Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-24T10:00:28.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 29 - From Bilingual Speakers to Korean Heritage Language Learners

from Part VI - Language Pedagogy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2022

By
Hi-Sun Kim
Edited by
Sungdai Cho  and
John Whitman
Sungdai Cho
Affiliation:
Binghamton University, State University of New York
John Whitman
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

Chapter 29 examines the recurring attributes in current definitions of HL learners. These include early and significant exposure to the HL, proficiency in the HL, bilingualism to some degree, dominance in a language other than the HL, and an ethnic/cultural connection to the HL. From sociolinguistic journey, Korean heritage language (KHL) learners often end up with high receptive language skill, low to moderate accuracy in their speaking, and zero metalinguistic knowledge, and consequently enroll in Korean language in college to (re)learn their HL language. This poses pedagogical challenges, as KHL learners are linguistically distinguished from L2 learners due to their language experience. This chapter explores issues in language acquisition, language attrition, and language processing of Korean-English bilingual children and how such experience sheds light in understanding the pedagogical issues related to the language processing of young adult KHL learners.

Keywords

heritage language learnersKoreanbilingualslanguage maintenance and attritionheritage language acquisitionlanguage developmentheritage language pedagogy
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Korean Linguistics , pp. 832 - 848
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baars, B. 1988. A Cognitive Theory of Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Benmamoun, E., Monstrul, S., and Polinsky, M.. 2013. Heritage languages and their speakers: Opportunities and challenges for linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics 39: 129–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloommaert, J., Collins, J., and Slembrouck, S.. 2005. Spaces of multilingualism. Language and Communication 25(3): 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, M. 2011. Measuring implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge: What can heritage language learners contribute? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 33(2): 247–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, R., and Dulany, D.. 1985. Conscious attention and abstraction in concept learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11: 45–58.Google Scholar
Chaudron, C. 1985. Intake: On models and methods for discovering learners’ processing of input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 7: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, J., Lee, J., and Oh, J.. 2018. Examining the oral language competency of children from Korean immigrant families in English-only and dual language immersion schools. Journal of Early Childhood Research 16(1): 32–51.Google Scholar
Cloud, N., Genessee, F., and Hamayan, D.. 2000. Dual Language Instruction: A Handbook for Enriched Education. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Collier, V. and Thomas, W.. 2004. The astounding effectiveness of dual language education for all. NABE Journal of Research and Practice 2(1): 1–20.Google Scholar
Gass, S. 1988. Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies. Applied Linguistics 9: 198–217.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. 2015. Language Proficiency in Native and Non-Native Speakers: Theory and Research. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kim, A., Park, A., and Lust, B.. 2018. Simultaneous vs. successive bilingualism among preschool-aged children: A study of four-year-old Korean-English bilinguals in the USA. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualsim 21(2): 164–78.Google Scholar
Kim, E. 2002. Investigating the acquisition of Korean particles by beginning and intermediate learners. The Korean Language in America 7: 165–76.Google Scholar
Kim, H. 2012. Identifying the source of stabilization in Korean heritage learners: A comparative data analysis of HL learners and bilingual children. In Byon, A. and Pyun, D., eds., Teaching and Learning Korean as a Foreign Language: A Collection of Empirical Studies. Columbus: The Ohio State University Foreign Language Publications, pp. 209–27.Google Scholar
Kim, I. 2012. Phenomena of discourse marker use of bilingual children and implications for heritage language education. The Korean Language in America 17(1):24–54.Google Scholar
Kim, J. 2001. The degree of L1 interference among heritage and non-heritage learners of Korean: Do heritage students have advantages over non-heritage students? The Korean Language in America 6: 285–96.Google Scholar
Kim, M. 2013. The mental lexicon of low-proficiency Korean heritage learners. Heritage Language Journal 10(1): 17–35.Google Scholar
Kim, S. 2017. A situated perspective on bilingual development: Preschool Korean-English bilinguals’ utilization of two languages and Korean honorifics. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 20(1): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J., and Shin, S. 2008. Korean heritage language education in the United States: The current state, opportunities, and possibilities. Heritage Language Journal 6(2): 153–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindholm-Leary, K., and Howard, E.. 2008. Language development and academic achievement in two-way immersion programs. In Fortune, T. and Tedick, D., eds., Pathway to Multilingualism: Evolving Perspectives of Dual Immersion Education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 177–200.Google Scholar
Merrill, C. 2002. The future of Korean language education in the U.S. Teaching Korean as a Foreign Language 28: 301–35.Google Scholar
O’Grady, W., Lee, M., and Choo, M.. 2000. The acquisition of relative clauses by heritage and non-heritage learners of Korean as a second language. The Korean Language in America 5: 245–56.Google Scholar
Park-Johnson, S. 2017. Code mixing as a window into language dominance: Evidence from Korean heritage speakers. Heritage Language Journal 14(1): 49–69.Google Scholar
Padilla, A., Sung, H., and Aninao, J.. 1997. Less-commonly taught languages in selected elementary and secondary schools in California. Final report. Foreign Language Assistance Act Program: Evaluation project. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
Polinsky, M. 2015. When L1 becomes an L3: Do heritage speakers make better L3 learners? Bilingualism, Language and Cognition 18: 163–78.Google Scholar
Polinsky, M., and Kagan, O.. 2007. Heritage languages: In the “wild” and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass 1: 368–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Portes, A. and Rumbaut, R.. 2006. Immigrant America: A portrait, 3rd ed. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Potowski, K., Jegerski, J., and Morgan-Short, K.. 2009. The effects of instruction on linguistic development in Spanish heritage language speakers. Language Learning 59(3): 537–79.Google Scholar
Ro, Y., and Cheatham, G.. 2009. Biliteracy and bilingual development in a second-generation Korean child. Journal of Research in Childhood Education 23(3): 290–308.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., and Treffers-Daller, J.. 2014. A prolegomenon to the construct of the native speaker: Heritage speaker bilinguals are natives too! Applied Linguistics 35(1): 93–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rumbaut, R. 2009. A language graveyard? The evolution of language competencies, preferences and use among young adult children of immigrants. In Wiley, T., Lee, J., and Rumberger, R., eds., The Education of Language Minority Immigrants in the United States. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 35–71.Google Scholar
Schmid, C. 2001. The Politics of Language: Conflict, Identity, and Cultural Pluralism in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11: 129–58.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. 1995. Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In Schmidt, R., ed., Attention and Awareness in Foreign Language Learning (Technical Report #9). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, pp. 1–64.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. 2001. Attention. In Robinson, P., ed., Cognition and Second Language Instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
Shin, S. 2018. Bilingualism in Schools and Society: Language, Identity, and Policy, 2nd ed. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shin, S., and Joo, A.. 2015. Lexical errors in Korean-Australian heritage learners’ compositions. Journal of Korean Language Education 26: 129–62.Google Scholar
Torres, J. 2013. Heritage and second language learners of Spanish: The roles of task complexity and inhibitory control. Ph.D. dissertation, Georgetown University. Retrieved from: https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/558678/Torres_georgetown_0076D_12015.pdf;sequence=1 [last accessed September 6, 2020].Google Scholar
Valdes, G. 2001. Heritage language students: Profiles and possibilities. In Peyton, J., Renard, D., and McGinnis, S., eds., Heritage Languages in America: Preserving a National Resource. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics, pp. 37–77.Google Scholar
Van Deusen-Scholl, N. 2003. Toward a definition of heritage language: Sociopolitical and pedagogical considerations. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 2: 211–30.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. 1994. Evaluating the role of consciousness in second language acquisition: Terms, linguistic features and research methodology. AILA Review 11: 27–36.Google Scholar
Zyzik, E. 2016. Toward a prototype model of the heritage language learner: Understanding strengths and needs. In Fairclough, M. and Beaudrie, S., eds., Innovative Strategies for Heritage Language Teaching: A Practical Guide for the Classroom. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 19–38.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×