Language Attrition in Progress [Reprint 2012 ed.] 9783110857863, 9783110130874

Citation preview

Language Attrition in Progress

STUDIES ON LANGUAGE ACQUISITION This series w i l l focus on both first language acquisition and s e c o n d / foreign language learning. It w i l l include studies on language acquisition in educational settings, f i r s t / s e c o n d / f o r e i g n language loss, and early bilingualism. High quality dissertations and other individual w o r k s w i l l be considered for publication, and also collections of papers f r o m international w o r k s h o p s and conferences. The primary goal of the series is to d r a w international attention to current research in the Netherlands on language acquisition. Editors of SOLA: Guus Extra, Tilburg University Ton van der Geest, Groningen University Peter Jordens, Nijmegen University Also published in this series: Guus Extra and Ton Vallen (eds.) Ethnic M i n o r i t i e s and Dutch as a Second Language

Bert Weltens, Kees de Bot and Theo van Eis (eds.)

Language Attrition in Progress

ψ

1986 Foris Publications Dordrecht - Holland/Providence - U.S.A.

Published

by:

Foris Publications Holland P.O. Box 509 3300 A M Dordrecht, The Netherlands Sole

distributor

for the

U.S.A.

and

Canada:

Foris Publications USA, Inc. P.O. Box 5904 Providence RI 02903 U.S.A.

CIP-DA

TA

Language Language Attrition in Progress / ed. by Bert Weltens, Kees de Bot, Theo van Els. Dordrecht [etc.]: Foris - (Studies on Language Acquisition; 2) With ref. ISBN 90-6765-322-5 SISO 803.2 UDC 800.6 Subject heading: language attrition.

ISBN 90 6765 322 5 (Paper) © 1986 Foris Publications - Dordrecht No part of this publication may be reproduced of transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the copyright owner. Printed in The Netherlands by ICG Printing Dordrecht

Contents

Preface

/.

vii

General

papers

T h e o v a n E l s : A n o v e r v i e w of E u r o p e a n r e s e a r c h on l a n g u a g e a t t r i t i o n

Ralph B. G i n s b e r g :

Issues in t h e a n a l y s i s of l a n g u a g e loss: M e t h o d o l o g y of

the Language Skills A t t r i t i o n Koen J a s p a e r t ,

3

Sjaak

Kroon

Project

& Roeland

van

19 Hout:

Points

of

reference

in

f i r s t - l a n g u a g e loss r e s e a r c h

II.

Dialect

37

loss

Frans Hinskens:

T h e s e l e c t i o n of

linguistic

variables

in e m p i r i c a l

research

on v a r i a t i o n a n d c h a n g e in d i a l e c t s Henk Münstermann

& Toon

Hägen,

Functional

53 and

d i a l e c t loss: A r e s e a r c h p l a n a n d some f i r s t

III.

First-language

Sally B o y d ,

structural

aspects

of

results

75

loss

Using the

present

to p r e d i c t t h e f u t u r e

in

language

contact:

T h e case of i m m i g r a n t m i n o r i t y l a n g u a g e s in Sweden Alan Davies,

L a n g u a g e loss a n d s y m b o l i c g a i n :

maintenance

T h e m e a n i n g of

99 institutional 117

IV.

Second-

and

foreign-language

Kees d e B o t & T o k e L i n t s e n ,

loss

Foreign-language

proficiency

Andrew Cohen,

Forgetting foreign-language vocabulary

Peter J o r d e n s ,

Kees

de

Bot,

Charles

van

Os

& Jos

in t h e e l d e r l y

..

143

Schumans,

Regression

in G e r m a n c a s e m a r k i n g Richard

Lambert

& Sarah

159

Moore,

Problem

areas

in

the

study

of

language

attrition Elite Olshtain,

177 The

a t t r i t i o n of E n g l i s h as a s e c o n d l a n g u a g e w i t h

speakers

of H e b r e w B e r t Weltens guage:

131

&• T h e o

185 van

Els,

Interim results

L i s t of c o n t r i b u t o r s

The

attrition

of

French

as

a

foreign

lan205

223

Preface

The

papers

in t h i s

t h e Language Kerkrade, financed to

Loss

the by

bring

the

European

in

on

s t a t e of the

aspects the art

loss

research

mainly concern of

a more

Netherlands,

Great Britain,

Attrition

Project,

language-attrition

Special t h a n k s dinating

just

Foundation for Centre

for

and

Thus, as

this

Israel.

some

of

ElIy

everything

In a d d i t i o n ,

its f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t , hospitality

September

1986.

and

for

the

symposium;

making

some

reflects research

the from

two

American Language

problems

that

with.

the

and

European

a n d t o t h e p e o p l e of t h e R o l d u c thus

but

the manuscript to

are

future.

in t h e

the methodological

Kersjes f o r t y p i n g

at

near

volume

represented by

was

who

research,

h i g h l i g h t t h e s t a t e of t h e a r t

discuss

a r e d u e t o ms.

t h e p r o g r e s s of l a n g u a g e

Nijmegen,

t o d o so in t h e

researchers f i n d themselves confronted

about

their

1986 -

Sweden,

which

and

nature.

Spring

was

the event

countries

to

Centre,

symposium

aim of

European

planning

Conference

The

i n t e r i m r e p o r t s of o n g o i n g

general

- as i t was in

1986.

T h e main

different

- or

most of t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s

10-14,

Foundation.

from

of

h e l d at t h e R o l d u c

March

Cultural

c o n t r i b u t i o n s are included, Skills

from

researchers

language

The contributions

revised versions w h i c h was

Netherlands,

together

engaged

focus

volume are Symposium

a substantial

coor-

Cultural

Conference

contribution

to

attrition.

The

editors

I GENERAL PAPERS

An Overview of European Research on Language Attrition Theo van Els University of Nijmegen

1.

INTRODUCTION

T h e f i r s t major conference devoted to research on language s k i l l loss was convened b y Richard Lambert at t h e U n i v e r s i t y of Pennsylvania, May 1980. Its o r i entation was mainly American;

Lambert & Freed (1982) contains the

proceedings

of t h a t conference. On t h e European side a f i r s t modest attempt to discuss language loss research was a t w o - d a y w o r k s h o p held at t h e U n i v e r s i t y of Nijmegen October 1982. T h e i n s p i r a t i o n f o r o r g a n i z i n g it was d e r i v e d from the Pennsylvania Conference.

Richard Lambert and Richard T u c k e r of t h e Center f o r A p p l i e d

L i n g u i s t i c s (Washington, the field guage

in the

loss

U.S.

and

D . C . ) presented a paper on t h e latest developments in Other papers

dialect

research f i n d i n g s .

loss,

were on f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e

mainly

discussing

research

loss,

plans

first-lan-

rather

than

The proceedings of t h e w o r k s h o p were not p u b l i s h e d ,

and

it was t h o u g h t - r i g h t l y - t h a t s e t t i n g up an organizational s t r u c t u r e f o r c o - o p eration

was

efforts

requiring

not called f o r any

yet,

kind

w o r k s h o p d i d do, however,

of

there

still

being f a r

co-ordination

or

too few actual

cooperative

action.

research What

the

was to create and f o s t e r an i n t e r e s t in the topic in

a number of researchers in t h e N e t h e r l a n d s .

The o v e r v i e w of European

research into language a t t r i t i o n which is t h e

subject

of t h i s p a p e r , I i n t e n d to d i v i d e into t h r e e p a r t s : - I will f i r s t deal w i t h t h e period u n t i l Bot & Weltens

(1985), Weltens

about 1980, mainly on t h e basis of De

(1987) and an informal presentation by

to an American-European conference at P r i n c e t o n , - I will then deal w i t h research developments

myself

1983;

in the recent past,

p a r t l y summa-

rized from the set of papers of t h i s volume; - I will, finally, future,

i.e.

discuss a number of issues t h a t may be of i n t e r e s t in t h e near

research topics t h a t one m i g h t , or o u g h t t o ,

consider

address-

ing.

2. THE YEARS UNTIL The

restriction

overview

of

that

European

1980 holds f o r research:

t h e whole we

only

of t h i s deal

volume,

with

also

research

holds f o r in the

field

this of

4

Van

natural'

language a t t r i t i o n ,

not with

'pathological'

attrition.

T h e field of

ral' language attrition we h a v e come to d i v i d e into f o u r c a t e g o r i e s , ful categorization

- we t h i n k

- than

one r e g u l a r l y comes a c r o s s , v i z . erational' within

language

individuals

attrition,

t h a t between

i.e.

respectively

the division

attrition

( see Weltens

'/ntergenerational' and

1987).

across

Following

of

the

types

(see figure

1. loss of L I

environment

in

resulting

in

that

intragen-

generations De Bot

(1985) we define t y p e s of a t t r i t i o n r e s e a r c h both in terms of what terms

'natu-

a more help-

into two main sub-fields

processes

Els

and

& Weltens

is lost and in

which

it is

lost,

the

following

in an L 1 - e n v i r o n m e n t ,

e.g.

dialect loss w i t h i n t h e dialect

four

1): commu-

nity; 2. loss of

LI

in an

L2-environment,

e.g.

loss

of

n a t i v e languages

by

migrant

workers ; 3. loss of L2 in an L l - e n v i r o n m e n t , 4. loss of

L2 in an

e.g.

L2-environment,

foreign-language

e.g.

loss;

second-language

loss b y

aging

mig-

rants .

Fig.

1: T y p e s of a t t r i t i o n

research.

It should be noted t h a t t h e f o u r t y p e s of language loss t h u s d i s t i n g u i s h e d still each

hold

respects.

Thus,

g u a g e loss,

a variety

of s u b - t y p e s

that d i f f e r

t h e example g i v e n of t h e t h i r d t y p e of

shows fundamental d i f f e r e n c e s

second-language

considerably

loss,

which

loss,

as to d e g r e e

also belongs to t h i s t y p e ;

and

in

i.e.

foreign-ian-

rate of

especially

during

returned

to

his

foreign-language

a

prolonged

native loss.

country, However,

stay

abroad,

contrasts foreign-

disappears

dramatically

and

once with

second-language

loss from

with

c h i l d r e n t h e speed w i t h w h i c h e v e n n e a r - n a t i v e competence in a n o t h e r acquired

the

what loss

younger language,

child

language loss,

that

has

happens

in

on t h e one

hand h a v e so much in common t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h e s t h e two of them t o g e t h e r all o t h e r t y p e s of

may

a number of

from

- at least f o r t h e time being - we would

O v e r v i e w European Research

5

p r e f e r not to break up the symmetry of o u r categorization. In general one may say that by f a r most of the research c a r r i e d out in Europe in the past belongs to the f i r s t c a t e g o r y , i . e . c o n c e r n s loss of L1 in an L I - e n v i r o n m e n t , in many cases more s p e c i f i c a l l y the loss of so-called minority l a n g u a g e s ' . A n overview of some of t h i s work is g i v e n in Haugen et al. (1981), which contains reviews of research projects i n v e s t i g a t i n g , f o r example, the loss of Welsh and Gaelic in G r e a t - B r i t a i n , of B r e t o n , B a s q u e and Provençal/Occitan in F r a n c e , of H u n g a r i a n in A u s t r i a , of F r i s i a n in the N e t h e r l a n d s , of RhaetoRomance in Italy and S w i t z e r l a n d , of German in Belgium, and of Swedish in F i n l a n d . Of c o u r s e , there are also a few i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of dialect loss, as e . g . of Alsatian dialects in F r a n c e . We do not want to go into these i n v e s t i g a t i o n s into any detail. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the r e s e a r c h in question is that it is mainly sociolinguistic in nature; that it i n v e s t i g a t e s L 1 - l o s s a c r o s s g e n e r a t i o n s , a n d , t h u s , to a g r e a t extent deals with ' l a n g u a g e death'; that it concentrates on functional aspects of a t t r i t i o n ; and that it relies on the questionnaire as its p r i n c i p a l research instrument (Weltens 1987). Besides r e s e a r c h of the f i r s t c a t e g o r y , t h e r e is also some r e s e a r c h of the second c a t e g o r y , c o n c e n t r a t i n g on L I - m a i n t e n a n c e among migrant w o r k e r s in E u r o p e . T h i s work is f o r the g r e a t e r p a r t f a i r l y recent; an example of it is the s t u d y of S e r b o - C r o a t i a n s p e a k i n g immigrants in Sweden and the Federal R e p u b lic of G e r m a n y , and of E n g l i s h s p e a k i n g residents of the N e t h e r l a n d s . In the European c o n t e x t , f i n a l l y , t h e r e is no research - in the period that we are reviewing in t h i s p a r t - c o n c e r n i n g categories 3 and 4. What research there is, is all of v e r y recent date. However, we must make a f u r t h e r comment in this connection (see also V a n Els 1986). It is - in a sense - not quite t r u e that there n e v e r was a n y second- or f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e loss research until v e r y r e c e n t l y , that until now what happened to f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y after i n s t r u c t i o n had been completed, was totally neglected. Important exceptions are the experimental studies of the 60s and 70s in which the effects of p a r t i c u l a r methods of teaching were measured. In these studies - most of them, it must be g r a n t e d , American and the best known of which were conducted by A s h e r (1969) on the Total P h y s i c a l Response - the l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y achieved by the learners was r e - t e s t e d after some time, be it u s u a l l y not more than 3 or 4 weeks after course completion (see Williamson 1982). However, t h e r e is also a fundamental difference between these studies and the f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e loss research that we are dealing with here. In methods studies r e s e a r c h e r s are not interested in the loss phenomenon as s u c h , but only in the retention of what was t a u g h t in the p r e c e d i n g language c o u r s e . No interest is e x h i b i t e d by the r e s e a r c h e r s in the nature of, nor in any explanations f o r , the loss s u s t a i n e d when they have to conclude that the results shown at f i r s t by the method(s) tested are, at least p a r t l y , s u p e r f i c i a l and o n l y t e m p o r a r y . However, even if

6

Van

these

studies

very

little

conducted has

also been

Even

if

not

into,

and

although

on

L1-loss

Ll-loss an

secondly, and

was

in t h e

varieties

first

major

still

papers

by

is

Dressier

investigation Ll-loss

in

an

loss

is,

of

LI-skills

of

is

Properly

learning

effects

still

period

lack

of

factors

of

European

-

the

the as

major

I see

develop-

it:

1 research

dialect

loss

2 research

(that

outweighs

(that

is,

on

(L2-loss

in loss,

in t h e s e

a matter

is,

of

in

can

of

the

in

done

by

De

Dutch

major

languages

to

intragen-

of

be

this

volume.

seen

from

-

example

and

also

by

Wolf-

Another

concerned

& Lintsen

in e l d e r l y

research

the

of c o u r s e ,

Great-Britain. Bot

pro-

factors.

for

volume

shift,

attrition

can,

as

intergen-

the

papers

as

papers, this

the

status

Reference

standard

fact,

language

in o r i e n t a t i o n

the

Trudgill in

much

and

in p s y c h o l o g i c a l

dialect

work

- that

the

reflected

Peter

very

explain

a change

specifically is t h e

and

was

death

to

& Hagen.

mentioned by

research

interest

in

Münstermann

LI-skills

language

to t y p e 3 research

language

been

clearly

and

the

on

contact

has

interest

on

of

f i e l d of

of t y p e

type

mainly

is

lively

the

part

amount

in p a r t i c u l a r

and a concomitant

as

there

significantly;

there

L1-environment, of

greater

-

as

Austria

the

in

representative

in w h i c h

such

and

research

devoted to

sociolinguistic

reported

the deterioration

proper, context.

retention

major d e v e l o p m e n t s ,

with

such work

in not

and

preceding

development

Hinskens

research European

which

is a c o n s i d e r a b l e

focussed

a very

be made to o t h e r gang

volume,

the attention

involved,

processes

loss the

indeed.

L1-environment)

oriented,

investigated,

in

certainly

has g r o w n

cesses

There

is

still

or the

The

this

there

concerned

erational

in part

L2-environment)

while

in

European

are two such

LI-environment)

erationally

rare

on-going

research,

in a n

studies,

There

in an

LI-loss

language found

RESEARCH

and

that

as be

are v e r y

represented

in t h e f i e l d .

is,

to

methods

recent

is,

- firstly,

regarded type

ON-COINC

all

is

endeavour

other

be

this

gone

AND

attrition ments

to

of

experimental

2. RECENT

-

were

work

Els

with

regarding people;

question

in

the their

project. The

paper

by

LI-environment, research able

in

To-date that

is

field

there

is

research

Davies, Olshtain,

dealing and

Bot

& Lintsen

testifying

of t y p e the

De

clearly

3.

A

of

Ll-loss

no on

to

considerable in

research L2-loss

with type Weltens

is

&

an in

in 2,

an and

Van

one

of

the

a growth

increase

of

of

that

we

L2-environment. of Els,

De all

Bot

papers

interest

research

L2-environment, Europe

five

that know

is of

with

L2-loss

language

activity

But the

& Lintsen,

dealing

in

on

in

is

2

belonging papers

Cohen, type

by

notice-

research. to

type

Boyd

Jordens 3

an

attrition

also

type

in

et

language

4, and al., loss

Overview

European

research,

are

Research

ample e v i d e n c e

has v e r y much grown

type

3

not

devoted

to

e a c h of

L2-loss

in

an

the

types

However, five

the

L2-loss

so

far

projects

the field

projects

to

workers

in t h e

context

of t h i s

of

be

different

ent migration texts, both

One

Dutch-Belgian Italian

and

the

somewhat

language

shift

as

which

project and

the amount

tongue

and

schools

conducted

(LMP

pupils' patterns yielded

(and of

language

a wealth

t h a t is in an

of

processes that

on the

language a

our this

in two c o u n t r i e s ,

and

there and

Turkish

paper

speakers

from

a

are two

other

migrant

p a r t of B e l g i u m ;

have

differ-

a n d social point

of

the

fact

thirdly, and

et

its f o c u s on t w o

linguistic

and,

in t h e

by Jaspaert

moreover

phenomenon

is

in

this

"the

on

the

local in

English in

language

conview, that

attrition

purpose

document of

and

four

Minorities 1985). in

large-scale and

around

Needless

to

mother

surveys

were

throughout

monolingual

school

them and their

say,

linguistic

The

England

community-run

"bilingual

of

(see L M P

linguistic diversity"

languages

L1-loss

Linguistic

1985

linguistic minorities

state

r a n g e of

individual

death. language

I mentioned

a n d to a n i n t e r e s t

follow.

papers

of

to

that

Italian

the

minorities

own

research in

as a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c

a t t r i t i o n r e s e a r c h in E u r o p e ,

all

death'

For

major d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t

a long

with

an

investigated.

( o p . cit. : 1 5 ) .

no n e e d to dwell f o r the

whose

which

on

in

come

noted

project are, f i r s t l y ,

LI-teaching

information

language

/ntrcrgenerational

focussed

has

be

the two d i f f e r e n t national

perceptions

use"

L1-loss

also

England,

L2-environment.

The second present-day

of

by

was concluded

b u t a l s o to

own

3

papers

research

institution.

methodological

conducted,

1985:14).

system,

adults')

type

should

of t y p e

of

not f i g u r e in t h e v o l u m e b u t w h i c h is o n e of t h e

in o r d e r to i n v e s t i g a t e

the educational

on

L2-environment

the

language use

range

of it

L2-environments;

1979 a n d

s e t o u t to e x p l o r e

conclude that

is c o n c e n t r a t e d

intergenerational

recently

s t a r t e d in

research

development

number

research

work

L1-loss

phenomenon are

investigations

the

Flemish-speaking

project

T h e o t h e r project that does Project,

on

secondly,

an

to

and

an

Netherlands,

alike

as

as an i n t r a g e n e r a t i o n a l

largest

is

in

and T u r k i s h ,

backgrounds;

are

other

S p e c i a l f e a t u r e s of t h i s

viz.

led

- in j u s t o n e

research

mentioned.

Belgium

though,

no

L1-loss

research work

From

outnumbers

N e t h e r l a n d s a n d in t h e

Li's,

be

in an L I - e n v i r o n m e n t

L1-loss

al. w a s c o n c e i v e d .

t h e a m o u n t of

volume.

represented,

in o n e of t h e s e - t h e N e t h e r l a n d s In

the

far

other than

in t h e c o n t e x t of t h e f i r s t

one might

LI-environment

L2-environment. r e s e a r c h on

in

in

years.

and that c o n c e r n s

represented

notice

than

interest

p o i n t to be r a i s e d

t h a t we a r e d i s c u s s i n g , and

that the

in E u r o p e in r e c e n t

T h e r e is o n e final 2

7

time o n t h i s Research processes

Research as

such

into is

in p s y c h o l o g i c a l f a c t o r s .

development

into of

main

which

L2-loss

attrition

Li-attrition the

f e a t u r e of

is a c h a n g e in o r i e n t a t i o n

is,

and

in w h i c h

object

of

is s o e v i d e n t

by

can

There

its

never the

very be

is

from

nature, concerned

disappearance

investigation,

to

has

or also

Van Els

8 become v e r y guages

and

rare.

The

dialects

has

attention shifted

of

researchers

from

the

systems i n v o l v e d to t h e changes in t h e actual ers,

either individually

interested

structural

in

changes

minority

in t h e

lan-

linguistic

use of t h e language b y its speak-

o r as g r o u p s , both f r o m a s t r u c t u r a l

and a communica-

t i v e p o i n t of v i e w . T h e recency of t h i s major change in o r i e n t a t i o n also e x p l a i n s w h y in t h i s f i e l d of research - w h i c h o r i g i n a l l y was almost e x c l u s i v e l y

linguistic

in

-

so

methodology,

a

fact

papers of t h i s volume t h a n t h e ones s p e c i f i c a l l y

deal-

character,

attention

is

but

now

still

devoted

has

w e l l - a t t e s t e d also in o t h e r

become m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r y to

matters

of

of

research

necessity

much

ing w i t h such q u e s t i o n s .

3. ASPECTS

OF AND FUTURE

From o u r s u r v e y growing

so f a r

interest

PLANS

it will

in t h i s f i e l d

of

FOR ATTRITION

have become e v i d e n t research,

RESEARCH that,

even

we have o n l y j u s t

if

now

t h e r e is a begun,

in

p a r t i c u l a r w i t h r e g a r d to research of t y p e s 2, 3 and 4. As a m a t t e r of f a c t , we have not even been able to mention one research

p r o j e c t of t y p e 4,

research on t h e loss of L2 in an L 2 - e n v i r o n m e n t .

B u t t h e o t h e r areas t o o ,

is

of

research

LI-environment of

applied

mention

on

LI-loss

in

an

L2-environment

( : t y p e s 2 and 3 r e s p e c t i v e l y ) ,

linguists

very

of language

recently.

attrition

less c o m p r e h e n s i v e ,

I t may

research

on

L2-loss

have o n l y come to t h e

is to be f o u n d y e t

in

Some general

that

no

more

or

such as S t e r n

f i r s t , to d i s c u s s a n u m b e r of aspects of

r e l a t i n g to language a t t r i t i o n

research;

second,

to

wind

plans.

aspects

Let us s t a r t t h e n b y d i s c u s s i n g , o r less general

an

attention

recent,

up b y p u t t i n g f o r w a r d a number of ideas c o n c e r n i n g new research 3.1.

that

(1984).

What I i n t e n d t o do in t h i s section is: nature

is of in

be said to be s i g n i f i c a n t

handbooks in t h e f i e l d of a p p l i e d l i n g u i s t i c s ,

(1983) o r Van Els et al.

a more general

and

that

nature, which

b r i e f l y , a small n u m b e r of aspects of a more

- it s h o u l d be added - have all p r i m a r i l y

in t h e c o n t e x t of f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e loss (see also Van Els 1986); t h e i r

arisen

undoubted

relevance f o r t h e o t h e r areas of research will not be s p e l t o u t . (a)

T h e r e is an i m p o r t a n t p o i n t to keep in mind when d e f i n i n g language tion,

which

has t o do w i t h

its

relation

to

language

acquisition,

p a r t i c u l a r w i t h t h e stages of so-called i n t e r l a n g u a g e m a n i f e s t i n g in

the

process

(1982:84-85)

of

and

acquisition. the

The

essence of

it

point is

was

first

also d i s c u s s e d

raised

by

attri-

more

in

themselves Andersen

extensively

in

the

rview

European

paper

by

Jaspaert

Andersen, stage

X

Research

a n d of

pretation

of t h e

bly

in

the

surface of

so

fossilization

learning the

think,

is

partly

learning

process be

has

observation

occur

at

- or,

rather,

defining

one's

baseline

loss,

occur

in

There

to

one

a

language

point

issue

at

be

from

in

of is

assessments

that

at one

observations and

the

of a t t r i t i o n

and

observation

concerns

to

acquisition

obser-

or

imperfect

errors

during Another,

language

loss

may

competence; degrees

loss

does

made

on

acquisition

language

may

the

in

of

lan-

not

only

time.

be

language

resulting

was

1978).

of

language

who which

fossilization;

of

of f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e for

competent

research

whether

that

an

inter-

similar

of

incomplete

is

of

considera-

in

A

correction

mind

further

case

& Lamendella

all s t a g e s

both

individual

the

Selinker

comparison keep

an

to

particular

differ

phenomenon

connection

a

interlanguage

insufficient

in t h i s

-

of

attrition

here

two processes

made

the

may well

as

according

resultant

completed.

the

regarded

who were fully

number

between

by

the

from

been

regarding been

about

should

individuals

are

not yet

X)

loss,

acquire':

concerns

stage

(see especially

final,

guage

only

brought

process

has

made

be

stage X

(which at

to

therefore,

of t h a t

loss

he

language

failure may

process;

features

can

True

from

competence

than

acquisition we

volume.

language

competent

vation, far

in t h i s

distinguished

an a c q u i s i t i o n

case

more

intended

be

foreign-language

attrition

once

et al.

should

of

9

the

relation

research.

proficiencies

be e x p e c t e d

The

of

to be v e r y

the much

alike. (i) of

The

first

language

language the

loss

are

typically

acquisition

negative.

For,

research. as

in f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e language types

are

indications be

whatsoever

operative

research. in

error

Cohen

in

Just

in are

finds

competence, exhibited

that

the case

is

as

errors

errors

- for

acquisition.

such when

his

come

when are

that these

certain

other

loss.

with

altogether

subjects

-

when "new

the

than

he

their

previous

competence

or other

- they

have

foreign-

also

no

starts not

error

been

no

have

been

found

to

to

show

up

of

error

Thus, losing not

- only in

when second

that

they

referring to

down,

the

to

learning;

begin

to b r e a k made

loss found

even

patterns" is

in

their

second-language

unexpectedly

some r e a s o n

when

in

occur

have

sources

incorrect of

that may

are

transfer.

language,

from is

there

likely

gradually

untypical

rather

there

major

interlingual

learning

errors

errors

known mainly,

themselves

sources are

are

question,

of

and

the

possibly,

that

Moreover,

learning,

subjects, up

that

manifest

error

and

whether,

errors

to

down,

research,

intra-

that

have errors

that

from

all t y p e s

also

break

language

learning

language not

know,

foreign-language as

research

(1975)

to

to

question

answer

may

starts

unique

The

as w e

learning

competence

that

far

the

different

make which

process

of

Van The

reason

occurs, which

is

why

not

language

may w e l l errors haps

a phenomenon

known

as y e t .

attrition

be t h a t

to occur

the

l i k e t h e one o b s e r v e d

But,

errors

i t may

differ from

particular

language

circumstances

in a d i s t i n c t i v e p a t t e r n .

the errors

point to at

acquisition

language

As Dorian

(1975)

attrition

(1982:57)

in

errors.

It

cause

says:

"Pertoo

( t h a t i s , arise f r o m p r o p e r t i e s of t h e

language being forgotten or from

the

s t r u c t u r e a n d o r d e r of t h e f o r g e t t i n g

process

sources and the

from

those

found

in

s t r a t e g i e s of

performance

(ii)

Typical also

attention

the

by

Cohen

phenomenon

resumed

usage

after

learners

gests

-

period

and of

may t h e n

"digest"

material

with

cope

that

he

-

by

just

non-use.

been

that

in

some

areas

loss

in o t h e r

text

of

of

foreign-language

areas

could well

foreign-language

interlanguage patterns

(iii)

Our

third

loss

that

in l a n g u a g e

observation

phrases

and

other

elements

down

(see H a n s e n 1980,

"I sure strike

when

social

do" and the

ear

usage w h i c h ,

kinda

quite

in o t h e r

out

the

foreign-lanthe

they

may

respects,

-

with

-

all

the

the

have

in

of

resort

usage.

sug-

Also,

opportunity

a to

foreign-language so t h a t

Residual

combination

a very

loss to

so C o h e n

instruction,

patterns

"some

learning

with

actual

in t h e

interesting

fact

that

are

not

foreign-language & Olshtain place has

particular

native' flavour

-,

hot" sound of

the

way

confrom

acquisition.

fillers'

Berman

learn-

up d u r i n g

and

less a d v a n c e d

in

a

previous

that

can t a k e p l a c e .

differ

our

learning', of

Residual

showing

in i n t e r l a n g u a g e

concerns

a person's

"It's as

notice

loss

to

case

be

guage elements w h i c h even have a s t r o n g idiomatic

deviate

brought

residual

the

competence

result

foreign-

to

competence

during

s o r t of u n l e a r n i n g of i n c o r r e c t p a t t e r n s " in

is

the

learner

may to

factors

acquisition.

as

strategies,

the

exposed

different

new

concrete

1982:158).

In

reduced

provide

of

system

use of t h e f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e

whatever

has

him

escaped

make f e w e r e r r o r s

may

the

that

learning only

linguistic

about the

non-use

properly

of

to

are not

if t h e

c o n t e x t of f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e

1987; see also V a l d m a n in a d d i t i o n a l

more complex

new h y p o t h e s e s

to

completely

So, e v e n

number

cause

phenomenon

referred

a period

have

a

interlanguage

in t h e

another

not

consists

k n o w l e d g e of to

had

(see W e l t e n s

basically,

guage

of

(1975),

which

researchers ing,

result

...".

into foreign-language

interlanguage patterns

be

may

underlying

from those known from research

may

learning,

loss w h i c h

and the

itself)

l a n g u a g e use a p p l i e d

foreign-language

i n t e r v e n e in f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e language

language

Cohen

least o n e a s p e c t

h a v e a l o g i c of t h e i r o w n

error

in a h a l f - f o r g o t t e n

of

by

Els

1983).

lost

the

same is

native-like, of

badly.

idioms, rate

as

breaking

Because phrases

context

deteriorated

- s u c h as the

competence

so g e n u i n e l y in

at

foreign-lan-

s u c h as

they

may

foreign-language Apparently

they

Overview

European

Research

11

are so ' d e e p l y

entrenched through

the original

man & O l s h t a i n

1983:233) that they

t e n d to be u s e d

quently.

formulaic e x p r e s s i o n s

Thus,

interlanguage that ensues use.

In

claim the

this

context

upon

Hansen

in

foreign-language

The order

in w h i c h

tence are

lost,

is t h e m i r r o r of

sequence aphasie

of c h i l d loss,

is

which

on

The

When

elements

even

s k i l l s in t h e

hand,

is

one very

similar

for

resemble

different

Such

any

lose t h e i r

of

in t h e

they

be

retained

(Andersen project

see

that,

of t h e r e g r e s s i o n

very

recently,

theory

are

a

or on

hypothesized, acquisition

the

that time

they

acquired "and

1982:97).

It is

started

investigated specifically

are

being,

longest

was

the

learners

learners

(see

in

that very which

Jordens

volume).

S o f a r no

r e s e a r c h seems to h a v e a d d r e s s e d t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r

linguistic

levels

of t h e

sub-skills

in

same

the

in

themselves

is t h a t w h a t is a c t u a l l y

will

in

would

language.

also,

For

field

acquisition

be

and,

acquisition.

in

foreign-lan-

other

could only

backgrounds

t h e o r y c a n claim learning

with

of f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e

of f i r s t - l a n g u a g e

few

proficiency

first-language found

the the

the o r d e r

loss,

in w h i c h

gratifying et a l . , t h i s

more

in

order

l a n g u a g e as a f i r s t

a link

that orders

foreign-language to

inverse

concerning

w h a t is a c q u i r e d latest will be lost e a r l i e s t " aspects

(d)

order

first-language

orders

t h e most t h a t r e g r e s s i o n in

in

in loss

that

w o u l d seem to be t h a t

acquisition

this

that

claim

in f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e

inverse order

and

unlikely.

c o u l d be f o u n d

closely earliest

researchers

learners

compeof

developed

(1941)

hand,

the

foreign-language

if e v i d e n c e

was f i r s t

states

l i n k b e t w e e n a p a r t i c u l a r s e q u e n c e of

of

are

been p r o p o s e d

A direct

on

they

language

which

reproduced

to b e g i n w i t h

loss

the other

is

by many

order

out

function,

why

of t h e p a p e r s

that has

theory,

t h a t c h i l d r e n a c q u i r e t h e same

lose f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e guage

several

Jakobson s

are affected

But, a reasonable hypothesis a c q u i r e d them.

Their

explain

it comes to h y p o t h e s e s

w a n t to u p h o l d t h a t f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e inverse order

In

theory

but

acquisition

not a d v o c a t e d loss.

linguistic

may

"regression"

aphasia,

language

non(1976)

in.

image of a c q u i s i t i o n .

research

of p a t h o l o g i c a l

they are a c q u i r i n g " .

debated issue.

the so-called

by

Fillmore's

b a s i s f o r l e a r n e r s to s o r t

is made to a p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r y

connection,

context

to W o n g

e l e m e n t s of t h e o n c e a c q u i r e d f o r e i g n

is a h o t l y

volume reference this

refers

acquisition

r e t a i n e d so well w h e n a t t r i t i o n s e t s

fre-

i m p o r t a n t p a r t in t h e k i n d of

provide the

r u l e s a n d f o r m s of t h e l a n g u a g e

(Ber-

disproportionately

d e t e r i o r a t i o n of c o m p e t e n c e c a u s e d (1980:181)

'that formulaic e x p r e s s i o n s

therefore,

(c)

play an

learning experience"

way

(phonology,

morphology,

of s p e a k i n g , by

attrition

syntax

and

lexicon)

listening,

writing

and

reading

processes

(Weltens

1987).

In

different

within are the

each

affected research

Van project

reported

indication t h a t petence There

of

on

Dutch

is also

Weltens

speakers

& Van

before

some e v i d e n c e

linguistic levels. part,

by

Els

non-use a f f e c t s t h e specific

in

this

volume

linguistic

attrition

of d i f f e r e n t i a l

shows rates

in

of

r a t e and d e g r e e of loss on t h e phonological level

(see Weltens

f i r s t aspects of f o r e i g n

1987).

It

has

have

only

actually

been

lost.

made r e f e r e n c e

areas of d i s c o u r s e . Andersen

Finally,

to

the

h a v e been that

to be affected

various

acquired: the

one of

may be

even if t h e s e items

loss

be

noted

in t h e

the

speed

themselves

that

so f a r

traditional

In p a r t i c u l a r t h e level of " d o i n g t h i n g s with

recognized f o r

some time, of c o u r s e ,

is t h e k i n d of

g u a g e l e a r n i n g - t h e kind of

we

linguistic language",

may well t u r n out to be t h e most important.

No r e s e a r c h c o n c e r n i n g loss of d i s c o u r s e can be r e p o r t e d , It has been

skills.

level will be less t h a n on

it should

differential

(1982:84-85) t h i n k s ,

to a f f e c t loss,

some

Reduction of f l u e n c y will follow, w h e n , f o r exam-

p l e , access to lexical items is slowed d o w n , not

global

loss f o r

been s u g g e s t e d

language competence

of f l u e n c y of p r o d u c t i o n . have

the

is

F r e n c h com-

L a n g u a g e skills in w h i c h automated processes play a major

a r e likely to be less s u b j e c t to loss once t h e y

lexical

there

levels of

Els

input,

that

however.

t h a t what

is most

is - in t h e case of

likely

foreign-lan-

instruction that the learners have

undergone.

A l t h o u g h t h e r e h a v e been claims, t h e r e is no empirical e v i d e n c e to s u p p o r t any

specific claim as to t h e g r e a t e r

particular

teaching

methods.

The

methods t h a t we h a v e

referred

have yielded

findings.

no such

t h a t methods in w h i c h as

in

for

slowly

example

but

durable

that

the

the

than that

to a b o v e One

of

on

competence a c q u i r e d

foreign-language

(summarized by Williamson

of t h e

claims t h a t

grammar-translation

competence

acquired

learnt

through

is l a c k i n g ,

method,

has been

through

direct

may

them

methods.

is

1982), made is

perhaps more

place, proceed

stable

W h e r e empirical

an argument could possibly

such a h y p o t h e s i s on t h e basis of f i n d i n g s

by

teaching

explicit t e a c h i n g of s t r u c t u r a l f e a t u r e s t a k e s

d e n c e for t h i s assumption for

durability studies

and evi-

be made

concerning the v e r y

rapid

a n d a p p a r e n t l y total loss of competence a c q u i r e d u n d e r t h e n a t u r a l circumstances ever,

characteristic

of

second-language

learning

(Hansen

1980).

How-

it should be pointed out t h a t all t h e empirical e v i d e n c e on rapid sec-

ond-language

loss,

so f a r ,

concerns

be t h a t age is t h e main f a c t o r . on 14 Dutch c h i l d r e n , a prolonged correlation

aged 5 to 8 y e a r s ,

stay in North-America was

found

between

than the younger

children, by

vocabulary

( A e r t s s e n et al.

1985).

volume.

a significant

and

t h e older c h i l d r e n

a r e r e p o r t e d in O l s h t a i n ' s p a p e r in t h i s

so it may some of our

very

age:

during negative

even

within

p r o v e d to retain Comparable

well

students

who had a c q u i r e d E n g l i s h

(8 to 15 m o n t h s ) ,

loss of

t h e small a g e - r a n g e of t h e s t u d y vocabulary

young

In a pilot s t u d y

more

findings

O v e r v i e w European 3.2.

New

Research

13

research

From the

preceding

survey

and d i s c u s s i o n

of language

loss

research

in the

European context the conclusion may safely be drawn that a general increase in the amount of research is d e s p e r a t e l y needed and that in the European

context

t h e r e is a special need for an expansion of research activities in p a r t i c u l a r of t y p e s 2, 3 and 4. However, what I would like to do in this final p a r a g r a p h , not so much plead for a q u a n t i t a t i v e growth of research forward

a small

number

of ideas

concerning

research

as s u c h ,

topics,

is

but to put

or themes,

or

a p p r o a c h e s , that I t h i n k d e s e r v e our attention in the near f u t u r e (see also V a n Els 1986).

One or two of the developments that I will draw attention to,

have

already been p r e p a r e d or hinted at in student pilot w o r k . (a)

T h e w o r k that J o r d e n s et al. report on in t h i s volume c r o s s e s boundaries in a v e r y interesting w a y . A s a matter of f a c t , f o u r t y p e s of l a n g u a g e b e h a v i o u r are compared: the acquisition and the loss of German are i n v e s t i g a t e d , both from the point of view of f i r s t - l a n g u a g e and from the point of view of f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e l e a r n e r s . Fundamental theoretical i s s u e s , like the r e g r e s s i o n hypothesis tested in t h i s p a r t i c u l a r project, may well be approached most f r u i t f u l l y by looking at them from two or more angles at the same time. In that w a y , for example, a p r o p e r assessment may be made of the effect that the w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d d i f f e r e n c e s in rate of loss between f i r s t - , second- and f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e attrition have on a meaningful interpretation of the r e g r e s s i o n h y p o t h e s i s .

(b)

A phenomenon t h a t , so f a r , has h a r d l y received any attention from lang u a g e attrition r e s e a r c h e r s is the influence of l e a r n i n g , simultaneously or s u c c e s s i v e l y , related f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e s (see Weltens 1987). T h e question w h e t h e r , if two or more f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e s have to be learned b y a g r o u p of p u p i l s , the l a n g u a g e s in question should be t a u g h t either simultaneously or s u c c e s s i v e l y a n d , if the latter, in what p a r t i c u l a r o r d e r , has - of c o u r s e - r e g u l a r l y been pondered by c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n e r s . In that connection it has been pointed out that the p r e v i o u s learning of French is likely to have a positive t r a n s f e r on the s u b s e q u e n t learning of Italian or S p a n ish by Dutch learners (see V a n Els et al. 1984:165). New light on this issue may well be shed by an investigation of the effect of instructional sequence on the loss of f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e s . Even if we should not e x p e c t to f i n d confirmation of the v e r y specific assumption that has been made on the basis of aphasia studies - that the language learned last should be affected most s e r i o u s l y and should recover slowest, it is not improbable that d i f f e r e n t instructional sequences have d i f f e r e n t consequences for retention and r e c o v e r y (see also V a n Els 1986).

V a n Els

14

(c)

Another of

i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t of t h e f i e l d t h a t

much

empirical

general

research,

question

is

not

is

so

re-learning

much

whether

a c q u i r e d is e v e r lost c o m p l e t e l y , degree

-

that the ther

the

re-learning

but rather

of w h a t

has

l e a r n e r has g o n e t h r o u g h

question

of

guage teaching,

so f a r

the

some i m p o r t a n c e ,

language

lost

certainly

Most

scholars

however,

it

re-learning concern

have

the

that

only

the is

facilitated

loss

with

specifically

to the

than

is

methods

possible

studies,

when

learning,

there

it comes t o

or

possible

research

plan

the

that

is

plan j u s t

guage a t t r i t i o n used study

for

research

measuring

at o u r

against

(Verkaik

viz. cases

also have been

a

wide

variety

the effects

owing

to

of of

may

non-use, Basically,

variables

are

fully

addresses

the

research re-training

has the

way,

actual £· V a n

viz.

in t h e

language

der Wijst

1986)

In

re-trainit can

in w h i c h

controlled. re-training

experimental

loss.

deterio-

but

r e f e r r e d t o also e x e m p l i f i e s a new a p p r o a c h

of

because

loss,

in q u e s t i o n

laboratory-like setting

which

in a n o t h e r

re-

over-hasty

language

the children

is

pattern

not o n l y

u n a l t e r e d classroom s i t u a t i o n ,

k n o w of

Han-

also t h a t

a p p r o a c h e s i t m a i n l y in a l a b o r a t o r y - l i k e

degrees

university

the

(2)

at least p a r t l y ,

also

that,

intervening I

(see t h e f o l l o w i n g p o i n t ) ,

and

general.

in an e x p e r i m e n t a l

of

less,

but

loss

in g e n e r a l

also because in t h e

investigating

competence

and they

negation.

(1980)

however,

but

grown older,

in t h e n o r m a l ,

also be a d m i n i s t e r e d

The research

lim-

language

issue

warning

for,

r a t e d o r has - t o all a p p e a r a n c e s - been f u l l y l o s t . i n g can t a k e place

(d)

disserare

viz.

a s p e c t of

more

A

called

learning may,

having

the foreign-language

only

of

such,

also b e c a u s e

structure,

language,

learning.

findings

but

re-learning

resembles,

have d e v e l o p e d i n t o b e t t e r l e a r n e r s in

as

pre-

As

studies

i n d e e d . What A l l e n d o r f f

regard

s t u d i e d t h e g a i n in speed of

many

fur-

have,

issue.

Both

cases,

important

l e a r n i n g of t h e

faster

d u e t o t h e age f a c t o r :

of

fact

A

in t w o d o c t o r a l

(1980).

grammatical very

pattern

the first

(much)

one

s c a n t data

from these

with

the

foreign-lan-

research,

re-learning

n u m b e r of

in t h e c o n t e x t of s e c o n d - l a n g u a g e

As

by

way.

t h e t w o s t u d i e s w e r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h o n l y one area of

designs

to what

experience before.

in

the

Hansen

into this

re-learning

developed d u r i n g learning

with

therefore,

have f o u n d

conclusions

of

and

restricted

are d e r i v e d from v e r y (1)

if so,

not o n l y in t h a t t h e y f o c u s on s e c o n d - l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g

themselves

(1980)

once

in t h e c o n t e x t of

engaged

investigated

(1980)

in a v e r y

insights,

sen

been

importance

Aliendorff

i t e d in s c o p e ,

Our

who

has been o n l y

viz.

The

competence

is also w h e t h e r p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t s a n d f e a t u r e s of t h e

recognized

tations,

subject

competence.

- and,

is

learning

v i o u s l e a r n i n g e x p e r i e n c e m a t t e r in some special

course,

lost

whether

been

the

has not been t h e of

a

issue

fashion.

to lanmethod

student

not o n l y

as The

was

pilot the

Overview

European

impact

of n o n - u s e

learners

-,

retrieval

but

with

project

(De

also

the

gotten,

but

factors

that

to

a part

in

My f i n a l

Cohen's

need was

man v o c a b u l a r y

under the

(see

that the first the

second

lary

new r e s e a r c h

there

pointed

can

be

that,

in g e n e r a l ,

ables

will

important

learners

seem t o

was

et a l .

of

countries such

will

be p r o b e d . variables

establishing

h a v e been of t h e

are

to

for-

various are

affected

has t o d o w i t h t h e

t h e f i e l d of

by

the

the

same

1985).

In t h e

it

is

Britain,

loss of

French

results

and

were

after

study

15*0.

In t h e

we

the

found

German

15% loss of

after the second. be d o n e b e f o r e It

has

as

cases years

in of

the different Dutch,

already

hand,

instruction

French i.e.

study

vocabu-

Further,

and

conflicting

been

suggested

as

USA,

of)

obtain

hand and

of the

interferbetween the

two

1986).

(see W e l t e n s

Germany,

age of

the important

loss a f r u i t f u l o p e n i n g

(one

vari-

a number

and

relations that

in r e p l i c a t i n g

French,

in

such

where

on t h e one

(see V a n Els

be f o u n d

the

had Ger-

b e t w e e n p e r i o d of n o n - u s e a n d o t h e r In t h e

learners,

taught

had

t h e loss of

year

in

dealt

r e s u l t in a n y loss at a l l , w h e r e a s

have to

such

language,

t h a t we d i d

conflicting

first

attri-

one of w h i c h

investigated very

in

need

language

s e c o n d a r y school p u p i l s who

h a v e been p r o p e r l y c o n t r o l l e d f o r ,

might

where

visual

is n o t j u s t

some p i l o t w o r k

satisfactorily.

may w e l l h a v e been

as G r e a t

in

and none w h a t s o e v e r

l a n g u a g e s on t h e o t h e r

the

-

student studies,

an a v e r a g e

research

loss of s e c o n d a r y s c h o o l loss

first

research

as t h e ones t h a t

in e x a c t l y t h e o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n :

l a n g u a g e of

comparisons

lexical

The

new

which

such

volume

in

circumstances,

In t h e f i e l d of f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e tic

task.

the

moreover,

directions

vocabulary

the interaction

possibly

foreign

of

explained

have to

ing variable

of

r e l i a n c e on t h e

detail -

this

also

Two

by Dutch

similar

loss

in t h e f i r s t y e a r

the first

loss.

Schumans

more s o p h i s t i c a t e d , outcomes

in

a global sense,

greater

y e a r of n o n - u s e d i d n o t

year

the findings

aim,

a n d t h e o t h e r of w h i c h

obtained

year

in

demonstrated clearly

f o u r y e a r s of F r e n c h ,

second

that

p r o j e c t is aimed at

a word'

comparisons,

w i t h t h e loss of v o c a b u l a r y

to

decision

such

the

to

speed

Dutch

see t h i s

degree.

t h e a r e a of f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e

as

much

knowing

£• V a n E l s ,

the

w i l l be f u l l

attrition as s u c h ,

p r o f i c i e n c y of

on

lexical

been

contribution

cross-linguistic

The

a visual

have

into

in

point concerning

more

established

In as f a r as t h e

investigate

French

as in W e l t e n s

1986) t h e r e

l e x i c a l items

play

just

was

in

approach

foreign-language

a t t r i t i o n to what

tion.

measured

new

out whether

for

impact

decision paradigm.

distinguished

(e)

its

B o t £· S c h r e u d e r

d e g r e e of

find

i n v e s t i g a t e d on t h e g e n e r a l

processes,

results

lexical

15

- measured b y a cloze t e s t ,

volume

the

Research

the

Dutch

& Van Els,

might the and

be

to

cross-linguis-

research

into

this volume).

investigated

in

the The

other

major

foreign

language(s),

(any

of) the

Scandinavian

16

V a n Els countries,

so that t h e effect

of d i f f e r e n t

first-language

losing one p a r t i c u l a r f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e might be s t u d i e d . ent f i r s t - l a n g u a g e b a c k g r o u n d s all

Germanic

in

origin,

have in common

whereas

the

foreign

backgrounds

is t h a t the l a n g u a g e s language

in

the loss

Romanic

language

of as

English

as

their

first

a foreign language,

language such

in

as

countries

France

is

inveswith

and

a

Spain,

w h e r e E n g l i s h is t a u g h t as (one of) the major f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e ( s ) in ondary

are

question

Romanic. T h i s c r o s s - l i n g u i s t i c comparison could be complemented b y tigating

on

What t h e s e d i f f e r -

sec-

education.

C r o s s - l i n g u i s t i c comparisons c o u l d ,

of c o u r s e ,

r e g a r d to L I - l o s s in an L 2 - e n v i r o n m e n t ,

also be u n d e r t a k e n

the second t y p e of l a n g u a g e

with loss

t h a t we have d i s t i n g u i s h e d . T h e r e is the w e l l - k n o w n project f u n d e d by the E u r o p e a n S c i e n c e Foundation c o n c e r n i n g the " S e c o n d L a n g u a g e by A d u l t Immigrants"

in W e s t e r n - E u r o p e

similar

international

project on an

(see P e r d u e 1982).

b a s i s to i n v e s t i g a t e the

Acquisition

S e t t i n g up a first-language

loss of the same g r o u p s of m i g r a n t w o r k e r s whose s e c o n d - l a n g u a g e tion is i n v e s t i g a t e d ,

acquisi-

c r o s s - n a t i o n a l l y a n d c r o s s - l i n g u i s t i c a l l y , might well be

considered. These concluding

r e m a r k s c o n c e r n i n g new d i r e c t i o n s f o r f u t u r e l a n g u a g e

tion r e s e a r c h h a v e , of n e c e s s i t y , been v e r y about o t h e r areas of n a t u r a l

language

limited.

loss t h a n the area of

loss to w h i c h I h a v e mainly r e s t r i c t e d m y s e l f . on

natural

language

loss,

the

reader

will

r e g a r d i n g the field of " p a t h o l o g i c a l " a t t r i t i o n .

attri-

More could h a v e been said foreign-language

S i n c e the f o c u s of the volume is not

have

T h e r e is,

expected

observations

h o w e v e r , one o b s e r v a -

tion that needs to be made in t h a t c o n n e c t i o n , w h i c h is t h a t t h e r e is a need f o r l i n k i n g up o u r field of n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e attrition with the other f i e l d , when the e x p l a n a t o r y

especially

power of theories developed f o r o u r f i e l d r e q u i r e s f u r t h e r

underpinning.

REFERENCES A e r t s s e n , J . , M. v a n de B e r g , verlies:

Verlies

van

R.

Buursen & T .

het E n g e l s

bij

Claassen (1985),

Nederlandse

kinderen.

Tweede-taalUnpublished

p a p e r U n i v e r s i t y of Nijmegen. Allendorff,

S.

(1980), Wiedererwerb einer Z w e i t s p r a c h e , d a r g e s t e l l t am Beispiel

der englischen Negation. Andersen,

R.

(1982), Determining the l i n g u i s t i c a t t r i b u t e s of l a n g u a g e a t t r i t i o n .

In: R . Lambert & B . Asher,

J.

(1969),

of Special

D i s s . U n i v e r s i t y of K i e l .

Freed ( e d s . ) ,

T h e total p h y s i c a l

Education

3:253-262.

83-118.

r e s p o n s e t e c h n i q u e of l e a r n i n g .

Journal

Overview European Berman, R.

Research

& E. Olshtain

language attrition. Cohen,

A.

(1975),

17

( 1 9 8 3 ) , F e a t u r e s of f i r s t l a n g u a g e t r a n s f e r in second

Applied

Linguistics

Forgetting

a

4:222-234.

second

language.

Language

Learning

25:127-138. De B o t , Κ . & R . S c h r e u d e r ( 1 9 8 6 ) , L a n g u a g e loss and l a n g u a g e r e c o v e r y : ical s k i l l s in F r e n c h as a f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e . Dutch Linguistics

Foundation.

De B o t , Κ . & Β . Weltens (1985), Handelingen Dorian,

Ν.

Language

Beschrijven versus verklaren.

Filologencongres,

loss and maintenance

In: R . Lambert & B .

Hansen, L.

Freed ( e d s . ) ,

In:

51-61.

in

l a n g u a g e contact

situ-

44-59.

( 1 9 8 0 ) , L e a r n i n g and f o r g e t t i n g a second l a n g u a g e : T h e a c q u i s i t i o n ,

loss and

re-acquisition

speaking children. Haugen,

Taalverlies:

van het 38e Nederlands

(1982),

ations.

Lex-

R e s e a r c h plan submitted to the

E.,

J.

today.

McClure

Edinburgh:

Jakobson,

R.

of

Diss.

(1941),

Hindu-Urdu

negative

structures

by

English-

U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a at B e r k e l e y .

& D.

Thompson

University

(eds.)

(1981),

Minority

languages

Press.

Kindersprache,

Aphasie

und

allgemeine

Lautgesetze.

U p p s a l a : A l m q u i s t & Wikseil. Lambert,

R.

& B.

Freed ( e d s . )

Mass.: Newbury Linguistic

Minorities

London: Perdue,

(ed.)

(1982),

manual.

Schumans, J . ,

The

(LMP)

keln

Second

Strasbourg:

(1985),

The

University A.

school

language

Lamendella ( 1 9 7 8 ) ,

acquisition

T.,

(1984), guages. Verkaik,

P.

by

Toegepaste

Studies

concepts

Language foreign

England.

adult

immigrants.

A

Taalwetenschap

in

Arti-

Bulletin

of language

in i n t e r -

3:143-191. teaching.

Oxford:

Oxford

(1986), T.

attrition language

and

the

administration

instruction.

In:

R.

of

secondary

Lambert

& B.

155-175. Errors

and f o r e i g n

F r e u d e n s t e i n ( e d . ) , Errors Van Els,

of

T w o p e r s p e c t i v e s on f o s s i l i z a t i o n

Interlanguage

and college

T.

languages

Press.

(1982),

Freed ( e d s . ) , Van Els,

other

European Science Foundation.

H . ( 1 9 8 3 ) , Fundamental

Valdman,

Rowley,

23:81-89.

& T.

language learning. Stern,

skills.

C . v a n Os & B . Weltens (1985), V o c a b u l a i r e k e n n i s in de vreemde

no. L.

of language

Paul.

taal na b e ë i n d i g i n g v a n het o n d e r w i j s . Selinker,

loss

House. Project

Routledge & Kegan

C.

field

(1982),

Bongaerts,

Applied

linguistics

in foreign G.

Extra, and

the

language

loss.

language

learning

C.

van

learning

Os and

& A.

Forthcoming and

in:

Janssen-van

teaching

R.

teaching. of foreign

Dieten lan-

London: Edward Arnold. & P. v a n d e r Wijst ( 1 9 8 6 ) ,

T a a l v e r l i e s en w o o r d h e r k e n n i n g

in het

F r a n s als vreemde taal. M . A . t h e s i s U n i v e r s i t y of Nijmegen. Weltens,

Β.

(1987),

The

attrition

of

foreign

language

skills:

A

literature

18

Van Els

review. Forthcoming in: Applied Linguistics 8. Williamson, S . (1982), Summary chart of f i n d i n g s from previous research on language loss. In: R . Lambert & B. Freed ( e d s . ) , 207-223. Wong Fillmore, L. (1976), T h e second time around: Cognitive and social strategies in second language acquisition. Diss. Stanford U n i v e r s i t y .

Issues in the Analysis of Language Loss: Methodology of the Language Skills Attrition Project Ralph B. Ginsberg University of Pennsylvania

1.

INTRODUCTION

In t h i s p a p e r I d i s c u s s the methodology of the L a n g u a g e S k i l l s A t t r i t i o n (LSAP),

Project

e m p h a s i z i n g the connections between the s u b s t a n t i v e i s s u e s we want to

a d d r e s s a n d the s t a t i s t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s we shall employ in doing so. T h e motivation of the project and the s p e c i f i c s of the data collection effort a r e d i s c u s s e d more f u l l y in the p a p e r b y my colleagues R i c h a r d Lambert and S a r a h J a n e Moore ( L a m b e r t & Moore, t h i s

volume).

My c o n c e r n here is with the rationale of the

a n a l y t i c a l s t r a t e g y . A l t h o u g h I f o c u s on t h i s one p r o j e c t , the problems of i n t e r pretation and i n f e r e n c e t h a t I s h a l l d i s c u s s a r i s e q u i t e g e n e r a l l y in the s t u d i e s of l a n g u a g e loss - indeed t h e y a r e endemic to most i n t e r e s t i n g

non-experimental

s t u d i e s of c h a n g e in the social and b e h a v i o r a l s c i e n c e s . A s will be a p p a r e n t in the s e q u e l ,

however,

the r a n g e of methods reviewed relate to special f e a t u r e s

of the L S A P d a t a b a s e w h i c h d i s t i n g u i s h it from many s t u d i e s in applied l i n g u i s tics, viz.

e x t e n s i v e and detailed d i a g n o s t i c t e s t s in t h r e e l a n g u a g e s , the meas-

urement of a wide r a n g e of f a c t o r s related to a t t r i t i o n , and the a v a i l a b i l i t y of a l a r g e e n o u g h sample of s u b j e c t s

( p e r h a p s two h u n d r e d p e r l a n g u a g e ) to a p p l y

r e l a t i v e l y elaborate s t a t i s t i c a l methods in modelling the n a t u r e and of

the

attrition

process.

Correlatively

we

are

trying

to

test

h y p o t h e s e s t h a n can be a d d r e s s e d b y simpler data s t r u c t u r e s , d i s c u s s e d b u t seldom a d d r e s s e d e m p i r i c a l l y . play between q u e s t i o n s ,

determinants more

complex

h y p o t h e s e s often

Be t h a t as it may,

it is the

inter-

d a t a , and methods t h a t motivates the p a p e r and hope-

f u l l y will make it u s e f u l to o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s , w h e t h e r o r not the s p e c i f i c methods d i s c u s s e d a r e d i r e c t l y a p p l i c a b l e to t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r s t u d i e s . In section 2 I g i v e an o v e r v i e w of the goals of L S A P

and the s t r u c t u r e of

the data with a view toward s p e c i f y i n g the methodology in the b r o a d e s t p o s s i b l e terms.

Against this background

I then t u r n to a d i s c u s s i o n of i s s u e s that a r e

e s p e c i a l l y problematic in L S A P and similar s t u d i e s of l a n g u a g e loss.

Sections 3

and 4 a r e c o n c e r n e d with methods of c h a r a c t e r i z i n g l a n g u a g e competence and its attrition.

Particular

attention

is paid

R a s c h model of item r e s p o n s e t h e o r y

to e x p l o r a t o r y (section 3 ) ,

methods,

and F i s c h e r ' s

including linear

the

logistic

model, w h i c h we use to i n v e s t i g a t e the a t t r i b u t e s of l i n g u i s t i c f e a t u r e s p a r t i c u l a r l y p r o n e to be lost (section 4 ) . ing the concomitants characteristics

of the

In sections 5 - 7 I review methods of s t u d y -

and c o r r e l a t e s respondents,

of l a n g u a g e motivation

loss

and

-

including

attitudes,

and,

background of

course,

Ginsberg

20

the r e s p o n d e n t s ' experiences between tests - when language proficiency ceptualized

and

measured

by

complex

testing

L S A P . Particular attention is paid to F i s c h e r ' s

procedures

like those

is conused

linear logistic model with

assumptions (section 6) and J ö r e s k o g ' s L I S R E L model (section 7 ) ,

in

relaxed

both of which

a d d r e s s the desiderata of section 2 head on.

2.

THE

LANGUAGE

SKILLS

ATTRITION

PROJECT:

GOALS,

DATA,

AND

METHODOLOGY T h e major goal

of L S A P ,

as

Clark

(1985:1)

has

put

it, is

"to determine

nature and extent of language skill attrition on the part of selected U . S .

the

popu-

lations in A r a b i c , C h i n e s e , and Japanese, both on a global basis and as a f u n c tion

of

student-specific,

language-specific,

interim e x p o s u r e / u s e - s p e c i f i c v a r i a b l e s " .

initial

instruction-specific,

and

T h e selected populations comprise the

three sources from which subjects are d r a w n : students in intensive

government

language p r o g r a m s , students in intensive y e a r - l o n g s t u d y p r o g r a m s abroad, and students

in academic

in the U . S . 1

programs

g u a g e attrition as " ( n e g a t i v e )

C l a r k continues

by defining

lan-

c h a n g e s in student performance on a battery of

tests administered at or near the end of an initial t r a i n i n g period (Time A ) and again during

(Time

B)

which

after a lapse of a specified

the students

may

have

period of

had a variety

of

instruction-free' informal

time,

exposure/use

opportunities". T h e principal components of the L S A P database and the overall s t r u c t u r e of the analysis follow directly from these succinct statements,

viz.

