Perceptions of identity, language abilities and language preferences among Russian-Hebrew and English-Hebrew bilingual children and their parents

Altman, Carmit; Burstein-Feldman, Zhanna; Fichman, Sveta; Armon-Lotem, Sharon; Joffe, Susan; Walters, Joel

doi:10.1080/01434632.2021.1974462

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By contrast, other studies indicate that positive attitudes towards HL maintenance and ethnolinguistic/enthocultural identity on the part of parents do not have straightforward relationships with the quantity and quality of children's HL experiences (e.g., Daskalaki & Pappas, 2022;Nagpal & Nicoladis, 2010). Furthermore, Altman, Burstein-Feldman, Fichman, Armon-Lotem, Joffe and Walters (2021) found that perceptions of HL and L2 abilities and heritage vs. societal identities were not aligned between parents and children in immigrant families in Israel from Russian L1 and English L1 backgrounds. Clearly, additional research is needed that is focused on mediating variables and bidirectionality among distal environment factors like attitudes and identity, proximal input factors, and children's bilingual development.…”

Section: Family Attitudes/identitiesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals

Paradis

2023

J. Child Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bilingual children are a more heterogenous group than their monolingual counterparts with respect to the sources of variation in their language learning environments, as well as the wide individual variation in their language abilities. Such heterogeneity in both individual difference factors and language abilities argues for the importance of an individual differences approach in research on bilingual development. The main objective of this article is to provide a review and synthesis of research on the sources of individual differences in the second language (L2) and heritage language (HL) development of child bilinguals. Several child-internal and child-external individual difference factors are discussed with respect to their influence on children’s dual language abilities. In addition, the emergent research on individual differences in bilingual children with developmental language disorder is reviewed. Both the theoretical and applied relevance of individual difference approaches to bilingual development are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Family Attitudes/identitiesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals

Paradis

2023

J. Child Lang.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies investigating the identity of HL speakers note their complex identities. For example, Kang (2013) showed that HL-Korean speakers residing in the USA perceived themselves as different from both Koreans and “mainstream Americans.” The identity perception of HL-English speakers residing in Israel was demonstrated for preschool children (see Altman et al, 2021 ). The authors showed that English-Hebrew bilingual children residing in Israel gave similar ratings to Societal/Israeli and Home/American identities, pointing to the existence of bicultural identity already in young children.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Requests and apologies in two languages among bilingual speakers: A comparison of heritage English speakers and English- and Hebrew-dominant bilinguals

Meir

2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLinguistic research over the last two decades has uncovered a significant number of properties that identify heritage language (HL) speakers as a particular phenomenon within bilingualism. However, despite the rapid development of HL research, the sphere of HL speech act pragmatics is still in its infancy.MethodologyThe current study sought to cover part of this gap by investigating both languages of HL adult speakers for whom English is their HL and Hebrew is their dominant societal language (SL; n = 20, hereafter HS) in comparison with two other groups: Hebrew-dominant speakers who were born to Hebrew-speaking families and raised in Israel, and thus English is the language of their schooling (n = 20, hereafter HEB-D), and English-dominant speakers who were born to English-speaking families and immigrated to Israel from an English-speaking country after the age of 18, and thus Hebrew is their L2 (n = 20, hereafter ENG-D). The discourse-pragmatic tasks in English and in Hebrew consisted of the same 36 scenarios eliciting requests and apologies in each language. Each request was followed by an apology that is related.ResultsThe results indicated that Hebrew-dominant speakers and English-dominant speakers, i.e., HEB-D and ENG-D, had different strategies for the realization of requests and apologies which they systematically transferred from their dominant language into their weaker one, confirming the cross-cultural and cross-linguistic differences between request and apology realizations in English and in Hebrew. However, the picture was more complex for the HL speakers in their HL-English and SL-Hebrew as in some cases their strategies paired up with the ENG-D in English, and with the HEB-D in Hebrew, while in other cases they developed a unique and hybrid linguistic style reflecting the strategies of both languages.DiscussionThe investigation of both languages of HL speakers enabled us to compare features of the two linguistic systems and make conclusions about their nature.

show abstract

“…Data were collected by means of two online surveys (one for children and one for parents) that were developed for the purpose of this study, which was part of a larger research project (see Rose et al 2023). The surveys were based on a questionnaire originally developed by the second and third authors and colleagues for Russian-Hebrew speakers (Altman et al 2014(Altman et al , 2021, and grounded in studies on sociolinguistics (e.g., Landry 1986, 1994;Anderson 1996;Lambert 1990;Sachdev and Bourhis 2005). They required participants to evaluate FLP statements on a five-point Likert scale.…”

Section: Materials and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It should take less than 15 min to complete. Note: The questionnaire was based on work by Altman et al (2014Altman et al ( , 2021, that was grounded in studies on sociolinguistics (e.g., Landry 1986, 1994;Anderson 1996;Lambert 1990;Sachdev and Bourhis 2005), as well as other papers, including Spolsky (2012), Lanza (1997), Piller (2001), andSeo (2017). To know a lot about America/Australia/Canada/UK/ South Africa etc.…”

Section: Supplementary Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Not really So so Quite a lot Very much Altman et al (2014Altman et al ( , 2021, that was grounded in studies on sociolinguistics (e.g., Landry 1986, 1994;Anderson 1996;Lambert 1990;Sachdev and Bourhis 2005), as well as other papers, including Spolsky (2012), Lanza (1997), Piller (2001), andSeo (2017). _______________________________________________________________________________…”

Section: Not At Allmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Age Variables in Family Language Policy

Rose,

Armon-Lotem,

Altman

2024

Languages

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Family language policy (FLP) provides a critical framework to explain the planning of language use in the home. It constitutes a dynamic construct that sheds light on variations in the language acquisition of bilingual children, potentially explaining the shifts that may occur in language dominance and preference. The environment and life experiences are thought to shape FLP, yet little is known about the function of age. This study examines the association of FLP with children’s chronological age and the age they become bilingual. Data were collected via questionnaires from parents and their bilingual children (n = 82) aged 5.08–14.08 (M = 8.98, SD = 3.27) speaking English (heritage language) and Hebrew (societal language). Correlations and logistic regressions indicate a relationship between FLP and dimensions of age. Findings reveal that age may have repercussions for parent language beliefs, patterns of language use within the home, and the adoption of language promotion strategies. Younger children and children with a later age of onset of bilingualism are associated with families who lean towards a pro-heritage language FLP. Considering dimensions of age enhances our understanding of FLP and may offer a greater insight into how languages are supported in the bilingual home.

show abstract

Perceptions of identity, language abilities and language preferences among Russian-Hebrew and English-Hebrew bilingual children and their parents

Cited by 9 publications

References 59 publications

Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals

Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals

Requests and apologies in two languages among bilingual speakers: A comparison of heritage English speakers and English- and Hebrew-dominant bilinguals

The Role of Age Variables in Family Language Policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About