Search

Introduction: Traditional studies of the population called "heritage speakers" (HS) have treated this group as distinct from other bilingual populations, e.g., simultaneous or late bilinguals (LB), focusing on group differences in the competencies of the first-acquired language or "heritage language". While several explanations have been proposed for such differences (e.g., incomplete acquisition, attrition, differential processing mechanisms), few have taken into consideration the individual variation that must occur, due to the fluctuation of factors such as exposure and use that characterize all bilinguals. In addition, few studies have used implicit measures, e.g., psychophysiological methods (ERPs; Eye-tracking), that can circumvent confounding variables such as resorting to conscious metalinguistic knowledge. Methodology: This study uses pupillometry, a method that has only recently been used in psycholinguistic studies of bilingualism, to investigate pupillary responses to three syntactic island constructions in two groups of Spanish/English bilinguals: heritage speakers and late bilinguals. Data were analyzed using generalized additive mixed effects models (GAMMs) and two models were created and compared to one another: one with group (LB/HS) and the other with groups collapsed and current and historical use of Spanish as continuous variables. Results: Results show that group-based models generally yield conflicting results while models collapsing groups and having usage as a predictor yield consistent ones. In particular, current use predicts sensitivity to L1 ungrammaticality across both HS and LB populations. We conclude that individual variation, as measured by use, is a critical factor tha must be taken into account in the description of the language competencies and processing of heritage and late bilinguals alike. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study examines emergent literacy skills in a group of young English Language Learners who are dominant in their native language, Spanish. We investigate the relative contribution of syntactic comprehension in the L1 and L2 to the development of emergent reading skills in English. Participants were bilingual kindergarteners from two public schools in New York City. Two main tests were administered: a test of syntactic comprehension, given in both Spanish and English, and a test of literacy skills, specifically listening comprehension in both the L1 and L2 are significant predictors of performance on L2 listening comprehension, with L1 syntactic comprehension shown to be the stronger predictor. These findings provide support for the position that L1 knowledge may be accessible to facilitate comprehension in the L2, particularly in cases in which the learners are dominant in the L1 (cf. Riches & Genesee, 2006). We interpret our results as evidence that there are benefits to supporting the development of the native language in the homes and classrooms of ELLs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted a visual world eye-tracking experiment with highly proficient Spanish-English bilingual adults to investigate the effects of relative language dominance, operationalized as a continuous, multidimensional variable, on the time course of relative clause processing in the first-learned language, Spanish. We found that participants exhibited two distinct processing preferences: a semantically driven preference to assign agency to referents of lexically animate noun phrases and a syntactically driven preference to interpret relative clauses as subject-extracted. Spanish dominance was found to exert a distinct influence on each of these preferences, gradiently attenuating the semantic preference while gradiently exaggerating the syntactic preference. While these results might be attributable to particular properties of Spanish and English, they also suggest a possible generalization that greater dominance in a language increases reliance on language-specific syntactic processing strategies while correspondingly decreasing reliance on more domain-general semantic processing strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]