The talk explores the relationship between how children acquire several languages and their linguistic environmental factors

Di Biase, Bruno

Mohamed Salleh, Rabiah Tul Adawiyah

Qi, Ruying

The International Islamic University Malaysia Repository

Bruno Di Biase and Ruying QiBilingualism Research Laboratory School of Humanities & Communication ArtsWestern Sydney University, AustraliaRabiah Tul Adawiyah Mohamed SallehChild Bilingualism CentreInternational Islamic University MalaysiaBilingualism and Environment: From Childhood to AdulthoodWebinar 3rd July 2020Bilingualism Research LabWe will look at: Human Environment acquisition & learning environments Two concerns: weaker language and transfer. What are they? Language dominance in the bilingual and Language dominance in the environment  The puzzling results of  transfer studies A case study tackles the puzzle The neglected role of  the environmental language (Lε) What characterizes the Human Environment? Tne one common thing to all human environments is communication through language Humans have evolved sophisticated communication systems: more than 7.000 languages are spoken on the globe Most humans use more than one language to communicate with relatives, neighbours, and across groups and countries5 Naturalistic environment - Instructed   environment Classroom— (e.g. SLA ) Instruction in L2 can also occur in where the dominant Environmental language is the same L2 Different learning environments  Most research in childhood bilingualism has been based on one-parent one-language situations in western nuclear families (Yip & Matthews, 2007) BUT Many other acquisition environments can nurture bilingualism:    Asian ‘extended’ families (e.g., Malaysia, Singapore, HK)One parent two-languages                Diverse acquisition contexts offer new windows on bilingual acquisition (e.g. immigrant families in Australia, Qi 2011): One-environment one-language (context-bound)6Diversity of acquisition contexts 7all those Bilingual Input Conditions have chances to succeed, _______________________________Bilingualism Research Lab (BRL): Looks mainly at Context-bound One-Environment and One-Language (1E1L)   (Qi, DiBiase & Campbell, 2006; Qi 2011; Qi & Di Biase 2019 )Theoretical and practical concerns of  Childhood Bilingualism include:The weaker language issue –Transfer (and language mixing)Content (wh-) Questions: A window to look at transferIn a sample of  902 languages (Dryer 2013) wh-questions are found to exhibit three positional patterns:(I) the interrogative phrase is obligatorily in initial position, e.g., Dutch, English, French, Italian; (29%)(II) ‘wh-in situ languages’, in which the interrogative phrase is not obligatorily in initial position, such as Cantonese, Japanese, Korean and Mandarin; (68%)(III) mixed, in the sense that some interrogative phrases are obligatorily initial and some are not, such as Indonesian. (3%) In their study of  Cantonese-English bilingual children in Hong Kong Yip & Matthews (2007) documented a number of  areas which demonstrate cross-linguistic influence in early grammatical development The direction of  systemic (i.e., not occasional) transfer was primarily from dominant Cantonese towards the weaker English: e.g., among other areas, the lack of  so-called wh- movement of  the in-situ question word in English.e.g., Daddy is where?Other studies also found similar transfer from Environmentally dominant towards the weaker languageEmpirical cases with Transfer(a) Yip & Matthews (2007) longitudinal, about 1.5 yrs4 children 1;03;10~2;01;22 Hong Kong (b)Soriente (2007) longitudinal, 1 child 1;7 - 4;6 Jakarta, Indonesia(c) Strik & Perez-Leroux (2011) cross-sectional 8 children, ages 4;03~6:04 FranceEmpirical cases with no transfer(d) Strik&Perez-Leroux (2011) cross sectional 8 children, ages 6;05~7;11 France(e) Mishina-Mori (2005) longitudinal 1 child: 1;11 to 3;02 USA(f) Mishina-Mori (2005) longitudinal 1 child: 2;04 -3;03 USA(g) Di Biase & Itani-Adams (2016); Itani-Adams (2013) longitudal 1 child: 1;11 – 4;10  Australia (h) Park-Johnson (2017) longitudinal, 11 months ~ 2 years. 