Cross-Linguistic Transfer of Writing Strategies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Forbes
Keyword(s):  
Writing Strategies ◽  
Linguistic Transfer

Option Writing Strategies in a Low Volatility Framework

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald X. He ◽  
Jason C. Hsu ◽  
Neil Rue
Keyword(s):  
Writing Strategies

Sentence comprehension in heritage language: Isomorphism, word order, and language transfer

2021 ◽  
pp. 026765832199790
Author(s):  
Anna Chrabaszcz ◽  
Elena Onischik ◽  
Olga Dragoy
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Language Transfer ◽  
Processing Strategy ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Sequence Of Events ◽  
Linguistic Transfer

This study examines the role of cross-linguistic transfer versus general processing strategy in two groups of heritage speakers ( n = 28 per group) with the same heritage language – Russian – and typologically different dominant languages: English and Estonian. A group of homeland Russian speakers ( n = 36) is tested to provide baseline comparison. Within the framework of the Competition model (MacWhinney, 2012), cross-linguistic transfer is defined as reliance on the processing cue prevalent in the heritage speaker’s dominant language (e.g. word order in English) for comprehension of heritage language. In accordance with the Isomorphic Mapping Hypothesis (O’Grady and Lee, 2005), the general processing strategy is defined in terms of isomorphism as a linear alignment between the order of the sentence constituents and the temporal sequence of events. Participants were asked to match pictures on the computer screen with auditorily presented sentences. Sentences included locative or instrumental constructions, in which two cues – word order (basic vs. inverted) and isomorphism mapping (isomorphic vs. nonisomorphic) – were fully crossed. The results revealed that (1) Russian native speakers are sensitive to isomorphism in sentence processing; (2) English-dominant heritage speakers experience dominant language transfer, as evidenced by their reliance primarily on the word order cue; (3) Estonian-dominant heritage speakers do not show significant effects of isomorphism or word order but experience significant processing costs in all conditions.

The Role of Emergent Bilingualism in the Development of Morphological Awareness in Arabic and Hebrew

2016 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 797-809 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mila Schwartz ◽  
Haitham Taha ◽  
Hanan Assad ◽  
Ferdos Khamaisi ◽  
Zohar Eviatar
Keyword(s):  
Morphological Awareness ◽  
Home Language ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Initial Exposure ◽  
Word Structure ◽  
Arabic Speakers ◽  
Semitic Language ◽  
Target Languages ◽  
Linguistic Transfer

Purpose The purpose of the present study was to investigate the role of dual language development and cross-linguistic influence on morphological awareness in young bilinguals' first language (L1) and second language (L2). We examined whether (a) the bilingual children (L1/L2 Arabic and L1/L2 Hebrew) precede their monolingual Hebrew- or Arabic-speaking peers in L1 and L2 morphological awareness, and (b) 1 Semitic language (Arabic) has cross-linguistic influence on another Semitic language (Hebrew) in morphological awareness. Method The study sample comprised 93 six-year-old children. The bilinguals had attended bilingual Hebrew−Arabic kindergartens for 1 academic year and were divided into 2 groups: home language Hebrew (L1) and home language Arabic (L1). These groups were compared to age-matched monolingual Hebrew speakers and monolingual Arabic speakers. We used nonwords similar in structure to familiar words in both target languages, representing 6 inflectional morphological categories. Results L1 Arabic and L1 Hebrew bilinguals performed significantly better than Arabic- and Hebrew-speaking monolinguals in the respective languages. Differences were not found between the bilingual groups. We found evidence of cross-linguistic transfer of morphological awareness from Arabic to Hebrew in 2 categories−bound possessives and dual number−probably because these categories are more salient in Palestinian Spoken Arabic than in Hebrew. Conclusions We conclude that children with even an initial exposure to L2 reveal acceleration of sensitivity to word structure in both of their languages. We suggest that this is due to the fact that two Semitic languages, Arabic and Hebrew, share a common core of linguistic features, together with favorable contextual factors and instructional factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document