Child Heritage Language Development: An Interplay Between Cross-Linguistic Influence and Language-External Factors.

Natalia Meir,Bibi Janssen

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.651730

Abstract

The current study investigated the mechanisms of heritage language (HL) development with a focus on case morphology. First, the effects of cross-linguistic influence (i.e., the influence of the properties of the societal language (SL) on the acquisition of the HL) was assessed by performing bilingual vs. monolingual, and between-bilingual group comparisons (Russian–Dutch vs. Russian–Hebrew bilinguals). Russian, Hebrew, and Dutch show differences in the marking of the accusative (ACC) and genitive (GEN) cases, and these differences were used as a basis for the evaluation of cross-linguistic influences. Second, the study evaluated the contribution of language-external factors such as chronological age, age of onset of bilingualism (AoO), languages spoken by the parent to the child (only HL, only SL, both HL and SL), and family language type (both parents are HL speakers, mixed families). Finally, we assessed how language-external factors might potentially mitigate the effects of cross-linguistic influences in bilinguals. Russian-Dutch bilinguals from the Netherlands (n = 39, MAGE = 5.1, SD = 0.8), Russian-Hebrew bilinguals from Israel (n = 36, MAGE = 4.9, SD = 0.9) and monolingual Russian-speaking children (n = 41, MAGE = 4.8, SD = 0.8), along with adult controls residing in the Russian Federation, participated in the study. The case production of ACC and GEN cases was evaluated using elicitation tasks. For the bilinguals, the background data on individual language-external factors were elicited from the participants. The results show that case morphology is challenging under HL acquisition—case acquisition in the HL is impeded under the influence of the properties of the SL. This is evident in the lower performance of both bilingual groups, compared with the monolingual controls who showed ceiling performance in the production of target inflection in the ACC and GEN contexts. More specifically, the acquisition of morphology is hindered when there are differences in the mapping of functional features (such as with Russian-Hebrew bilinguals) and/or the absence of this feature marking (such as with Russian-Dutch bilinguals). But the findings also point to the involvement of language-external factors as important mitigators of potential negative effects of cross-linguistic influence. In summary, HL development is an intricate interplay between cross-linguistic influence and language-external factors.

Highlights

The term “heritage language” (HL)— called “minority language,” “community language,” “home language,” “family language,” “mother tongue,” and “L1”—refers to a language that is spoken at home, but not by the majority of society which uses societal language (SL) (Rothman, 2009; Benmamoun et al, 2013; Montrul, 2016; Polinsky, 2018; Ortega, 2020)
Heritage language speakers acquire their HL from birth via naturalistic input, but as adults, they show divergence from the baseline
To address RQ2, we aimed to evaluate whether age, age of onset of bilingualism (AoO) of SL, home language use, family type, HL and SL input quantity, and HL and SL proficiency affects the acquisition of case morphology in bilingual HL-Russian development

Summary

Introduction

The term “heritage language” (HL)— called “minority language,” “community language,” “home language,” “family language,” “mother tongue,” and “L1”—refers to a language that is spoken at home, but not by the majority of society which uses societal language (SL) (Rothman, 2009; Benmamoun et al, 2013; Montrul, 2016; Polinsky, 2018; Ortega, 2020). Numerous studies have investigated the end-state grammars of adult HL speakers (for an overview see Montrul, 2016; Polinsky, 2018; Polinsky and Scontras, 2019, 2020). The current study aims to contribute to the understanding of the mechanisms affecting child HL development. We used the term “child HL speakers,” but it should be noted that in previous research, the term “L1 development” in simultaneous or early sequential bilinguals has been used instead [for a detailed discussion on the terminology in HL and child bilingualism research see Kupisch and Rothman (Kupisch and Rothman, 2018)]. For a detailed review of the potential mechanisms affecting HL development see Montrul (2016), Polinsky (2018), and Polinsky and Scontras (2019, 2020)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion