Heritage Language Education in Germany: A Focus on Turkish and Russian from Primary to Higher Education

Olfert, Helena; Schmitz, Anke

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44694-3_25

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding children, about one-third of kindergarten children under six years of age in Berlin have a non-German family language, i.e., their heritage language (HL) (Autorengruppe Bildungsberichterstattung 2020). Although Russian-and Turkish-speaking communities in Germany differ in many respects regarding their social, cultural, and demographic backgrounds, as well as their immigrant history, attitudes toward language retention (e.g., presence of HLs on an institutional level) and different language maintenance opportunities (e.g., access to HL media), both languages are vital and well retained in their respective communities (see, e.g., Olfert and Schmitz 2018). This especially applies to large cities with a high percentage of Russian-and Turkishspeaking populations such as Berlin.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Four-Year Longitudinal Comparative Study on the Lexicon Development of Russian and Turkish Heritage Speakers in Germany

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Russian and Turkish are the most frequently spoken and intensively investigated heritage languages in Germany, but contrastive research on their development in early childhood is still missing. This longitudinal study compares the trajectories of expressive lexicon development in Russian (n = 70) and Turkish (n = 79) heritage speakers and identifies predictors for their lexicon size at preschool age. Heritage lexicon size was tested with two comparable tests assessing the expressive lexicon at four test points between the mean ages of 3.3 (range: 25–49 months) and 5.6 (range: 54–78 months) years. The influence of language-related factors, such as input quantity, parents’ heritage language proficiency and age of onset (AoO) of German, and other potential predictors, i.e., intelligence and socio-economic status, is evaluated. Results show that the Turkish group’s abilities grow slower but are similar at the last test point. Common predictors for lexicon size are input quantity from siblings and AoO. Group-specific influences are parental input quantity in the Russian group and siblings’ proficiency in the Turkish group. Our findings emphasize the interplay of input quantity and society language AoO for heritage lexicon development. The relevance of our results for the usage-based theory of language acquisition is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Four-Year Longitudinal Comparative Study on the Lexicon Development of Russian and Turkish Heritage Speakers in Germany

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Germany, for instance, there are Heritage Language courses integrated in the public-school curriculum. However, this is only done during the primary school (see Olfert and Schmitz, 2018). The further development of the HL skills from the secondary school onwards depends primarily on the family.…”

Section: Overview Of Family Language Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Space, family language policy and invisibility of languages

Haque

2023

Energeia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper draws upon arguments about spaces as a central idea in order to understand language inequality and invisibility through the framework of family language policy. Tracing the history of sociolinguistic studies, space occupies a pivotal role whose importance has been revealed making contribution to many useful theories. Family language policy is the private sphere within the concept of space, long neglected, but renewed interest over the past 20 years has demonstrated in a sustained manner the tussle over the maintenance of the heritage language in the face of the host language. Language invisibilization within the family domain is not confined to heritage language and its accents but also to other non-reported languages, such as secret language and sacred languages. More in-depth empirical observations with new innovative methodologies are needed to understand the inequality and invisibility of languages at micro-level. The importance of the Family domain as the first place of socialization for children, compels us to seek a better understanding of spatially organized language practices and beliefs which have an impact on the whole upcoming generation.

show abstract

“…The balanced simultaneous bilinguals should be HL speakers. Due to migration, Turkish and Russian are the most frequent heritage (or minority) languages in Germany (Olfert & Schmitz, 2017). Communities with a Turkish HL background typically consider the HL their family language and have a positive attitude toward it (Bayram & Wright, 2017).…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Communities with a Turkish HL background typically consider the HL their family language and have a positive attitude toward it (Bayram & Wright, 2017). Even though the situation is more variable within the Russian HL community, members who maintain Russian as a functional minority language also tend to value the language as part of their identity (for review, Olfert & Schmitz, 2017). The subsample of more unbalanced sequential bilinguals should use German as their first language (L1) and either English or French as a second language (L2) predominantly in instructional, educational, or work contexts.…”

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Language-dependent emotions in heritage and second language bilinguals: When physiological reactions deviate from feelings

Thomä

2023

International Journal of Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and objectives: Whether bilinguals show language-dependent emotions often depends on the emotion measure used. Here, we examine if differences between automatic pupil reactions and self-reported feelings in response to an emotional narrative presented in a first, second, or heritage language (HL) indicate different stages of emotion processing. Methodology: German HL speakers of Russian and Turkish ( n = 72) and German second language (L2) speakers of English and French ( n = 89) listened to a video-based emotional narrative in German or their other language and rated how they felt about it (arousal and valence). We contrasted pupil diameter during the video with a language-specific baseline. Age of acquisition, language use frequency in emotional contexts, and language proficiency were used to verify that HL speakers were balanced simultaneous and L2 speakers unbalanced sequential bilinguals. Data and analysis: Linear mixed-effects models were fitted to the pupillometry data and ordinal logistic models to the self-report data. Findings and conclusions: HL speakers showed similar automatic reactions in both languages but rated the German narrative less emotional. L2 speakers showed weaker automatic reactions in L2 yet rated the narrative similar in both languages. This reversed pattern confirmed that automatic and conscious emotion measures tap into different stages of bilingual emotion processing. Furthermore, language-dependent emotions in self-reports seem to be linked to sociocultural frames that go beyond the scope of context and processing-based explanations. Originality: The study is among the first to systematically examine discrepancies between automatic and conscious measures of bilingual language-dependent emotions with different types of bilinguals and within one experimental paradigm. Significance: The findings imply that theories of bilingual emotions need further development to explain consistently and explicitly why language-dependent emotional reactions vary with bilingualism and emotion measures. Methodologically, the findings advocate for multi-measure approaches to enhance the validity of future research.

show abstract

Heritage Language Education in Germany: A Focus on Turkish and Russian from Primary to Higher Education

Cited by 6 publications

References 8 publications

A Four-Year Longitudinal Comparative Study on the Lexicon Development of Russian and Turkish Heritage Speakers in Germany

A Four-Year Longitudinal Comparative Study on the Lexicon Development of Russian and Turkish Heritage Speakers in Germany

Space, family language policy and invisibility of languages

Language-dependent emotions in heritage and second language bilinguals: When physiological reactions deviate from feelings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About