Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-86b6f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-08T22:04:38.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dominant-language replacement: The case of international adoptees*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2009

KENNETH HYLTENSTAM ,
EMANUEL BYLUND ,
NICLAS ABRAHAMSSON  and
HYEON-SOOK PARK
KENNETH HYLTENSTAM*
Affiliation:
Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University
EMANUEL BYLUND
Affiliation:
Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University
NICLAS ABRAHAMSSON
Affiliation:
Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University
HYEON-SOOK PARK
Affiliation:
Department of Scandinavian Languages, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul
*
Address for correspondence: Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University, SE – 106 91 Stockholm, Swedenkenneth.hyltenstam@biling.su.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article challenges a recent proposal for the theoretical interpretation of L1 and L2 interaction that results from the abrupt change of language environment in internationally adopted children. According to this proposal (Pallier, Dehaene, Poline, LeBihan, Argenti, Depoux and Mehler, 2003; Ventureyra, Pallier and Yoo, 2004), such children experience a total loss of their L1, while, as adults, they exhibit a nativelike ultimate attainment of their L2. These authors suggest that what they see as a total loss of L1 allows a resetting of the neural network that normally subserves L1 retention and hence permits a complete acquisition of the L2. Data from two of our own research projects, one on L1 remnants in Korean adoptees in Sweden (see Park, forthcoming), and the other on age of acquisition and ultimate L2 attainment of Swedish (see Abrahamsson and Hyltenstam, in press), which included data from Latin American adoptees in Sweden among other participants, suggest (i) that L1 remnants are indeed maintained, (ii) that L2 attainment is not enhanced by severe L1 attrition, and (iii) that there is an age dimension to both the degree of L1 attrition and the level of L2 ultimate attainment in international adoptees. We therefore contend that a maturational interpretation of language replacement data is preferable.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , April 2009 , pp. 121 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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.)

Footnotes

*

This work was supported by the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation, grant No. 1999-0383:01 to K. H. and N. A. and grant no. J2001-0244:1,2,3 to H.-S. P. We would like to thank Katrin Stölten for carrying out the phonetic analyses of VOT production and categorical perception. We are also grateful to Christopher Stroud for comments on an earlier draft and Thomas Lavelle for checking and correcting our English writing.

