L1 accessibility among Turkish-Dutch bilinguals

Abstract

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).

The Roles of Age, Attitude, and Use in First Language Development and Attrition of Turkish–English Bilinguals

“…Despite a tendency across such Turkish communities to remain loyal to their language and culture and a high level of endogamy (e.g., Backus, ), linguistic changes have been observed in a range of studies. These changes may affect all areas of the language, from accentedness (Karayayla & Schmid, ; Stangen, Kupisch, Proietti Ergün, & Zielke, ) through grammatical (e.g., Gürel, ; Onar Valk & Backus, ; Yağmur, ; Yılmaz, ), morphological (Arslan, De Kok, & Bastiaanse, ; Karayayla, in press; Pfaff, ), and lexical (Backus, ; Karayayla, 2018; Treffers‐Daller, Daller, Furman, & Rothman, ; Yılmaz & Schmid, ) complexity and sophistication.…”

“…Language Learning 70:S1, March 2020, pp. 54-84 accentedness (Karayayla & Schmid, 2019;Stangen, Kupisch, Proietti Ergün, & Zielke, 2015) through grammatical (e.g., Gürel, 2004;Onar Valk & Backus, 2013;Yagmur, 1997;Yılmaz, 2011), morphological (Arslan, De Kok, & Bastiaanse, 2015;Karayayla, in press;Pfaff, 1993), and lexical (Backus, 2012;Karayayla, 2018;Treffers-Daller, Daller, Furman, & Rothman, 2016;Yılmaz & Schmid, 2012) complexity and sophistication.…”

Predictors of Language Dominance: An Integrated Analysis of First Language Attrition and Second Language Acquisition in Late Bilinguals

“…Fluency: in both free and elicited discourse, L1At populations have consistently been demonstrated to be less fluent than monolinguals, as indicated by a slower speech rate and higher incidence of pauses, filled pauses, repetitions and self-corrections (e.g., Dostert, 2009; Schmid and Fägersten, 2010; Cherciov, 2011; Yılmaz and Schmid, 2012; Bergmann et al, 2015). …”

Relación entre el vocabulario y el uso de la lengua en rumanos que viven en Madrid

“…Once a year Schmid (2012), it does not have a great impact on language performance as the professional use is restricted. The main jobs of Romanian participants are receptionists, doormen, public relationships, construction, cleaning staff, taking care of children, teachers, writers or nurses.…”

“…In a similar vein, Guardado (2002) reflected on the loss and maintenance of first language in Hispanic families in Vancouver and, besides that, literature on attrition is extensive (cf. Ben-Rafael & Schmid, 2007;Hansen, 2001;Köpke & Schmid, 2004;Lambert & Freed, 1982;Schmid & Dusseldorp, 2010;Yilmaz & Schmid, 2012).…”