- a battery of tests in each of the three l a n g u a g e s , administered at two points in time - the dependent variables in the s t u d y , i.e. o u r measures of the phenomena we are t r y i n g to describe and explain, are d e r i v e d from these tests; - measures of characteristics of the r e s p o n d e n t s ,

including b a c k g r o u n d

charac-

teristics s u c h as education, age, etc.; and measures of attitudes and motivation (see G a r d n e r 1982, for relevant scales) - these are independent variables whose effects on attrition we want to a s s e s s and control; - measures of e x p o s u r e and use of the language between the tests - these are crucial

determinants of attrition, analogous

or clinical s t u d y ,

and o b v i o u s l y

to treatments

in an

experimental

no measures of attrition make sense without

adjusting for them. Some significant variables which p r o b a b l y affect the nature and extent of attrition but which are not measured in L S A P , or indeed in any other s t u d y of lang u a g e loss of which I am aware - linguistic aptitude, general intelligence, nitive

and

learning

styles,

facility

in

various

aspects

of

English,

cogand

t e s t - t a k i n g ability - should also be noted, because their absence is an important

21

A n a l y s i s of language loss consideration in e v a l u a t i n g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of o u r methods. The

unique

contribution

of

LSAP,

and

the

largest

revolves

around the comprehensive

language t e s t i n g

acterize

the

language

guages,

r e s p o n d e n t s will be g i v e n t h r e e kinds of t e s t s :

nature

and

- general proficiency

extent

tests,

of

tests,

of

its

database,

program designed to For

each

s c o r e d on a s t a n d a r d i z e d scale,

o v e r a l l performance in realistic - proficiency-aspects

loss.

part

of

char-

the three

aimed at

lan-

measuring

situations;

aimed at measuring specific aspects of o v e r a l l

formance s u c h as reading s p e e d ,

per-

comprehension in noise, and ability to c a r r y

out c e r t a i n communicative f u n c t i o n s ; - diagnostic tests

intended

to determine w h e t h e r

lost a whole r a n g e of v e r y In each ing,

language t h e d i a g n o s t i c t e s t

and r e a d i n g ;

and s t r u c t u r e ing lexicon, various

feature quency

M o r e o v e r , t h e items comprising t h e six

h a v e been chosen

not

speakers which example,

Attributes

questions

only

for t h e i r

in t h e language

A t t r i b u t e s of

involved,

process a n d on

items in t h e former

of

subtests

intrinsic but also

of

importance

t h e second

raised by t h e

type

project.

languages;

a n d t h e possibility

of

at

vary

kinds of d i f f i c u l t i e s

pre-

category

introduction,

(read-

so as to

might be related to w h e t h e r or

point

similar terms across all t h r e e field to E n g l i s h

or

speak-

for

of use.

linguistic

c o v e r s t h r e e modalities,

in t h e i n s t r u c t i o n / l e a r n i n g

is lost.

retained

lexicon

etc.)

include,

has

listening,

(syntax).

sented to E n g l i s h

a respondent

features.

and w i t h i n each modality t h e r e a r e s u b t e s t s f o r both

levels of p r o f i c i e n c y

on f a c t o r s

cess)

specific linguistic

amount

relate

they

specific

(instructional

pro-

of

fre-

to t h e

F o r lexicon

not a

drill, most

can be

and

interesting defined

examples i n c l u d e similarity of

e x p r e s s i n g t h e concept

in

semantic

in o t h e r

words.

B y contrast,

structural

a t t r i b u t e s a r e language-specific a n d relate to t h e pecul-

iar

learning,

using,

problems

speakers; e.g. formations

and

retaining

the

in C h i n e s e s t r u c t u r a l a t t r i b u t e s

of

English

word order

required,

language p r e s e n t s

to

English

include t h e complexity of t r a n s -

and

the presence

of semantic

and

d i s c o u r s e level c o n s t r a i n t s on c o - o c c u r r e n c e . The

methodology

of

LSAP

can

now

be outlined

based on t h e fundamental premise implicit in language nents

a r e not

reasons. terms,

competence Its

is

a complex,

necessarily major

tasks

acquired are:

to

multidimensional or lost

at

t h e loss of specific diagnostic

items

subtests

multiple,

interdependent

measures

terms.

rates o r

linguistic

common

of

same

pedagogical

and to

deter-

e x p e r i e n c e associated emphasis

is

compo-

for the

and

t h a t a r e lost;

It

namely t h a t

whose

A n a l y s i s of t h e p r o f i c i e n c y

replaces t h e

c i e n c y with r i c h e r and more p r e c i s e d e s c r i p t i o n s . yield

in

and post-instructional

linguistic features.

and

broad

phenomenon

t h e same

characterize,

t h e specific a s p e c t s of language p r o f i c i e n c y

mine a t t r i b u t e s of r e s p o n d e n t s

in v e r y

L S A P ' s goals and d a t a ,

with

aspects and

on o v e r a l l

profi-

S i n c e t h e t e s t i n g program will

language

proficiency,

explanatory

Ginsberg

22 models of a t t r i t i o n must consequently be essentially m u l t i v a r i a t e , v a r i e d formulations

and statistical armamentarium

that that

models must take into account t h e e r r o r s

of measurement

best t e s t s ,

the

variables,

interactions

between personal

intervening

experience.

influence of

unmeasured

characteristics,

In the

next

five

initial

sections

w i t h all of t h e

implies. inherent

and t h e

Moreover, in even t h e

possibly

complex

language p r o f i c i e n c y , I discuss

and

t h e methods

models t h a t will be used to accomplish t h i s ambitious p r o g r a m ,

and

f o c u s i n g on t h e

analysis of t h e various diagnostic tests which is clearly central to both t a s k s .

3.

DEFINING

THE

DEPENDENT

VARIABLES:

ITEM

ANALYSIS

AND

ABILITY

MEASUREMENT A n a l y s i s of ( l o n g i s h )

diagnostic tests of language competence,

e x p l o r a t o r y and data

screening phases of a s t u d y ,

would

especially in the

p l a u s i b l y begin

with

t h e p o w e r f u l and r e l i a b l y implemented methods of item response t h e o r y and classical t e s t t h e o r y . 2

Here the Rasch

tone-parameter

logistic)

model has p r i d e of

place, not only because of its desirable statistical and epistemologica! p r o p e r t i e s but

also because

it forms

the basis of many

w i t h r i c h e r and more complex data s t r u c t u r e s .

generalizations

designed to

deal

Suppose all responses are b i n a r y

and let Ynj

= 1 if i n d i v i d u a l η responds c o r r e c t l y to item i = 0 otherwise.

T h e n t h e Rasch model postulates t h a t e x p ( a n - c¡ ) Probi Y n ¡ = 1 ) = 1 + e x p ( a n - c¡ ) where a n is person n's a b i l i t y (competence in t h e area t e s t e d ) ,

and

Cj is t h e d i f f i c u l t y of item i. More elaborate f u n c t i o n a l logistic models) at

the

cost,

forms

(e.g.

allow f o r d i f f e r e n t i a l however,

of

the

so-called two-

and

three-parameter

d i s c r i m i n a t i o n among items and

increasing

data

requirements.

guessing,

Discrimination,

for

example, is modelled by multiplying t h e exponent in the Rasch model by a scale factor,

bj.

As

bj

approaches

infinity

Prob(

Ynj

= 1 )

approaches

1 or

0,

A n a l y s i s of l a n g u a g e loss

23

d e p e n d i n g on whether a n is g r e a t e r o r less than c¡, and the model reduces the familiar

Guttman

scale;

but,

as

Hambleton

& Swaminathan

(1985:39)

pointed out, s u c h deterministic models are not likely to fit aptitude and tests,

like those d e s i g n e d for L S A P ,

models to handle polytomous & Masters prove

1982; M a s t e r s

especially

useful

(e.g.

Andersen

& Wright

1984;

and T h i s s e n

in

ability

v e r y well. M o r e o v e r , e x t e n s i o n s of

items

language

attrition

1977; Samejima 1979; & Steinberg

studies

where

1984)

partially

to

have Rasch Wright should

correct

a n s w e r s a n d p a r t i c u l a r t y p e s of e r r o r s p r o v i d e the main clues as to nature and mechanisms of l a n g u a g e loss. For both c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l and longitudinal d e s i g n s the measures Cj of item d i f f i c u l t y , on the one h a n d , the form of s c o r e s principal

dependent

attrition.3

variables

If the data

different

and a n of each r e s p o n d e n t ' s l i n g u i s t i c competence (in

and " p e r s o n

parameters")

in

domain of competence

cutting)

subsequent

are composed

each of three modalities

on the other, will analyses

of a n u m b e r of

- for

(listening,

example

speaking,

of

constitute the

the determinants

subtests,

in L S A P

there

reading),

and

each

are s u b t e s t s within

(or

the modalities there are s u b t e s t s for lexicon and s t r u c t u r e

r e s p o n d e n t measures can be g e n e r a t e d for each s u b t e s t separately. fit and

statistical tests of

scoring

procedures

criteria

of

a

parameters g e n e r a t e d b y

indicate w h e t h e r the

single

scale,

flag

items on

respondents

with

G o o d n e s s of and test

(sub-)test

aberrant

or

for

cross-

- item and

the item a n a l y s i s

a given

of

tapping a

meet the

uninformative

r e s p o n s e p a t t e r n s , a n d more g e n e r a l l y g i v e some clues r e g a r d i n g the validity of the a s s u m p t i o n s ( n u m b e r of p a r a m e t e r s , dimensionality, A t t h i s e x p l o r a t o r y , data reduction s t a g e , i n c l u d i n g both tions

and

(binary) give

classical

recently

variables

insight

into

"normal

developed (see M i s l e v y

the

or linguistic

tions among the items. b y maximum

of

models do not they

can

More importantly

likelihood or

Bayesian

specifically

- can also

competencies

satisfactorily

represent

p r o v i d e clues can be

involved. either item

about the

interrela-

scores,

u s e d like test

p e r s o n parameters as the d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s in s u b s e q u e n t

correla-

categorical

linguistic

estimates of individual

methods,

for

review and comparison)

the

kinds -

b a s e d on tetrachoric

designed

1986, for a

processes,

factor a n a l y s e s of v a r i o u s

methods

methods

dimensionality

A l t h o u g h the factor a n a l y s i s structure

theory"

etc.).

derived

scores

and

analyses.

It s h o u l d be clear, b y the w a y , that the same methods a p p l y to the m e a s u r e ment of attitudes, motivation, and other latent ( u n o b s e r v e d ) factors revealed b y p r o b a b i l i s t i c indicators whose effects on attrition will be s t u d i e d or controlled. M a n y computer p r o g r a m s are available to c a r r y out t h i s p h a s e of the a n a l y sis.

In L S A P we plan to use T E S T F A C T

theory al.

(binary

1985a) for

data);

data);

(Mislevy

item r e s p o n s e models

MSTEPS, MSCALE tomous

BILOG

and

(Wilson et al. & Bock

(binary data);

( R o s s n e r et al. 1985a, L1SREL-VI

1984)

(Jöreskog

1984) for classical and M S T E P S

test et

(Thissen

1985),

1985b) for item r e s p o n s e models

(poly-

& Sörbom

M U L T I LOG

(Rossner

1985)

and

TESTFACT

for

24

Ginsberg

factor analysis.

t.

RICHER MODELS VARIABLES

OF

PERFORMANCE;

MORE

MEASURES

OF

DEPENDENT

Please note that for the most part the discussion in this section applies, mutatis mutandis, both to a test of language competence administered at a given point in time and to yes-no variables indicating whether or not there has been attrition on a set of diagnostic features. In the latter case the item response models of the previous section are largely irrelevant but the models of this section address the central questions of attrition studies, including LSAP. Whatever their convenience and heuristic value, it should be clearly understood that the test theory and item response models discussed above maintain a strong, not to say invalidating assumption which severely limits their applicability to many language attrition projects: namely that a single dimension of language proficiency underlies the responses to all items in a given analysis. Questions of what aspects of language are lost can hardly be raised, much less answered, when all that can be measured is the overall level of an individual's competence and the greater or lesser "difficulty" of the items. Of course, splitting a test into subtests, each measuring a domain of competence, and analyzing the subtests separately, goes part of the way. And, as noted, there are statistical procedures designed to assess the homogeneity of a set of items. But for LSAP, and I suspect for many other language attrition studies, subtests are not an adequate alternative. First of all, as with analysis of the test as a whole, investigation of the key links to linguistic and psychological theory, i.e. the cognitive and linguistic processes entailed in responding to the test items, is precluded. Presumably several such "components" of linguistic competence and "strategies" of performance must be employed to answer a given item correctly, or to make certain characteristic e r r o r s , no matter how simple the item may appear; and, conversely, a given component or strategy bears on many items. Components and strategies, rather than items per se, are the main object of analysis. Second, but no less important for a project like LSAP, the effects of exogenous characteristics of items, such as pedagogical emphasis, cannot be represented. These too are a source of variation in item response which cuts across any subtest boundaries that may be tenable on purely linguistic or psychological grounds; yet a model responsive to the hypotheses of the study must somehow or another build them in. What we need are models allowing us to place structure on either or both of the item and person parameters. If responses to items entail components of competence which can be specified a priori, as is often the case in aphasia studies

A n a l y s i s of l a n g u a g e (Obler

1982),

(1980,

1984,

the

loss

25

multicomponent

1985)

or

R a s c h model may be u s e d . component wise

abilities,

acteristic as t h e

of

components.

Indeed,

it c a n

incorrect answers

components t h e n

ences,

be a c h i e v e d categories

as

in

LSAP,

is

on

by

giving

model

is

usual

indicators

data

of t h e

charas

weaker

written

to t a p

structure

only

data

specific ability

compo-

a b i l i t y on t h e

and t h e y could

one

rather

one-dimensional

1973,

1977b,

F i s c h e r ' s model holds exp(

an

far

correct

linguistic

than

models,

on

be usespec-

and

Fischer

&

feature,

individual

and

differ-

in p a r t i c u l a r

a n d his c o l l e a g u e s ,

Yni

other-

c o n s i s t i n g of

1983a;

Prob(

or

errors

a n d has c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y

(Scheiblechner

its simplest f o r m ,

cues

less e l a b o r a t e

so-called " l i n e a r l o g i s t i c models" of F i s c h e r Fischer

the

involved.

response

constrained

1972;

of

a c r o s s p o p u l a t i o n s o r a c r o s s time, w h e n a r i c h e r

deliberately

centers

(Whitely)

extension

to c i r c u m v e n t

p l a y a role a n a l o g o u s to f a c t o r s c o r e s ,

items a r e

Embretson

r e q u i r e i n d e p e n d e n t e s t i m a t e s of

be f i t t e d to t h e

ification than overall p r o f i c i e n c y interest

of

e a c h item. M e a s u r e s of t h e r e s p o n d e n t s '

f u l in c o m p a r i n g g r o u p s , When

models

multidimensional

Stegelmann's

supplemented by

n e n t s r e q u i r e d to a n s w e r

when

may

response

r e s p o n s e mechanisms a r e c o n c e r n e d

requirements. and

which

items a n d

particular

trait

(1983)

E m b r e t s o n ' s methods

estimates

(re-)structuring

latent

Stegelmann's

seem

the

appropriate

Formann

1982).

In

that

- cYj

)

= 1 ) = 1

+

exp(

an

- c'r¡

)

where Γ| = ( r n r¡h ) c' = ( c - | , . . . , c ^ )

a r e k n o w n p r o p e r t i e s of item i, a n d a r e t h e p a r a m e t e r s to b e e s t i m a t e d .

H e r e c Y j models t h e " d i f f i c u l t y " b i n a t i o n of t h e h a t t r i b u t e s , attributes tion,

mentioned

similarity

implies t h a t t h e a fortiori, of items, model. also

(1973; data.

in

characterizing 2,

viz.

for

strong

see

conditional by

the

semantic

(unobserved)

formal

similarities

it.

also G i n s b e r g and

tests

1986)

field

(for

likelihood

approach

Fischer

& Formann

of

the

the r's are the point of items),

used

Fischer or

in

by

the

to t h e

parameters logit

an,

model

economics

c may

(1983a),

etc.

If h = m = t h e total

ability

to

marginal

of

the

Cj = 0

either in

a

likelihood

and,

number Rasch model

McFadden

analyze

be a c h i e v e d implemented

item

introduc-

difficulty

t h e model r e d u c e s

conditional

parameters

(1972);

lexical

it c o r r e c t l y .

commonly

of t h e

In L S A P

not d e t e r m i n e an item's

individual to

is s p e c i f i e d to be a l i n e a r com-

real-life f r e q u e n c y ,

item a t t r i b u t e does

t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of a n s w e r i n g

Estimation

program

English

i-th

r¡,

section

and r- = 1 for i = j and 0 otherwise, Save

has

to

in

of item i, w h i c h

choice by

the

FORTRAN approach

Ginsberg

26 described

by

Thissen

(1982)

but

not y e t

Note t h a t in a one g r o u p d e s i g n , e . g . p r i n c i p a l object of t h e

5.

ANALYZING

implemented

in

a transportable

form.

a s t u d y of a p h a s i e s , tests on c- a r e t h e

study.

ATTRITION

WITH

PANEL

DESIGNS:

SIMPLE

CATEGORICAL

CRITERIA Methods

of

studying

attrition

based

designs t u r n on how attrition and measured.

items

a few,

often

analyzed

LSAP

such

analysis

early

stages

of

specific

an a n a l y s i s

before one f i t s complicated

one

largely

must

models.

very

reliable

Moreover,

there

by

is no

fundamental

Certainly

the

interest.

gross features

regard

it is

of

necessary

of comparing

the data

see j u s t interven-

hand no single

a separate analysis, or

in

the

to

(respondent characteristics,

psychological

statistical method

or

heuristic

is so salient as to compel of

(attrition)

a binary

h o w e v e r , t h a t in

seem to be related to e a c h . On t h e o t h e r

indicator

relating

It should be c l e a r ,

this

w h i c h f e a t u r e s a r e lost and w h i c h f a c t o r s diagnostic f e a t u r e

f e a t u r e measured

examine

In

to attri-

and methods

measures d e r i v e d from a p r i o r anal-

diagnostic

limited,

panel)

is conceptualized

methods w h i c h a p p l y

simultaneously,

"one item t e s t s " .

is of

ing e x p e r i e n c e , e t c . )

after;

T h e r e remain methods r e l a t i n g to c h a n g e

j u s t one

polytomous item, i . e . o u r

( b e f o r e and

in l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y

( a t t r i t i o n ) on q u a n t i t a t i v e ability

y s i s of t e s t s and s u b t e s t s . in

(change)

longitudinal

In t h e next two sections I d i s c u s s

tion on s e v e r a l categorical to c h a n g e

on

nor

linguistic

is a n y a processes.

t h e item-by-item

effects

on attrition s h o r t of f i t t i n g a more complex model. S i m i l a r l y , t a k i n g each f e a t u r e one at a time makes

it impossible to t e s t a t t r i b u t e s of

t h e i r being lost, a c e n t r a l concern of For

two

(qualitative,

points

in

binary)

characteristics

time,

as

outcomes

in

LSAP,

responses

whose probabilities

and i n t e r v e n i n g

items t h a t might

lead to

LSAP.

experiences

by

to

an

can be

item define related to

logit or p r o b i t

various

individual

regressions.

For

example, when t h e r e is good reason to believe t h a t t h e r e is no l e a r n i n g between measurements, ignored and

respondents

who

the probability

of

did

could be confined to respondents g a i n i n g modelled If one

not

losing

have

the

it modelled

any

at

time

rest;

or

who c h a n g e , and t h e p r o b a b i l i t y of

(an analog of McNemar's t e s t ;

cannot make

feature

among t h e

assumptions

about

Bock,

personal

intervening

1 can

losing v s .

communication).

experience

loglinear

multinomial logit models of t h e two-way t a b l e of responses ( c o r r e c t - c o r r e c t , rect-incorrect, These

incorrect-correct,

regression

tions at

many

methods

points

are

incorrect-incorrect)

well-known

and

in time new possibilités

binary

(or

qualitative)

1984).

But

for

reasons

time

series

given

(e.g.

above

seem

straightforward.

arise,

Laird

limited

would

al.

effort

is

1984;

observamodels of

Stirateli!

probably

or

cor-

appropriate.

With

such as logistic

et

be

attention

better

et

al.

spent

A n a l y s i s of l a n g u a g e loss

27

elsewhere.

6.

ANALYZING

ATTRITION

WITH

PANEL

DESIGNS:

SEVERAL

CATEGORICAL

CRITERIA

Of t h e v a r i o u s models f o r been

m e a s u r i n g c h a n g e based on m u l t i - i t e m t e s t s t h a t

suggested within the framework

of t h e l i n e a r l o g i s t i c m o d e l , tions" the

(LLRA),

references

pre-school

seems

particularly

education programs

subtests

-

simultaneously.

speaking

jt

response t h e o r y ,

by

(Fischer

Rop

on n a m i n g ,

(1977)

verbal,

backgrounds,

1977a, of

lexicon,

comprehending

have

a close

relative

relaxed

assump-

1983a,

the effects

1983b of

and

several

and n o n v e r b a l intelligence

of

w h i c h he t a k e s as an e x a m p l e ,

analogs in LSAP w h e r e all of t h e items on t h e

T o make m a t t e r s c o n c r e t e ,

Y

promising

A study

c h i l d r e n of d i f f e r i n g socioeconomic

analyzed

item

F i s c h e r s " l i n e a r l o g i s t i c model w i t h

cited t h e r e ) .

has s t r o n g m e t h o d o l o g i c a l

of

structure,

etc.

-

should

various also

be

c o n s i d e r t h e f o l l o w i n g special case:

= 1 if p e r s o n η a n s w e r s item i c o r r e c t l y at t i m e t = 0 otherwise

exp( f n . ) Prob( Y n i l

= 1 ) = 1 - exp( f n j exp( f n i

)

- dn

)

Prob( Y n ¡ 2 = 1 ) = 1 + exp( f n j

d

+ dn )

n = *n'b

where f

ni

is some f u n c t i o n of p e r s o n n's location on t h e l a t e n t d i m e n s i o n s of corop e t e n c e u n d e r l y i n g item i ;

b =

( b - j , . . . , b ) ' a r e t h e e f f e c t s we w a n t t o m e a s u r e , trend,

main

effects,

("treatments"); x n ' = ( x n i , • • •, of t h e s e

x n

q)

and interactions

between

including

intervening

an o v e r a l l experiences

and a r e

effects.

design

variables characterizing

person

η in

terms

Ginsberg

28 Subject to constraints

on

identification,

change

effects can also be made

item

specific. Of course, this model also applies to single diagnostic items which can be viewed as battery

"one

item t e s t s " .

of polytomies,

tional and longitudinal

In

Fischer

comparison designs,

(1977a) analogs

of independent

covering

samples,

in both

one or a cross-sec-

and o b s e r v a t i o n s at several points

in time are

discussed. Several comments are in o r d e r . First, as Spada £· McGaw

(1985) point out in

a review of applications of these models to the assessment of learning letting f j depend

completely

generally on

unrealistic assumption of unidimensional

η and i avoids

effects,

the restrictive

item and individual ability which

and char-

acterizes the classical Rasch model. It is t h u s possible to investigate differential attrition on sets of items measuring different abilities.

Second,

in this form of

the model the d n , and hence the likelihood of attrition, depend on η x n ) but not on the item i. T h u s , stantively

crucial

(null)

(through

the fit of this model tests a s t r o n g and s u b -

hypothesis

about attrition,

namely

that g i v e n

condi-

tions, χ, affect all domains of language competence (i.e. all s u b s e t s of d i a g n o s tic

items)

uniformly.

alternative

Conversely,

parameterizations

of

rejection of

this

model

the form dj or even

between g i v e n conditions and instructional

dnj,

and

postulation

implies

p r o g r a m s on the one hand, and s p e -

cific domains of competence on the other. T h i r d ,

careful choice of the compo-

nents of the vector of exogenous variables, x , enables us to test another damental

class

"treatment"

of

hypotheses

( p r o g r a m ) affects

whether programs

about

of

interactions

attrition,

all population

namely

subgroups

whether

equally,

should be tailored to the needs of specific

fun-

a

or

given

conversely

groups.

Fourth,

with r e g a r d to estimation Fischer (1983a, 1983b) s u g g e s t s a conditional maximum likelihood approach which has desirable statistical properties and which can be economically

implemented.

The

conditioning

makes

it

possible

to

consistently

estimate the b ' s without estimating the f j (or even s p e c i f y i n g their

functional

form),

mentioned

thus

avoiding

the

hazards

ATTRITION

WITH

of

measuring

individual

changes

above.

7.

ANALYZING

QUANTITATIVE

CRITERIA:

THE

LISREL

MODEL Unquestionably the richest and most powerful methods for s t u d y i n g the determinants and concomitants of attrition (change) tative, better yet approximately nents and

of

individual

factor

language

analysis,

and

competence

"proficiency

statistical

apply when the criteria are q u a n t i -

normally d i s t r i b u t e d variables, s u c h as compo-

range

of available

methods

begin

to even outline them here.

derived

aspects" here

I shall

is

only

from the such

truly

as

(sub-)test reading

staggering

scoring

speed. and

I

The

cannot

call attention to one family

of

A n a l y s i s of l a n g u a g e models,

the

& Sörbom

LISREL-VI of t h e s e

models),

and

COFAMM

(Sörbom

tive

and

of

of

applications

of

bearing

very

attrition

studies.

(latent)

close

this

relatives

1976)

to

in

variables

manual

1973a,

a

and

2,

1973b,

is a l s o a p r i m e r (Jöreskog many and

et

data w i t h o u t

In its m o s t g e n e r a l f o r m t h e L I S R E L model

in

the

1971)

substan-

particular

structurally many

seeing

resemblances

is d e f i n e d

pro-

al.

of t h e in

multivariate,

methodological

1978,

used computer

a p a g e of J ö r e s k o g ' s

to l o n g i t u d i n a l

substantive

address

section

in

hardly turn

models

(1970a,

ACOVSM

- which

alluded

o n e can

these

Jöreskog

1985;

its c l o s e

issues

Indeed,

of

implemented in t h e w i d e l y

& Jöreskog

unobserved

setting.

-

& Sörbom

and

methodological

problems

models

1977)

(Jöreskog

use

ented

29

LISREL/ACOVS

1979; J ö r e s k o g gram

loss

an to

by three sets

the ori-

reviews example language of

equa-

t i o n s , a s t r u c t u r a l e q u a t i o n s y s t e m of t h e f o r m η

= Βη

+

Γξ

+

ζ

where τι

is a m χ 1 v e c t o r of latent e n d o g e n o u s

ξ

is

a

n

χ

1 vector

covariance matrix ζ

is a v e c t o r of

of

latent

(dependent)

exogenous

variables;

(independent)

variables

with

i ;

latent d i s t u r b a n c e s ,

uncorrelated with

ζ, with

covariance

matrix Τ ; and Β

a n d Γ a r e m a t r i c e s of p a r a m e t e r s m e a s u r i n g t h e e f f e c t s of i n t e r e s t (bjj =

0); a n d a p a i r of m e a s u r e m e n t models f o r t h e q χ 1 v e c t o r χ of o b s e r v e d of ξ , a n d t h e ρ χ 1 v e c t o r of o b s e r v e d χ

= Λχξ

+

δ

Cov(6)

= 06

y

= Α η y

+

ε

CovU)

= 0

Included

as s p e c i a l

attrition

studies.

just

confirmatory

models

will

be

test (reading

t

c a s e s a r e a n u m b e r of m e a s u r e m e n t m o d e l s

The

measurement

factor

analysis

same s t r u c t u r e

as

etc.)

equation

with

u s e d to e x a m i n e t h e lexicon,

indicators

i n d i c a t o r s of η:

ξ

(or

for η)

χ

(or

as the

interrelationships

y),

which pertain

taken

factors.

between

In

by

itself,

LSAP

the v a r i o u s

to is

these sub-

s c o r e s , w h i c h f r o m a formal p o i n t of v i e w h a v e t h e

multitrait-multimethod

matrices

(Jöreskog

1970c;

Werts

et al.

Ginsberg

30 1972).

When the factor model is f u r t h e r restricted to one latent ξ, the model of

classical test t h e o r y o b t a i n s ,

with χ =

) a set of test s c o r e s and ξ

(often denoted b y τ in the literature)

the " t r u e s c o r e " ; c o n s t r a i n i n g the X's to

be equal y i e l d s

In

analyzing

"parallel t e s t s " ,

several

subtests

etc.

general,

simultaneously

than one u n d e r l y i n g factor.

Taking

however,

there is

no bar to

and allowing an item to load on more

χ as o b s e r v e d

responses and starting

with

a matrix of tetrachoric correlations L I S R E L can, t h e r e f o r e , be u s e d in the datareduction p h a s e of the a n a l y s i s . T h e factor s t r u c t u r e in L S A P with

are the v a r i o u s test p o p u l a t i o n s ,

somewhat

which

more effort,

the factors

in the

by

in several g r o u p s ,

can be compared with

LISREL-VI.

Second

measurement model

(e.g.

order true

which

COFAMM

factor

or,

analysis,

s c o r e s on

LSAP

in

sub-

t e s t s ) themselves have a factor s t r u c t u r e , can be written y = Λ γ ( Γ ξ • ζ) * ε which

is

the

general

form of

the

covariance

structure

of

Jöreskog's

ACOVS

model. Note that at the other extreme, when all relevant v a r i a b l e s are o b s e r v e d and measurement c o n s i d e r a t i o n s are not relevant,

so that y = η a n d χ = ξ, one

has the usual simultaneous equation s y s t e m of econometrics. T h e most important applications of the L I S R E L model to attrition studies tain to the a n a l y s i s of time s t r u c t u r e d data

l a n g u a g e competence is measured at several points so-called

"simplex"

covariance

structure

Weiner p r o c e s s e s for the e r r o r s above; J ö r e s k o g

1970b; and Werts et al. of academic g r o w t h ) .

formulation growth

of g r o w t h

curves

and within

curves,

which

themselves a n d / o r

individuals.

originally

discussed

showed

allow f o r the

correlated

why

factor

by

model

Guttman of

the

of six

plexity

grammar,

punctuation,

- an example which

papers

include the

individual

errors

program

c o n c e r n e d the factor s t r u c t u r e ture)

autoregressive

and cited

1977; the examples are c o n c e r n e d with

must be u s e d to

(1954), previous

tests of

could as well

who

in

the

across

time

represent

the

structure

per-

o r d e r e d in time. coined

paragraph

verbal ability

vocabulary,

LISREL

variation

in test s c o r e s

r e s p o n s e s , not j u s t r e s p o n s e s

example

(spelling,

by

(see J ö r e s k o g ' s

I s h o u l d also mention that the simplex

tains to any set of o r d e r e d the

generated

Particular instances

(The A C O V S M

s t r u c t u r e of the c u r v e s . )

-

If

in time, then models with the

- are a p p r o p r i a t e

the measurement

per-

(for a review see J ö r e s k o g 1979).

the

cannot

and

apply,

ordered by

literature, f o r e i g n

a p p l y to s u b t e s t s of items

The

term

comlitera-

graded

by

d i f f i c u l t y or point of introduction in the L S A P d i a g n o s t i c t e s t s . In L S A P the relevant longitudinal L I S R E L models are t h o s e p e r t a i n i n g to twowave

panels.

Figure

1 illustrates

the p o s s i b i l i t i e s .

ables are r e p r e s e n t e d b y b o x e s , u n o b s e r v e d

Observed

(latent)

variables

(measured) are

vari-

represented

b y e l l i p s e s , and e r r o r s ( ζ , ε, a n d δ) are not enclosed at all; causal effects are represented by

arrows,

and

noncausal

relationships

by a r c s ;

and all

elements

A n a l y s i s of l a n g u a g e

loss

31

Correlated Errors : e

Fig.

