This study investigates whether lexical knowledge in the first language (L1) of late Turkish-Dutch bilinguals becomes less accessible for the production of fluent speech and in controlled experimental tasks as a result of extended stay in the Netherlands. It is also considered to what degree extra-linguistic factors can account for this phenomenon. Data are collected from the first generation Turkish migrants (n = 52) and from a monolingual reference group in Turkey (n = 52) via a lexical naming task, a free speech task and a sociolinguistic background questionnaire. The results show that the bilingual group is indistinguishable from the monolinguals on the experimental task. However, in the free speech task, they not only are significantly more disfluent than the monolinguals but also make significantly less use of diverse, in particular low-frequency, vocabulary. Overall, the results signal that bilinguals were outperformed by the monolinguals in spontaneous language production but not on a controlled task. We interpret this finding to indicate a decrease of automaticity in the access to linguistic knowledge which impedes the rapid integration of information from all linguistic levels. Further analyses with respect to the relations between the L1 change and nonlinguistic factors are discussed within the Activation Threshold Hypothesis (ATH).

Late bilinguals who spend (part of) their adult lives in an environment where a language other than the one they learned in childhood is spoken typically experience a range of language development phenomena. Most obviously, they will acquire some level of receptive and/or productive knowledge of the new, or second, language (L2). How basic or advanced that level will be is determined by a range of environmental, experiential, attitudinal and individual factors. Secondly, they will most likely find the knowledge of their native language (L1) beginning to diverge from that of monolingual speakers in their country of origin, a process known as language attrition. In the course of this developmental process, some L2 skills may eventually match or even overtake the corresponding skill in the L1. This shift in the balance between L1 and L2 is the focus of investigations of language dominance. The present study explores language dominance in four migrant populations (Germans in the Netherlands and Canada, Turks and Moroccans in the Netherlands). Investigating both the development of formal/controlled skills and more automatic aspects of lexical access and fluency, we aim to attain an understanding of how extralinguistic factors contribute to the development of both languages. We argue that an integrated perspective can contribute more profound insights into the predictors of this complex process of bilingual development. In particular, our findings show that statistical models based on linear relationships fall short of capturing the full picture. We propose an alternative method of analysing data, namely discriminant function analysis, based on a categorisation of the populations, and demonstrate how this can enhance our understanding. Our findings suggest that different aspects of the bilingual experience contribute differently to language development, regardless of language combination and type of skill measured. Contrary to what previous research suggests, measures relating to the intensity of informal use of both the L1 and the L2 in daily life are important in determining whether someone is a good or a poor L1 maintainer, while high vs. low success in acquisition appears to be predominantly associated with personal factors such as educational level.

This study investigates potential changes or simplifications in the L1 grammar of late Turkish-Dutch bilinguals in a migrant setting and examines the non-linguistic factors that might have played a role in this process. In our analyses, the bilingual group’s production of embedded sentences in spontaneous speech was compared to that of a monolingual reference group. Based on previous frameworks, complex embeddings were ranked according to their morphological complexity, and it was investigated to what extent a change in preferential patterns (if any) could be explained by linguistic and socio-cultural preferences and demographic characteristics of the bilingual group. Statistical analyses revealed a slight tendency to underuse the most complex types of embeddings by the bilingual group, while their performance did not differ from the monolingual group for any of the other embedding types. Where a difference in performance was observed, the level of education turned out to be the only parameter that influenced the outcome, while language use patterns, age of immigration, length of residence or cultural orientations did not have any impact.

This paper compares results of two studies examining L2 English and L2 Dutch-induced syntactic changes that occur in L1 Turkish grammars of speakers living in North America and in the Netherlands, respectively. We examine potential restructuring in the L1 knowledge of binding properties of overt and null subject pronouns in first and second generation immigrants. The results of the L2 Dutch-speaking groups in the Netherlands are found to be similar to those of the L2 English-speaking group in North America, as reported in Gürel (2002), in the sense that all bilingual groups diverge, to some extent, from monolinguals in their judgments of pronoun binding. In line with our predictions, findings suggest that L2 English and L2 Dutch can influence L1 Turkish syntactic judgments in a similar fashion and that an L2 can induce inter- as well as intra-generational L1 change.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the research on the attrition of native language (L1) in late bilinguals in relation to their second language (L2) development and integration into the L2 society. Despite lack of empirical evidence, it is often implicitly assumed that maintaining L1 knowledge impedes L2 learning. Furthermore, individuals whose L1 skills decline as a result of immersion in an L2 environment and become highly competent in the L2 are expected to achieve better cultural integration as opposed to those who prefer to preserve their mother tongue. We point to the fact that bilingualism and biculturalism have often been investigated independently and hence the lack of evidence for a straightforward association between the development of languages and cultural affiliation; and we call for in-depth studies that integrate language and culture in order to reveal their consequences for L1 development.