References

Abrahamsson, N. & Hyltenstam, K. in press. Age of L2 acquisition and degree of nativelikeness – listener perception vs. linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning, 59 (2).Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, N., Stölten, K. & Hyltenstam, K. in press. Effects of age on voice onset time: The production of voiceless stops by near near-native L2 speakers. In Haberzettl, S. (ed.), Processes and outcomes: Explaining achievement in language learning, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Adoption Council of Canada (2007). www.adoption.ca (retrieved 19 July (2007)).Google Scholar
Au, T., Knightly, L., Jun, S.-A. & Oh, J. (2002). Overhearing a language during childhood. Psychological Science, 13 (3), 238–243.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bahrick, H. P. (1984). Semantic memory content in permastore: Fifty years of memory for Spanish learned in school. Journal of Experimantal Psychology: General, 113 (1), 1–26.Google ScholarPubMed
Bernardini, P. & Schlyter, S. (2004). Growing syntactic structure and code-mixing in the weaker language: The Ivy Hypothesis. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 49–69.Google Scholar
Bever, T. (1981). Normal acquisition processes explain the critical period for language learning. In Diller, K. (ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude, pp. 176–198. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (ed.) (1999). Second language acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis, pp. 23–38. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2005). Interpreting age effects in second language acquisition. In Kroll, J. F. & De Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives, pp. 109–127. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bongaerts, T. (2005). Introduction: Ultimate attainment and the Critical Period Hypothesis for second language acquisition. IRAL, 43 (3), 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burling, R. (1959). Language development of a Garo and English-speaking child. Word, 15, 45–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, Y. G. (2000). The age effect in second language acquisition: Is it too late to acquire native-level competence in a second language after the age of seven? In Oshima-Takane, Y., Shirai, Y. & Sirai, H. (eds.), Studies in language sciences 1, pp. 159–169. The Japanese Society for Language Sciences.Google Scholar
Bylund, E. (2008). Age differences in first language attrition: A maturational constraints persepctive (Dissertations in Bilingualism 17). Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Bylund, E. in press a. Effects of age of L2 acquisition on L1 event conceptualization patterns. To appear in Bilingualism: Language and Congnition.Google Scholar
Bylund, E. in press b. Maturational constraints and first language attrition. Language Learning 59 (3).Google Scholar
Cheour, M., Ceponiene, R., Lehtokoski, A., Luuk, A., Allik, J., Alho, K. & Näätänen, R. (1998). Development of language-specific phoneme representations in the infant brain. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 351–353.Google Scholar
Cook, V. (2003). Introduction: The changing L1 in the L2 user's mind. In V. Cook (ed.). The effects of the second language on the first. pp. 1–18. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Cummins, J. (1981). Bilingualism and minority language children. Toronto: OISE Press.Google Scholar
Curtiss, S. (1977). Genie: A psycholinguistic study of a modern-day “wild child”. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Curtiss, S. (1988). Abnormal language acquisition and the modularity of language. In Newmeyer, F. J. (ed.) Linguistics: The Cambridge survey, pp. 99–116. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
de Bot, K., Martens, V. & Stoessel, S. (2004). Finding residual lexical knowledge: The “Savings” approach to testing vocabulary. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8 (3), 373–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K. & Stoessel, S. (2000). In search of yesterday's words: Reactivating a long forgotten language. Applied Linguistics, 21 (3), 364–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunkel, H. (1948). Second language learning. Boston, MA: Ginn & Company.Google Scholar
Ekberg, L. (1998). Regeltillämpning kontra lexikonkunskap i svenskan hos invandrarbarn i Malmö. In Møller, J., Quist, P., Holmen, A. & Jørgensen, J. N. (eds.), Nordiske sprog som andetsprog. Københavnerstudier i tosprogethed, 30, pp. 247–263. Copenhagen: Institut for humanistiske fag, Danmarks Lærerhøjskole.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (1999). Age of learning and second language speech. In Birdsong (ed.), pp. 101–132.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., Frieda, E. M. & Nozawa, T. (1997). Amount of native-language (L1) use affects the pronunciation of an L2. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 169–186.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., Munro, M. & MacKay, I. (1995). Factors affecting strength of perceived foreign accent in a second language. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 76 (3), 708–721.Google Scholar
Francis, N. (2005). Research findings in attrition: Implications for the Critical Period Hypothesis. Language Learning, 55 (3), 491–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardell, I. (1979). A Swedish study on intercountry adoptions: A report from Allmänna Barnhuset. Stockholm: Allmänna barnhuset.Google Scholar
Genesee, F. & Nicoladis, E. (2006), Bilingual acquisition. In Hoff, E. & Shatz, M. (eds.), Handbook of language development, pp. 324–342. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Glennen, S. & Masters, M. G. (2002), Typical and atypical language development in infants and toddlers adopted from Eastern Europe. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 11, 417–433.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1982). Life with two languages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Harley, B. & Wang, W. (1997). The Critical Period Hypothesis: Where are we now? In De Groot, A. M. B. & Kroll, J. F. (eds.), Tutorials in bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives, pp. 19–51. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hene, B. (1987). Vuxna utlandsadopterade i Sverige – en intervjuundersökning. SPRINS-rapport. 37. Institutionen för lingvistik, Göteborgs universitet.Google Scholar
Hene, B. (1993). Utlandsadopterade barns och svenska barns ordförståelse: En jämförelse mellan barn i åldern 10–12 år (SPRINS-gruppen 41). Göteborgs universitet.Google Scholar
Hene, B. (2004). Adjektivs metaforiska betydelser – utlandsadopterade och svenska barns tolkningar. In Hyltenstam, K. & Lindberg, I. (eds.), Svenska som andraspråk – i forskning, undervisning och samhälle, pp. 277–296. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, C. (1991). An introduction to bilingualism. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (1992). Non-native features in near-native speakers: On the ultimate attainment of childhood L2 learners. In Harris, R. (ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals, pp. 351–368. Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2000). Who can become native-like in a second language? All, some or none? Studia Linguistica, 54 (2), 150–166.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2003)a, Age of onset and ultimate attainment in near-native speakers of Swedish. In Fraurud, K. & Hyltenstam, K. (eds.), Multilingualism in global and local perspectives: Selected papers from the 8th Nordic Conference on Bilingualism, November 1–3, 2001, Stockholm Rinkeby, pp. 319–340. Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University & Rinkeby Institute of Multilingual Research.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2003)b. Maturational constraints in SLA. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition, pp. 539–588. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. & Newport, E. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, C. W. (1965), On the autonomy of the tensity feature in stop classification (with special reference to Korean stops). Word, 21, 339–359.Google Scholar
Köpke, B. & Schmid, M. (2004). Language attrition: The next phase. In Schmid, M., Köpke, B., Keijzer, M. & Weilemar, L., (eds.), First language attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues, pp. 1–43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Krakow, R. & Roberts, J. (2003). Acquisition of English vocabulary by young Chinese adoptees. Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders, 1 (3), 169–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhl, P., Williams, K., Lacerda, F., Stevens, K. & Lindblom, B. (1992). Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. Science, 255, 606–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leopold, W. F. (1939)–1949. Speech development of a bilingual child: A linguist's record (4 vols.). Evaston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Long, M. (2005). Problems with supposed counter-evidence to the Critical Period Hypothesis. IRAL, 43 (3), 287–317.Google Scholar
MacKay, I. R. A., Flege, J. E. & Imai, S. (2006). Evaluating the effects of chronological age and sentence duration on degree of perceived foreign accent. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 157–183.Google Scholar
Major, R. (1993). Sociolinguistic factors in loss and acquisition of phonology. In Hyltenstam, K. & Viberg, Å. (eds.), Progression and regression in language: Sociocultural, neuropsychological, and linguistic perspectives, pp. 463–478. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marinova-Todd, S. H. (2003). Comprehensive analysis of ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Mayberry, R. & Lock, E. (2003). Age constraints on first versus second language acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and epigenesist. Brain and Language, 87 (3), 369–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllister, R. (2003). Development of a new speech comprehension test with a phonological distance metric. In D. Solé, D. Recasens & J. Romero (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, Barcelona 3–9 August 2003, pp. 149–151. Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (2000). Grammaticality judgments in a second language: Influences of age of acquisition and native language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 395–423.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1984). Second-language acquisition in childhood (vol. 1): Preschool children (2nd edn.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MIA (2007). Myndigheten för internationella adpotionsfrågor. Stockholm. www.mia.eu (retrieved 19 July 2007).Google Scholar
Ministère des Affaires étrangères (2007), Mission de l'adoption internationale 16/02/2007. www.diplomatie,gouv.fr (retrieved 19 July 2007).Google Scholar
Oh, J., Jun, S.-A., Knightly, L. & Au, T. (2003). Holding on to childhood language memory. Cognition, 86, B53–B64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pallier, C., Dehaene, S., Poline, J.-B., LeBihan, D., Argenti, A.-M., Dupoux, E. & Mehler, J. (2003). Brain imaging of language plasticity in adopted adults: Can a second language replace the first? Cerebral Cortex, 13, 155–161.Google Scholar
Park, H.-S. (forthcoming). Have Korean adoptees completely lost their first language Korean? Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F. & Schumann, J. (1994). Neurobiological mechanisms of language acquisition. Language Learning, 44 (4), 681–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyun, K.-S. (1987). Korean–Swedish interlanguage phonology. Ph.D. dissertation, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Roberts, J., Krakow, R. & Pollock, K. (2003). Language outcomes for preschool children adopted from China as infants and toddlers. Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders, 1 (3), 177–183.Google Scholar
Ruben, R. (1997). A time frame of critical/sensitive periods of language development. Acta Otolaryngologica, 117, 202–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruben, R. (1999). Persistency of an effect: Otitis media during the first year of life with nine years follow-up. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 49, 115–118.Google Scholar
Snedeker, J., Geren, J. & Shafto, C. (2007). Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development. Psychological Science, 18 (1), 79–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stölten, K. (2005). Effects of age of learning of VOT in voiceless stops produced by near-native L2 speakers. In Eriksson, A. & Lindh, J. (eds.), Proceedings FONETIK 2005: The 18th Swedish Phonetics Conference, May 25–27 2005, pp. 91–94. Department of Linguistics, Göteborg University.Google Scholar
Stölten, K. (2006), Effects of age on VOT: Categorical perception of Swedish stops by near-native L2 speakers. Working Papers, 52, 125–128. Lund University, Centre for Language & Literature, Department of Linguistics & Phonetics.Google Scholar
Stölten, K., Abrahamsson, N. & Hyltenstam, K. submitted. Effects of age of learning on voice onset time: Categorical perception of Swedish stops by near-native L2 speakers.Google Scholar
Tsukada, K., Birdsong, D., Bialystok, E., Mack, M., Sung, H. & Flege, J. (2005). A developmental study of English vowel production and perception by native Korean adults and children. Journal of Phonetics, 33, 263–290.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of State (2007). http://www.travel.state.gov/family/adoption/stats (retrieved 19 July 2007).Google Scholar
van Ijzendoorn, M. H., Juffer, F. & Klein Poelhuis, C. W. (2005). Adoption and cognitive development: A meta-analytic comparison of adopted and non-adopted children's IQ and school performance. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 301–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ventureyra, V., Pallier, C. & Yoo, H. (2004). The loss of first language phonetic perception in adopted Koreans. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17 (1), 79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber-Fox, C. & Neville, H. (1999). Functional neural subsystems are differentially affected by delays in second language immersion: ERP and behavioural evidence in bilinguals. In Birdsong (ed.), pp. 23–38.Google Scholar
Werker, J. & Tees, R. (1984). Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 7 (1), 49–63.Google Scholar
Yukawa, E. (1997). L1 Japanese attrition and regaining: Three case studies of two early bilingual children. Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University.Google Scholar
Yukawa, E. (1998). L1 Japanese attrition and regaining: Three case studies of two early bilingual children. Tokyo: Kurioso.Google Scholar
Xing Tan, T. & Yang, Y. (2005). Language development of Chinese adoptees 18–35 months old. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20 (1), 57–68.Google Scholar