1: A L I S R E L model f o r t h e l a n g u a g e a t t r i t i o n

a r e labeled b y t h e r e l e v a n t L I S R E L underlying scores

"ability"

(derived

which

is

p a r a m e t e r s . We a s s u m e h e r e t h a t t h e r e is an

measured

b y the methods

at t w o

reviewed

controlled

for

time 1 a b i l i t y ,

points

in

in s e c t i o n 3 ) ,

measurement for each s u b t e s t are correlated. ability

process.

for

the e r r o r s

the two t e s t s ,

r a t h e r t h a n t r y i n g to model t h e v e r y m u c h

of t h e c h a n g e

in a b i l i t y ,

of

in

the

scores tion, ables,

issues see

and

Linn

background,

have a

experience

representing & Slinde

is

similar

measured variables,

and

measured measurement

represented

as

f o r time 1 level.

change

1977,

by

time

Anderson

at

time 1,

which accordingly

six

subtest of

(For

vs.

key

in

discussion

"gain"

Attitudes,

("loss") motiva-

independent

however,

construct,

measurement

a general

1980.) are

Note,

of

l e s s reliable estimates

2 ability

et al. which

structure.

a theoretical

by

T o g e t at a t t r i t i o n we model time 2

allowing

controlled

time

and that the e r r o r s

that

determined

vari-

intervening by

several

h a v e a s i m p l e , joint effect on time 2 a b i l -

ity. 1 · T h e r ' s a n d t h e B ' s a r e t h e e f f e c t s we w a n t to estimate. To

keep t h i n g s

model of s t r u c t u r a l 1980;

Bentler

in p e r s p e c t i v e equations

1980 f o r

with

a review),

I should latent nor

is

stress

variables

that

LISREL

(see e . g .

Jöreskog's

the

only

is

not t h e

Bentler approach

only

& Weeks to

the

Ginsberg

32 problem

(see,

e.g.,

the chapters

models" a r e d e s c r i b e d ) . phases of t h e analysis LISREL.

In

in J ö r e s k o g

More i m p o r t a n t l y ,

& Wold 1982, w h e r e Wold's

especially

in t h e i n i t i a l ,

"soft

exploratory

it may not be necessary to use as elaborate a model as

particular,

when

there

are

no l a t e n t

variables,

or

rather

when

e r r o r s of measurement are small compared to t h e o t h e r sources of random v a r i a tion

(Ϋ in t h e LISREL m o d e l ) ,

two-wave

attrition

studies

like LSAP fall

t h e r u b r i c of repeated measures and panel s t u d i e s w h e r e w e l l - k n o w n used t e c h n i q u e s of

simultaneous equations

and m u l t i v a r i a t e

ance (see Bock 1979 f o r a clear statement) also

reliably

implemented

MULTIVARIANCE-VI of

in

( F i n n 1980),

hypotheses than

growth

(e.g.

curves,

more s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d t h a n when t h e models,

is

Bock

either

not t e n a b l e .

recently

1983, and

1981; a n d , Laird

et

LISREL o r m u l t i v a r i a t e parameters,

Finally,

i.e.

f o r applications

al.

1985)

are

analysis of

noted all of

reasonably a p p l i e d in small s t u d i e s . at t h e

same time it

govern

these

derive from a tightly

controlled,

be

recognized

require, say,

that

randomized e x p e r i m e n t a l

all

structural sev-

cannot be

For smaller data sets simpler methods should

to

perhaps

covariance

rates of a t t r i t i o n ,

it s h o u l d be

and indeed t h e logistic models of p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n s ,

but

as range

developed

eral h u n d r e d o b s e r v a t i o n s to o b t a i n reliable estimates a n d , t h e r e f o r e , be u s e d ,

are

such

Bayes approaches t o t h e estimation of v a r i a n c e

assumption t h a t f i x e d

individuals

programs,

Furthermore,

H a r v i l l e 1977; Dempster et al. 1982,

covari-

p e r m i t tests of a much w i d e r

LISREL when t h e y a p p l y .

Reinsel

analysis of

These t e c h n i q u e s

computer

and t h e y

maximum likelihood and empirical components

can be used.

standard

under

and w i d e l y

unless

design t h e

must

the

data

questions

a d d r e s s e d must be c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y simple as w e l l .

FOOTNOTES 1.

Although

it may appear t o be s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d ,

t h e selection of

f r o m s p e c i f i c p r o g r a m s poses s u b t l e t h r e a t s to v a l i d i t y which

LSAP

main

shares

problem

with

being

non-experimental

bias

in

the

studies

measurement

unmeasured v a r i a b l e s g o v e r n i n g t h e selection 2.

There see,

is a l a r g e l i t e r a t u r e e.g.

Wright

Lord

& Novick

& Stone 1979,

on t h e s e 1968;

in many

of

effects

respondents

generalizability settings, resulting

the from

process.

approaches.

and f o r

and Hambleton

and

item

For

classical t e s t

response

& Swaminathan

theory,

theory

see

1985; all t h r e e

e.g. refer-

ences c o n t a i n comparisons between classical and item response methods. 3.

Item

difficulty

emphasis,

parameters

contrast

with

t e n c e related to personal

will

be

the target

related

to

language,

characteristics

item a t t r i b u t e s etc.)

(attitudes,

and

(pedagogical

individual

motivation,

compe-

intervening

A n a l y s i s of l a n g u a g e loss

33

e x p e r i e n c e , e t c . ) : see section 4. 4.

Other

models

might

specify

" b a c k g r o u n d " and vice

intervening

experience

in

the

same

way

categories.

In:

as

versa.

REFERENCES Andersen,

E.

(1977),

Kempf £· B .

The

logistic

Repp ( e d s . ) ,

model

for

Mathematical

m answer

models

for

social

psychology.

W. New

Y o r k : Wiley, 59-80. Anderson,

S.,

A.

Auquier,

( 1 9 8 0 ) , Statistical B e n t l e r , P.

Review

P.

& D.

ables. Bock,

(1979),

In: J . R.

Weeks

studies.

Principals

Weisberg

Wiley.

C a u s a l modeling.

Linear

structural

equations

with latent

vari-

of t i m e - s t r u c t u r e d

data.

45:289-308.

U n i v a r i a t e and m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s Baltes ( e d s . ) ,

and development.

(1983),

& H.

New Y o r k :

31:419-456.

(1980),

Nesselroade & P.

of behavior Bock,

of Psychology

Psychometrika

R.

D. O a k e s , W. V a n d a e l e

for comparative

(1980), Multivariate a n a l y s i s with latent v a r i a b l e s :

Annual Bentler,

W. H a u c k ,

methods

research

New Y o r k : Academic P r e s s ,

The discrete Bayesian.

of modern

Longitudinal

psychological

In:

H . Wainer & S .

measurement.

In the

study

199-231. Messick

Hillsdale,

NJ :

(eds.), Erlbaum,

103-115. Clark, J .

(1985), L a n g u a g e S k i l l s A t t r i t i o n P r o j e c t : P r e c i s and summary of com-

pleted/subsequent activities. Washington, tics, Dempster,

Α.,

D.

Rubin

ponents models. Embretson tests.

& R.

S.

Embretson design.

In:

S.

G.

Association

76:341-353.

latent t r a i t models f o r

ability

S.

A g e n e r a l latent t r a i t model f o r r e s p o n s e

pro-

(1985),

Embretson

Multicomponent

(ed.),

Test

latent

design:

New

trait

directions

New Y o r k : Academic P r e s s , VI:

User's

guide.

models

in

in

text

psychol-

195-218.

Chicago,

IL:

National

Educa-

Resources. (1973), T h e

tional r e s e a r c h . G.

Estimation in c o v a r i a n c e com-

49:175-186.

(1980), Muitivariance

tional

Fischer,

Linguis-

45:479-494.

ogy and psychometrics.

Fischer,

Center for Applied

Statistical

Multicomponent

(1984),

Psychometrika (Whitely),

of the American

(1980),

Psychometrika (Whitely), S .

cesses.

Tsutakawa (1981),

Journal

(Whitely),

Embretson

Finn, J .

DC:

Draft.

(1977a),

Acta

linear l o g i s t i c test model as an i n s t r u m e n t Psychologica

in e d u c a -

37:359-374.

Some p r o b a b i l i s t i c models f o r the d e s c r i p t i o n of

attitude

and behavioral c h a n g e s u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e of mass communication.

In: W.

Kempf & B .

Repp ( e d s . ) ,

Mathematical

models

for

social

psychology.

New

34

Ginsberg York:

Fischer, H.

Wiley,

G.

Spada

Berlin: Fischer,

Kempf

G.

Fischer,

Logistic

(1983b),

&• A .

estimating

In:

G.

Theory

models

models

with

item

& A.

D.

models f o r

Weiss

(ed.),

(1972),

An

parameters

algorithm

of

the

and

I n s t i t u t d e r U n i v e r s i t ä t Wien

Formann

(1982),

bert & B.

(1982),

Social

Freed

House,

in

The

in s e c o n d loss

Applied

language

of language

retention.

skills.

(1954),

A

(ed.),

MeasR.

Lam-

Mass.:

New-

& H.

Press,

Boston:

factor

analysis:

in

social

the

The

radex.

sciences.

In:

P.

New

York:

(1985),

Item

response

theory:

Principles

and

Kluwer-Nijhoff.

Maximum

related

to

thinking

258-348.

Swaminathan

(1977), and

approach

Manuscript.

likelihood

problems.

approaches

Journal

of

the

to v a r i a n c e American

component

Statistical

esti-

Associa-

72:320-340.

Jöreskog,

Κ.

(1970a),

Biometrika Jöreskog, nal

new

Mathematical

University

applications.

tion

#9).

In:

Rowley,

L.

mation

for

Vienna:

24-43.

Guttman,

D.

program

l a t e n t t r a i t mod-

Models of m u l t i v a r i a t e q u a l i t a t i v e v a r i a b l e s .

R.

New

Psychological

(1986),

Columbia

qualita-

Bulletin

R.

Lazarsfeld

in

model.

Some a p p l i c a t i o n s of l o g i s t i c

factors

(eds.),

test

Ginsberg,

Harville,

Psy-

testing.

a FORTRAN

(Research

6:397-416.

Hambleton,

In:

learning.

constraints.

horizons

logistic

urement

bury

linear

and

linear

l i n e a r c o n s t r a i n t s on t h e p a r a m e t e r s .

R.

and application. thinking

measuring change

New

els w i t h Gardner,

of

309-329.

Formann

the

Psychologisches Fischer,

models:

latent trait

Some l a t e n t t r a i t

Academic P r e s s ,

G.

test

Structural

48:3-25.

observations.

York:

logistic (eds.),

281-293.

(1983a),

chometrika tive

Linear

& W.

Huber,

G.

Fischer,

59-80.

(1977b),

A

Κ.

(1970b),

Estimating

of Mathematical

Jöreskog, In:

Κ. C.

tion

Κ.

(1970c),

Jöreskog,

Κ.

A.

social

(1973b), Contemporary (1978),

and testing

of

of c o v a r i a n c e

simplex

Psychology

the

structures.

models.

problems

British

Jour-

correlation

matrix.

23:121-145.

multitest-multioccasion

Current

and

techniques

U n i v e r s i t y of W a s h i n g t o n ,

Goldberger sciences. In:

R.

& O.

in

multivariate

68-100.

(eds.),

Seminar

psychological

data

Atkinson,

Krantz,

developments

Freeman,

Duncan

New Y o r k :

Analyzing

matrices.

Francisco: Κ.

analysis

A g e n e r a l method f o r e s t i m a t i n g a l i n e a r s t r u c t u r a l

In:

in the

(eds.),

(ed.),

Seattle, WA:

covariance San

method f o r

Statistical

Factoring

(1973a),

system.

models Jöreskog,

and

Lunneborg

psychology. Jöreskog,

general

57:239-251.

in

D.

mathematical

Structural

Press, by

equation

85-112.

structural R.

equa-

Luce

psychology,

analysis & P.

of

Suppes

Volume

II.

1-56.

Structural analysis

of c o v a r i a n c e a n d c o r r e l a t i o n

matrices.

A n a l y s i s of l a n g u a g e Psychometrika Jöreskog,

Κ.

Statistical

research Κ.

in

the

In: D.

Κ.

& D.

K . , M.

of

MANOVA.

behavior

models

in

& P. B a l t e s

and

longitudinal

(eds.),

development.

Longi-

New

York:

Statistical models a n d methods f o r a n a l y s i s of

Amsterdam:

Sörbom

(1985),

( e d s . ) , Latent

North Holland,

LISREL-VI:

User's

variables

285-325.

guide.

Mooresville,

IN:

Inc.

van Thillo

program

of s t r u c t u r a l

Nesselroade

Aigner & A. Goldberger

models.

Scientific Software, puter

study

& D. Sörbom (1977),

in socio-economic

Jöreskog,

In: J.

303-351.

l o n g i t u d i n a l data. Jöreskog,

estimation

investigations.

Academic Press, Jöreskog,

35

43:443-477.

(1979),

development tudinal

loss

for

& G.

analysis

Princeton,

Gruvaeus

of

(1971),

covariance

NJ :

Educational

(eds.)

(1982),

ACOVSM

structures Testing

- A general

including

Service

com-

generalized

(Research

Bulletin

70-01). Jöreskog,

Κ.

& Η.

Causality, Laird,

N.,

structure, G.

Beck

responses. Laird,

Ν.,

Wold

prediction,

& J.

N.

R.

Lange

& J.

between

Part

Ware

(1984),

Stram

(1985),

II.

under

indirect

Amsterdam:

Mixed

models

observation:

North

for

Holland.

serial

categorical

Draft. & D.

repeated m e a s u r e s : Linn,

Systems

Slinde pre-

Maximum

likelihood computations

A p p l i c a t i o n s of t h e EM a l g o r i t h m . (1977),

and

T h e determination

post-testing

periods.

of t h e

Review

with

Draft. s i g n i f i c a n c e of

of

change

Educational

Research

47:212-250. Lord,

F.

& M. Novick

ing, MA: Masters,

G.

& B.

Wright (1984),

ment models. McFadden, In:

D.

Press,

(1986),

variables. R.

binary

(ed.),

& R.

Recent Bock

G.

of

Read-

p r o c e s s in a family of

measure-

in

test

q u a l i t a t i v e choice

econometrics.

developments

skills.

New

Statistical

behavior.

York:

(1977), The

R.

Academic

language & B. House,

repeated-measurement covariance

of

categorical

Statistics.

analysis

Lambert

Newbury

random-effects

and

test

loss

Freed

as

scoring

with

Inc. they

(eds.),

pertain The

loss

to of

60-79. or growth

structure.

curve

Journal

models of

the

77:190-195.

application of a linear

curricula

factor analysis

IN: Scientific Software.

a s p e c t s of

In:

Association

the

Item

Mooresville,

Multivariate

in

of Educational

BILOC:

Rowley, M a s s . :

(1982),

of p r e - s c h o o l

Journal

Neurolinguistic

multivariate

American I.

scores.

logit a n a l y s i s

(1984),

models.

(1982),

language

Rop,

essential

Frontiers

second language attrition.

with

of mental

49:529-544.

Conditional

F o r t h c o m i n g in:

logistic

L.

Reinsei,

theories

105-142.

R.

Mislevy,

The

Psychometrika

(1973),

P.Zarembka

Mislevy,

Obier,

( 1 9 6 8 ) , Statistical

Addison-Wesley.

l o g i s t i c model d e s c r i b i n g t h e

on c o g n i t i v e g r o w t h .

In:

H.

Spada

a n d W.

effects Kempf

Ginsberg

36 (eds.),

Structural

models

of

thinking

and

learning.

Berlin:

Huber,

281-293. Rossner,

M.,

R.

Congdon

& B. Wright

(computer p r o g r a m s ) .

Chicago,

(1985a

and

b),

MSTEPS

and

I L : Department of E d u c a t i o n ,

MSCALE

U n i v e r s i t y of

Chicago. Samejima,

F.

(1979),

Knoxville,

A

TE:

new

family

Department

of

of

models

for

the

Psychology,

multiple

University

choice of

item.

Tennessee

(Research Report #79-4). Scheiblechner,

H.

Zeitschrift Sörbom,

(1972),

fuer

D.

Das

Lernen

Experimentelle

& K.

Jöreskog

und

(1976),

National Educational R e s o u r c e s , Spada,

H.

& B.

McGaw

in psychology

In:

S.

R.,

Angewandte

N.

D.

(1982),

D.

Embretson

& J.

(1985),

D.

Werts,

C.,

K.

C.,

R.

Jöreskog Linn

demic g r o w t h . Wilson,

D.,

factor Wright,

B.

Test

effects with

design:

New

model to a general 48:259-267.

Ware

Random-effects

(1984),

Biometrics

linear

directions

169-194. model

models

having

for

serial

40:961-971. one-parame-

47:175-186.

(version

t.0):

User's

guide.

Mooresville,

IN:

Inc. (1984), A r e s p o n s e model for multiple choice items.

& R.

& G.

(1972),

multitrait-multimethod model

Gibbons

(1984),

Measurement Measurement

TESTFACT:

I N : Scientific Software,

(1982),

Rating

scale

analysis.

Β . & M. Stone (1979), Best

test design.

Chicago,

for

32:655-678.

A simplex model for a n a l y z i n g

and Psychological

Mooresville, Masters

A

and Psychological

& K . J ö r e s k o g (1977), Educational

R . Wood & R . analysis.

Linn

Educational

aca-

37:745-756.

Test

scoring

and

item

Inc. Chicago,

IL:

Press. Wright,

IL:

49:501-519.

studying growth. Werts,

(ed.),

Psychometrika

MULTILOC

& L. S t e i n b e r g

Psychometrika

Chicago,

New Y o r k : Academic P r e s s ,

Psychometrika

Scientific Software, Thissen,

19:476-506.

guide.

M a r g i n a l maximum likelihood estimation for the

ter logistic model. Thissen,

User's

E x p a n d i n g the R a s c h

Laird

Denkaufgaben.

Inc.

o b s e r v a t i o n s with b i n a r y r e s p o n s e s . Thissen,

komplexer Psychologie

COFAMM:

and psychometrics. (1983),

more than one dimension. Stirateli!,

Lösen

(1985), T h e a s s e s s m e n t of l e a r n i n g

logistic test models. S t e g e l m a n n , W.

und

I L : Mesa

Press.

Mesa

Points of Reference in First-Language Loss Research Koen Jaspaert,

1.

Sjaak Kroon & Roeland van Hout Tilburg University

INTRODUCTION

Language

loss can be

defined

as a form of

individual

language evolution

which an i n d i v i d u a l loses ( p a r t of) his competence or p r o f i c i e n c y

by

in a p a r t i c u l a r

language ( A n d e r s e n 1982:84). A d e f i n i t i o n f o c u j i n g on loss in the i n d i v i d u a l can cope e x c e l l e n t l y w i t h instances in which people lose p a r t of t h e i r p r o f i c i e n c y a second o r f o r e i g n language

(L2 loss).

in

It is also in t h i s specific research area

t h a t t h e terminology and methodology of t h e s t u d y of language loss have been developed and applied. T h e o v e r v i e w of studies t h a t & Freed's loss

(1982)

i n f l u e n t i a l book i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s

research v e r y

well.

Nevertheless,

is i n c o r p o r a t e d in Lambert

L2 p r e - o c c u p a t i o n of

language

it has been p o i n t e d out several

times

t h a t t h e concept of language loss should also i n c o r p o r a t e t h e process of p r i m a r y language loss ( L I

loss),

i.e.

t h e loss of one's f i r s t

guage of those responsible f o r one's socialization However, in studies on p r i m a r y is t h e

basic u n i t

of analysis.

proficiency

(Freed 1982,

Lambert

lan-

1982).

language loss it is often not the i n d i v i d u a l t h a t In studies

Hagen, t h i s volume) or language death studies on LI

language or the f i r s t

on dialect

(e.g.

of ethnic g r o u p s

loss ( e . g .

Münstermann &

Dorian 1980, 1982) as well as in immigrant c o u n t r i e s ,

the

evolution of p r o f i c i e n c y in specific g r o u p s forms t h e main focus of analysis.

living

in

The

main cause of the process of loss is not to be located in t h e i n d i v i d u a l

forget-

t i n g o r losing some elements o r rules of a language, b u t in an incomplete t r a n s f e r of a language f r o m one generation to t h e n e x t . This point nicely i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t t h e terminology and methodology of L2 loss cannot be t r a n s p l a n t e d into tions.

The

study

of

LI

research on LI

loss

is marked

which are h a r d l y dealt w i t h e x p l i c i t l y

loss w i t h o u t at

by

specific

in t h e

least some precau-

methodological

l i t e r a t u r e on

problems,

language loss.

We

encountered some of these problems when s e t t i n g up a research project on mary language ders,

the Dutch-speaking

problems dictor

loss of T u r k s and Italians of Belgium.

in t h e

(Jaspaert

research

& Kroon

design;

1986).

and

In t h i s paper we will not

related to t h e operationalisation and analysis

variables

elsewhere

part

l i v i n g in t h e Netherlands

some of

The discussion

discuss

of e x p l a n a t o r y or

these

have

here will

been

priFlanpre-

discussed

be r e s t r i c t e d

to

t h e operationalisation and measurement of t h e e x t e n t and nature of the process of p r i m a r y language loss. In section 2 some basic d i f f e r e n c e s between

research designs in L2 and L1

Jaspaert et

38

loss

will

be

so-called

described.

one-shot

A

measurements

is a b s e n t .

serve

point

as

the

establishing the onalisation

of

A

of

central

of

role in

the

aspects

research

which

the

or

the

reference

for

in

language

that are

of

hardly touched

and

than

in t h e

panied by

problems upon

focus

ence.

Section

with

the

kinds

5

aim

of

use

deals

of

data

w i t h t h e d e f i n i t i o n of a p o i n t of

the

of

control

with

the

establishing

sources.

In

2.

In

DIFFERENCES

the

Loss

IN

concept

may

of

simply

skills o v e r time but

not

(Xj,Xj

+1

) ·

Taking

most

natural

the

research

+^

design

a group

individuals

of

a

who

that

guage

level

Examples Weltens

of

comparison of

proficiency

this

& Van

Another a group

or

process part

approach

Els i n t h i s

approach

of d i f f e r e n t persons

cumstances

with

ent,

favourable

more

comparing

to

two

loss

of

be

time

of

can

L1

the

found

to

loss

two

the

factor

level

be

lost

unit

of

of

time.

language

by

in

during

the

the

carrying

out

by

following

a period

The

contributions

of

simplest i.e.

the

moments by

nondesign

a so-called

by comparing

different

X¡,

period

analysis,

is t r a c e d

language.

be d e t e c t e d

in

reference

k n o w n at moment

the change over time, at

of

the

dimension

a language

then

suggested

LOSS

by

is

central

with that

groups. acquired

the

time

factor

This

can,

for

or

used

a group that acquired or groups

the

different

is

in

lantime.

Olshtain

and

volume. grasping

that

in

said

of l a n g u a g e

individuals

can

played

change

as t h e

refer-

reference, of

points

L2 AND

is

of

of

basis it

loss.

accom-

research.

is

feature

far.

elabo-

section 4 we

point

section,

a

inter-

so

language

point

and various loss

role

speaker

forget

The

on

BETWEEN

has t w o p o i n t s o f m e a s u r e m e n t t o o b s e r v e design.

a the

negative

language o r minimal c o n t a c t

pretest-posttest

creating loss,

designs

incorporates

The

of LI

language

and

will be

In

the

and

play

done

designs

reference.

can

operati-

d e s i g n s may be

If a language f e a t u r e

individual

measurements.

use of t h a t

as

have

establishing

concluding

a crucial

1982:6).

longitudinal

the

DESIGNS

loss

moment

of

research

be d e s c r i b e d at

6,

in p r i m a r y

RESEARCH

(Lambert

anymore

amount

section

language

for

possibilities

the

t h a t a combination of d i f f e r e n t is a u s e f u l w a y t o p r o c e e d

groups

and should

l i t e r a t u r e on

In s e c t i o n 3 i t w i l l b e s h o w n t h a t a l s o s i m p l e l o n g i t u d i n a l

will

of data

the analysis

longitudinal

the

defining

loss

they

be

longitudinal

kind for

language

to

of

The definition

research

upon

appears

form

reference

loss.

research

aspects of

loss

becomes w h i c h

point

the

L1

in t h e

measuring

loss

some p r o b l e m a t i c

in

factor

language

t h e p l a n n i n g of

data

design

time

problem then

comparison

the point

A l s o in s e c t i o n 2 , rated,

of

in

n a t u r e and e x t e n t of

more i m p o r t a n t pretation

typical

design,

al.

conditions. (the

In

a

research

a language case

static

the group

design

be done b y

under

simplest

is

under

design

comparison),

the

comparing

unfavourable

u s e d t h e same l a n g u a g e

that

so-called

in

instance,

is

cir-

differthat

where

of the

Points of reference

39

l a n g u a g e loss process is detected by comparing the language level or p r o f i c i e n c y of those two g r o u p s . T h i s means that these g r o u p d i f f e r e n c e s are supposed to reflect the d i f f e r e n c e s in language p r o f i c i e n c y between the research g r o u p now and that same g r o u p earlier, or between the p r o f i c i e n c y of the g r o u p now and the p r o f i c i e n c y it would have had if the u n f a v o u r a b l e circumstances had not o c c u r r e d . In this way the static g r o u p comparison deals with the time f a c t o r without being longitudinal in the s t r i c t sense of the word. When, for instance, one wants to f i n d out whether second generation members of an ethnic minority g r o u p l i v i n g in Western Europe have a lower p r o f i c i e n c y in the minority l a n g u a g e , one would want to compare t h e i r p r o f i c i e n c y with that of a g r o u p who a c q u i r e d that l a n g u a g e in more natural conditions. T h e latter g r o u p f u n c t i o n s as the control g r o u p . However, it is not always s e l f - e v i d e n t when one uses the research s t r a t e g y of g r o u p comparison, what k i n d of g r o u p should be the control g r o u p , or - to use our own terminology - which g r o u p could g i v e the r e s e a r c h e r the optimum point of reference. There research between loss and

are at least two reasons w h y a longitudinal design is not feasible in on L1 loss. T h e f i r s t one c o n c e r n s the length of the time i n t e r v a l s measurements; the second has to do with differences between language language change.

In L2 loss a period of a couple of months of n o n - u s e may s u f f i c e to detect a substantial change in l a n g u a g e competence ( c f . O l s h t a i n , t h i s volume). O b v i o u s l y , the loss of a p r i m a r y l a n g u a g e - a l a n g u a g e one used to know so well for s u c h a long time - seems to be a rather slow process in most c a s e s . O n l y when some minor c h a n g e s are the essential v a r i a b l e s in a research plan, does it make sense to work with relatively s h o r t time i n t e r v a l s . In o r d e r to answer more t h o r o u g h questions on l a n g u a g e loss ( e . g . which informant c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s play an important role in the loss p r o c e s s , how fast and in what way does the loss s p r e a d in the g r o u p , how can loss data be used to p r e d i c t the f u t u r e lang u a g e situation, how do l a n g u a g e loss and l a n g u a g e s h i f t relate to each o t h e r ) , time i n t e r v a l s of at least s e v e r a l y e a r s seem to be needed. T h e necessity of long time i n t e r v a l s becomes even more acute when it is taken into account that the act of measuring l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y in L I may have a s t r o n g impact on the loss p r o c e s s . T h e confrontation with a certain amount of language loss may be all the stimulus an informant needs to remember aspects of the tested v a r i ables (or to go out and f i n d out about these v a r i a b l e s ) in an analogous test situation some months later. T h e n the d e s i g n itself has d i s t u r b e d the natural course of the language loss process it hoped to t r a c k down. A second argument a g a i n s t a longitudinal d e s i g n in research on L1 loss is that not only processes of l a n g u a g e loss may o c c u r in a g i v e n time period. ( N a t u r a l ) language c h a n g e or l a n g u a g e evolution may be the only cause for a l i n g u i s t i c element o c c u r r i n g at moment X¡ to have disappeared at moment X¡+·]· T h e element may have been replaced b y another element. Especially in the case

40

Jaspaert et al

of v e r y

long time i n t e r v a l s ,

t h e potential o c c u r r e n c e of p u r e change

has to be taken into account.

It is necessary

cesses f r o m change processes,

because o t h e r w i s e t h e concept of

will

lose its

and,

at

specificity

the

in comparison

same time,

Unfortunately,

its

with

usefulness

the empirical

as

observation

to c a r e f u l l y

other

forms

a concept

that

of

in empirical

a linguistic

too,

may

LI

element

evolution

linguistics. has

disap-

t h a t underlies

losers do not j u s t lose l i n g u i s t i c elements o v e r time.

lose lexical

items which

r e f e r to t h i n g s

peared because of c u l t u r a l change,

in

pro-

language loss

language

peared does not g i v e us a d i r e c t clue to t h e latent process disappearance.

processes

separate loss

reality

that

have

or t h e y may s u b s t i t u t e l i n g u i s t i c

its

They, disap-

elements.

T h e f a c t t h a t such a s u b s t i t u t e is b o r r o w e d f r o m another language system may be too u n i m p o r t a n t a f e a t u r e of language loss to w a r r a n t t h e claim t h a t language loss is a separate,

autonomous language change process.

A f t e r all, i t does not

make sense t o look upon all n o n - E n g l i s h Western Europeans as language

losers

because of the f a c t t h a t t h e y b o r r o w elements f r o m t h e English language. T h e conclusion has to be t h a t only in a v e r y limited way l o n g i t u d i n a l designs are useful in p r i m a r y problem

of

defining

language the

point

deserves special care as well.

loss research. of

reference

However, in

order

One solution is to

in o t h e r designs

to

trace

the

language

loss

i n t r o d u c e into t h e design a

c o n t r o l g r o u p (see section 4 ) , b u t t h i s s t r a t e g y is not always p r a c t i c a b l e . has to d r a w , t h e n , on o t h e r resources t h a t g i v e information on t h e

One

(supposed)

p r e v i o u s language p r o f i c i e n c y of t h e subjects or on t h e language p r o f i c i e n c y

of

p r e c e d i n g generations (see section 5 ) .

3.

