Applied Psycholinguistics · 2007 · 184 citations · 14 references
Second Language LearningDual Language LearningSimultaneous AcquisitionMultilingualismLanguage DevelopmentSecond Language SpeakingLanguage EducationEarly Childhood LanguagePsycholinguisticsEducationBilingual Language DevelopmentEarly Child BilingualismMere ExposureLanguage ProficiencyCode-switchingMonoliteracySecond Language AcquisitionChild LanguageLanguage AcquisitionBilingualismLanguage StudiesCognitive ScienceSecond LanguageHeritage Language AcquisitionForeign Language LearningBilingual EducationWeaker LanguageSecond Language StudiesDominant LanguageForeign Language AcquisitionLinguistics
Research shows that simultaneous bilinguals can attain L1‑like competence in each language, yet the weaker language hypothesis posits that the weaker language differs from balanced bilingual L1 and resembles L2, raising questions about the limits of human language acquisition. The study tests the weaker language hypothesis by examining unusual constructions in the weaker language and analyzing French usage among German‑dominant bilinguals. The authors analyze unusual grammatical constructions in the weaker language and assess French usage patterns among bilinguals whose dominant language is German. Evidence shows that weaker languages do not resemble L2, can be delayed but not indicative of acquisition failure, and that reduced input is unlikely to cause such failure.
Past research demonstrates that first language (L1)-like competence in each language can be attained in simultaneous acquisition of bilingualism by mere exposure to the target languages. The question is whether this is also true for the “weaker” language (WL). The WL hypothesis claims that the WL differs fundamentally from monolingual L1 and balanced bilingual L1 and resembles second language (L2) acquisition. In this article, these claims are put to a test by analyzing “unusual” constructions in WLs, possibly indicating acquisition failure, and by reporting on analyses of the use of French by bilinguals whose dominant language is German. The available evidence does not justify the claim that WLs resemble L2. Instead, it shows that WL development can be delayed, but does not suggest acquisition failure. Finally, reduced input is unlikely to cause acquisition failure. The fundamental issue at stake is to explore the limits of the human language making capacity.
14