No abstract

Aims and objectives: The main objective of this study is to find evidence for the Linguistic Proximity Model, which allows for facilitative and non-facilitative cross-linguistic influence (CLI) from all previously known languages in third language (L3) acquisition. We target CLI in L3 English based on bilingual heritage speakers (Russian-German and Turkish-German) in comparison with second language acquisition of monolingual German speakers. Methodology: We examine the outcome of an English word order test. The participants produced sentences based on randomly ordered words. The focus of this study is the placement of direct and indirect pronominal objects with varying ditransitive verbs. Data analysis: 195 students in school years 7 and 9, separated into three language groups, participated in the study: German monolinguals ( nG7 = 47; nG9 = 64), Russian-German bilinguals ( nR7 = 19; nR9 = 30) and Turkish-German bilinguals ( nT7 = 19; nT9 = 16). The placement of pronominal objects in the sentence task is compared to results from equivalent word order tests in English, German, Russian and Turkish that were repeated with native speakers. Findings: We find some support for the Linguistic Proximity Model because the outcome shows that facilitative and non-facilitative CLI is possible from both the heritage language and the majority language. Determining factors are the background languages, the age of the participants and frequency. However, the majority language, German, displays the strongest influence of both background languages due to its dominant status. Originality: This study provides further support for the Linguistic Proximity Model, by using a sentence completion task with unbalanced bilingual heritage speakers. Significance/implications: We provide evidence for showing that both facilitative and non-facilitative influence from all previously known languages of bilingual heritage speakers is possible and verifiable. We therefore add to the field of L3 acquisition and the discussion about current models of CLI.

This study investigates whether English in instructed settings is more successfully acquired by learners who are already bilingual in comparison to those with a monolingual background. There remains substantial controversy regarding potential advantages of bilingual speakers in their acquisition of additional languages, especially in heritage speaker contexts. We here contribute to this discussion by analysing the English C-test results of 1,718 bilingual and monolingual students of grades 7 and 9, sampled in schools across Germany. The bilingual students speak either Russian or Turkish (heritage language) and German (majority language). The monolingual control group was raised in German only. The main predictor variables are reading fluency and comprehension in German and the heritage languages. Additional predictor variables include school type, school year, socioeconomic status, cognitive ability, amongst others. Using correlation and regression analyses we test if reading fluency and comprehension impact proficiency in English and if bilingual students enjoy advantages over their monolingual German peers. The results reveal no systematic advantage of bilingual students, although we find significant correlations between reading fluency and comprehension and C-test results. School type, cognitive skills, among others, are predictors for English performance, whereas socioeconomic status returns no significant effect.

This study investigates the relationship between (extra)linguistic variables and proficiency in a foreign language. Based on 1,403 secondary school students in Germany (age 12/13 and 14/15), we assess whether proficiency in German, if applicable also Russian or Turkish, cognitive ability, school type, gender, socio-economic status, self-concept, motivation, and self-assessment function differently in predicting English language proficiency when monolingual German learners of English (n = 849) are compared to their bilingual peers (Russian-German: n = 236; Turkish-German: n = 318). Two comprehensive structural equation models capture the multitude of factors influencing foreign language acquisition and contribute to the discussion on multilingual advantages or effects. The results reveal that most variables are statistically significant, but the models function comparably across the three language groups with only minor contrasts regarding effect sizes. We submit that the three language groups are more similar than different and that the heritage languages Russian and Turkish add comparatively little to predicting English language proficiency.