Article contents
When L1 becomes an L3: Do heritage speakers make better L3 learners?*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 December 2013
Abstract
Heritage speakers who re-learn their childhood language in adulthood are an important group for the study of L3 acquisition. Such re-learners have selective advantages over other L2/L3 learners in phonetics/phonology, but lack a global advantage at re-learning the prestige variety of their L1. These learners show asymmetrical transfer effects in morphosyntax: transfer occurs only from the dominant language. Two tentative explanations for this asymmetry are suggested. First, re-learners may deploy the skills acquired in a classroom setting, where they have used only their dominant language. Second, re-learners may implicitly strive to increase the typological distance between their childhood language and the language of classroom instruction. These findings have implications for models of L3/Ln learning: the Cumulative Enhancement Model, the Typological Proximity Model, and the L2 Status Factor Model. The data discussed in this paper are most consistent with the latter model, but they also highlight the significance of the typological distance between languages under acquisition.
Keywords
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 18 , Special Issue 2: L3 Acquisition: A Focus on Cognitive Approaches , April 2015 , pp. 163 - 178
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013
Footnotes
I would like to thank Caitlin Keenan, Ken Mai, Robyn Orfitelli, Keith Plaster, Carson Schütze, two anonymous reviewers, and especially María del Pilar García Mayo and Jason Rothman for helpful comments on earlier drafts. I am solely responsible for any remaining errors in the paper. This work was supported in part by funding from the United States Government through the Center for Advanced Study of Language at the University of Maryland and from the National Heritage Language Resource Center at UCLA. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of any agency or entity of the United States Government.
References
- 24
- Cited by