7 children 2;04 ~ 7;11 USA(i) Yip & Matthews (2007) longitudinal 1 child 1;08;28-3;00;03  Hong Kong(j) Yip & Matthews (2007) longitudinal 1 child 3;01;05-4;06;07 Hong Kong(k) Qi (2011) Qi & Di Biase (in press) longitudinal 1 child: 1;07 to 4;06Australiaexplanations Where transfer has been observed different explanations are offered:  External factors: Language dominance (in the child) Internal factors: Structural overlap Structural complexity Isomorphism  transfer in bilingual children remains a theoretical puzzle. Explaining cases of  no transfer Case (d) the older group of  children in Strik & Perez-Leroux (2011) cross-sectional study (> 6 yrsold) is a clear effect of  age. Cf. Yip & Matthews (2007:119) Cases (e-h) NO Isomorphism (Japanese-English and Korean-English SOV vs. SVO) Case (k) Isomorphism (Chinese-Mandarin), Dominance (Mandarin), Overlap and Complexity are all there. Why is there no transfer?RQ: What is the missing piece in the puzzle?Ruying QiThe missing piece of  the puzzleThe role of the environmental language Lε We are proposing a new approach:  if  the environments are separated and of  equal status in terms of  strength of  input, children learn structural rules of  different languages quite independently and associate them strongly to different social settings. The rules for language use are not separated from the environmental context, so the strength of  association of  a grammatical rule with a context outweighs any possibility of  interference.  We call this: Independent Socially-situated Indexing Empirical cases Child dominantlanguage LaChild ‘weaker’language LαEnvironment-prominentlanguage LεStructuraloverlap/complexityLa-LαIsomorphismTransfer(a)Yip & Matthews (2007) longitudinal, about 1.5 yrs4 children 1;03;10~2;01;22 Hong Kong Cantonese English Cantonese (=La) YES YES YES(b)Soriente (2007) longitudinal, 1 child 1;7 - 4;6 Jakarta, IndonesiaIndonesian Italian Indonesian (=La) YES YES YES(c) Strik&Perez-Leroux (2011) cross-sectional 8 children, 4;03~6:04 FranceFrench Dutch French (=La) YES YES YES(d) Strik&Perez-Leroux (2011) cross sectional 8 children, 6;05~7;11 - France* French Dutch French (=La) YES YES NO(e) Mishina-Mori (2005) longitudinal 1 child 1;11 to 3;02 USA English Japanese English (=La) YES NO NO(f) Mishina-Mori (2005) longitudinal 1 child2;04 -3;03 USA Japanese English English (=Lα) YES NO NO(g) Di Biase & Itani-Adams (2016); Itani-Adams (2013) 1 child longitudinalAustralia. 1;11 – 4;10 Japanese = EnglishJapanese = EnglishEnglish YES NO NO(h) Park-Johnson (2017)longitudinal, 11 months ~ 2 years. 7 children 2;04 ~ 7;11 –USAKorean English English (=Lα) YES NO NO(i) Yip & Matthews (2007) longitudinal 1 child 1;08;28-3;00;03 - Hong KongEnglish Cantonese Cantonese (=Lα) YES YES NO(j) Yip & Matthews (2007) longitudinal 1 child 3;01;05-4;06;07 Hong KongCantonese=EnglishCantonese (=English)Cantonese YES YES NO(k) Qi (2011); Qi & Di Biase (2019)1 child longitudinal 1;07 to 4;06AustraliaMandarin English English (=Lα)LεYES YES NOTable 1 Summary of cases in Bilingual children wh- questions studies*Cases Isomorphism La= Lα Lε = La Lε = Lα Transfera + n/a + – +b + n/a + – +c + n/a + – +d* + n/a + – –e – n/a + – –f – n/a – + –g – + n/a n/a –h – n/a – + –i + n/a – + –j + + n/a n/a –k + n/a – + –Table 2: Conditions for transfer* Age factor: past transfer period Solving the puzzleThe role of  Lε* in the extra-domestic environmentThe robust input from the extra-domestic environment, which we call Lε, balances out the dominance of  the intra-home environment providing two structural templates which the child keeps distinct in their acquisition. (Qi & Di Biase, 2019)*Language epsilon: the language which is the official or majority language predominantly used in the bilingual child’s extra-domestic environment.MethodInformant: J (1;7 – 4;6)Languages: Mandarin & English  (context-bound= one language-one environment)Residence: Australia (Australian English)Home environment: Immigrant extended familyData type: spontaneous speech productionData collection: audio-recording + dairy recordingSessions: 82Duration: 30 mins/session (approx)Venues: home/child care centre/outingsEnglish as the weaker language in J’s case The dominant language in J’s case is Mandarin. English is the ‘weaker language’ over the period of the investigation (from 1 year 7 months to over 4 years of age).0.001.002.003.004.005.006.007.001;07;01;10;02;02;02;06;022;09;223;0;073;03;033;07;013;09;264;0;04;2;254;5;2MLU valuesMLU from age 1;07;0 to 4;05;02MLU:MMLU:EFindings: Emergence of  questionsMANDARIN Questions emerge at age 2;6 In situ questions emerge clearly at 2;7 Questions are target-like from the beginningENGLISH Questions emerge at 3;6 No in-situ questions emerge They follow a similar developmental path as monolinguals.James Wh- Questions in Mandarin(2;7;3) gan4 ma?do  what? what are you doing?(2;9;22) ci4wei2 zai4 gan4 ma?hedgehog is  do whatWhat is the hedgehog doing?