Abstract
Abstract 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.
Highlights
The English foreign language classroom in Germany – and other countries – is characterized by various explicit and implicit norms that guide the education process and at least partially determine its failure or success
I.e. from the first measurement point (MP 1) to the last (MP 4), we observe a decrease in all groups
Lexical insertions from previously acquired languages into the target language production, is viewed as not adhering to the norms defined in the context of foreign language learning in school
Summary
The English foreign language classroom in Germany – and other countries – is characterized by various explicit and implicit norms that guide the education process and at least partially determine its failure or success. The German English foreign language classroom, especially in the upper grades, displays a strong monolingual orientation in that English serves both as the target language and the language of instruction, despite the multilingual turn in language education (Berthele 2020; Fuller 2020; García and Li Wei 2014; May 2014; Melo-Pfeifer 2018). Language mixing is avoided (Fuller 2020: 167) This philosophy increases the time spent on the task of learning English by using it as much as possible, which is believed to enhance educational success. It represents the dominant philosophy in EFL classrooms around the world (see Malabarba 2019: 244–246 who views this as the legacy of Krashen 1985)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
