Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (6)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = Russian heritage learners

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
19 pages, 2032 KiB  
Article
“How Often Do You Encounter the Verb Obnaruzhit’?” Subjective Frequency of Russian Verbs in Heritage Speakers and Other Types of Russian–German Bilinguals
by Christina Clasmeier and Tanja Anstatt
Languages 2024, 9(8), 256; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9080256 - 23 Jul 2024
Viewed by 1103
Abstract
The literature shows that word frequency data obtained from corpora (corpus frequency, CF) and L1 speaker estimation (subjective frequency, SF) are substantially correlated. However, little is known about languages other than English and the frequency estimation of different types of bilingual speakers. We [...] Read more.
The literature shows that word frequency data obtained from corpora (corpus frequency, CF) and L1 speaker estimation (subjective frequency, SF) are substantially correlated. However, little is known about languages other than English and the frequency estimation of different types of bilingual speakers. We address both issues and compare the correlation coefficients of the CF and SF for 49 Russian verbs as well as SF data between four groups of Russian speakers: monolinguals (MOs), late bilinguals (LBs), heritage speakers (HSs), and foreign language learners (FLs). We gained SF data from a frequency estimation study with 447 participants and found that despite the reduced exposure to Russian in the three bilingual groups, their SF data were correlated with the CF at the same level (moderately) as the monolinguals’ SF. Interestingly, the correlations between the SF of the MOs, LBs, and HSs were very high, indicating that the SF is extremely stable over different speaker groups and that HSs do not differ from other L1 speakers in this respect. Furthermore, in absolute terms, HSs judged the verbs consistently lower than LBs and MOs, demonstrating that speakers have a finely adjusted ability to estimate the frequency with which they encounter words. The learners, on the other hand, were a clearly distinguished group, with only moderate correlations with all groups of L1 speakers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Heritage Russian Bilingualism across the Lifespan)
Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 756 KiB  
Article
Predictive Language Processing in Russian Heritage Speakers: Task Effects on Morphosyntactic Prediction in Reading
by Olga Parshina, Nina Ladinskaya, Lidia Gault and Irina A. Sekerina
Languages 2024, 9(5), 158; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9050158 - 26 Apr 2024
Viewed by 2374
Abstract
This study investigates the effect of task demands on the predictive processing of morphosyntactic cues (word class, noun/adjective gender, case, and number) in reading among Heritage Speakers of Russian (N = 29), comparing them with Russian language learners (N = 29) and monolingual [...] Read more.
This study investigates the effect of task demands on the predictive processing of morphosyntactic cues (word class, noun/adjective gender, case, and number) in reading among Heritage Speakers of Russian (N = 29), comparing them with Russian language learners (N = 29) and monolingual Russian speakers (N = 63). Following the utility account of bilingual prediction, we hypothesized that the predictive use of morphosyntactic cues would be more evident in a less-demanding reading cloze task (Experiment 1) than in a more-challenging eye-tracking reading task (Experiment 2), and for cues that RHSs regard as more reliable (word class and number vs. gender and case cues). The results confirmed our predictions: In Experiment 1, Heritage Speakers (and L2 learners) used all cues predictively to generate the upcoming lexical item, with higher accuracy for word class and number cues compared to gender and case cues. In Experiment 2, in contrast to monolingual readers, neither Heritage Speakers nor L2 learners used gender cues on adjectives to anticipate the gender of the upcoming noun. The results are discussed in respect to the interplay between task demands, cue weight, oral fluency, and Russian literacy experience. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Heritage Russian Bilingualism across the Lifespan)
Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 1197 KiB  
Article
A Corpus-Based Study on Orthographic Errors of Russian Heritage Learners and Their Implications for Linguistic Research and Language Teaching
by Olesya Kisselev, Irina Dubinina and Galina Paquette
Languages 2024, 9(4), 126; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9040126 - 1 Apr 2024
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2388
Abstract
The challenges faced by heritage language (HL) learners in mastering spelling and orthography are well-documented. Despite these documented difficulties, this aspect of HL linguistic knowledge has received limited attention from HL researchers. Beyond instructional implications, the study of spelling and orthography in HL [...] Read more.
The challenges faced by heritage language (HL) learners in mastering spelling and orthography are well-documented. Despite these documented difficulties, this aspect of HL linguistic knowledge has received limited attention from HL researchers. Beyond instructional implications, the study of spelling and orthography in HL speakers holds significance to building a finer understanding of the nature of heritage languages, since the development of orthographic skills is intricately linked to the knowledge of phonology and morphology as well as to metalinguistic awareness in these two areas. The study presented in this paper attempts to contribute to this area of research by turning its attention to orthographic skills of Russian heritage learners with English as their dominant language. The corpus-based research presented here categorizes orthographic errors in adjectival endings in hand-written essays produced by college-age HL learners of Russian of various writing proficiency levels and attempts to provide preliminary explanations for the source of these errors. While this paper is exploratory in nature and limited in scope by focusing only on adjectival endings, our results emphasize the need for further exploration in this underrepresented area to enhance our understanding of heritage language development and improve instructional strategies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Heritage Russian Bilingualism across the Lifespan)
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 824 KiB  
Article
The Acquisition of Copula Alternation Ser/Estar and Adjective in L1 Russian, Spanish Heritage Speakers
by Iban Mañas Navarrete, Pedro Guijarro Fuentes and Iria Bello Viruega
Languages 2023, 8(4), 269; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8040269 - 15 Nov 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2653
Abstract
Spanish copula choice ser/estar and the semantic and pragmatic distinctions that derive from their alternation in predicate adjective constructions have been discussed in several studies focused on the features of Spanish as a heritage language, usually focusing on the lack of [...] Read more.
Spanish copula choice ser/estar and the semantic and pragmatic distinctions that derive from their alternation in predicate adjective constructions have been discussed in several studies focused on the features of Spanish as a heritage language, usually focusing on the lack of equivalence between English and Spanish. The aim of this study is to determine the competence of a group of heritage speakers of Spanish that were born and raised in Russia in adjective copula selection for ser and estar and to what extent it differs from that of L2 speakers. A group of second-generation heritage Spanish-Russian speakers (n = 29) and a group of L1 Russian learners of Spanish as foreign language (n = 23) performed a translation recognition task in Spanish based on extracts from contemporary Spanish literary works. From a crosslinguistic perspective, a partial correspondence can be established between long forms of the Russian adjective with ser, and short forms of the Russian adjective with estar. Taking this cross-language relationship into account, we considered congruent and non-congruent cross-language scenarios. The results confirm that the heritage speakers outperformed the L2 Spanish speakers. This suggests a possible benefit of earlier exposure and use of Spanish. The facilitative effect of L1 can be traced in the ser-preferred scenarios but it fades away in the estar-preferred contexts for both groups. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Approaches to the Acquisition of Heritage Spanish)
Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 917 KiB  
Article
Can Heritage Speakers Predict Lexical and Morphosyntactic Information in Reading?
by Olga Parshina, Anastasiya Lopukhina and Irina A. Sekerina
Languages 2022, 7(1), 60; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7010060 - 4 Mar 2022
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 3623
Abstract
Ample evidence suggests that monolingual adults can successfully generate lexical and morphosyntactic predictions in reading and that correct predictions facilitate sentence comprehension. In this eye-tracking corpus reading study, we investigate whether the same is true for reading in heritage language. Specifically, we ask [...] Read more.
Ample evidence suggests that monolingual adults can successfully generate lexical and morphosyntactic predictions in reading and that correct predictions facilitate sentence comprehension. In this eye-tracking corpus reading study, we investigate whether the same is true for reading in heritage language. Specifically, we ask whether heritage speakers (HSs) of Russian are able to anticipate lexical and/or morphosyntactic information of the upcoming words in the sentence and whether they differ in the predictions from monolingual children and L2 learners. We are also interested in whether the literacy level (i.e., Russian literacy experience or reading fluency in English) influences lexical and morphosyntactic prediction. Our results indicate that HSs as well as other groups were able to anticipate the specific lexical item, and the ability was contingent on the Russian literacy experience and reading fluency in dominant English as evident in some of the early and late eye-tracking measures. Similar to children and L2 learners, the word class and the verb number predictability affected reading times in HSs, but HSs were the only group to anticipate the number of the upcoming noun. We discuss findings in respect to the utility account of the bilingual prediction and divergent attainment trajectory of the heritage language development. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Cognitive Nature of Bilingual Reading)
Show Figures