(3;0;14)   mei4mei    zai4 na3 li3?Little sister  in    where? Where is my sister?Syntax: English questions Age6 Where is daddy going? I don’t know whereDaddy?4;75 what do you like? What can I do? What are you doing?4;64 could you read my book?Joy. could you give me that book?can I have it? (Yes/No questions)4;03 what colour you have eat? 3;7 2 mummy. you get some  sunblock?  you want this big one. or not big one?this is the book? (Yes/No questions)3;93;71 What? How much? 3;6Rabiah Tul AdawiyahMohamed Salleh• The influence of linguistic environment is also seen in a study by Mohamed Salleh et al (2016, 2019) on the development of plurals in Malay and English in a bilingual child.• The child was observed to acquire the plurals based on the dominant language environment. • The child used grammatical plural –s in English to express plurals in Malay and English when she was in Australia- where the dominant language is English.• In Malaysia, where the child’s dominant language is Malay, she used Malay grammatical plurals to mark nouns in both languages. Discussion  The role of linguistic environment In J’s case, contrary to expectation (dominant language, structural overlap and isomorphic nature of Mandarin and English), transfer of in-situ patterns towards the weaker (English) language did not occur. The environmentally predominant language (Lε English)  exerts a strong counterbalancing influence to transfer in support of the weaker language. The developmental variable: the Strik & Perez-Leroux study observed transfer in their younger group only. Not the older informants. Similarly Yip and Matthews’ informants eventually converged towards the target (2007:119). Soriente’s informant also reached the mature Italian wh- initial construction when he moved to Italy and his environmental Lε was Italian. So, where transfer appears it will be, at most, a temporary phenomenon which, can be overcome when it is given environmental support in the course of development. .Conclusion: The role of Lε If  the separate environments are afforded equal status in terms of  strength of input, children can learn structural templates of  different languages quite independently and in strong association to different interlocutors and social settings. Transfer is unlikely to occur under such conditions. In a supporting Lε environment the weaker language will develop like that of  their monolingual peers.Qi, R. & Di Biase, B. (2019). The influence of  the environmental language (Lε) in Mandarin-English bilingual development: the case of  transfer in wh-questions. The International Journal of Bilingualism. Mohamed Salleh, R. T. A., Kawaguchi, S., & Di Biase, B. (2019). A Case Study on the Acquisition of  Plurality in a Bilingual Malay-English Context-bound Child. GEMA Online®Journal of Language Studies, 19(3), 22-42. References De Houwer, A. (1990). The acquisition of two languages: A case study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Di Biase, B. & Itani-Adams, Y. (2016). The simultaneous development of wh-questions intypologically distant languages: a Japanese-English bilingual child case study. PacificSecondLanguage Research Forum. Chuo University, Tokyo; 9-11 September 2016. Dryer, M. S. (2013). Position of Interrogative Phrases in Content Questions. In: Dryer, M. S. & Haspelmath, M. (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.  Evans, N. (2003). Evans, Context, culture and structuration in the languages of Australia. Annual Review of Anthropology; 32: 13-40 Genesee, F. (1989) . Early bilingual development: One language or two? Journal of Child Language, 6, 161-179. Lanza, E. (1997). Language mixing in English bilingualism: A sociolinguistic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Meisel, J. (1986). Word order and case marking in early child language: evidence fromsimultaneous acquisition of two first languages. Linguistics, 24, 123-183. Meisel, J.M (2007). The weaker language in early child bilingualism: Acquiring a first language asa second language. Applied Psychilinguistics, 28, 3 (in press). Mishina-Mori, S. (2005). Autonomous and interdependent development of two language systems in Japanese/English simultaneous bilinguals: Evidence from question formation. First Language, 25(3), 291–315. Park-Johnson, S.K. (2017). Crosslinguistic influence of wh-in-situ questions by Korean-English bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingualism, International Journal of Bilingualism, Vol.  21(4), 419–432. Qi, R. (2011). The bilingual acquisition of English and Mandarin. New York: Cambria Press. Qi R. & Di Biase (2019). Environmental influence in Mandarin-English bilingual development: the case of transfer in wh-questions. International Journal of Bilingualism. Soriente, A. (2007). Cross-linguistic and cognitive structures in the acquisition of whquestions in an Indonesian-Italian bilingual child. In I. Kecskes, & L. Albertazzi (Eds.), Cognitive aspects of bilingualism (pp. 325–362). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. Strik, N., & Pérez-Leroux, A. T. (2011). Jij doe wat girafe? Wh-movement and inversion in Dutch-French bilingual children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1(2), 175–205.Age/ Structures 3;6 to 3;11:29 4;0 to 4;6Recordings10 sessionsDiaryentriesRecordings10 sessionsDiaryentriesSVWh-Subj(V)(sub-clause )1Wh- Cop Subj 3 1Who/WhatSUBJ VO/C 3 2Wh-(phrase) Aux Subj V11 7Wh-(phrase) S Aux V(X)2 1 2What's C 17 7 6 2Wh-X 22 10 5Single Wh-word 2 4 4 3Song with wh-word 2 (n) (n)Total 45 11 39 32Table 4 James emergence and development of English Wh-questionsConclusionVariability itself should be expected as a characteristic of acquisition & learning. Cf. Grosejan’s (1989) holistic intuition that bilinguals are not two monolinguals in one but have their own unique profile.Bilingual children are thus prime examples of human adaptability. Humans continuously adapt to variation and change while endeavouring to communicate with other humans (cf. Evans, 2003).Transfer Transfer in bilingual children may be broadly understood as “the incorporation of  a grammatical property into one language from the other “ Paradis and Genesee (1996). They add “by systemic we mean influence at the level of  representation or competence, sustained over a period of  time” (1996:3) For Meisel (2007) however, qualitative changes of  linguistic knowledge maybe attributed to transfer only if integration of grammatical properties of  one language into another systemcan be demonstrated. If  it is a strategy for language use or the result of  occasional online activation of  knowledge from the other language then we have only quantitative changes. In this study we focus on the Wh- questions domain where certain patterns occur in bilingual development that are not found in monolingual development.Transfer in bilingual children:Content (wh-) questionsResearch into the development of the two languages in bilingual children shows structural transfer from some wh-in-situ languages towards non-wh-in-situ languages, usually affecting the weaker language.ABSTRACT: The role of Lε in bilingual developmentRuying Qi and Bruno Di Biase. Bilingualism Research Laboratory (BRL) @ WSU-JNUSchool of Humanities and Communication Arts, Western Sydney University, AustraliaThis paper aims to show the relevance of linguistic ecology, particularly the hitherto neglectedrole of what we call Lε, i.e., the prevailing language in the extra-domestic environment, for theconceivable emergence of transfer in bilingual development. We examine the hotly debated areaof content (or wh-) questions in languages that present contrasting typology in constructing suchquestions, and look at possible transfer of ‘wh-in situ’ question patterns, such as exhibited in e.g.,Cantonese, Mandarin, Japanese and Korean towards languages with a non wh-in-situ typologysuch as, e.g., English, French and Dutch, over the course of bilingual development. In reviewingeight recent (mostly longitudinal) key empirical studies examining wh- questions we identify 11separate configurations of bilinguals, different from each other with respect to at least onevariable chosen among those structural hypotheses offered in those studies as accounting fortransfer (or lack thereof) from wh-in-situ question languages towards non-wh-in-situ languages.These critical are variables are dominance (stronger/weaker language of the child), structuraloverlap/complexity, isomorphism, the environmentally prominent language (Lε) and thepresence/absence of transfer of the wh-in-situ question. Invariably, Lε patterns with lack oftransfer, i.e., transfer does not occur towards the language of the child that coincides with Lε,even when it is the weaker language of the child and the languages are isomorphic in their basicsyntactic patterns such as Mandarin and English, both SVO. This state of affairs is compatiblewith a critical role for Lε in accounting for crosslinguistic influence.

Bilingualism and environment: from childhood to adulthood

http://irep.iium.edu.my/81647/6/Bilingualism%20Webinar%203rd%20July%202020.pdf

Bilingualism and environment: from childhood to adulthood

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

The International Islamic University Malaysia Repository