In Jasone Cenoz, Britta Hufeisen & Ulrike Jessner (eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives, 59–68. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters). Such insertions are referred to as 'lexical transfer', commonly divided into 'transfer of form' and 'transfer of meaning' (Bardel, Camilla. 2015. Lexical cross-linguistic influence in third language development. In Hagen Peukert (ed.), Transfer effects in multilingual language development, 111–128. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; Ringbom, Håkan. 2001. Lexical transfer in L3 production. In Jasone Cenoz, Britta Hufeisen & Ulrike Jessner (eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives, 59–68. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters). Lexical transfer challenges the monolingual habitus prevailing in foreign language classes which requires students to rely exclusively on the target language and inhibit other influences. Thus, in such English classes, students should avoid the use of different languages and ideally only produce monolingual English output. In this context, the current study investigates the use of lexical transfer instances in short English texts written by bilingual (Russian/Turkish-German) and monolingual (German) secondary school students (initially attending year 7) from a longitudinal perspective. It assesses i) whether the students increasingly adhere to the imposed normative rules and ii) what influence background variables such as language background (mono- vs. bilingual), type of school (higher vs. lower academic track), gender (female vs. male), or age (four measurement points over a period of 2.5 years) exert on the use of lexical transfer instances. Apart from gender, all factors impact lexical transfer in a statistically significant way, evoking different norm-based explanations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: The main objective of this study is to find evidence for the Linguistic Proximity Model, which allows for facilitative and non-facilitative cross-linguistic influence (CLI) from all previously known languages in third language (L3) acquisition. We target CLI in L3 English based on bilingual heritage speakers (Russian-German and Turkish-German) in comparison with second language acquisition of monolingual German speakers. Methodology: We examine the outcome of an English word order test. The participants produced sentences based on randomly ordered words. The focus of this study is the placement of direct and indirect pronominal objects with varying ditransitive verbs. Data analysis: 195 students in school years 7 and 9, separated into three language groups, participated in the study: German monolinguals (n G7 = 47; n G9 = 64), Russian-German bilinguals (n R7 = 19; n R9 = 30) and Turkish-German bilinguals (n T7 = 19; n T9 = 16). The placement of pronominal objects in the sentence task is compared to results from equivalent word order tests in English, German, Russian and Turkish that were repeated with native speakers. Findings: We find some support for the Linguistic Proximity Model because the outcome shows that facilitative and non-facilitative CLI is possible from both the heritage language and the majority language. Determining factors are the background languages, the age of the participants and frequency. However, the majority language, German, displays the strongest influence of both background languages due to its dominant status. Originality: This study provides further support for the Linguistic Proximity Model, by using a sentence completion task with unbalanced bilingual heritage speakers. Significance/implications: We provide evidence for showing that both facilitative and non-facilitative influence from all previously known languages of bilingual heritage speakers is possible and verifiable. We therefore add to the field of L3 acquisition and the discussion about current models of CLI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bi- and multilingualism has been shown to have positive effects on the attainment of third and additional languages. These effects, however, depend on the type of bi- and multilingualism and the status of the languages involved (Cenoz, 2003; Jessner, 2006). In this exploratory trend study, we revisit Cummins' Threshold Hypothesis (1979), claiming that bilingual children must reach certain levels of attainment in order to (a) avoid academic deficits and (b) allow bilingualism to have a positive effect on their cognitive development and academic attainment. To this end, we examine the attainment of English as an academic language of 16-years-old school children from Hamburg (n=52). Our findings support the existence of thresholds for literacy attainment. We argue that language external factors may override positive effects of bilingualism. In addition, these factors may compensate negative effects attributable to low literacy attainment in German and the heritage languages. We also show that low attainment levels in migrant children's heritage languages preempt high literacy attainment in additional languages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]