THE POINT

OF REFERENCE

Part of the merits of

a simple p r e t e s t - p o s t t e s t

f a c t o r in language loss linear

IN PRET EST-POSTTEST

DESIGNS

design to

i n c o r p o r a t e the

research is based upon t h e assumption

relationship between time and t h e loss of language,

time

t h a t t h e r e is a

and p a r t i c u l a r l y

the

speed of language loss. T h e l i n e a r i t y assumption implies t h a t t h e amount of language

loss in a specific time p e r i o d ,

which

is equal to one's language

profi-

ciency at moment X j minus t h e p r o f i c i e n c y measured at some later moment X¡ + n / is independent relation

is

related to

not

of t h e degree of linear,

the

t h e speed of

period ( X j , X j

+n

language loss

degree of

language

language

loss t h a t

is

at moment X j . loss

However,

at moment Xj

to be expected

is

during

) . T h e d i f f e r e n c e between a linear and a n o n - l i n e a r

if

the

directly a time

relationship

between time and language loss is depicted in f i g u r e 1. T h e logistic r e l a t i o n s h i p in f i g u r e 1 clearly shows an i n t e r d e p e n d e n c y of t h e speed of language loss in a given time period and t h e degree of language

loss

at the b e g i n n i n g of t h a t p e r i o d .

pat-

terns,

it is n 2 c e s s a r y ,

Because of t h e o c c u r r e n c e of n o n - l i n e a r

if one is to draw conclusions on t h e speed of

language

Points of

reference

41

degree of LL

X F i g . 1:

X

X, '2

1

X 4

3

TIME

Hypothetical relationship between time and degree of language loss (A:

linear relationship;

B:

logistic relationship; X ^ ,

measuring moments; f ( A ) :

X1-X2=X3-X4; f ( B ) :

problem of

establishing

solved only p a r t l y , in the analysis Xj.

It

is

a point

of

reference

for

This means that

moment

X

in the sense that it is moved to moment X ¡ ;

requires the

important

to

establishment of

note

that

it

is

a point of

highly

X^:

X 1 -X2

/bRytJa

φ

/ bo'k/

->

/bpi'kska / ,

book

->

œ

/kop

/

->

/kœpka

/,

head

α

->

ε

/ pan

/

- >

/penaka

/,

pan

a

->

e

/ pa:r

- >

/pe:Rka

/,

pair

ou

- >

œy

->

/vRceyks

/,

woman

u

- >

o

- >

0

/ / VRDU /

In some cases t h e r e

/,

loaf

is a n o t h e r vowel mutation

instead of

umlaut,

especially

in

cases w h e r e umlaut is impossible: ι : -> e î J

/ IL : f

/ -> / Ι ε ϊ J f k a / ,

body

u : -> œy

/mu:s

/ -> /mceyska

mouse

ι, : -> ε

/ p e p i ì R , ' -> /pe'peRka/,

In t h e t e s t t h e emphasis

/,

piece of p a p e r

is on t h e p r e s e n c e o r absence of

(the correct)

vowel

mutation. Pluralisation,

t h e second v a r i a b l e ,

is

much

less t r a n s p a r e n t .

Houben

a r g u e s t h a t p l u r a l i s a t i o n in t h e dialect of M a a s t r i c h t is a h i s t o r i c a l l y m i x t u r e of r u l e s . The first

Nevertheless,

(1905)

inextricable

he d e s c r i b e s f i v e categories of p l u r a l s .

c a t e g o r y contains t h e p l u r a l s t h a t a r e formed by

umlaut and

have

no s u f f i x : /bo-k / -> / b j f k / '

book

/kop

head

/ -> /kœp / ,

S e c o n d , t h e r e is suffix

-s f o r all diminutives a n d most nouns w i t h final / - a l / ,

/- aR / or /- a / . In t h e t h i r d c a t e g o r y

t h e nouns a r e p l u r a l i s e d by t h e suffix / - a / ,

p r o b a b l y t h e most f r e q u e n t . ganized g r o u p of nouns, last c a t e g o r y contains

which is

T h e f o u r t h c a t e g o r y c o n s i s t s of a seemingly

which

are pluralised

by

suffix

/- aR / .

unor-

The fifth

and

nouns t h a t do not u n d e r g o any c h a n g e in pluralisation or

( a n d t h i s is in f a c t a sixth c a t e g o r y ) t e r n of t h e stem v o w e l :

o n l y in t h e q u a n t i t y

( l e n g t h ) or tone-pat-

Aspects of dialect loss / ηφ'ί

81

/ -> / n(á't / ,

nut

/ b e Rax / -> /b£R3x/,

mountain

Needless to say, t h e r e are many exceptions to these categories, b u t even w i t h out these, t h e complexity of p l u r a l i s a t i o n in t h e Maastricht dialect can h a r d l y be denied. The verb

next

system,

three

linguistic

in p a r t i c u l a r

variables

in t h e

the formation

of

acceptability past tense,

test focus

past

vowel mutation in t h e 2nd and 3 r d persons of t h e present tense. formation of past tense in the dialect f i n a l consonants,

the - d

in t h e

is v e r b stem

s u f f i x causes

+

/-

on

participle,

da / •

The

After

the and

regular voiceless

r e g r e s s i v e assimilation

of

voice.

T h e rule is t h e same in D u t c h , except t h a t t h e assimilation of voice is p r o g r e s sive (MA = Maastricht d i a l e c t ; SD = s t a n d a r d MA

/ Ra'gda

/

( f r o m rake,

SD

/

/

( f r o m raken,

Ra'kte

Dutch): "to touch") "to touch")

Many v e r b s t h a t have a s t r o n g conjugation in D u t c h , have a s t r o n g conjugation in t h e dialect as well. these exceptions

However,

t h e dialect

has

t h e r e are q u i t e a few exceptions. (or

had)

a weak conjugation

In most of

in cases

where

s t a n d a r d Dutch has a s t r o n g c o n j u g a t i o n . MA

/ Jœyvda

/

(from sjuive,

" t o shove")

SD

/ εχο'ί

/

( f r o m schuiven,

" t o shove")

T h e same goes f o r t h e past p a r t i c i p l e , where t h e general rule is: /

* stem * / X /

MA

/ysjeijnt

/

( f r o m sjijne,

SD

/ γθεχβηθ

/

( f r o m schijnen,

"to shine")

It is t h i s c o n t r a s t between weak conjugation

"to shine") in t h e dialect and s t r o n g

tion in s t a n d a r d equivalents t h a t is used as a v a r i a b l e in t h e t e s t . latter

two variables

both focus

on t h e

same c o n t r a s t ,

i.e.

conjugaSince the

weak v s .

strong,

also a combination of t h e two is presented in t h e tables below. In some i r r e g u l a r v e r b s in t h e dialect t h e r e is vowel mutation in t h e 2nd and 3 r d persons s i n g u l a r of the p r e s e n t tense.

T h i s phenomenon is comparable to

t h e German e-i-Wechsel

T h e r e is no such rule in s t a n d a r d

Dutch.

This

According

to

o r the a-Umlaut

vowel mutation Houben

(1905)

rule.

in the dialect it

seems to

can be umlaut b u t be conditioned

each of t h e seven classes he d i s t i n g u i s h e s f o r t h e i r r e g u l a r

also

shortening.

phonologically verbs.

within

Münstermann & Hagen

82 1 / ιχ le's

/

2 / ¿ ι χ IfS's

/ 3 /he'R

lyS's /

( " I read, you read, he r e a d s " , from leze, 1

/ ι χ

ba'yRip /

2

/ d i x

bayRips

/

3

/he'R

"to read") bayRip/

( " I u n d e r s t a n d , you u n d e r s t a n d , he u n d e r s t a n d s " , from

begriepe,

"to u n d e r s t a n d " ) T h e s i x t h v a r i a b l e in the test is pronominal s u b s t i t u t i o n . In contrast to s t a n d a r d D u t c h , in which masculine and feminine g e n d e r have merged into one cate g o r y , the dialect has a three g e n d e r s y s t e m . T h e g e n d e r of a noun is not only marked by the form of the article, but also by the flexion of adjectives a n d , N P - e x t e r n a l l y , by pronominal s u b s t i t u t i o n : / h e î J ï z an ncey ' t o t a l ("Here

wi ' v m s t a za

/.

s a ( f ) new ( f ) table; how do you like it ( f ) ? " )

T h e flexion of adjectives is also used as a v a r i a b l e . Generally the flexion of the adjective is the same for masculine and feminine ( s u f f i x / - a / ) , but f o r a phonologically conditioned g r o u p of a d j e c t i v e s , the flexion of adjectives before s i n g u l a r nouns with feminine g e n d e r is, as with neutral g e n d e r , without s u f f i x ( c f . H i n s k e n s & Muysken 1986 for a more e x a c t d e s c r i p t i o n of t h i s phonological c o n d i t i o n i n g ) . Houben (1905) a r g u e s that t h i s s t r o n g flexion goes for adjectives with final - f , -I, ~m, -n, -ng, -r, -d, and -/' from intervocalic d: /ana

YRute ma :n

/

/ ana 'doma ma:n

/

/an

yRuta vrou

/

/an

vrou

/

/a

YRut

/

/ a ( n ) dom

ke:nt

/

ke:nt

("a tall man, woman, c h i l d " )

dom

("a s t u p i d " e t c . )

T h e r e may be d i f f e r e n t forms of the adjective f o r masculine and feminine g e n d e r on the one hand, and neutral g e n d e r and p r e d i c a t i v e use on the other hand. In these cases the root vowel undergoes vowel mutation: / ana weiza ma:n ("a wise man")

/

/

de'

ma:n

i s

wi:s

/

" ( t h a t man is w i s e " )

T h e next v a r i a b l e is of a more s y n t a c t i c nature. It is the separability of the so called pronominal a d v e r b . A pronominal a d v e r b is composed of some anaphorical a d v e r b ( t h a t replaces a p r o n o u n ) and a preposition. If the anaphorical element is not s t r e s s e d ( " e r " instead of "daar" or " h i e r " ; E n g l i s h equivalents "it" instead of "that" or " t h i s " ) the pronominal a d v e r b is (or was) not separable in the dialect, while in s t a n d a r d D u t c h it is separable by other c o n s t i t u e n t s :

A s p e c t s of dialect loss SD

/ î k hep

83 nou y e ' n t e î t fo*R

/

( " I have it now no time f o r " ) MA

/ l X hœp nu' γε'ηθη t u t

dav^'R

/

( " I have now no time it f o r " ) T h e last v a r i a b l e to be d i s c u s s e d is the p r o d u c t i v e n e s s of the s u f f i x -etig, w h i c h , when added to v e r b stems, produces adjectives. T h e function of these adjectives is mostly similar to that of the p r e s e n t p a r t i c i p l e . T h e Dutch e q u i v alent is -erig, which has, however, not been as p r o d u c t i v e as -etig. T h e r e were three more variables in the t e s t , which will not be d i s c u s s e d here. Two of these are not d i s c u s s e d because t h e y only o c c u r once in the test (the p r e s e n t participle on -enteere, and the formation of a female denominator from a male denominator by a d d i n g -5e), and the t h i r d is left out here because its d i s c u s s i o n would t a k e as much time and space as the d i s c u s s i o n of the other v a r i a b l e s together. T h i s is the contrast between dialect and s t a n d a r d Dutch in several f u n c t i o n s of the a d v e r b er. T h e results of these variables are not d i s c u s s e d , but t h e y are included in the total test score. T h i s total test score should be r e g a r d e d as a v e r y global measure, since we cannot, a p r i o r i , estimate the relative importance or weight of the separate v a r i a b l e s . T h e results of the test were scored as follows. Each v a r i a n t was r e g a r d e d as a dichotomous v a r i a b l e . When a dialect loss v a r i a b l e was accepted, and also when an o r i g i n a l dialect v a r i a n t was rejected, the score would be 0. In r e v e r s e , when an o r i g i n a l v a r i a n t was accepted, and also when a loss v a r i a n t was rejected and adequately c o r r e c t e d , the score would be 1. Summing the scores f o r each pair of sentences resulted in an item score between 0 and 2. E v e r y v a r i a b l e was represented in several pairs of sentences, i . e . s e v e r a l items. Summing the scores of all items of the same v a r i a b l e , and d i v i d i n g this sum by the number of items per v a r i a b l e resulted in a score between 0 and 2 for each of the v a r i a b l e s . T h e results of the acceptability test for the entire sample are g i v e n in table 2. As has been made clear above, the h i g h e r the score for a l i n g u i s t i c v a r i a b l e , the more resistant it appears to be to dialect loss. From a f i r s t look at table 2 we may conclude that none of the variables shows complete loss of o r i g i n a l v a r i a n t s , nor does any of them show complete p r e s e r v a t i o n of original v a r i a n t s . If we go down the l i s t , it is clear that the formation of diminutives proves to be quite r e s i s t a n t . T h i s could be accounted for by the relative t r a n s p a r e n c y of the rules. It is all the more s t r a n g e that the mean score as well as the s t a n d a r d deviation for pluralisation are equal to those for diminutive formation. A s we demonstrated above, pluralisation in the dialect of Maastricht is almost complete chaos. Of c o u r s e , it is v e r y d i f f i c u l t to v e r i f y or f a l s i f y any

Münstermann & Hagen

84 Table 2:

Means and standard deviations for the variables in the acceptability test.

Variable

Mean

S.d.

Diminutive formation Pluralisation V e r b s : Past tense V e r b s : Past participle V e r b s : Past + perfect V e r b s : Vowel mutation Pronominal substitution Flexion of adjectives Pronominal adverbs Adjectives on -etig

1..51 .51 0 .67 1 .17 0.92 1 .44 1 .73 1 .83 1 .02 1 .17

0.23 0.24 0.46 0.39 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.27 0.13 0.44

Totale test score

1 .32

0.17

hypothesis on the relation between t r a n s p a r e n c y and language maintenance or loss, because t r a n s p a r e n c y or opaqueness is v e r y hard to quantify. But this finding certainly does not constitute an independent argument in f a v o u r of such a hypothesis. Dialect loss is evident in the v e r b system. T y p i c a l for the loss we found here is that it is the opposite of an increase of r e g u l a r i t y . Weak conjugations have become s t r o n g , where their standard Dutch equivalents were s t r o n g . Perhaps this is the clearest case of dialect loss as opposed to internal change. We would not expect internal change to increase i r r e g u l a r i t y . Another remarkable fact is that this loss does not affect the complete conjugation with the same s t r e n g t h . T h e score for the formation of past tense is considerably lower than the score for the formation of the past participle. Although we do not have any evidence of t h i s , a possible reason for this seeming discrepancy can be found in the frequency of use of both tenses. Perfect tense seems to be the more frequently used. Maybe the analysis of spontaneous speech, later on in the project, can shed some light on this problem. Vowel mutation in 2nd and 3 r d person s i n g u l a r of i r r e g u l a r v e r b s , and also pronominal substitution and the flexion of adjectives are rather well p r e s e r v e d . Of course, the latter two variables are closely related to one another, since they are both conditioned by the t h r e e - g e n d e r system. As expected there is not much difference in mean and standard deviation for these two variables. Separability of the unstressed pronominal adverb has become completely optional. A score of 1 with a small standard deviation means approval of both

Aspects of dialect loss

85

t h e o r i g i n a l v a r i a n t and t h e dialect loss v a r i a n t . T h e t o t a l t e s t score shows t h a t , far,

however,

in g e n e r a l , t h e dialect loss is moderate.

t h e o r e t i c a l maximum of 2 f o r each v a r i a b l e . down b y

So

we have o n l y compared t h e mean scores of t h e e n t i r e sample to a

generation.

In o r d e r to

t h e comparison o v e r g e n e r a t i o n s

In t a b l e 3 these scores are b r o k e n

exclude the

p o s s i b i l i t y of

bias due t o

sex,

was made o n l y f o r t h e male subjects (n=48,

16

in each c e l l ) . In t h i s comparison t h e p o i n t of t i o n (Gen.

1).

r e f e r e n c e is t h e score of t h e oldest

genera-

In t h e last t w o columns of t h e t a b l e , t h e r e s u l t s of oneway ana-

lyses of v a r i a n c e f o r each of t h e v a r i a b l e s are s h o w n .

If we compare t h e

results

of t h e y o u n g e r g e n e r a t i o n s w i t h those of t h e o l d e s t , dialect loss r e l a t i v e t o t h e results

from

the older

generation

is

clearly

more e v i d e n t .

For

all

variables,

e x c e p t d i m i n u t i v e f o r m a t i o n , t h e oldest g e n e r a t i o n has t h e h i g h e s t scores. Again dialect loss is most a p p a r e n t the youngest generation weak c o n j u g a t i o n equivalent

is

in t h e v e r b system.

has a score of

For t h e past

.43, w h i c h means t h a t ,

tense,

in t h i s

group,

in t h e dialect has v i r t u a l l y d i s a p p e a r e d w h e r e v e r t h e s t a n d a r d

strong.

Though

somewhat

less

dramatically,

the

results

for

the

past p a r t i c i p l e p o i n t in t h e same d i r e c t i o n . For vowel mutation

in i r r e g u l a r

tions are almost equal and f a i r l y s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower.

verbs,

the

scores of t h e t w o o l d e r

T h e same goes f o r t h e f l e x i o n of a d j e c t i v e s ,

seems q u i t e r e s i s t a n t

genera-

h i g h . T h e score of t h e y o u n g e s t g e n e r a t i o n is a variable

that

if we compare t h e scores t o t h e t h e o r e t i c a l maximum,

but

c l e a r l y shows a steep decline if we compare t h e scores of t h e t h r e e g e n e r a t i o n s . Looking at t h e t o t a l t e s t s c o r e s ,

we cannot

d i f f e r e n c e between t h e f i r s t t w o g e n e r a t i o n s t h e last t w o g e n e r a t i o n s seems to t a k e

place

is .15.

between

locate a p o i n t

is

the

results

The

between

For some of t h e v a r i a b l e s t h e s t r o n g e s t decline

t h e second

and

third

dialect loss in M a a s t r i c h t appears to be a g r a d u a l In table 4 ,

of d e c l i n e .

.12 and t h e d i f f e r e n c e

of t h e

middle

generations,

but

generally

process.

generation

are

broken

down

by

the

independent variable sex. For

only

one

variable

(pluralisation)

between male and female i n f o r m a n t s . that

women

are more c o n s e r v a t i v e

a

significant

I t i s , of

speakers

course,

of

difference

was

not enough

t h e dialect t h a n

t o t a l t e s t score also shows a t e n d e n c y in t h i s d i r e c t i o n .

to

men,

and p o s s i b l y even b e t t e r ,

contradict

(1983)

findings

of

Hoppenbrouwers

most s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c studies of language v a r i a t i o n , v a t i v e and more f r e q u e n t

speakers of d i a l e c t .

tions f o r t h e c o n t r a d i c t o r y f i n d i n g the

use and

certainly

not

subjective

suitability

a low-prestige

mentioned

men seem t o be more

in t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y . of t h e

variety.

One

dialect, of

above.

T h e r e are t w o possible

t h e r e l a t i v e p r e s t i g e of t h e dialect in q u e s t i o n . the

but

the

T h e f i n d i n g t h a t women

do not p e r f o r m worse on a dialect loss t e s t , the

found

conclude

seems to Also

in

conserexplana-

T h e f i r s t one lies

in

As we shall see f r o m data of t h e dialect reasons

of

Maastricht

brought

forward

is in

Münstermann & Hagen Table 3:

Results of the acceptability test f o r each of the three generations.

Variable Diminutive formation

Pluralisation

V e r b s : Past tense

V e r b s : Past participle

V e r b s : Past

+

perfect

V e r b s : Vowel mutation

Pronominal substitution

Gen.

Mean

S.d.

1

1.52

0.23

2

1.55

0.24

3

1.39

0.19

1

1.55

0.17

2

1.46

0.25

3

1.40

0.27

1

0.88

0.44

2

0.76

0.37

3

0.43

0.38

1

1.33

0.27

2

1.15

0.49

3

0.96

0.27

1

1.10

0.27

2

0.95

0.39

3

0.69

0.26

1

1.56

0.22

2

1.52

0.34

3

1.16

0.41

1

1.83

0.27

2

1.79

0.30

3

1.65

0.33

Flexion of adjectives

1

1.92

0.15

2

1.83 1.65

0.24

Pronominal adverbs

3 1

Adjectives on

-etig

Total test score

F

Sign.

2.59

0.09

1.82

0.17

5.55

0.01

4.41

0.02

7.24

0.00

7.18

0.00

1.71

0.19

4.46

0.02

0.12

0.88

0.26

0.27

15.35

0.00

0.35

1.04

0.16

2

1.02

0.08

3

1,02

0.15

1

1.19

2

1.09

0.25 0.46

3

1.09

0.52

1

1.42

0.11

2

1.30

3

1.15

0.15 0.14

Aspects of dialect loss Table 4:

87

Results of the acceptability test for sex (n=32, 16 per c e l l ) .

Variable Diminutive formation Pluralisation V e r b s : Past tense V e r b s : Past participle V e r b s : Past

+

perfect

V e r b s : Vowel mutation Pronominal substitution Flexion of adjectives Pronominal adverbs Adjectives on

-etig

Total test score

Sex

Mean

S.d.

m f m f m f m f m f m f m f m f m f m f

1..55 1..59 1..45 1,,64 0..76 0,.63 1..15 1..27 0 .95 0..95 1 .52 1 .53 1 .79 1 .65 1 .83 1 .92 1 .02 1 .00 1 .09 1 .31

0.24 0.22 0.25 0.18 0.37 0.53 0.49 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.34 0.21 0.30 0.35 0.24 0.19 0.08 0.12 0.45 0.48

m f

1 .30 1 .39

0.15 0.14

F

Sign.

0.26

0.61

5.27

0.03

0.72

0.40

0.64

0.43

0.00

0.96

0.01

0.92

1.60

0.22

1.15

0.29

0.32

0.58

1.75

0.20

3.45

0.07

sociolinguistics for the different performances of men and women is that women seek to derive prestige from speaking the standard language ( c f . T r u d g i l l 1974). Within the speech community of Maastricht, however, there is no need to do so, because of the high prestige of the dialect itself. T h e second explanation may sound a little more speculative. In spite of all efforts of emancipation, women still have the largest share in the education of children. In Maast r i c h t the f i r s t language for most of the children is still the dialect. Eventually they all become bidialectal. Most of our female informants stated that they wished to teach their children pure dialect, which means that they themselves must t r y to be aware of the norms for "pure" dialect. Another argument is that they must be able to clearly separate the dialect from the standard, and in order to do so, must have a detailed knowledge of the contrasts between the systems.

Münstermann £· Hagen

88 Table 5:

Results of the acceptability test for each of the two neighbourhoods (n=64, 32 in each c e l l ) .

Variable Diminutive formation Pluralisation V e r b s : Past tense V e r b s : Past participle V e r b s : Past

+

perfect

V e r b s : Vowel mutation Pronominal substitution Flexion of adjectives Pronominal adverbs Adjectives on

-etlg

Total test score

Neighb.

Mean

S.d.

BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP

1..47 1..55 1..48 1,.54 0..81 0..53 1 .22 1 .14 1 .02 0.83 1 .35 1 .53 1 .74 1 .72 1 .77 1 .89 1 .02 1 .02 1 .17 1 .17

0.23 0.22 0.21 0.26 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.36 0.34 0.36 0.32 0.35 0.31 0.33 0.30 0.22 0.12 0.15 0.39 0.49

BD VP

1 .30 1 .34

0.17 0.17

F

Sign.

1.89

0.17

0.78

0.38

6.60

0.01

0.75

0.39

4.37

0.04

4.47

0.04

0.07

0.80

3.08

0.08

0.00

1.00

0.00

1.00

1.07

0.30

In table 5 the results of the entire sample are broken down by the variable neighbourhood ( B D stands for Blauw Dörrep, the working class neighbourhood, and V P for the V i l l a p a r k ) . Here also, the clearest differences are in the v e r b system, in particular the past tense. T h i s , however, is the only variable that confirms the suggestion by Lousberg (1961) that socially bound variation runs parallel to historical development. T h e other significant difference, for vowel mutation in i r r e g u l a r v e r b s , even contradicts this suggestion. As far as this variable is concerned, the upper-middle class informants are apparently more conservative. So, from the results of this acceptability test we cannot draw conclusions as to the relation between social variation and dialect loss. T h e r e is - we would like to add - a possible explanation for the opposite directions of the two significant differences found. Although this explanation

A s p e c t s of dialect loss could complicate the a n a l y s i s ,

89 it seems worth c o n s i d e r i n g .

past tense dialect loss manifests itself as a decrease

In the v a r i a b l e of

in r e g u l a r i t y ,

the v a r i a b l e of vowel mutation dialect loss means an increase

whereas in

in r e g u l a r i t y .

The

h i g h e r score of the people in Blauw Dörrep for past tense and t h e i r lower score f o r vowel mutation may t h u s have been caused by mere generalisation of

regu-

larity. 3.2.

The loss of

functions

Two domain questionnaires were used. T h e f i r s t one measures reported use of the dialect in several domains and the second one measures the s u b j e c t i v e s u i t ability of the use of dialect. In both questionnaires f i v e - p o i n t scales were u s e d , r u n n i n g from " n e v e r " to "always" in the use q u e s t i o n n a i r e , and from "not suitable" to " v e r y suitable" in the s u i t a b i l i t y questionnaire. T h e two q u e s t i o n naires were not made up of e x a c t l y the same list of domains. T h e domain " I n school d u r i n g l e s s o n s " , for example, can be p a r t of a s u i t a b i l i t y q u e s t i o n n a i r e f o r all informants, but in a use questionnaire it is only relevant to y o u n g people. T h e opposite goes for a domain like " c h i l d r e n " . T h e scores of both q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were f a c t o r - a n a l y s e d . We will not g i v e a detailed d e s c r i p t i o n of the a n a l y s e s , but will confine o u r s e l v e s to the general outcome. A f t e r removal of the items with low communalities, f o r both q u e s t i o n naires t h r e e - f a c t o r solutions were found that were interpretable and comparable. T h e f a c t o r s could be labelled "instrumentalism", " s o l i d a r i t y " and "family" ( c f . Münstermann & V a n Hout 1986). T h e percentages of v a r i a n c e explained were 63% for the s u i t a b i l i t y questionnaire and 67° f o r the r e p o r t e d - u s e - q u e s t i o n n a i r e . T h e f a c t o r s called "instrumentalism" are dominated b y s u c h domains as "with s t r a n g e r s in Maastricht", "with o f f i c i a l s " , "in school", etc. The solidarity factors were constituted b y domains like " n e i g h b o u r h o o d " , " f r i e n d s " , " c o l l e a g u e s " , " c l u b s " , etc. T h e label "family" s p e a k s for itself. It is remarkable that the family domains are on a separate factor instead of on the s o l i d a r i t y f a c t o r . T h i s may have been caused b y the extremely high scores and the low v a r i a n c e s . In table 6 the results of the reported use f a c t o r s are b r o k e n down b y n e i g h bourhood and generation. T h e v a r i a b l e sex has been left out of consideration here ( b u t does not c a u s e any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s ) . T h e scores for the f a c tors were computed by summing the scores of the items with high loadings on a factor and d i v i d i n g t h i s sum b y the number of items in the summation. T h i s results in a score between 1 and 5, like the o r i g i n a l item s c o r e s . In g e n e r a l , we can conclude that the scores are quite h i g h . T h e h i g h e s t , of c o u r s e , are the scores for "family", which is not v e r y remarkable, s i n c e all the informants are dialect s p e a k e r s . T h e lowest s c o r e s , as could also have been p r e d i c t e d , are for "instrumentalism". But even these scores are above the theoretical middle of the scale ( e x c e p t for one c e l l ) . T h e r e are s i g n i f i c a n t

M ü n s t e r m a n n & Hagen

90 T a b l e 6:

The

variables

of

the

reported

use

questionnaire

b r o k e n down b y n e i g h b o u r h o o d and g e n e r a t i o n . R e p o r t e d use: BD

Instrumentalism Tot

VP

G

1

4.17

4.04

4.10

E

2

3.92

3.31

3.60

Ν

3

3.44

2.98

3.21

Tot

3.84

3.44

3.64

F/Sign.

2.96

0.09 R e p o r t e d use :

BD

VP

F

5. 07

Sign.

0.01

Family Tot

G

1

5.00

4.83

4.92

E

2

4.92

4.29

4.60

Ν

3

4.92

3.87

4.40

Tot

4.94

4.33

4.64

F/Sign.

6.62

0.01

F

1 .63

Sign.

0.21

R e p o r t e d use: S o l i d a r i t y BD

VP

Tot

G

1

4.63

4.67

4.65

E

2

4.67

4.12

4.40

Ν

3

4.75

4.04

4.40

Tot

4.68

4.28

4.48

F/Sign,

6.74

0.01

differences

F

1 .16

Sign.

0.33

in r e p o r t e d use between t h e t w o n e i g h b o u r h o o d s : t h e i n f o r m a n t s

in

Blauw D ö r r e p claim t o use t h e dialect more o f t e n in all t h r e e g r o u p s of domains.

Aspects of dialect loss

91

A generation difference is only clear in the factor "instrumentalism". "Family" and the "solidarity" domains remain strong dialect domains, but in the more official domains the dialect seems to be losing g r o u n d . T h e results show that standard Dutch can only have an instrumental function, but in this function it becomes more important. T h e results of the suitability questionnaire are shown in table 7. A comparison of the results in this table with the results in table 6 shows that most suitability scores are lower than the comparable reported use scores. T h i s may have been at least partly caused by the fact that, as already mentioned, the two questionnaires were not identical. Normally we would expect subjective suitability to be higher than reported use ( c f . Münstermann 8· Van Hout 1986). T h e opposite outcome means that there are informants who speak the dialect in situations they consider the dialect less suitable for. T h i s can mean several t h i n g s . F i r s t , it may be that, if possible, an informant speaks the dialect in e v e r y situation, and that considerations of suitability are only made in the second instance, for example when other people present do not speak or understand the dialect. Second, and this could be t r u e for some of the informants in Blauw Dörrep, it could mean that an informant does not have enough skills in standard Dutch to speak it when n e c e s s a r y . T h e r e are no significant differences between the three generations nor between the two neighbourhoods as far as the suitability of the dialect for these three functions is concerned. As in table 6, the lower scores are to be found in "instrumentalism". T h e r e were no significant two-way interactions between the effects of neighbourhood and generation for any of the variables of reported use or suitability. In f i g u r e 1 the results for both the reported-use questionnaire and the suitability questionnaire are presented g r a p h i c a l l y . T h e g r a p h s clearly show that, as far as reported use is concerned, the smallest differences between the two neighbourhoods are to be found in the oldest generation. For "family" and "solidarity" the differences between the two neighbourhoods become larger with the decrease of age. For "instrumentalism" the middle generation shows the largest difference, but this is almost equal to the difference for the youngest generation. Since reported use in the working class neighbourhood, particularly for "family" and "solidarity", appears to be constant over the three generations and decreases in the upper-middle class neighbourhood, it is likely that the use of the dialect is becoming more socially bound than it used to be, even though the dialect generally holds a strong position. T h i s suggestion lines up with the fact that for "instrumentalism" the decrease of reported use is apparent for both neighbourhoods. These f i n d i n g s will be compared with attitudinal data later on in the project.

Münstermann & Hag' Table 7:

The variables of the suitability questionnaire broken down by neighbourhood and generation. Suitability: BD

VP

Instrumentalism Tot

G

1

3.02

3.60

3.31

E

2

2.60

3.17

2.89

Ν

3

3.04

2.81

2.93

Tot

2.89

3.10

3.04

F/Sign.

1.42

0.24

F

1.12

Sign.

0.34

Suitability : Family BD

VP

Tot

1

4.79

4.87

4.83

E

2

4.12

4.29

4.21

Ν

3

4.67

4.37

4.52

Tot

4.53

4.51

4.52

F/Sign.

0.00

0.95

G

F

2.51

Sign.

0.09

S u i t a b i l i t y : Solidarity BD

VP

Tot

G

1

4.88

4.72

4.80

E

2

4.65

4.32

4.49

Ν

3

4.60

4.35

4.47

Tot

4.71

4.47

4.48

F/Sign.

3.14

0.08

F

2.43

Sign.

0.01

A s p e c t s of dialect loss REPORTED

93 SUITABILITY

USE

BD

Instrumentalism 3

VP

3

GEN

3

GEN

BD

VP

Family

3

GEN

VP

3

GEN

3

GEN

4

Solidarity

3

GEN

F i g . 1: A g r a p h i c representation of the reported use and suitability

scores

b r o k e n down b y n e i g h b o u r h o o d a n d generation (cf. tables 6 & 7).

Münstermann & Hagen

94 3.3.

The

Since

relation

between

loss

it would be r a t h e r

between

of functions

and

structural

p r e m a t u r e to d r a w a n y

loss

conclusions about t h e

functional

and

s t r u c t u r a l loss on t h e basis of only

even a production

test

- we will only

touch

one t e s t

upon t h i s matter v e r y

relation

- and

not

briefly.

In

table 8 t h e c o r r e l a t i o n coefficients between t h e total t e s t s c o r e and t h e v a r i a b l e s T a b l e 8:

Correlations test

score

between t h e and

the

total

reported

use v a r i a b l e s . I nstrumentalism

.30

Solidarity

.11

Family

.19

of r e p o r t e d use a r e g i v e n . A more detailed tic variables

inspection of t h e c o r r e l a t i o n coefficients

and t h e scores f o r

o u r optimism.

For

t h e time b e i n g ,

we can only

loss a n d functional dialect loss a r e i n d e p e n d e n t

4.

between all

r e p o r t e d use and s u i t a b i l i t y suggest that

does

linguis-

not

increase

structural

dialect

processes.

SUMMARY

The

results

of t h e s t r u c t u r a l

phenomenon.

Not only do t h e

substantially

from

the

theoretical

h a v e also been f o u n d . guistic

resistant than others, and

past

which

are strong

loss t e s t show

maximum,

but

same e x t e n t .

even

participle

if t h e y in

t h a t dialect

clear

It is also c l e a r t h a t dialect

v a r i a b l e s to t h e

tense

dialect

r e s u l t s f o r most of t h e l i n g u i s t i c

the

Some

represent

conjugation

in s t a n d a r d D u t c h .

generation

loss does

variables

loss is a

variables

appear

be much

t h e same c o n t r a s t , of

weak

differences

not a f f e c t all to

verbs

in

real

differ

such as the

linmore past

dialect

Explanations for these differences

-

would,

f o r t h e moment, be mere s p e c u l a t i o n . T h e r e are practically

no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s c a u s e d b y t h e v a r i a b l e

neigh-

b o u r h o o d . T h e two d i f f e r e n c e s we d i d f i n d point in opposite d i r e c t i o n s . Female informants do not e x h i b i t more dialect loss t h a n male informants. some of t h e v a r i a b l e s t h e y

even

seem to be more c o n s e r v a t i v e

s p e a k e r s of

For the

dialect. A s f a r as t h e use of dialect is c o n c e r n e d , still

holds a v e r y f i r m position.

function,

but

in g e n e r a l

we can conclude t h a t t h e

Some loss has been shown for t h e

t h e s p e a k e r s of t h e dialect

in

dialect

instrumental

M a a s t r i c h t t e n d to

use

A s p e c t s of d i a l e c t their

dialect for

of t h e f a m i l y

loss all

95

purposes.

- crucial,

loss of o t h e r f u n c t i o n s informants

in t h e

often

informants

that

than it w a s

bourhood, trast are,

and

in

the

in t h e

(cf.

neighbourhoods

upper-middle

class

losing p r e s t i g e ,

correlations test

class

between

do

not,

production

use variables.

is

use

of

Given

latter,

sharper.

the

justify

Perhaps

from

F o r t h e time b e i n g ,

The more

the

quite

the

Since

high,

fact

neigh-

real con-

the

scores

we cannot

say

may p o i n t in t h e

future.

results

and

1986).

in t h e f o r m e r

in t h e

the

the dialect

neighbourhood.

but the observed difference

the

domain

to a c c e l e r a t e

& V a n Hout

informants

probably

f o r t h e moment,

tests,

in t h e c r u c i a l

likely

claimed to

neighbourhood,

b e t w e e n t h e t w o t y p e s of d i a l e c t loss. l y s i s of t h e

is

Münstermann

dialect-speaking

d i r e c t i o n of s u c h a d e v e l o p m e n t in t h e The

domain

neighbourhood

upper-middle

to f i n d

two

t h a t t h e d i a l e c t is

acceptability

loss w a s f o u n d this

somewhat more d i f f i c u l t to f i n d t h e m

between even

class

in t h e

easy

any

loss

considerably

working

very

Hardly

because

reported-use

test

the assumption

of

we cannot

the

relation

w e will l e a r n more f r o m t h e ana-

regression

a n d loss of f u n c t i o n s a p p e a r to b e r e l a t i v e l y

and a

analyses

with

but conclude that

independent

all

reported-

structural

loss

processes.

REFERENCES Bourhis,

R.,

H.

Subjective

Giles Vitality

Multilingual De B o t ,

Κ.

& D.

and

(1985),

Questionnaire

Multicultural Onderzoek

parent-time'-methode. Dorian,

Ν.

(1981),

Philadelphia: Edwards,

V.

et

Η.

terkunde H.

Boosten Gal,

S.

d e 'ap-

of a Scottish

Gaelic

dialect.

on n o n - s t a n d a r d d i a l e c t s

W.Viereck

(ed.),

Focus

Volume 4 ) .

of

on:

British England

Amsterdam/

97-139.

Beschaafd

I en

het g e b r u i k v a n

II.

Nederlands

Tijdschrift

of

la

force

voor

Nederlandse

van

't Mestreechs.

d'intercourse Taal-

en

Let-

194-208.

Woordenboek

of diksjenaer

Maastricht:

& Stols. Language

Austria.

J.

(1978),

W.

McCormack

issues.

Research

Benjamins,

of

Press.

English Around the World,

Algemeen

Journal

26:33-40.

life-cycle

In:

groups.

of a

2:144-155.

Letteren The

prospects.

65:101-114 a n d (1955),

(1979),

lingual Hill,

John

(1948),

on t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n

ethnolinguistic

of P e n n s y l v a n i a

(1985),

( V a r i e t i e s of

l'esprit de clocher

Endepols,

der

The University

Philadelphia: Endepols,

for

Notes

n a a r t a a l v e r a n d e r i n g en death.

Progress and

Wales

(1981),

Development

Forum

Language

& B . Weltens

English: and

Rosenthal

shift:

Social

New Y o r k :

Language & S.

T h e Hague:

death,

Wurm

language

(eds.),

Mouton,

determinants

Academic

contact

Approaches

45-78.

of linguistic

change

in

bi-

evolution.

In:

Press. and

language

to language.

Anthropological

M ü n s t e r m a n n & Hagen

96 Hinskens

F.

& P.

Muysken

diabetologische Ubach

over

(1986),

variatie:

Worms.

Formeie

De flexie

To

appear

en functionele

van

in:

het

benaderingen

adjectief

GLOT,

in

special

het

issue

van

dialect

in

van

honour

of

p r o f . d r . A . S a s s e n em. Hoppenbrouwers,

C.

(1983),

Het

genus

in

een

Brabants

regiolect.

TABU

13:1-25 Houben,

J.

(1905),

Het

dialect

der

stad

Maastricht.

Diss.

University

of

Amsterdam. Lousberg,

M.

(1961),

De

taalsituatie

in

Maastricht

en

Eijsden.

M.A.

thesis

U n i v e r s i t y of Nijmegen. Macnamara, J . (1971), tion

of

Irish.

planned?

J.

H.

gebruik.

& R.

In: J .

van

Momentopname R.

(1982),

In:

& W.

& B.

Bernud

(eds.),

Pee.

Limburg,

(1986),

Geerts & K. Jaspaert in

and

Lambert & B .

be

contra g e s c h i k t h e i d (eds.),

en

Werk-in-uitvoe-

Nederland

Nederlandse

conducting

Freed

Newbury House,

en

Vlaanderen.

van

Blanquaert, J.

(eds.),

research

in

language

The

of

language

loss

119-137.

Dialectatlassen

Part 8, Dialectatlas

b y E.

restaura-

languages

235-249.

in d e s i g n i n g

R.

Can

65-94.

Taalattitudes

de sociolinguistiek

ACCO,

Rowley, M a s s . :

R N D (1962), Reeks

G.

van

Issues

skill attrition. skills.

Hout

Creten,

Leuven/Amersfoort: Oxford,

Rubin

Hawaii: U n i v e r s i t y of Hawaii P r e s s ,

Münstermann, ring.

S u c c e s s e s a n d f a i l u r e s in the movement for the

In:

o n d e r leiding v a n E.

Belgisch

Ciaessens,

Limburg W. Goffin

en

Blanquaert

luid

& A.

Nederiands

Stevens.

Ant-

werpen . Shepherd, Trudgill,

P. (1946), Van P.

(1974),

The

taol naar social

bridge: Cambridge University Trudgill,

P. (1983),

nites

are

(1886),

manuscript Gent).

In:

is

in

the

known

Goffin.

of English

in

Norwich.

l a n g u a g e s h i f t and identity. W h y

P.Trudgill,

O x f o r d : Blackwell, Manuscript

Maastricht:

Cam-

Press.

L a n g u a g e contact,

not A l b a n i a n s .

perspectives. Willems

taal.

differentiation

as

collection

On

dialect.

Social

and

Arvaregional

127-140. "De of

enquete Willems". the

Koninklijke

Unpublished

Vlaamse

(The

Academie

in

Ill FIRST-LANGUAGE LOSS

Using the Present to Predict the Future in Language Contact: The Case of Immigrant Minority Languages in Sweden Sally University

1.

INTRODUCTION

Many

studies

of

and onwards contact

in

language

the

contexts

shift

or

to

spective... tion

that

have have

The

under

which

been

Later

no g e n e r a l

involved

of

in

mer call t h e

this

t h e mid

outcome of

takes

between

such

place.

1960's

language

However,

of

ethnic

and

ways"

viewed

factors

partially

as

in

different

broader

is a c l e a r

contributory of c o n t a c t

be

mainte-

in

required

per-

indica-

factors

...

situations

(as

before

greater

recognized".

the

attempts

(1981) to c o n s t r u c t schemata

vitality

when

may

influencing

both

a typology

change)

as

"cut

ambivalent

and that

sociocultural

area,

to

significance

so m a n y

interactions

be

a theory

research

from

purportedly

found

r e g u l a r i t y among s u c h f a c t o r s c a n b e

Allardt & Starck

shift

contact

cited factors

actually

p r e s e n c e of

complex

must f r e q u e n t l y well as

language

Boyd

Göteborg

(1972:122-123):

of t h e most p o p u l a r l y

nance and

and

an e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e o b s e r v e d

social c o n d i t i o n s

Fishman pointed out "Many

maintenance

have sought

of

linguistic

of

Giles

et a l .

(1977)

and

f o r an e v a l u a t i o n of w h a t t h e f o r minorities,

does

not seem to

have

b r o u g h t us all t h a t much c l o s e r to an u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p

between

t h e social c o n t e x t of l a n g u a g e c o n t a c t a n d t h e outcome of t h i s c o n t a c t :

minority

language maintenance or Another

approach

shift.

to t h e s t u d y

of

language contact

t h e p a t t e r n of l a n g u a g e u s e b y b i l i n g u a l s

nance

or

language

and the

shift.

Thus,

a stable language maintenance

tion

in

this

domain many shift, nance.

researchers

have or

Other

factors

language

mainte-

pattern

of

language

use

an o n g o i n g p r o c e s s of

situation. the

Following

Most

among

pattern

of

Fishman

language

of t h e

as an

however, pattern

i n d i c a t i o n of

use

(1972:115-116,

(e.g. of

Gal

language

a n d f o u n d t h e m i n d i c a t i v e of o n - g o i n g

stability,

1979 a n d use

i.e.

Dorian

in a s p e c i f i c

change.

bilingual

language shift,

studies approaching in

for

c o n s i d e r domain o v e r l a p as an i n d i c a t i o n of o n - g o i n g

scholars,

aspects

T h e p a t t e r n of lant h e social

investigated

overlap.

a n d domain s e p a r a t i o n

at other shift,

way

separation

investigate

ultimate outcome of c o n t a c t : the

variable,

to

between

s p e a k e r s c a n be t a k e n as i n d i c a t i v e of of

been

in t h e c o m m u n i t y .

g u a g e u s e c a n be v i e w e d as an i n t e r v e n i n g in t h e c o n t e x t of c o n t a c t

has

the

or

ques-

terms

of

example), language

l a n g u a g e mainte1981)

have

c a s e of

looked

language

100

Boyd T h e p u r p o s e of t h i s p a p e r is to examine both of these a p p r o a c h e s

in the

light of my

people in S w e d e n .

recent

research

among

s e c o n d generation

critically,

immigrant

young

T h e wide variation in the social conditions u n d e r which

dif-

ferent minority g r o u p s live in S w e d e n initially led me to the h y p o t h e s i s that the outcome of

l a n g u a g e contact would be d i f f e r e n t f o r

My

have c a u s e d me to re-evaluate the importance of some of the social

results

d i f f e r e n t minority

factors c o n s i d e r e d crucial to the outcome of contact,

groups.

and to look at the pattern

of l a n g u a g e use from a somewhat different p e r s p e c t i v e than that of domain c o n figuration .

2. THE

SOCIAL

CONTEXT

OF LANGUAGE

CONTACT

A s u r v e y of some of the literature of l a n g u a g e contact ( B o y d 1985, ch. p r i o r to and after F i s h m a n ' s

pessimistic statement

quoted above does

us reason f o r much g r e a t e r optimism than Fishman e x p r e s s e s t h e r e . of

such a s u r v e y ,

interacting

different c a s e s , cases

where

seems

to h a v e

have.

one

is left with

an extremely

social f a c t o r s , which are c o n s i d e r e d

We

and by

one are

or

different s c h o l a r s ,

more of these

factors

long list of o v e r l a p p i n g

a n d an either

effect to the one

still

from

way

give

A t the e n d and

relevant to l a n g u a g e contact in

had the opposite a long

2) both not

almost equally does

not seem

long list

of

to a p p l y

or

assumed

to

it is commonly

understanding

the

complex

relationship

between the social context of l a n g u a g e contact and the outcome of contact. Still, the factors mentioned in the s t u d i e s I s u r v e y e d , w h i c h concentrated on contact between

an immigrant minority

language

and a host

majority

language,

could be loosely g r o u p e d into six major c a t e g o r i e s : (1)

Historical

factors:

of m i g r a n t s

(i.e. p r i o r to contact) the social and l i n g u i s t i c situation

in the home c o u n t r y , relations between the home c o u n t r y

host c o u n t r y ,

the social situation of the majority a n d other minority

and com-

munities in the host c o u n t r y p r i o r to the a r r i v a l of immigrants. (2)

Demographic other

factors:

groups

g r o u p size, b i r t h

arriving,

length

s t a y , chain v s . s p o n t a n e o u s (3)

Geographic

factors:

tlement

host

in

Social

structural

immigration

period,

planned

number of length

of

migration.

distance to home c o u n t r y ,

country,

settlement, u r b a n v s . (4)

of

rate, m a r r i a g e p a t t e r n s ,

self-sufficiency

of

g e o g r a p h i c isolation of s e t community,

concentration

of

rural settlement.

factors:

social classes

r e p r e s e n t e d in m i g r a n t g r o u p ,

nomic niche o c c u p i e d , social s t r u c t u r e of majority, power

eco-

relations between

groups. (5)

Institutional

factors:

existence of separate minority

institutions,

acceptance

on equal or unequal terms in majority institutions ( c u l t u r a l , r e l i g i o u s , cational, mass media, g o v e r n m e n t s e r v i c e and

industry).

edu-

M i n o r i t y l a n g u a g e s in Sweden (6)

Attitudinal

factors:

101

minority in- and o u t - g r o u p attitudes, majority i n -

o u t - g r o u p attitudes in relevant contexts of i n t e r g r o u p Clearly,

it would

survival

b a s e d on s u c h a long a n d complex

be

impossible to evaluate the

chances

However,

as a preliminary

b a s i s for f o r m i n g

s u r v i v a l of v a r i o u s minority

for minority

list of social f a c t o r s .

clear that they are p r o b a b l y of d i f f e r e n t importance,

language

It is

equally

a n d s h o u l d be weighted.

hypotheses

l a n g u a g e s in S w e d e n ,

and

relations.

as to the chances

for

I have made an evaluation of

the p r o s p e c t s for different categories of ethnic minorities

in S w e d e n ,

based on

a consideration of as many of these factors as possible.

3. IMMIGRANTS In Sweden

IN

SWEDEN

today approximately

s e c o n d generation

be c o n s i d e r e d

first or

immigrants, if we use a broad definition of the term.

one million

persons

Table 1

s h o w s the number of f i r s t and s e c o n d generation the close of 1983, centage

of each

immigrants

listed b y c o u n t r y o r continent of o r i g i n ,

group

belonging

to the

the two c o u n t r i e s which are dominating more than one c o u n t r y of o r i g i n , and ranking.

can

Note that

" f i r s t generation

second

generation.

in the c o u n t r y

per-

I have also

listed

in each of the categories (in p a r e n t h e s e s )

immigrants"

representing

these c o u n t r i e s '

includes

at

i n c l u d i n g the

both f o r e i g n

overall citizens

r e s i d i n g in Sweden and naturalized Swedes b o r n a b r o a d , and " s e c o n d generation immigrants" broad

includes

category

children

of f i r s t

born

generation

to one

o r two

immigrants.

parents

Actually,

belonging

almost

to

this

half of

those

listed here as second generation immigrants have a native b o r n Swede as one of their parents. The spond ent

categories

into w h i c h

these

national

groups

have

been

divided

corre-

not o n l y to different areas of the w o r l d , but in some respects to d i f f e r -

p a t t e r n s of

living

and to S w e d e s '

in Sweden

stereotypes

and

(in

relation to the factors d i s c u s s e d

attitudes

in

regard

to

the different

above) national

g r o u p s . Of c o u r s e , a n y scheme of categorization must n e c e s s a r i l y o v e r l o o k c o n siderable variation both between different national g r o u p s in each c a t e g o r y , also

within

national

groups.

Group

6

may

seem

particularly

but

heterogeneous,

i n c l u d i n g g r o u p s of widely different size, d i f f e r i n g levels of education, and d i f ferent

reasons

for e m i g r a t i n g .

most concrete plans to maintain

What this g r o u p

has in

r e t u r n to the home c o u n t r y ,

common is

and

perhaps

the

a strong tendency

intimate and f r e q u e n t contact with other members of the g r o u p

to

(when

g r o u p size and concentration allow it), after coming to S w e d e n . Variation

within

Jugoslavian

and

groups

emigrating

Turkish

minorities

from in

the

Sweden

same for

nation example

is

also

great:

represent

a

the wide

102

Boyd

T a b l e 1:

Immigrants l i v i n g

in S w e d e n on December 31, 1983, b y

generation

and b y c o u n t r y / c o n t i n e n t of o r i g i n

( P e r c e n t a g e of total in

theses; sources: C B S

1984).

1985 and S I A

paren-

A r e a of

Nations best

Percentage

Total (1st &

origin

r e p r e s e n t e d in area

second

2nd gen.)

(ranking

generation

(% Total)

1. F i n l a n d

Finland

overaj) (1)

30.5

344,976 (39.6)

Denmark

2. S c a n d i n a v i a

Norway

(2)

30.6

125,308

(3)

(14.4)

3. N o r t h & West Europe

(excl.

Scand.),

N.Am.

West G e r m a n y USA

(4)

39.9

108,349

(10)

(12.4)

4. Eastern Europe

(incl.

Soviet Union)

Poland

(6)

Hungary

(9)

20.1

91,742 (10.5)

5. S o u t h e r n

Jugoslavia

Europe

(5)

35.0

99,588

Greece (8)

(11.4)

6. S . A m e r . , A f r i c a , A s i a , Oceania

Turkey

+

Chile (12

unknown

(7)

22.4

102.271 (11.7)

Total

30.2

872,234 (100.0)

variety

of

themselves. able.

ethnic

almost

T h i s makes t h e i r inclusion

However,

tongue)

backgrounds,

figures

below

are not available,

the

as

much

as

the

in a n y s i n g l e c a t e g o r y

level

of

national

origin

and some s o r t of categorization

home

countries

highly (e.g.

scheme is

question-

for

mother

necessary

in o r d e r to form h y p o t h e s e s o r make any c o m p a r i s o n s at all, when s u c h a large number of national g r o u p s is i n v o l v e d .

M i n o r i t y l a n g u a g e s in Sweden A

preliminary

category

of the

chances

for

language

maintenance

for

each

listed in the table above is shown below, from best chances to w o r s t

chances. These ation

ranking

103

r a n k i n g s have been made on the basis of a subjective c o n s i d e r -

of the factors

listed above,

and

are

information about the patterns of l i v i n g of

based in

some cases on

incomplete

some of the smaller g r o u p s .

Pros-

pects for l a n g u a g e s u r v i v a l among six categories of immigrants in Sweden are as follows : (1)

Southern

Europeans;

(2)

Latin A m e r i c a n s , A s i a n s a n d A f r i c a n s ;

(3)

Finns;

(4)

Eastern

(5)

N o r t h & West E u r o p e a n s and N o r t h

(6)

Scandinavians, excluding

Europeans;

In section 5 of t h i s p a p e r , multilingualism

among

Americans;

Finns.

I will p r e s e n t some of the r e s u l t s of my

second

generation

immigrant

young

people

study

in

of

Sweden,

g r o u p e d in p a r t a c c o r d i n g to t h i s s y s t e m of categorization. We shall then see to what

extent

the

pattern

of multilingualism

in the

second

generation

confirms

t h e s e h y p o t h e s e s f o r l a n g u a g e maintenance o r shift.

4. THE PATTERN The

pattern

of

OF LANGUAGE language

sociologists a n d

use

USE among

sociolinguists

multilinguals

dealing with

has

been

studied

l a n g u a g e contact.

A

by

many

commonly

used

concept in many s t u d i e s is that of domain c o n f i g u r a t i o n , w h e r e domain is taken to mean the set of contexts vidual

bilingual s p e a k e r

in w h i c h a p a r t i c u l a r

or by

a bilingual

domains of bilingual s p e a k e r s o v e r l a p , are

usually

a s s u m e d to be bleak;

group.

l a n g u a g e is u s e d b y an A s mentioned

the p r o s p e c t s for

if they

are clearly

above,

language

separated,

l a n g u a g e is c o n s i d e r e d to have better chances for long-term

the connection

if

the

maintenance the

minority

survival.

It is unclear whether the connection between domain separation a n d is based d i r e c t l y on empirical i n v e s t i g a t i o n s in multilingual

indi-

stability

societies, o r w h e t h e r

is b a s e d on some s o r t of functional a r g u m e n t .

It seems

unlikely

to me that a n y clear cases of domain separation can be e s t a b l i s h e d for multilingual

communities

multilingual g u a g e for etc.

(I

which

are

studied

carefully

s p e a k e r and g r o u p b e h a v e s various

purposes,

with different

have tried to formulate

and t h o r o u g h l y .

somewhat r e g u l a r l y interlocutors,

some of these

regularities

Clearly,

in their use of in in

different Boyd

each lan-

settings

1985,

ch.

6 ) . B u t I d o u b t v e r y much that a n y multilingual s p e a k e r ' s o r g r o u p ' s pattern of l a n g u a g e use can be d e s c r i b e d accurately without

reference to certain

contexts

Boyd

104

or activities where different l a n g u a g e s are u s e d on different o c c a s i o n s , that is, where the switch

domains

languages

communities

overlap.

in

Indeed,

conversation

most

with

bilingual

other

speakers

bilinguals,

and

h a v e occasion at

in

it is

impossi-

( e . g . the Puerto Rican community in New Y o r k C i t y )

ble to a s c r i b e to e v e r y c o d e - s w i t c h

a c h a n g e in communicative

or a n y other aspect of the c o n v e r s a t i o n a l situation ( P o p l a c k

to

least

some

context,

intent

1980).

O n e solution may be to weaken the demands f o r domain separation

somewhat,

and p r o p o s e that communities with a g r e a t e r amount of domain o v e r l a p are more likely to be u n d e r g o i n g

language

shift than

t h o s e whose domains

overlap

only

s l i g h t l y . E v e n if we d i s r e g a r d the problems of m e a s u r i n g the amount of o v e r l a p , I s u g g e s t that even t h i s relationship may be p r o v e n w r o n g study.

b y careful

empirical

It seems intuitively to be t r u e that p r o c e s s e s of l a n g u a g e s h i f t must

through

a p h a s e of c o n s i d e r a b l e domain o v e r l a p .

that g r e a t e r domain o v e r l a p

necessarily

However,

go

it need not be t r u e

leads to l a n g u a g e s h i f t , a n y more t h a n

sociolinguistic variation n e c e s s a r i l y is indicative of l i n g u i s t i c c h a n g e . A g a i n ,

the

Puerto Rican community in New Y o r k would seem to p r o v i d e a p r o b a b l e c o u n t e r example to s u c h a h y p o t h e s i s , s i n c e domain o v e r l a p is e x t e n s i v e ( i n c l u d i n g m a s sive code-switching munity)

(Poplack

in c o n v e r s a t i o n s

1980),

but w h e r e

Another

aspect of the pattern

guage

u s e among

multilingual

l a n g u a g e s h i f t does

place ( F i s h m a n 1966, Fishman et al. some i n v e s t i g a t o r s

between

older and

not seem to be t a k i n g

1971).

of l a n g u a g e

use which

is the aspect of a g e - g r a d i n g ,

L a b o v , for example,

members of the com-

younger

bilingual

some s c h o l a r s ( e . g .

i.e.

has

been s t u d i e d

by

different p a t t e r n s of lan-

speakers.

Following

Gal 1979, D o r i a n

the lead

1981) h a v e

of

explicitly

o r implicitly i n t e r p r e t e d a c h a n g e in the pattern of l a n g u a g e use between

gen-

erations as indicative of l a n g u a g e s h i f t in p r o g r e s s .

how-

e v e r , that a g e - g r a d i n g

It s h o u l d be noted,

in s o c i o l i n g u i s t i c variation has n e v e r been taken to be a

sufficient condition f o r h y p o t h e s i z i n g

change-in-progress

p r o b a b l y also the case f o r l a n g u a g e s h i f t - i n - p r o g r e s s .

( L a b o v 1981). T h i s

Gal

(1979), f o r

has s t u d i e d other aspects of l a n g u a g e u s e in the community, towards Dorian

languages (1981)

has

and

their

coupled l a n g u a g e

tence of

certain

grading,

a s t r o n g e r case

paper,

speakers,

speakers.

When

style

s h i f t with

this

specific c h a n g e s

evidence

is

taken

to c o n t i n u e d multilingualism,

attitudes

languages, in the

together

with

pattern of l a n g u a g e

interlocutors.

age-

In

here,

l a n g u a g e contact will lead to

namely, the

and

compe-

in p r o g r e s s .

I would like to a d d a f u r t h e r aspect to t h o s e enumerated

multilinguals in c o n v e r s a t i o n with different

example,

s u c h as

between

can be made for l a n g u a g e s h i f t

can be examined f o r clues as to w h e t h e r shift or

shifting

is

this

which

language use f o r

Minority

l a n g u a g e s in

5.

RESULTS

The

results

among

Sweden

presented

in

second generation

questionnaire survey m u n i c i p a l i t i e s of

105

this

section

immigrants

are

taken

in S w e d e n .

from

a

They

are based

among 700 i m m i g r a n t y o u n g p e o p l e ,

Boras and

Nacka,

a n d in p a r t on t w o

study

of

4).

description

B o t h methods r e l y

of t h e

study

and

s e r i e s of

its m e t h o d s ,

h e a v i l y on s e l f - r e p o r t s of l a n g u a g e

see

be

reflected

in

people c l a s s i f i e d active

different

as s e c o n d

u s e of more t h a n

active bilingualism for

the

example,

survival

the arrival

active

l a n g u a g e in e v e r y d a y

in a m i n o r i t y , of

of t h e m i n o r i t y

of

generation immigrants.

one

is h i g h

degrees

new

language are

of

better

(For

1985,

ch.

in S w e d e n a r e t a k e n among

young I mean

interaction.

If t h e d e g r e e

being equal

the minority), than

one

active bilingualism

all o t h e r t h i n g s

members

parents

Boyd

bilingualism

By

in t h e

interviews:

use.

T h e c h a n c e s f o r s u r v i v a l of d i f f e r e n t m i n o r i t y l a n g u a g e s to

p a r t on a

14-16 y e a r s o l d ,

w i t h 40 F i n n i s h y o u n g p e o p l e f r o m B o r a s a n d o n e w i t h t h e l e t t e r ' s a more d e t a i l e d

bilingualism in

the

in a g r o u p

of

(such

as,

prospects

for

where the

degree

of a c t i v e b i l i n g u a l i s m w i t h i n t h e s e c o n d g e n e r a t i o n is low. 5.1.

Ethnic

background

In o r d e r to s t u d y

the relative chances for minority

different language minorities, ground" (1)

language

s u r v i v a l among t h e

t h e p o p u l a t i o n w a s d i v i d e d into f i v e " e t h n i c

back-

categories: "fifi":

young

people

b o t h of w h o s e

parents

were

born

and

raised

in

and raised

in

Finland. (2)

"anan":

y o u n g p e o p l e b o t h of w h o s e p a r e n t s

a country other than Sweden or Finland (3)

"swefi":

young

people o n e of

t h e o t h e r b o r n a n d r a i s e d in (4)

"swan":

young

people o n e

were born

( b o t h in t h e same

whose parents

country).

is a n a t i v e

Swede,

and

is

Swede,

and

Finland.

of w h o s e

parents

a native

t h e o t h e r b o r n a n d r a i s e d in a c o u n t r y o t h e r t h a n S w e d e n o r (5)

"diff":

young

countries, T h i s categorization background

people w h o s e p a r e n t s w e r e b o r n

other than

and raised

Finland.

in

different

Sweden.

scheme a c t u a l l y

r e p r e s e n t s t w o d i f f e r e n t d i m e n s i o n s of

among t h e y o u n g people

(if

we ignore for

ethnic

a moment t h e " d i f f "

cat-

egory) : (1)

The

specific

vs.

"other").

paper.

minority This

background is

the

of t h e

dimension

young

discussed

person in

(i.e.

section

Finnish

2 of

this

Boyd

106 (2)

Whether t h e y o u n g p e r s o n ' s

background involves

both a m i n o r i t y

and

m a j o r i t y g r o u p a f f i l i a t i o n by b i r t h , o r o n l y a m i n o r i t y b a c k g r o u n d .

In

other

is

words,

clearly

if

minority

the

young

("fifi"

and

person's "anan")

ethnic or

is

group

membership

ambiguous

("swefi"

and

"swan"). In table 2

I present

the figures

for

the

degree

of

active

bilingualism

within

these f i v e e t h n i c b a c k g r o u n d c a t e g o r i e s . A c t i v e b i l i n g u a l i s m is d e f i n e d as a c t i v e use of

more t h a n one language

b i l i n g u a l i s m is d e f i n e d as p e r i o d of l i f e , ations

other

in e v e r y d a y ,

face-to-face

"lapsed bilingualism"

(i.e.

b u t not at t h e age i n v e s t i g a t e d ) ,

than

everyday,

face-to-face

bilingualism

Marginal

at an

earlier

o r a c t i v e b i l i n g u a l i s m in

interaction

t r a v e l l i n g to t h e p a r e n t s ' home c o u n t r y f o r vacations T a b l e 2:

interaction.

(e.g.

reading

situ-

magazines,

etc.).

Degree of b i l i n g u a l i s m among t h e e t h n i c b a c k g r o u n d categor i e s , in n u m b e r of r e s p o n d e n t s , and in p e r c e n t a g e s .

Active

"Fifi"

"Anan"

"Swefi"

176

"Swan"

"Diff"

68

25

32

11

bilinguals

74.3

79.1

17.7

15.4

36.7

Marginal

51

18

50

97

11

bilinguals

21.5

20.9

35.5

46.6

36.7

Monolinguals

10

in Swedish Total

4.2 237

T a b l e 2 shows

66

79

0.0

46.8

38.0

86

33.8 x 2 =269.24,

0

141

12.3

20.1

Total 312 44. 4 227 32. 3

8

208

163

26.7

23. 2

30

29.6

702 100. 0

4.3

d f =8, p= .0001

that

there

is a

clear

difference

in t h e

degree of

bilingualism

between " f i f i " and " a n a n " y o u n g people on t h e one hand compared w i t h and " s w a n " on t h e o t h e r .

" D i f f " takes an i n t e r m e d i a r y

position.

"swefi"

I t should also

be noted t h a t " s w e f i " and " s w a n " t a k e n t o g e t h e r are a l a r g e r g r o u p t h a n and

"anan" together.

The

domination

of y o u n g

people w i t h

both Swedish

"fifi" and

m i n o r i t y b a c k g r o u n d w i t h i n t h e g r o u p of i m m i g r a n t y o u n g people is even g r e a t er

for

the

c o u n t r y as a whole

than

it was

in t h e p o p u l a t i o n

studied

in

this

M i n o r i t y languages in Sweden investigation

(Reinans

107

1981).

It

seems

as

if

the

young

people whose

parents

b o t h belong to t h e same e t h n i c m i n o r i t y are in most cases a c t i v e l y b i l i n g u a l t h i s age.

However,

are o n l y "swefi"

rarely

if t h e y o u n g p e r s o n s

actively

and " s w a n "

bilingual

have a n a t i v e Swedish

in t h i s age g r o u p .

At the

parent,

same time,

y o u n g people belong t o t h e c a t e g o r y of marginal

T h e d i f f e r e n c e between " f i f i "

at

they many

bilinguals.

and " a n a n " as opposed t o " s w e f i " and " s w a n " was

shown t o have t h e s t r o n g e s t relation to what I have called a c t i v e b i l i n g u a l i s m of all t h e b a c k g r o u n d v a r i a b l e s

s t u d i e d in t h i s

investigation

(see Boyd 1985,

ch.

5). I will

now t u r n to t h e o t h e r dimension of e t h n i c b a c k g r o u n d ,

e t h n i c g r o u p t h e y o u n g p e r s o n belongs t o . difference

in t h e d e g r e e of

active

between " s w e f i " and " s w a n " . to distinguish

tion 3, this group A further

between

"fifi"

minorities

bilingualism

In o t h e r w o r d s ,

between

"fifi"

and

However,

breakdown

was

" a n a n " was

made to

(1)

due to t h e f a c t

widely d i f f e r i n g "North":

see w h e t h e r

degrees

of

that the

active

"anan"

the

lack

Africa.

(2)

in sec-

"South":

The former

sur-

difference

latter group

bilingualism.

and " s w a n "

of

included

Table 3

shows

b r o k e n down i n t o two

i n c l u d i n g y o u n g people whose p a r e n t s come f r o m

p a r t s of S c a n d i n a v i a , N o r t h e r n , Western and Eastern E u r o p e , and N o r t h and

and

t h e Finnish g r o u p does not seem

a c c o r d i n g to t h e hypotheses p r e s e n t e d

t h e d e g r e e of a c t i v e b i l i n g u a l i s m f o r

ca;

little

"anan"

had n e i t h e r t h e best nor w o r s t p r o s p e c t s f o r language

and

with

categories:

which

itself w i t h an u n u s u a l l y high o r low rate of a c t i v e b i l i n g u a l i s m in

t h e second g e n e r a t i o n . vival.

t h a t of

In table 2 we see s u r p r i s i n g l y

those

group

from

were

Southern

Europe,

predicted to

have

Latin

America,

relatively

other Ameri-

Asia

and

poor chances

for

language maintenance compared t o t h e F i n n s , and t h e l a t t e r g r o u p were p r e d i c t ed t o have r e l a t i v e l y good chances. T h i s b r e a k d o w n does not s u p p o r t t h e h y p o t h e s e s p r e s e n t e d in section 3 v e r y s t r o n g l y at a l l .

In f a c t ,

f o r " s w a n " t h e r e s u l t s go c o u n t e r to t h e

hypothesis.

While t h e r e is some d i f f e r e n c e in t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e h y p o t h e s i s f o r " a n a n " , difference and

is

"swan"

not s t a t i s t i c a l l y were

tested,

significant.

but

Different

none p r o d u c e d

conclude t h a t t h i s aspect of e t h n i c

methods of

signficant

dividing

results.

We can

cuss t h i s f i n d i n g in t h e f i n a l section of t h i s social

factors

which

were

only

b a c k g r o u n d does not seem to have had a n y

major e f f e c t on t h e degree of b i l i n g u a l i s m in t h e second g e n e r a t i o n . Other

the

"anan"

found

I will

dis-

paper. to

have

significant

relations

to

the

d e g r e e of a c t i v e b i l i n g u a l i s m w e r e t h e f o l l o w i n g : (1)

The

social

status

of

the

parents'

occupations.

An

initial

analysis

t h i s v a r i a b l e showed t h a t y o u n g people whose p a r e n t s had e i t h e r or very

high

status

w o r k i n g class o r bilingual,

occupations

(i.e.

middle-working

u p p e r - m i d d l e class) were most l i k e l y

class,

of

low

lower-

t o be

actively

while those p u p i l s whose p a r e n t s had m i d d l e - r a n g e

occupa-

Boyd Table 3:

Degree of

bilingualism for

"Northern"

g r o u n d s , w i t h i n "anan" and

and

"A η a n" North

"Southern"

"S w a η

South

North

Μ

South

Active

39

29

27

bilinguals

75.0

85.3

16.2

11.4

76

21

45.5

60.0

13

bilinguals

25.0

14.7

Monolinguals

0

0

64

10

in

0.0

0.0

38.3

28.6

Total Ν

5

4

Marginal

Swedish

34

52 x2=1.21,

tions

df=2 ,

(lower-middle

marginally

bilingual

167

class

and

in t h e

in

ethnic

background

of p a r e n t s ' o c c u p a t i o n s parents'

occupations,

t o be a c t i v e l y (2)

The

density

likely

of

pupils

the

school

neighborhood

1983),

is

it

many

The

probably other

length

people

of

who

class

higher

their

lives

the

effect

for the young

the

person

class.

The

p u p i l s in t h e school c l a s s , t h e

the

more

reflects

in

which

true

that

immigrants time

were

much

whose

l o w e r t h e s t a t u s of

respondent's

school

quite

the pupil young

will

tend

the

lives

people to

bilingual.

well

be

the

born

degree

or

respondent had

actively

in S w e d e n .

lived

bilingual

However,

the

has in

(Amman

living more

been another

than former

Since

make-up

in

in

the

of

the

& Jonsson communities

actively

t h a n t h o s e w h o l i v e in c o m m u n i t i e s w i t h f e w i m m i g r a n t (3)

people

In o t h e r w o r d s ,

i t was t h a t t h e y o u n g p e r s o n was a c t i v e l y of

be high

disappeared when the fac-

the tendency

in

immigrant

immediate with

was c o n t r o l l e d .

to

the

bilingual.

of immigrant

greater the density make-up

tended

However,

small g r o u p o f y o u n g

seemed t o be t h a t t h e

the greater

class)

Swedish.

p a r e n t s had u p p e r - m i d d l e class o c c u p a t i o n s t o r of

df==2, p = . 2 9

upper-working

monolingual

r a t e of a c t i v e b i l i n g u a l i s m

35

x2=2.44,

P=.25

or

back-

"swan".

bilingual

pupils. Sweden.

country,

Young were

had

to

lived

a

those

who

group

made up o n l y 20%

all

Minority languages in Sweden

109

of the population as a whole, and of these the v a s t majority had lived at least 10 y e a r s in S w e d e n . (4)

Plans

to stay

Young

in Sweden

or return

to the parents'

people who reported that t h e i r families

the parents'

c o u n t r y of o r i g i n

country

of

origin.

planned to r e t u r n

to

were to a f a r g r e a t e r extent actively

bilingual than those whose families planned to remain in Sweden.

Both

t h i s factor and the p r e v i o u s one t u r n e d out to have a high correlation with the factor I called ethnic b a c k g r o u n d (see a b o v e ) , so that those y o u n g people who belonged to ''swefi" and "swan" were h i g h l y

over-

represented in the g r o u p s who were born in Sweden and who planned to remain here. T h e g r o u p of y o u n g people whose families planned to r e t u r n to the parents'

c o u n t r y of o r i g i n was also v e r y small - only

10% of the total population, while an additional 15% were uncertain of the family's

plans

( F o r a more detailed description

and a n a l y s i s

of

these and other social f a c t o r s and t h e i r relation to active bilingualism, see Boyd 1985, c h . 5 ) . 5.2.

Pattern

of language

use

T h e pattern of l a n g u a g e use was s t u d i e d for that p a r t of the population which was classified as a c t i v e l y b i l i n g u a l , i . e . 44.4% of the total population. T a b l e 4:

L a n g u a g e use with six c l a s s e s of interlocutor, for active b i l i n g u a l s : number of respondents and p e r c e n t a g e s . Boy/Girl

Mostly Swedish Mostly ML Both languages Total

Mother

Father

Siblings

friend

Best friend

56 18.1

60 20.5

200 73.0

142 79.8

252 82.4

Most friends 265 86.3

212

181

35

17

15

10

68.4

61.8

12.8

9.6

4.9

3.3

42

52

39

19

13.5

17.7

14.2

10.7

39 12.7

32 10.4

310

293

274

178

306

307

Boyd

110 Among t h e

most s i g n i f i c a n t

a c t i v e u s e of S w e d i s h o r 4 shows t h e language

results

in

a minority

this

analysis

most o f t e n u s e d

by the actively

c o n v e r s a t i o n s w i t h six d i f f e r e n t c a t e g o r i e s of Table 4 indicates

that

use of t h e

versations with the parents, siblings

and f r i e n d s ,

with

5 a

similar

conwith

in

each

was

explanation

i n g data f o r

the respondents

i n t e r l o c u t o r d i d not T a b l e 5:

Mother

ML

Total

use

with

ticular,

six

who

Note

that

excluded.

interlocutor, the question

classes

of

because

interacted the

of l a n g u a g e

In

only

was

of

miss-

use with

bilingual

interlocutor,

that

for

Most

Best

friend

friend

friends

44

177

19

73

150

71.4

45.2

70.9

83.8

205

173

33

10

6

8

73.0

66.3

13.3

23.8

5.8

4.5

36

44

38

13

24

21

12.8

16.9

15.3

31.0

23.3

11.7

281

261

248

42

103

179

interlocutors in

the

number

there

Boy/Girl Siblings

Father

apparent

are

language

cannot explain the strong language

people

16.9

important factor ity

young

be t h a t

in S w e d i s h .

bilinguals.

T h e t r e n d of t a b l e 4 is still monolingual

whom

p a t t e r n might

and the friends

40

Both languages

of

dominates

14.2

Mostly

Mostly

for

but

were

category

for this

(ML)

apply.

Language active

Swedish

for each

language

language

made,

category

varies

p e o p l e in in

calculation

monolinguals

bilingual young

the

Table

a n d u s e of S w e d i s h dominates in c o n v e r s a t i o n s

m possible

respondents

concerning

interlocutors.

interlocutor.

minority

p a r e n t s a r e monolingual in t h e m i n o r i t y table

were those

language with different

choice

tendency

with the parents

in t a b l e 5, e v e n

excluded.

and

(cf.

While

I

Boyd

when conversations

am

convinced

1985,

section

that

6.6.1.1),

among t h e s e y o u n g p e o p l e to Swedish

with

skill

I expected

an

alone

u s e t h e minor-

siblings and friends.

in t h e c a s e of c o n v e r s a t i o n s w i t h s i b l i n g s ,

it

with is

In

par-

u s e of t h e minor-

i t y l a n g u a g e to be much more common t h a n it w a s r e p o r t e d to b e . Siblings occupy the minority

a key

position in t h i s a n a l y s i s .

language was used with parents

t h e case

that

and siblings and Swedish was

If it h a d been

used

Minority languages in Sweden

111

with friends, then it could be argued that the minority language has a dominant position in interaction within the family and in the home. T h i s seems to be the case in many minority communities, for example among Sámis in Sweden (Helander 1984). Instead, among immigrant young people the language boundary seems to be drawn between generations: the minority language is used with the older generation and Swedish with age peers. That the boundary is clearly generational is confirmed by our interview material: many young people report using the minority language with adults other than parents ( e . g . friends' parents), while they use Swedish in the vast majority of conversations with other members of the second generation. Because the population investigated in the questionnaire survey represents only a narrow age range, it was possible to compare the patterns of language use of older and younger speakers only within the smaller group of Finnish informants studied in the two interview series. While the group of parents interviewed displayed wide variation in the pattern of language use, and the children a narrower range of variation, it was generally true that the parents used the minority language more often, and in a far wider range of contexts than their children did. For example, many parents had the opportunity to use Finnish on the job, with Finnish co-workers, while, as we have seen, their children use Finnish only rarely with friends. The pattern of language use for the young people can be said to display another sort of age-grading as well: use of different languages with interlocutors of different ages. T h i s sort of age-grading can also be an important indicator of language shift in progress. I will discuss this point further in the final section of this paper. One possible exception to the general pattern of domains following generational boundaries can be found in the results for language use with the boy or g i r l friend, which show that a sizeable proportion of young people in table 5 use ML at least sometimes in these conversations. The figures are based on a small number of cases, but it may be that use of a minority language in this relationship seems more natural (as it presumably follows the pattern of language use between the young people's parents) than in other cases of age-peer interaction, where Swedish dominates even between young people and their bilingual peers. ( 6.

DISCUSSION

Taken as a whole, the results of the study show a s u r p r i s i n g l y low degree of active bilingualism among second generation immigrants in Sweden. T h e picture seems comparable to what was commonly found earlier in this century among

112

Boyd

second

generation

result

is somewhat

the

"ethnic

towards

linguists

for the

in

States

has

led

particular

in

to

a

(e.g.

& Starck

general

to

a

relatively

in.

e.g.

Boyd

working

in

the

field

of

bilingualism

u n d e r normal c i r c u m s t a n c e s ,

I have

r e s u l t s of my

study

for

Boyd,

languages

even

resource

presented

1985 a n d

minority on

1966).

This

have

called

(1981)

more

positive

attitude

policy

towards

generous and

for

forthcoming),

in

Sweden

immigrants

individual,

position

also

be

in

other

discussed

supported.

Sweden,

minority

languages

then

group

advantage

larger society

If

I

feel

and

papers

he

(see

in w h i c h

is t r u e ,

as

an

society

I

the

assimilation

that

the

she or

ways it

that a large-scale linguistic

to

the

this

and

could

seem to i n d i c a t e ,

among

the

arguments

minority

b i l i n g u a l i s m is a d e f i n i t e

individual and a benefit for the community and

lives

Fishman

Allardt

Sweden.

today feel t h a t ,

going

and

United

since what

movement"

ethnicity,

Most

in t h e

unexpected,

revival

immigrants in

think

immigrants

is

important

at

large

is

g o i n g to w a s t e . 6.1.

Ethnic

background

T h e r e s u l t s p r e s e n t e d in s e c t i o n 5 as were

s h o w n to g i v e

sented

in section

different

ethnic

little support

3.

Despite

minorities

active

bilingualism

ethnic

minority

in t h e

wide

in

variations

Sweden,

second

background.

r e g a r d s t h e v a r i a b l e of e t h n i c

to t h e h y p o t h e s e s

for

in t h e

patterns

of

no

major

difference

generation

could

be f o u n d t h a t

Instead,

background

language s u r v i v a l in

it seemed to b e q u i t e

living the

an

was clear or ambiguous,

that

is, w h e t h e r

both

significant

or only

of

the

degree

coincided

o r not t h e y o u n g p e r s o n ' s m e m b e r s h i p in an e t h n i c m i n o r i t y a n d / o r majority

preof

with

whether

the

Swedish

one p a r e n t

was

immigrant. I

have

no immediate e x p l a n a t i o n

for the

lack of s i g n i f i c a n t

d e g r e e of b i l i n g u a l i s m among t h e v a r i o u s e t h n i c m i n o r i t i e s . course,

s h o r t c o m i n g s in t h e methods of a n a l y s i s ,

situation

of d i f f e r e n t

of a c t i v e

bilingualism.

Another have and

e x p l a n a t i o n may

in common:

generous even

minorities,

policy

the fact towards

or

in

regard

all r e s i d e

minorities

in t h i s

of

pluralism,

ethnic

in S w e d e n .

country, it

A rants

in t h e a g e g r o u p i n v e s t i g a t e d

recent in

state

Sweden

positive ( S O U

investigation reported

1984).

Still,

in t h i s

into t h e

that attitudes

extent

and

may

in

or

m i n o r i t i e s in

t h e official

be that

the

of

social

measurement

Despite the

is s t i l l e x t r e m e l y

the

is,

r e g a r d to t h e

to t h e d e f i n i t i o n

immigrant y o u n g p e o p l e to a s s i m i l a t e l i n g u i s t i c a l l y ticularly

in

lie in s o m e t h i n g all t h e e t h n i c

that they

encouragement

either

difference

One possibility

Sweden

relatively acceptance

pressure strong,

on par-

study. of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n

towards

immigrants

against

immig-

were

surprisingly

it is not d i f f i c u l t to d e t e c t a t t i t u d e s a n d

expectations

M i n o r i t y languages in S w e d e n on

the

part

saying

in

of

majority

113

group

S w e d i s h commonly

seden d i t man kommer", lish "When

members

c i t e d in

that

should

immigrants

assimilate.

A

"Man f â r

ta

is

w h i c h is more or less e q u i v a l e n t to t h e s a y i n g

in Rome, do as t h e Romans d o " .

milation may

immigrants

discussions of

be u n u s u a l l y

strong

in Eng-

One reason t h e expectation of assi-

in Sweden

is t h e

fact that Swedes

who emi-

g r a t e d to t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s in most cases assimilated l i n g u i s t i c a l l y w i t h i n one or two g e n e r a t i o n s . as

a country

variation

In many o t h e r r e s p e c t s ,

where

and

uniformity

individuality

the United States.

(Britten

In g e n e r a l ,

S w e d e n can be c h a r a c t e r i z e d

and conformity Austin

are highly

1968),

as

valued,

compared

it seems to be important to a n a l y z e c a r e f u l l y

norms a n d v a l u e s of t h e host c o u n t r y ,

and of t h e majority g r o u p

as well as t h e conditions u n d e r w h i c h t h e minorities themselves Language

the

in p a r t i c u l a r ,

live.

r e g a r d to t h e p a t t e r n of language

to indicate t h a t a rapid language s h i f t

is in p r o g r e s s

immigrants.

normally

Interaction

interaction w i t h use t h e

w i t h age

peers

among second

takes

place

if this

minority

p a t t e r n of language

language

less

and

use c o n t i n u e s ,

less

as

they

from home, t h e i r contacts with t h e i r p a r e n t s

minority

group

definite

risk t h a t

investigation

presumably many

would

become less

young

a f t e r moving away from home.

less

people categorized

be categorized

w h e r e m a r r i a g e between

and

as

marginally

older.

Clearly,

actively

young they in t h e

there

bilingual

within

only

As

and o t h e r adults

bilingual

while

It can

that these

grow

frequent. as

use seem generation

in S w e d i s h ,

p a r e n t s often t a k e s place in t h e minority language.

be e x p e c t e d t h a t , move away

to

use

T h e r e s u l t of my i n v e s t i g a t i o n w i t h

people

than

f o r example

in a s s e s s i n g t h e p r o s p e c t s of t h e s u r v i v a l of lin-

g u i s t i c a n d e t h n i c minorities,

6.2.

generally

rather

is a

in

a few

this years

M a r r i a g e p a t t e r n s among t h e f i r s t generation -

immigrants and S w e d e s is q u i t e common - s u g g e s t

that

m a r r i a g e w i t h i n t h e same minority in t h e second generation will not predominate. If t h e p a t t e r n of language other well,

immigrant

(see

use in homes

table 2 above)

t h e p r o s p e c t s of minority

tion seem v e r y There

are,

First,

true

for

the

is S w e d i s h and

second

the

generation

languages being passed on to t h e t h i r d

as

genera-

dim. however,

c e r t a i n aspects

languages in S w e d e n , w h i c h here.

w h e r e one p a r e n t

holds

of

t h e situation

of immigrant

minority

may c a u s e us to r e v i s e t h e p i c t u r e I h a v e s k e t c h e d

and most i m p o r t a n t l y ,

programs of education with minority

languag-

es as t h e medium of i n s t r u c t i o n h a v e s t a r t e d for many immigrant pupils belonging

to t h e

largest

should t h e s e classes

minority

in

particular

Finnish.

g i v e s u p p o r t to t h e minority

language

languages

by

y o u n g people's skills in t h e l a n g u a g e s ,

groups,

Not

increasing

only the

but t h e y should p r o v i d e them with much

g r e a t e r o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r using t h e languages e v e n outside t h e classroom.

Boyd

114 Second,

t h e r e may

be a t e n d e n c y

S w e d i s h more f r e q u e n t l y a n d er, or even older particularly way

of

young

i m p o r t a n t to e x p r e s s

doing

young

bilingual

this

is

people can

through

express

non-standard speech,

in t h e a g e g r o u p i n v e s t i g a t e d

in c o n t e x t s w h e r e people.

T h e mid-teens

solidarity

language

their

it is not u s e d b y

with o n e ' s

(Labov

slang, swearing

is an

a n d an

Payne

1975).

orientation

etc, b u t b y

not

it is

important Bilingual

only

by

u s i n g t h e majority

e v e n in s i t u a t i o n s w h e r e t h e i r p a r e n t s a r e p r e s e n t , f o r

use

young-

age w h e n

peers,

1972,

reference g r o u p

h e r e to

either

using

language,

example.

F i n a l l y , t h e c o n t i n u e d immigration of a b o u t 3 5 , 0 0 0 i n d i v i d u a l s to S w e d e n each year

should

future

generation tinued ought

see to it that t h e

(Widgren

1981),

in t h e f u t u r e ,

movement to

even

of

provide

country

individuals

So far,

multilingual

proceeds

for the

rapidly

within

as it seems to do in t h e p r e s e n t .

a continued

their o f f s p r i n g .

remains

if assimilation

this

in

both

need need

for

directions bilingual

has o n l y

over

skills

led to

g u a g e m a i n t e n a n c e f o r l i n g u i s t i c m i n o r i t i e s in t h i s

Actually,

the

second

the

Swedish

among

a very

foreseeable the

con-

border

immigrants

limited s o r t

of

and lan-

country.

REFERENCES Allardt,

E.

& C.

svenskarna Amman,

G.

Starck

& I.

utbildning, Boyd,

S.

Spräkgränser

Jonsson

(1983),

klass och boende.

(1985),

och s v e n s k

Diss.

University.

Diss.

Lithman

( e d . ) , Final

Britten A u s t i n , (1985),

survival:

Lund

Den

andra

report

Arsbok

language

generationens

for

Swedish.

En studie

contact,

sprákliga

av

language

Gothenburg. situation.

Stockholm:

London:

Sverige.

skola.

U n i v e r s i t y of

of the PIL-project.

P. ( 1 9 6 8 ) , On being

Statistisk

of

Finlands-

A l m q v i s t & Wiksell.

Segregation study

(forthcoming),

samhällsstruktur.

Stockholm:

A

S.

Language

och

perspektiv.

s h i f t a n d l a n g u a g e choice in S w e d e n . Boyd,

CBS

(1981),

i ett jämförande

In:

Y.

Liber.

Seeker & Warburg.

Stockholm:

Central

B u r e a u of

Sta-

tistics . Dorian,

N.

(1981),

Philadelphia: Fishman, and

J.

ence Fishman, ton:

(1966),

perpetuation

religious Fishman,

Language

J.

groups. (1972),

approach J.,

death.

The

life-cycle

U n i v e r s i t y of P e n n s y l v a n i a Language of

loyalty

non-English

The Hague: The

sociology

to language

R. Cooper

Ma

the

Gaelic

dialect.

United

States.

tongues

by

The

American

maintenance ethnic

and

social

sci-

Mouton. of language.

in society.

& R.

Indiana University

in

mother

of a Scottish

Press.

(1971),

Publications

An

interdisciplinary

Rowley, M a s s . : Bilingualism (The Hague:

in

Newbury the

barrio.

Mouton).

House. Blooming-

M i n o r i t y l a n g u a g e s in S w e d e n Gal, S .

(1979),

lingual Giles,

Language

Austria.

H.,

R.

group

E.

& D.

relations.

relations.

Heiander,

shift.

Social

determinants

New Y o r k : Academic

Bourhis

ethnic g r o u p

115

Taylor In:

(1977),

Om

Towards

H. Giles ( e d . ) ,

L o n d o n : Academic

(1984),

of linguistic

change

in

bi-

Press. a theory

Language,

of l a n g u a g e

ethnicity

and

in

inter-

Press.

trespräkighet.

En

undersökning

av

spräkvalet

hos

samerna i Ö v r e S o p p e r o . D i s s . U n i v e r s i t y of Umeà. L a b o v , W.

(1972), T h e relation of reading failure to peer g r o u p s t a t u s .

Labov,

Language

in the inner

city.

Philadelphia:

U n i v e r s i t y of

In: W.

Pennsylva-

nia P r e s s . Labov,

W.

(1981),

What

can

chronic

descriptions?

omnibus.

Carbondale:

Payne, A.

(1975), The

Philadelphia:

U.S.

In:

be learned D.

about

Sankoff

Linguistic Research

re-organization

change

& H.

progress

from

(eds.),

syn-

Variation

Inc.

of linguistic

Regional S u r v e y

in

Cedergren rules:

(Pennsylvania

A preliminary working

report.

papers

on

lin-

g u i s t i c c h a n g e and v a r i a t i o n , V o l . 1, no. 6 ) . Poplack,

S.

(1980),

Sometimes

I'll start a sentence in S p a n i s h

E S P A Ñ O L : T o w a r d a t y p o l o g y of c o d e - s w i t c h i n g . Reinans,

S.

(1981),

Om den a n d r a g e n e r a t i o n e n .

( e d s . ) , Invandringen SIA

(1984),

Invandrare

Immigration S O U (1984),

1983.

Stockholm: Statistik

E. Hamberg

EN

18:581-618. & T.

Hammar

Liber.

3/81.

Norrköping:

Swedish

Authority.

I rätt

crimination.

och framtiden. i Sverige

In:

Y TERMINO

Linguistics

riktning. Stockholm:

Final

report

of the

Swedish

commission

Department of L a b o r ( S t a t e n s Offentliga

on

dis-

Utrednin-

g a r 1984, no. 5 5 ) . W i d g r e n , J . (1981), T.

I n v a n d r a r p o l i t i k och l ä n g s i k t s p l a n e r i n g .

Hammar ( e d s . ) , I nvandringen

och framtiden.

In:

Stockholm:

E. Hamberg & Liber.

Language Loss and Symbolic Gain: The Meaning of Institutional Maintenance A/an Davies of Edinburgh

University

1.

INTRODUCTION

In addition to the general issues of language loss and the standard v e r s u s

the

dialect in language education, the issues addressed in this paper are the indeterminacy

of the notion

'mother tongue'

provision within normative s e t t i n g s ,

and t h e

problem of

language

teaching

itself always a practical question but made

also a theoretical concern in the context of minority language education because of

mother tongue

Scotland

is

indeterminacy.

discussed

and

the

Institutional

particular

language maintenance

problems

of

the

policy

Chinese

in

community

highlighted with a brief analysis of i n t e r v i e w data.

2.

ETHNIC

BOUNDARIES

Anthropological

l i t e r a t u r e on ethnic boundaries and ethnic identity

compellingly

accepts t h a t boundaries a r e indeterminate and that identity can be attained conscious Barth

choice.

(1969),

Kaufman

Horowitz

1984), Rosen & B u r g e s s (1985),

indicate

the

(1961),

(1975), (1980),

saliency

Sherif

followed

& Hovland by

e.g.

(1961),

Giles

Le Page & T a b o u r e t - K e l l e r

of ethnic

indeterminacy

erminacy

has

competence, as necessary

always

been acknowledged:

the

Tosi

(1982),

and Le Page

linguistic idealisations,

since

abstractions/concepts

not to speak

(1979,

language

Linguistically

speech community and even of language itself,

cholinguistic and sociolinguistic g r o u n d s .

by

(1965),

(1977),

and,

seen as itself an e t h n i c i t y , of language indeterminacy.

Moerman

is

this indetof

langue,

have been

proposed

of being necessary

on psy-

Horowitz (1975) points to t h e dilemma

in terms of e t h n i c i t y : " O n what precise basis p r e v i o u s l y unrelated groups come to r e g a r d themselves as possessing a common identity while excluding others from sharing it,

remains

an

essentially

know that the indicia

unresearched

what

do the criteria follow?

most

influential

in

contact with ethnic likeness

and

question.

Put

of identity tend to follow the criteria shaping

Generally, and

two t y p e s

altering

group

The

second

is

the

boundaries.

size

and

we

may

of i d e n t i t y ,

of v a r i a b l e

s t r a n g e r s p e r c e i v e d as possessing

difference.

starkly,

seem to The

first

but be is

v a r y i n g degrees of importance of

the

Davies

118 political unit w i t h i n w h i c h g r o u p s f i n d t h e m s e l v e s . related. which

Political

group

T h e two a r e , of c o u r s e ,

b o u n d a r i e s t e n d to set t h e dimensions of t h e f i e l d w i t h i n

contact o c c u r s .

