The aim of this 2-year-long ethnographic study was to examine how children's verbal and nonverbal behavior reflects their language awareness at a bilingual Arabic–Hebrew-speaking preschool in Israel. Listening to young children's talk about language and its use provides insight into their internal thinking mechanisms regarding languages in their environment as they engage in language learning. As far as we know, few studies to date have examined very young children's language awareness as expressed in their verbal and nonverbal interactions with their peers and teachers in the natural context of the preschool bilingual classroom. De Houwer (2017) called for more research to explore how young bilinguals' language awareness is related to their daily need to switch between languages to adjust to their interlocutors' language competence and communicative troubles, namely to investigate their sociolinguistic awareness (Cheung, Mak, Luo, & Xiao, 2010).

We adopted the perspective that children's L2 acquisition is situated within the social events and interactional practices of the classroom community (Cekaite, 2017). Drawing on this perspective, our study differs from the vast majority of studies on young bilingual children's language awareness through its longitudinal ethnographic observations of how 3- to 5-year-old children develop language awareness in the natural context of classroom interaction with peers and teachers. The novelty of this study is also in the methodological triangulation of the data sources and participants. Thus, to enhance the credibility of the ethnographic classroom observations of children's' talk about language and their nonverbal behaviors; we conducted semi-structured interviews with the teachers and parents. These interviews enabled a more comprehensive picture of how the context of preschool bilingual education affects children's sociolinguistic awareness, raises their curiosity about language in their environment, in turn promoting their language awareness.

Two theoretical assumptions inspired our work: (1) bilingual children's advanced level of language awareness development including pragmatic sensitivity to their interlocutors in comparison to their monolingual peers (e.g., Barac, Bialystok, Castro, & Sanchez, 2014); (2) children's verbal and nonverbal interaction with their peers and teachers as a means of promoting L2 development and acquisition (e.g., Blum-Kulka & Gorbatt, 2014).

In light of the Theory of Mind, young bilinguals' pragmatic sensitivity might be expressed in their higher level of attention to communicative cues and intentions of their partners in interaction (peers, parents, and teachers) than monolingual children (e.g., Flawell & Miller, 2000). This advantage among young bilinguals has been attributed among the other factors to their higher sociolinguistic awareness, which is required for communicating with speakers of different languages and with different levels of language competence (Cheung, et al., 2010).

Young bilinguals' language awareness could be expressed not only by explicit talk about language per se, but also by nonverbal behavior (e.g., Cruz-Ferreira, 2006). Behaviors such as body language, gestures, visualization, and expressions of happiness or anger with regard to the children's use of some specific language for communication or even open refusal to communicate in it, may provide clues to our understanding of young bilingual children's language awareness in the case of limited L2 verbal ability.

The present study was motivated to address the following questions:

1. What could be learned from longitudinal observations of the children's verbal and nonverbal behavior about their language awareness in a context of dual language preschool bilingual education?
2. What do the teachers and parents think about bilingual children's language awareness? 

We applied a qualitative paradigm and used linguistic ethnography as the methodological framework. A combination of ethnographic methods (children's longitudinal classroom observations, field-notes, interviews with teachers and parents) and linguistic methods (analysis of children's talk) permitted us to generate a descriptive analysis of the children's verbal and non-verbal behavior about their language awareness. Methods for collecting and processing the data were based on the legal and ethical guidelines regulating research. We applied a purposive sampling for our sample choice in order to select the information-rich cases which are representative for the target bilingual classroom population. Our close observations were focused on six children. To ensure internal diversity and representativeness of the sample, the selection criteria were gender and ethnic background. Thus, the sample included the three Hebrew (L1) speakers (one girl and two boys) and the three Arabic (L1) speakers (two girls and one boy). In addition, the study participants were two preschool teachers: one Hebrew model teacher, and one Arabic model teacher. The teachers expressed their willingness to be observed during all study periods and to be interviewed. We conducted semi-structured interviews with the teachers. Our goal was to obtain the teachers' self-reports regarding the target children's bilingual development and their reflections on the children's interest in languages and verbal and nonverbal behaviors reflecting their language awareness. Finally, six semi-structured interviews were conducted with the target children's parents. Each interview lasted approximately 60 minutes. We asked about family language practice and children's exposure to their L2 outside the preschool context, children's queries about languages around them, and verbal and nonverbal behavior reflecting their language awareness. First, the data were transcribed in detail allowing for the inclusion of nonverbal information from the videos and field notes. Then, the transcriptions were coded for information about the date of the observed behavior, the participants' L1 and the language/s used, their partners in interaction, their verbal or nonverbal behavior and its classification in terms of language awareness category and subcategory, type of classroom activity, and contextual comments. The following categories and subcategories in the children's verbal and nonverbal behavioral patterns reflecting their language awareness: (1) Pragmatic sensitivity to communicative needs of peers and teachers: negotiating meanings (a) by translating, and (b) by using multiple verbal and nonverbal resources; (2) Critical evaluation of L2 competence: (a) self-monitoring and corrective feedback on others' incorrect language use; and (b) talk about L2 comprehension or lack of it and about unwillingness to use L2.

The study has shown how children as young as 3 to 5 years old applied diverse verbal and nonverbal mediating cues to solve their interlocutors' communicative troubles. From a sociocultural learning theory perspective, the mediation is viewed as an active process, central to teaching and learning through interaction. We linked the observed cases of our children's L2 mediation to their early developed sociolinguistic awareness, reflecting on growth of their Theory of Mind. We assumed that their pragmatic sensitivity to the interlocutors' communicative troubles was encouraged by a unique classroom context where the teachers stimulated children's language mediation and peers' backup. Moreover, the study highlighted a link between early development of language awareness in bilingual classroom environment and children's individual characteristics. This study added to our knowledge that personality characteristics such as outgoingness and gregariousness, as well as curiosity about languages, play a role in language awareness development. Finally, the study can be beneficial for language teachers' understanding of how they can support the children's language awareness development through encouraging peer mediation in the bilingual classroom. Nonetheless, we are aware that, since our investigation was limited to a contextually embedded case study of a single classroom, our findings might not be fully generalizable. Still, it is reasonable to assume that research exploring bilingual children's language awareness should have, as a foreground, the social context as a necessary condition for its development. Social goals at early ages such as establishing friendships and social positioning are essential for children's well-being, and language "is used as one means to achieve these social goals" (Philp, & Duchene, 2008; p. 84).

Barac, R., Bialystok, E., Castro, D. C., & Sanchez, M. (2014). The cognitive development of young dual language learners: A critical review. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 29, 699–714. Blum-Kulka, S., & Gorbatt, N. (2014). “Say princess”: The challenges and affordances of young Hebrew L2 novices’ interaction with their peers. In A. Cekaite, S. Blum-Kulka, V. Grøver, & E. Teubal (Eds.), Children’s peer talk: Learning from each other (pp. 169–193). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Cekaite, A. (2017). What makes a child a good language learner? Interactional competence, identity, and immersion in a Swedish classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 45-61. Cheung, H., Mak, W. Y., Luo, X., & Xiao, W. (2010). Sociolinguistic awareness and false belief in young Cantonese learners of English. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 188–194 Cruz-Ferreira, M. (2006). Three is a crowd?Acquiring Portuguese in a trilingual environment. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters. De Houwer, A. (2017). Early multilingualism and language awareness. In J. Cenoz, D. Gorter, & S. Mey (2017). Language awareness and multilingualism. Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 88-97). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Philp, J., & Duchene, S. (2008). When the gate opens: The interaction between social and linguistic goals in child second language development. In J. Philp, R. Oliver, & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language acquisition and the younger learner: Child’s play? (pp. 83–104). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.