Figure 1

32 pages, 1525 KiB  
Article
Evaluating the Russian Language Proficiency of Bilingual and Second Language Learners of Russian
by Tatiana Luchkina, Tania Ionin, Natalia Lysenko, Anastasia Stoops and Nadezhda Suvorkina
Languages 2021, 6(2), 83; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages6020083 - 11 May 2021
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 6820
Abstract
The starting point of most experimental and clinical examinations of bilingual language development is the choice of the measure of participants’ proficiency, which affects the interpretation of experimental findings and has pedagogical and clinical implications. Recent work on heritage and L2 acquisition of [...] Read more.
The starting point of most experimental and clinical examinations of bilingual language development is the choice of the measure of participants’ proficiency, which affects the interpretation of experimental findings and has pedagogical and clinical implications. Recent work on heritage and L2 acquisition of Russian used varying proficiency assessment tools, including elicited production, vocabulary recognition, and in-house measures. Using such different approaches to proficiency assessment is problematic if one seeks a coherent vision of bilingual speaker competence at different acquisition stages. The aim of the present study is to provide a suite of validated bilingual assessment materials designed to evaluate the language proficiency speakers of Russian as a second or heritage language. The materials include an adaptation of a normed language background questionnaire (Leap-Q), a battery of participant-reported proficiency measures, and a normed cloze deletion test. We offer two response formats in combination with two distinct scoring methods in order to make the testing materials suited for bilingual Russian speakers who self-assess as (semi-) proficient as well as for those whose bilingualism is incipient, or declining due to language attrition. Data from 52 baseline speakers and 503 speakers of Russian who reported dominant proficiency in a different language are analyzed for test validation purposes. Obtained measures of internal and external validity provide evidence that the cloze deletion test reported in this study reliably discriminates between dissimilar target language attainment levels in diverse populations of bilingual and multilingual Russian speakers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Language and Literacy in Bilingual Learners)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop