Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:32:15.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

First language acquisition in a second language submersion environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Ludo Th. Verhoeven  and
Hendrik E. Boeschoten
Ludo Th. Verhoeven*
Affiliation:
Tilburg University, The Netherlands
Hendrik E. Boeschoten*
Affiliation:
Tilburg University, The Netherlands
*
L. Th. Verhoeven & H. E. Boeschoten, Department of Language and Literature, Tilburg University, Postbox 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands.
L. Th. Verhoeven & H. E. Boeschoten, Department of Language and Literature, Tilburg University, Postbox 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the present paper a linguistic description is given of the process of first language acquisition of Turkish children aged 4 to 8 in a Dutch submersion environment in the Netherlands. On the basis of the assumption that language development involves the acquisition of distinct subskills in differential patternings, the development of lexical, morphosyntactic, and pragmatic abilities have been investigated separately. Furthermore, these longitudinal data are compared with cross-sectional language data of five- and seven-year-old children in Turkey. This comparison was made in order to be able to interpret whether the Turkish language skills of native Turkish-speaking children in the Netherlands were showing delay, stagnation, or attrition of skills. The overall results suggest that in the age range of 4 to 8 years the acquisition of first language skills by Turkish children in the Netherlands can best be characterized as stagnated.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , September 1986 , pp. 241 - 255
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andersen, R. W. (1982). Determining the linguistic attributes of language attrition. In Lambert, R. & Freed, B. (Eds.), The loss of language skills. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Boeschoten, H. E. (1985). Turkish teaching in the Netherlands. Paper presented at the Conference on Minority Languages and Education in Sitges (Spain).Google Scholar
Boeschoten, H. E., & Verhoeven, L. Th. (1984). Turkish language development of Turkish children in the Netherlands. Paper presented at the 2nd Conference on Turkish Linguistics in Istanbul (Turkey).Google Scholar
Boeschoten, H. E., & Verhoeven, L. Th. (1985). Integration niederländischer lexikalischer Elemente ins Türkische: Sprachmischung bei Immigranten der ersten und zweiten Generation. Linguistische Berichte, 98, 347–364.Google Scholar
Ekstrand, L. (1980). Unpopular views on popular beliefs about immigrant children. In Bhatnager, J. (Ed.), Education immigrants. London: Croon Helm.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. (1966). Language loyalty in the United States. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Fishman, J. (1972). Language and nationalism. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Gaarder, A. (1977). Language maintenance or language shift. In Mackey, W. & Andersson, T. (Eds.), Bilingualism in early childhood. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1969). The Norwegian language in America: A study in bilingual behavior. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. (1973). Bilingualism, language contact and immigrant languages in the United States. In Sebeok, T. (Ed.), Current trends in linguistics, vol. 10. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hernandez-Chavez, E. (1978). Language maintenance, bilingual education and philosophies of bilingualism in the US. In Alatis, J. (Ed.), International dimensions of bilingual education (pp. 527–550). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, K. W. (1970). Syntactic maturity in school children and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 35(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lalleman, J. (1983). Turkse kinderen in Nederland. Tijdschrift voor Taal- & Tekstwetenschap, 3(2), 97–192.Google Scholar
Saltarelli, M., & Gronzo, (1977). Migrant languages: Linguistic change in progress. In Giles, H. & Saint-Jacques, B. (Eds.), Language and ethnic relations (pp. 1–13). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Skutnabb-Kangas, T. (1976). Bilingualism, semilingualism and school achievement. Linguistische Berichte, 45, 55–64.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Cummins, J. (1979). Bilingualism, cognitive development and education. Language Teaching and Linguistics: Abstracts, 12(1) 4–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tosi, A. (1979). Bilinguismo e Immigrazione. Rassegna Italiana di Linguistica Applicata, 10, 177–193.Google Scholar
Verdoot, A. (1977). Educational policies on languages. In Giles, H. (Ed.), Language ethnicity and intergroup relations. London: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Verhoeven, L. Th., & Extra, G. (1983). Turkish children’s process of learning to read Dutch as a second language. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 7, 37–53.Google Scholar