Session Information
31 SES 07 C, Growing up with a Heritage Language in Germany: Effects on further language skills
Paper Session
Contribution
The idea of potential advantages related to bilingual speakers still remains controversial. Numerous studies that were conducted on balanced bilinguals document such advantages, especially in relation to specific skills (Bialystok et al. 2012; Cenoz & Valencia 1994; Cummins 2001; Fleckenstein et al. 2018; Jessner 2006; Lasagabaster 2001; Safont Jordà 2003; Sanz 2000).
However, studies carried out with bilingual heritage speakers usually fail to demonstrate such advantages (Sanders & Meijers 1995; Spellerberg 2016). Moreover, even established advantages of balanced bilinguals could not be replicated in more recent studies (Duñabeitia & Carreiras 2015; Paap & Greenberg 2013; Tsimprea Maluch et al. 2016).
The advantages found by the abovementioned studies refer to four broad cognitive domains, such as executive function (control) including cognitive reserve, cognitive development and educational attainment, metalinguistic awareness, and language acquisition and learning. Cummins’ (1976, 1979) two hypotheses, the ‘threshold hypothesis’ and the ‘interdependence hypothesis’, suggest a positive effect for bilinguals in case of an academic development of their heritage language. These hypotheses could possibly be transferred to the acquisition of additional languages.
The aim of the current study is to explore the relationship between language proficiencies of bilinguals in their background languages and their proficiency in English as an additional language. More precisely, we investigate whether and to what extent higher proficiencies in already acquired languages correlate with higher language proficiencies in English. Based on Cummins’ hypotheses as well as current studies on advantages or disadvantages of bilinguals, we pursue the following questions:
(I) Is there a relationship between the reading skills in the background languages and English language proficiency, especially if other variables are controlled for?
(II) Do bilinguals with higher reading skills also show a higher proficiency in English?
(III) Does heritage language tuition impact the proficiency in English positively?
Results of our analyses are expected to show whether any traces of bilingual advantages can be detected.
Method
For the purpose of this study we draw on data from the longitudinal research project Multilingual Development at the University of Hamburg. In particular, data are taken from the first point of measurement (n=958) sampling students that attend years 7 and 9 at German schools, divided into three language groups: German monolinguals (nG7=360; nG9=346), Russian-German bilinguals (nR7=62; nR9=62), and Turkish-German bilinguals (nT7=61; nT9=67). A reading fluency and comprehension test (Schneider et al. 2016) conducted in German with all students and the respective heritage language of the bilingually raised participants provides insight into their receptive abilities and language proficiencies. The focus of this task was to see how many words the participants were able to read within the time frame of six minutes and how much of the read text they comprehended, measured by content-related multiple choice gaps. In addition to the language proficiency in German and the heritage language, proficiency in English as an additional language was assessed by four C-tests per participant. By means of completing end-clipped words within a text that also needed to be grammatically adapted, the results are indicative of lexical and grammatical proficiency in English. Additionally, the participants had to complete a standardized cognitive ability test (Heller & Perleth 2000: KFT 4-12+ R). The results of the reading fluency and comprehension tests in German and the respective heritage language in combination with the results of the C-tests served as a basis for correlation, regression, and t-test analyses. Various language external factors, such as age of onset for each language, HISEI, school grade, gender, school type, motivation, self-concept that were collected with extensive background questionnaires, as well as the students’ cognitive ability scores were used in the regression analyses as independent variables and were controlled for. The language dependencies were analyzed with correlation analyses between the language scores, the regression analyses clarify the impact of the independent variables on the model of variance, and the t-tests provide insights into the relationship of heritage language tuition and C-test results.
Expected Outcomes
The results document clear relationships between the background languages and the proficiency level in English. Nevertheless the correlations either decrease or disappear completely as soon as other language external variables are considered. Therefore, it is questionable whether Cummins’ interdependence hypothesis holds for the acquisition of an additional language. However, a higher proficiency in background languages could result in a higher proficiency in English. As soon as a median split is performed on the reading skills in the heritage languages, those students that show a higher score in the reading fluency and comprehension test also record a higher score in their English proficiency and vice versa. Nevertheless, social elements as well as motivational aspects seem to substantiate the distribution and the different proficiency scores. In general, the school type has a substantial effect on language proficiency. The results of our analyses do not show a significant positive relation between heritage language tuition and English proficiency. Our results question Cummins’ hypotheses as we don’t find a dominant role of heritage language proficiency, if it is considered solely and thereby cannot validate his hypotheses. Nevertheless, it should be stressed that we focused on reading skills and not general language proficiencies. Our results show that it is not easy to talk about multilingual advantages when we only consider bilingualism irrespective of the different language groups. Language external aspects prove to have a more dominant and significant role than language skills solely. Indeed, these factors seem to have a more intense impact on the acquisition of an additional language. Although we were not able to prove significant advantages for bilinguals, it is noteworthy that we cannot show any disadvantages either.
References
Bialystok, E., F.I.M. Craik & G. Luk. 2012. Bilingualism: consequences for mind and brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 16 (4), 240-250. Cenoz, J. & J. Valencia. 1994. Additive trilingualism: Evidence from the Basque Country. Applied Psycholinguistics 15 (2), 195-207. Cummins, J. 1976. The influence of bilingualism on cognitive growth: A synthesis of research findings and explanatory hypotheses. Working Papers on Bilingualism (9), 2-43. Cummins, J. 1979. Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research 49 (2), 222-251. Cummins, J. 2001. Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon et al.: Multilingual Matters. Duñabeitia, J.A. & M. Carreiras. 2015. The bilingual advantage: Acta est fabula? Cortex 73, 371-372. Fleckenstein, J., J. Möller, J. Baumert. 2018. Mehrsprachigkeit als Ressource. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft 21 (1), 97-120. Heller, K. & C. Perleth. 2000. Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4. bis 12. Klassen, Revision: KFT 4-12; Manual. Göttingen: Beltz Test. Jessner, U. 2006. Linguistic Awareness in Multilinguals: English as a Third Language. Edinburgh University Press. Lasagabaster, D. 2001. The Effect of Knowledge About the L1 on Foreign Language Skiulls and Grammar. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 4 (5), 310-331. Paap, K.R. & Z.I. Greenberg. 2013. There is no coherent evidence for a bilingual advantage in executive processing. Cognitive Psychology 66, 232-258. Safont Jordà, M.P. 2003. Instructional effects on the use of request acts modification devices by EFL learners. In: Pragmatic Competence and Foreign Language Teaching, 211-232. Sanders, M. & G. Meijers. 1995. English as L3 in elementary school. In: ITL Review of Applied Linguistics 107 (8), 59-78. Sanz, C. 2000. Bilingual education enhances third language acquisition: Evidence from Catalonia. Applied Psycholinguistics 21 (1), 23-44. Schneider, W., M. Schlagmüller & M. Ennemoser. 2016. Lesegeschwindigkeits- und -verständnistest für die Klassenstufen 5-12. 2., erw. und neu normierte Aufl. Göttingen: Hogrefe. Spellerberg, S.M. 2016. Metalinguistic awareness and academic achievement in a linguistically diverse school setting: a study of lower secondary pupils in Denmark. International Journal of Multilingualism 13 (1), 19-39. Tsimprea Maluch, J., M. Neumann & S. Kempert. 2016. Bilingualism as a resource for foreign language learning of language minority students? Empirical evidence from a longitudinal study during primary and secondary school in Germany. Learning and Individual Differences 51, 111-118.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.