Cross-Linguistic Influence on L2 Before and After Extreme Reduction in Input: The Case of Japanese Returnee Children

Abstract

This study investigates the choice of genitive forms (the woman's book vs. the book of the woman) in the English of Japanese-English bilingual returnees (i.e., children who returned from a second language dominant environment to their first language environment). The specific aim was to examine whether change in language dominance/exposure influences choice of genitive form in the bilingual children; the more general question was the extent to which observed behavior can be explained by cross linguistic influence (CLI). First, we compared the choice of genitive form between monolingual English speakers and bilinguals who had recently returned to Japan from an English speaking environment. Second, we tracked changes in genitive preference within bilingual children, comparing their performances upon return to Japan to those of one year later. Results show that CLI alone is insufficient to explain the difference in genitive evaluation between bilinguals and monolinguals, as well as the intragroup bilingual variation over time. We suggest that both CLI and general processing considerations couple together to influence the changes in genitive preference.

Heritage language use in the country of residence matters for language maintenance, but short visits to the homeland can boost heritage language outcomes

“…This investigation of short-term re-immersion to the home country is different from existing studies with adult returnees or short re-immersion where they tested participants before and immediately after re-immersion (Chamorro et al, 2016;Genevska-Hanke, 2017;Casado et al, 2023). Another related issue is that we did not examine how the onset of the visits might relate to the child's chronological age in line with what has been pursued in studies with returnees controlled for the timing of testing after re-immersion (e.g., incubation period; Flores, 2020;Kubota et al, 2020Kubota et al, , 2021. For example, it could the case that younger heritage children who are still in the process of acquiring the heritage language within a biologically more favorable window for language learning could benefit more from visits to the homeland compared to older children, who may have already stabilized in their HL learning, especially in relation to syntax.…”

“…The second line of research comes from studies on returnee children and adults, namely heritage speakers who returned from the country of residence to the country of origin as children and adolescents (Flores et al, 2017(Flores et al, , 2022Flores, 2019;Kubota et al, 2020Kubota et al, , 2021 or as adults (Genevska-Hanke, 2017;Köpke and Genevska-Hanke, 2018). This line of research examines whether heritage language reversal is possible after re-immersion to the country of origin and how long it takes (Flores and Snape, 2021;Montrul, 2023).…”

“…The finding that frequent, short-term visits to the home country give rise to improved performance on lexical and syntactic domains is in line with two emerging areas of bilingualism research. Adult studies that examine how even short re-immersion in the home country can reverse (temporary) attrition effects (Chamorro et al, 2016;Genevska-Hanke, 2017;Casado et al, 2023), and studies with child and adult returnees (Köpke and Genevska-Hanke, 2018;Kubota et al, 2020;Flores and Snape, 2021) that show that long-term immersion can trigger heritage language reversal. In our study, we found that expressive vocabulary and the vulnerable interface condition (WF) benefited more by naturalistic exposure to an input where VS is highly frequent.…”

More insights into the interaction between age, exposure, and attitudes in language attrition and retention from the perspective of bilingual returnees

“…For returnees, most research has failed to show a clear link between the length of residence back in the homeland (period of incubation), and the degree of attrition (Flores, 2010, 2020; Taura, 2008), particularly in the case of non-child returnees. Similarly, the role of amount of exposure to the FSL has not been sufficiently explored in previous research on returnees (with the exception of Kubota, Heycock, et al, 2020, for child returnees). Most studies assumed a dichotomy between “total loss of contact” and “reduced contact,” not considering the degree of contact as continuum.…”

“…Many studies report a fast decline of linguistic competences in child returnees, that is, in speakers who lost regular exposure to the FSL during childhood (Flores, 2015;Kuhberg, 1992) in contrast to speakers who return as teenagers (Flores, 2010). A different outcome is mainly observed in child returnees who continue to contact regularly with the FSL, for instance, through formal instruction, as reported for Japanese returnees regarding the maintenance of English (Kubota, Heycock, et al, 2020).…”