That contact,

in t u r n ,

renders

it

necessary

f o r g r o u p s to s o r t out a f f i n i t i e s and d i s p a r i t i e s . It

is

not

"choice" of t h e

really

accurate

process

is t h e

considerations

entirely,

entangled

with

(but

others)

not

"(...)

but,

it

within still

Research

on scales (weight,

where

and u n l i k e n e s s ? " What t h a t v i e w

group Y ,

rather

group

Non-speakers

has

so on)

b r e a k t h e bond

always

change:

language X because of

I speak

Western

" t h e common

in e i t h e r

type

characteristic made

a

little

and

of

I am c u l t u r a l l y

it

X that

learning.

points

man who

groups context"

unanswered.

but

stimulus

that of

is t h e likeness

language

etc.

I claim membership of

likely

t h e r e f o r e to

Petersen

to t h e attempt

(1975), by

race and l a n g u a g e "

persists

in

a member of move

discuss-

scholars (178).

confusing the

two

"to

But

he

(genetic

is h a l f - r i g h t , f o r t h e effect on c u r r e n t b e h a v i o r of heritage

is t h a t in

is

likely

marks

to

the

their

be t h e same"

separation

intensity

of

of As

r e q u i r e s a "pool of s y m b o l s " .

contributes

to t h e

pool

but

is

(179).

ethnic

feeling,

Indeed,

groups

their

has

typical

Petersen and others

B r a s s 1974, Khleif 1980, B o u r h i s 1984),

reminds u s ,

religion,

e i t h e r colour or

some

heavily

identity.

as much a c a u s e of political d i s p u t e as a n y o t h e r e t h n i c i t y . colour

of

with the

in a d v a n c e ,

language are

Europe,

difference

L e v y 1962,

Brass (op.cit.)

are

specific

proceeded

demands, o r e v e n t h e i r symbols of communal a d h e r e n c e . show ( e . g .

in

of

result

strategic

they

w h a t a r e t h e criteria

language

t h e minority

and l i n g u i s t i c c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s )

usually

relatedness

specified

in t h e popular mind between

goes on to s a y :

whatever

involved,

the

a choice o r an act of

it is because

s u b n a t i o n s of

belief

are

s u b s t a n t i v e questions

from c u l t u r a l allegiance to second language

a

one

v i r t u e of

or

implies f o r t h e discussion of e t h n i c b o u n d a r i e s is t h a t

I do not speak

the

as

(123).

can itself be an i d e n t i t y ,

ing

process

a r e alike by

encountered

major

of judgement and

of

series

leaves t h e

size,

these

judgements the

t h i n g most at issue in b o u n d a r y

Y.

sifting

T h a t is not to rule out instrumental

perceptual

property

Thus

this

conclusion t h a t some g r o u p s

imputed common a n c e s t r y .

(121);

to d e s c r i b e

in t h e sense t h a t one chooses f r i e n d s or allies f o r t h e e n d

l a n g u a g e can be Nation

formation,

Language,

probably

like

race,

less salient

than

race.

From t h e point of v i e w of P e t e r s e n ' s "common man" t h e r i g h t s of g r o u p s and individuals

in t h e U S A

& Hiller (1979:21) "the

landmark

presented consitute

a r e legally

defined b y Lau ν

Nichols (1974).

Teitelbaum

comment: case in bilingual education was

to t h e

courts

national-origin

the

issue

minority

of

whether

groups

Lau ν Nichols. non-English

receive

an

It

squarely

students

education

free

who from

L a n g u a g e loss and symbolic gain unlawful discrimination understand. tion,

the

(...)

Lau

119

when i n s t r u c t e d in E n g l i s h ,

Although

decision

it d i d not e x p r e s s l y

legitimized

and g a v e

a language t h e y

do not

e n d o r s e bilingual

educa-

impetus

to t h e movement

equal educational o p p o r t u n i t y f o r s t u d e n t s who do not speak The

E C analogue for Lau is t h e Directive

Children,

which

reception

system

guages of for

in

1976 i n c l u d e d

w h i c h would

include

t h e host c o u n t r y "

teaching

these

and

children

on the Education

provision

for

intensive

"providing

their

mother

s t u d y of

and

and

culture,

of o r i g i n " .

Workers'

developing

t h e language

more o p p o r t u n i t i e s

tongue

school a n d in collaboration w i t h t h e c o u n t r y

of Migrant

"organizing

removed

the

element

of

compulsion

and

the

absolute

issue.

The

Lau

Remedies

t h a t commitment means. are

helpful

in t h e

appropriate

if

possible

legal

t w e n t y o r more c h i l d r e n of a p a r t i c u l a r e x t e n s i v e or sophisticated p r o g r a m . p a r t s of t h e Indeed

UK

has been slow

in

grounds. to

mother

T h e problem has

context,

a

key

recommending

that

national-origin g r o u p a r e needed f o r an

T h e t a k e - u p of t h e E C D i r e c t i v e

partly

it may be t h a t numerosity

right

Numbers a r e o b v i o u s l y

USA

a

lan-

T h e 1977 revision of t h e

t o n g u e t e a c h i n g , and was accepted by t h e B r i t i s h g o v e r n m e n t . remained of w h a t e x a c t l y

or

as

D i r e c t i v e was more acceptable in t h e U K on political and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e It

for

English".

because of t h e

has been

in v a r i o u s

small numbers

involved.

used as an e x c u s e f o r t h e lack of

action.

3. In

PUBLIC

LANGUAGE

Scotland,

itself

legal p u r p o s e s , The

education

largest

an ethnic

are

The three

unit

in to

"unofficial

in Scottish

in

in

the

in S c o t l a n d a r e found primary

(...)

in S t r a t h c l y d e , enrol

in t h e c i t y , the

de

facto

and

on

the

roll

in

(civil) report:

Strathclyde

Scotland Overall

some

is

66

per

numbers

of

Pakistan,

of

India

ethnic (...)

Kong.

On

pupils

w i t h Glasgow a c c o u n t i n g for almost 80 p e r

cent

of

ethnic

is f u r t h e r

minority

concentration:

pupils

in

primary

schools accommodate 70 p e r cent of all T h i s t r e n d of concentration demon-

occurring

provision

individual

and Hong

some 70 p e r cent of e t h n i c minority

while 4 s e c o n d a r y segregation

the

educational

s u g g e s t t h a t t h e r e a r e at least 6500 -

Within Glasgow t h e r e

about t h e n a t u r e of educational majority

and

region.

Glasgow's s e c o n d a r y e t h n i c minority p u p i l s . strates

educational

recently published a

government.

surveys

S t r a t h c l y d e total. schools

for

Strathclyde

Scotland local

UK

Department

major g r o u p i n g s o r i g i n a t e from

c e n t of t h a t schools

SCOTLAND

schools whose e t h n i c o r i g i n s a r e outwith t h e U K .

t h e basis of t h e global f i g u r e s

10

area

Education

devolved

minorities a r e small:

IN

minorities

government

responsibilities 7000 pupils

autonomous

the Scottish of

local

MAINTENANCE

in

these

areas,

w h e r e ethnic

schools"

(Scottish

raising

questions

'minorities'

constitute a

Education

Department

120

Davies

1983:4). In other words the report points to the typical situation of density within s p a r s i t y . If overall Scottish numbers are used then attention to ethnic minority languages would appear unjustified: it is not a 'Scottish' problem. If, however, the view is taken, as in the Lau Remedies and quite explicitly in the civil liberties view as expressed in the Lau judgement itself, that it is the school that is the unit, even more the c l a s s , then within S t r a t h c l y d e and p a r ticularly within Glasgow numerosity can be used to the advantage of ethnic minority language maintenance. In Glasgow the decision has now been taken and implemented to mount community (not 'minority') language teaching in two secondary schools as a beginning. In one of these Urdu and Punjabi are now being taught in Secondary 1, each with its own teacher. Punjabi has 9 pupils and Urdu 14. T h e community languages are organised and supported on the same terms as any so-called f o r eign language ( e . g . F r e n c h ) : that is to s a y , they are taught as foreign languages for three or four hours per week. It is to be hoped that the teaching methods and materials are as good as they are for French for "if it means c h i l dren being taught by unprepared teachers, possibly against their will, b y medieval methods, it could do more harm than good" (Rosen & B u r g e s s 1980:107). In the other school a smaller g r o u p , between 6 and 9, have started Chinese from Secondary 3. T h e problem here has been which Chinese, Mandarin or Cantonese. A d v i c e is conflicting. T h e children all have connections with Hong Kong as do most of the Chinese UK community. T h e home language is Cantonese or Hakka; it is unlikely to be Mandarin. Cantonese is a language of wide provenance with a long tradition, literature, etc. If the children return to Hong Kong, it is Cantonese they are likely to need. On the other hand, Mandarin is the Chinese national language: the writing system is the same and since learning Chinese at school is largely a process of becoming literate, why not learn spoken Mandarin as well? A n d in these children's lifetime contact with China (including perhaps Hong Kong) is likely to be t h r o u g h Mandarin. Notice that this is a different argument from that concerning a choice between Urdu and Punjabi, i . e . whether for those whose ethnic connection is with Pakistan, where Urdu is the national language, it is thought more appropriate to receive education, to become literate in Urdu rather than in Punjabi: this is the familiar extension of the diglossia polarity, from Creole or French in Haiti, English or Swahili in T a n z a n i a , and in such cases the likely choice is what Ferguson (1959) in his discussion of diglossia has called the High or Η-code. T h e r e is a f u r t h e r dimension as Rosen & B u r g e s s (1980:107) point out: "It is by no means clear what is meant by 'the mother tongue' of the pupils. We understand, for example, that the Punjabi spoken in this count r y [ i . e . the U K ] has changed significantly and that this changed Punjabi is already f i n d i n g its way into the printed form. T h i s is the Punjabi children know. Is it the Punjabi they should be taught?".

L a n g u a g e loss a n d symbolic g a i n They

a r g u e that this

121

is the same i s s u e as that of the Italian s p e a k i n g

community

(Tosi

1979,

1984) where c h i l d r e n

connection

have

received

instruction

in

standard

maintenance i n p u t has been the f r a g m e n t a r y is in a p r o c e s s of swift attrition.

Bedford

of families with a S o u t h e r n Italian while the

Italian

only

home

S o u t h e r n Italian home dialect w h i c h

B u t in terms of choice t h i s t h i r d case is d i f -

ferent from the other two.

H.

A CASE OF

DIGLOSSIA

In the f i r s t case ( C h i n e s e : M a n d a r i n o r C a n t o n e s e ) , the i s s u e is classic d i g l o s sia and has Cantonese common.

to do with need a n d u s e f u l n e s s a n d practical

is u s e d

as the

Although

s p o k e n medium

the community

itself

must be c o n s u l t e d ,

d i s p u t e that the code to teach s h o u l d be C a n t o n e s e . jabi and the

Urdu),

typical

time

and the o r t h o g r a p h y

considerations. is

in a n y

there is

really

In the second case

we h a v e the e x t e n s i o n to d i g l o s s i a p l u s bilingualism

addition

of v a l u e

and

among p a r e n t s that the p r o p e r

prestige

to

Urdu

and

the

l a n g u a g e of l e a r n i n g is U r d u :

case no

(Pun-

b u t with

possible

attitude

"Educated

Pakis-

tani families and Indian Muslim families p r e f e r to speak U r d u at home, w h a t e v e r the

mother

there

tongue"

is really

(S.

Hamid,

no d o u b t , when

personal there

communication).

Again,

however,

must be a choice, as to which code

to

teach, v i z . that the code to teach s h o u l d be U r d u . In the t h i r d situation

case,

that of the

changing

v a r i e t y of

in P a k i s t a n o r

the U K .

Punjabi and

the

Italian s p e a k e r s

Indeed the solution in t h e i r situation might be to teach them,

in the

Strathclyde

experiment,

albeit false b e g i n n e r s . s e c o n d examples

Punjabi,

(Illich 1981). Punjabi

ensure

that the

codes.

But

forms

rather

or

as if t h e y

U r d u or s t a n d a r d

Where is the d e s c r i p t i o n that

changed

Italian?

to stipulate

that,

to b e h a v e

and with

learners,

problem of teaching Italian.

and

anything

For what else could be

a n d where the materials f o r that

The

only

are themselves to

language

in

exactly

and different from the f i r s t

t h e r e is a real

teachers employed

than

were f o r e i g n

For in t h e i r situation,

of maintenance,

other than s t a n d a r d changed

Italian,

Italy a n d s p e a k i n g local dialects w i t h , of c o u r s e , the

important difference of l a n g u a g e attrition among

taught?

or

is quite d i f f e r e n t and is o n l y qualitatively different from that of c h i l -

dren living

as

Punjabi

require

possible

proficient

teachers

characteristic

to

teacherly

compromise in those

use

these

normative

is

to

changed changed attitudes

t o w a r d s the s t a n d a r d codes t h e y h a v e themselves a c q u i r e d would be u n r e a l i s t i c . In

terms

of

the

taxonomic/model

typologies

proposed

L o v a s (1970) reported in T r u e b a & B a r n e t t - M i z r a h i

by

e.g.

Fishman

(1979), the S t r a t h c l y d e

t u r e does not fit neatly a n y w h e r e , since it b e g i n s too late to be p r o p e r l y sitional,

monoliterate,

compensatory,

it

is

partial or full b i l i n g u a l i s m . no

doubt

a

kind

of

ventran-

Since it may be r e g a r d e d

transitional

programme,

&

as

perhaps

Davies

122

a d d i t i o n a l w o u l d be a b e t t e r t e r m : rather,

as w i t h

French

as

in no sense is it i n t e n d e d t o r e p l a c e

a foreign

language,

i t is

an a t t e m p t t o

English;

provide

an

a d d i t i o n a l t o o l . O r is it?

5.

TWO VARIETIES

Let

me now

return

approach.

I want

tion,

(1)

viz.

largely

OF MINORITY

LANGUAGE

to

examples

the

earlier

now t o d i s t i n g u i s h

standard'

second

language

(e.g.

Cantonese).

(into e.g.

whose

(e.g.

e.g.

take

different educa-

home e n v i r o n m e n t

UK),

Urdu,

a

language

and

(2)

Mandarin

in

the

'Maintenance plus

to

mother

tongue

speakers

of

English)

ways

of a n d

cause

even

school

use,

for

maintenance.

even

foreign

Languages

language

a r e lost

type

is t o

(after

lllich

1981)

' T a u g h t mother tongue'

t a u g h t w h i c h in t h e c o m m u n i t y ' s v i e w T h e p u r p o s e of expansion')

child already type

the first

is to indicate belongs;

('Taught

mother

mother tongue

is

instruction

membership

t o secure

lack of

mother

type

('Maintenance

that

learners

of

an

'official'

or

plus

of a c o m m u n i t y t o w h i c h official

membership

of f a c t t h e s e c o n d t y p e may in p r a c t i c e be j u s t

being

tongue.

language' of

the

instruction

a community

t h e c h i l d ( o r t h e c h i l d ' s p a r e n t s on b e h a l f of t h e c h i l d ) w i s h e s t o j o i n . sense

use:

tongue

T h e second i n s t r u c t i o n t y p e I

t h e p u r p o s e of t h e s e c o n d tongue')

speakprovide

s i n c e h e r e a new code is

stands for' the mother

a n d symbolise

to

(e.g. expand

also t o

through

instruction

s p e a k e r s p r o v i d e s some s u p p o r t f o r m a i n t e n a n c e . label

speakers)

to

Pun-

expansion'

i n t o l i t e r a c y a n d o t h e r v a r i e t i e s a n d in t h e case of t h e m i n o r i t y l a n g u a g e e r s ( b u t n o t in t h e case of t h e m o t h e r t o n g u e E n g l i s h

or

UK)

s i n c e t h e reason f o r t e a c h i n g t h e m o t h e r t o n g u e

English

is

official'

n o n - s t a n d a r d l a n g u a g e at home ( e . g .

T h e f i r s t i n s t r u c t i o n t y p e I label

literacy skills)

Cantonese,

to children

instruction

but

of m i n o r i t y

C a n t o n e s e in t h e

c h i l d r e n w h o speak a n o n - o f f i c i a l o r jabi,

I discussed,

two varieties

mother tongue education

in t h e m o t h e r t o n g u e

MAINTENANCE

which

In p o i n t

as s y m b o l i c as t h e f i r s t in

'standard'

language

in

such

the

community

l a n g u a g e l e a r n i n g p r o g r a m m e s may g e t no f u r t h e r t h a n t h e a l p h a b e t a n d elementary literacy

(Indeed,

if b e y o n d b e g i n n e r F r e n c h

is r a r e l y a c h i e v e d b y most UK

c h i l d r e n , w h y s h o u l d M a n d a r i n o r U r d u be a c q u i r e d a n y b e t t e r w h e n t h e o p p o r tunity

for their

munity

child?).

represent

use is more Learning

a symbolic statement

no d i f f e r e n t f r o m l e a r n i n g nance

plus

community

remote t h a n

a 'Taught

expansion ) membership

guage class,

a n d in t h i s

Cantonese.

may is

also

both

i.e. the children

is,

be

say,

French f o r the minority

mother tongue',

therefore,

may

sense l e a r n i n g U r d u

in

or Mandarin

In t h e same w a y my f i r s t t y p e membership

indicated

securing

and secured

(or parent for the child)

by

in

com-

practice

that

the

attendance

desired

at a

makes an act of

lan-

identity

t h a t s t a t e s t h a t t h e c h i l d ( w h o may be a s p e a k e r of B e d f o r d c h a n g e d I t a l i a n , B r i t i s h changed Punjabi)

r e a l l y is a s p e a k e r

of I t a l i a n ,

Punjabi e t c . ,

is

('Mainte-

i.e.

or

really

L a n g u a g e loss a n d symbolic belongs.

is l a c k i n g

functional

value:

in

use.

indeed,

both

the

it is p r e c i s e l y

language.

initially,

as

pose

and

directing

enough external

will

Neither i.e.

But

them

both

into

d e m a n d s will

language

be

value that

informs

purposes can,

subject

for

(e.g.

purposes

can

learning

both

either

by

are

l i k e l y to

cause

grammes,

or

provision

for

above

all,

language

establishing

or

start

individual

demands that

by

providing

foreign

a s in t h e C o u n c i l of example

of

the U S S R

Hebrew

problems

them with

languages,

examinations.

teaching for

defining

If

teacher

surveys

bilingualism, downward students use

a

regard

as

use

is

in

of

terms

and

academia), in w h i c h , and

ritualised)

was

of

being

was

given

In t h e W e l s h

i.e.

possible.

over public

Such

and,

functional, must

then itself, The

dissidents

v a l u e of a n

which

in

overpower-

case what

has

It

is

the

helped

function

w o r s h i p of e n r i c h i n g t h e a c q u i s i t i o n

in t h e s h a p e of H a u g e n ' s

what one

of

intimate

maintain

language

in eisteddfodau

input (because

recognition

to my

themselves

c o n t i n u e d to p r o v i d e a p u b l i c no d o u b t

societal

leading

speakers

l i t e r a t e role

insistence on

a 'modern'

of

language by

evidence

immediate f a m i l y ,

and

function routinised

of t h e

need

for

receptive use, that so much

a Welsh has

the

language inestimable

e n v i r o n m e n t a n d of

t h e m o d e r n i t y of t h e l a n g u a g e as well as itself r e q u i r i n g neering

pro-

teaching

materials

Jewish

experience

kitchen,

H superposed

in Wales to t h e

made a v a i l a b l e .

is

heritage

o t h e r p u b l i c u s e , a g a i n p r o v i d i n g a b o v e all o n g o i n g attention

language

about the possibility

else, a continued comprehensible made

of

among

the

variety

is r e l i g i o u s w o r s h i p w h i c h h a s if n o t h i n g

which

language

( L M P 1985) b a s e d on t h e

in t h e W e l s h

p o t jam' W e l s h ,

( a p a r t f r o m t h e élite formal

Project

attrition

self-stigmatised

non-standard.

teach-

i n t e r n a l d e m a n d s of f u n c t i o n .

maintenance

not o p t i m i s t i c

manifested

labelled

secret

com-

language

methods,

case, w h e r e sentimental

England,

fossilisation, once

of

in

except

Soon

such

instrumentality.

O p i n i o n of t h e L i n g u i s t i c M i n o r i t i e s of t h e i r

purmoti-

programmes,

minority

learning

least their

languages.

h a s to a c c e p t t h a t a n d

create

and/or

s e e m s to b e a s p e c i a l

i n g k i n d c a n c r e a t e its o w n

language

at

off,

must treat

array

training,

languages

Europe schemes, acquisition

most

the complete

successful

community

for

and

need-

any specific learners

languages-for-specific-purposes

purpose

symbolic

in t e r m s of

m u n i t y l a n g u a g e t e a c h i n g as e n t i r e l y e q u i v a l e n t to o t h e r f o r e i g n ing,

outlined,

sentimental

be t h e m s e l v e s

History)

of

to

be p r e s e n t e d ,

a time,

can only

be n e c e s s a r y ,

identity. I have

preferred

p u r p o s e is f u n c t i o n a l

they

the

is an act of

minority always

same time b o t h

functional,

learning.

for

sentimental

- just like a n y school

language

vating

need

purposes. At the

wholly

own function

the p u r p o s e s

Instrumental

securing-membership ing

123

A t t e n d i n g a language class indicates that,

What is

gain

TV-channel advantage symbolising

informal l a n g u a g e

( 1 9 6 6 ) e l a b o r a t i o n of f u n c t i o n s .

engi-

Davies

124 6.

DOUBTS

ABOUT

LANGUAGE

MAINTENANCE:

THE

CASE

OF

CHINESE

IN

EDINBURGH In t h e UK at p r e s e n t some 10,000 l e a r n e r s a t t e n d w e e k - e n d community classes

in

Chinese ( H o n g

Kong

Government

Office

1985),

a huge

language

commitment.

In t h e case of t h e Chinese community in E d i n b u r g h , w h i c h we have b e g u n

stud-

ying,

it

the

maintenance

noticeable

how l a r g e

language

a part

t h r e e w e e k - e n d schools the

provision

encouraging involved

itself", the

use

the

community

of

the

the

it,

LMP,

"is

language

as well

other

of

than

pupils

Cantonese;

plays

again

is

in t h a t t w o of

Christian churches:

a form

as t h e

is

religion

are u n d e r t h e auspices of says

in o r g a n i s i n g

of

institutionalised

collective

English

"(...)

activity

among

themselves"

often

the

(LMP

the

adults

1985:265).

T h e LMP's pessimism is shared b y Fishman (1985), whose summary of t h e e t h n i c revival

in t h e USA

e x c e p t as a m a r k e r

seems t o

accept

of i d e n t i t y .

the

i m p o s s i b i l i t y of

He goes f u r t h e r

and

language

maintenance

concludes t h a t

what

the

rise and f a l l of t h e e t h n i c r e v i v a l d e m o n s t r a t e is t h a t language is not necessary in o r d e r t o claim e t h n i c i t y . 60s and

He admits t h a t t h e rationale f o r t h e r e v i v a l

70s was t h a t " l a n g u a g e

ethnocultural behavior"

(505).

r e q u i r e an e t h n i c language: but ( . . . )

is both p a r t

However,

of,

indexical

the ethnocultural

"Non-English mother

In t h e

Edinburgh

Chinese

languages,

since members of t h e community

community

community,

New T e r r i t o r i e s of Hong Kong) are o f t e n language of l i t e r a c y and e n c o u r a g e

- the official

literacy

-

i.e.

Cantonese

in t h e

symbolic of

s e l f - c o n c e p t does

tongues

it is a small role r a t h e r t h a n a c e n t r a l one"

of and

have a role to

not

play,

(275). is o n l y

one of

the

three

(largely drawn from

the

h e r i t a g e s p e a k e r s of Hakka and of t h e

reason f o r t h e schools' e x i s t e n c e is t o teach

Mandarin.

If we agree t h a t

the official

role of

community language maintenance is to a d d r e s s t h e ' T a u g h t mother t o n g u e ' , speech may lose its essential power

to teach i t "

(LMP 1985:268), t h e n t h e f u t u r e of Cantonese in t h e Chinese com-

munity

schools f o r t h o s e f r o m Hakka s p e a k i n g

if t h e r e is an a t t e m p t

that

"vernacular

homes is bleak i n d e e d .

formally There

is

l i t t l e i n c e n t i v e and l i t t l e demand on c h i l d r e n f r o m t h e s e homes t o a c q u i r e Cantonese: t h e available i n p u t

is o n l y

in these w e e k - e n d 2 - h o u r classes.

Little

won-

d e r t h a t Hakka s p e a k e r s ' c h i l d r e n abandon H a k k a , do not a c q u i r e Cantonese o r Mandarin

and s h i f t

dence s u g g e s t s ,

more o r

along w i t h

less completely

to

English,

or

so a p o c r y p h a l

evi-

stories of s e m i - l i n g u a l i s m and c h i l d r e n ' s i n a b i l i t y

or

u n w i l l i n g n e s s to i n t e r a c t w i t h t h e i r Hakka s p e a k i n g p a r e n t s in Hakka o r in E n g lish

(but

see M a r t i n - J o n e s

& Romaine

1986, f o r

a denial

of t h e

possibility

of

semilinguaiism). Fifteen speakers

we have r e c e n t l y

i n a b i l i t y to r e t r i e v e k i n s h i p terms typical

example one y o u n g

adult,

interviewed

in Cantonese have

all

shown

in Cantonese o u t s i d e t h e n u c l e a r f a m i l y . aged

18,

resident

in Scotland

for

8

In a

years,

b o r n in Hong Kong and a n a t i v e s p e a k e r of Cantonese, was able t o p r o d u c e t h e

Language loss and symbolic gain

125

formal code t e r m s f o r m o t h e r ' s f a t h e r and m o t h e r ' s mother ( / d z o u 2 5

mou /) poV).

but

was

unable to

t h e colloquial

referents

(/guo

/dzou2

guo/,

/po*

D i r e c t lexical b o r r o w i n g f r o m English was endemic in tasks d e s c r i b i n g a

picture, Year.

a group Reduction

nation p a t t e r n from

retrieve

fu6/,

English,

shapes,

and

relating

with

at t h e

recent

Chinese

New

open

vowels becoming

into-

interference

close and a t e n d e n c y to

acculturate

labialisation.

communicative

strategy

of

overgeneralisation

r e l a t i v e s b e i n g r e f e r r e d t o not b y ' f r i e n d ' and general terms like referents.

events

and in some case phonological as well as p h o n e t i c

towards English The

of

in tones was common, as was t h e adoption of an English

There

common,

for

example

k i n s h i p name b u t b y t h e Cantonese w o r d f o r

t h i n g ' and ' s t u f f

was f r e q u e n t

was

use of

used f o r n o n - r e t r i e v e d

an emphasis

marker

(/ge/)

p h a t i c d e c l a r a t i v e sentences as if t o lay claim t o some d i s t i n c t

specific

in

non-em-

i n d i c a t o r of

the

i n t e n d e d code. T h e g r o u p contained t h r e e c h i l d r e n f r o m Hakka s p e a k i n g families, all b o r n in Scotland. Two, tonese;

both aged 11, had g r e a t d i f f i c u l t i e s

t h e s e t w o showed most r e d u c t i o n

in c o m p r e h e n d i n g any Can-

in p r o d u c t i v e Cantonese. When asked

t o add up a set of f i g u r e s , all t h r e e used E n g l i s h and not Chinese n u m b e r s . In g e n e r a l ,

in t h e sample of Cantonese and Hakka speakers a t t r i t i o n

tonese was most m a r k e d in t h e y o u n g e r

children.

Counting

in Can-

in English and

not

( o r not o n l y ) in Cantonese was noted in two of t h e y o u n g e r Cantonese speakers as well as in t h e t h r e e Hakka

7.

IMPLICATIONS

speakers.

FOR PUBLIC

LANGUAGE

MAINTENANCE

If community schools f i n d maintenance and language gain d i f f i c u l t , l i k e l y f a t e of p u b l i c

i n s t r u c t i o n w i t h i n t h e state system

process we have y e t to evaluate?

w h a t is t h e

( r e f e r r e d to a b o v e ) ,

It is possible t h a t it w i l l be more

because of t h e attachment of p r e s t i g e t h r o u g h p u b l i c

recognition,

but our

diction

is t h a t w h i l e its e x i s t e n c e as an o f f i c i a l s u b j e c t of i n s t r u c t i o n w i l l

strong

symbolic

minority

value

language will

to

in t h e

maintenance

of

t o be seen

the

to those who

set of

that group.

ethnic

symbolise and p e r h a p s maintain Language a t t r i t i o n

communities,

be limited

nance and t o a r e s t r i c t e d role

the

minority

uptake

among

do not in f a c t In o t h e r w o r d s ,

languages

though

a

successful

learners

pregive of

a

require

mainte-

it w i l l

have no

it

will

serve

to

ethnicity.

and loss are aspects of language change.

as both p o s i t i v e and

negative.

Language s h i f t has

We may s h a r e d r Johnson's

regret

( " I am always s o r r y when any language is lost because languages are t h e p e d i g r e e of language

nations"; gain

Boswell

as well

as

1773),

but

language

recognise

loss.

too t h a t

Edwards

(1985)

language is

quite

shift

means

forthright:

Davies

126 "language

maintenance

doomed to f a i l u r e "

and

revival

efforts

are

usually

munity and public maintenance classes e x i s t to maintain ity not

language.

on social f a c t o r s

artificial

(...)

and

(169). We a g r e e ; but what we h a v e a r g u e d is that both comContinuing

enthusiasm

( a n d symbolise)

for s u c h programmes

but p a r t l y too on t h e i r s u c c e s s

ethnic-

depends

in i m p r o v i n g

largely

language

profi-

c i e n c y : the s i g n s are not hopeful.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I wish to a c k n o w l e d g e with g r a t i t u d e the a s s i s t a n c e of T A N G Wai L a n , g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t in the Department of A p p l i e d b u r g h , with the i n t e r v i e w s a n d their

Linguistics,

a post-

U n i v e r s i t y of

Edin-

analysis.

REFERENCES B a r t h , F. (1969), Ethnic Boswell, J .

groups

and boundaries.

(1773), The life of Samuel

B o u r h i s , R . (1984),

Conflict

Johnson.

and language

Boston: London:

planning

Little ε. B r o w n . Bell & D a l d y .

in Quebec.

Clevedon:

Mul-

tilingual M a t t e r s . Brass,

P.

(1974),

Language,

Cambridge University Edwards, J.

(1985), Language,

Ferguson, C. Fishman, J .

Giles, H.

& J. Τ E SOL

(ed.)

Academic Haugen,

E.

society

(1959), D i g l o s s i a . (1985), The

Fishman, J . tive.

religion

Lovas

rise

Word

and

(1970),

Quarterly

(1977),

and

politics

in

North

India.

London:

Press. and

identity.

Oxford:

Blackwell.

15:325-340.

fall of the ethnic Bilingual

revival.

education

in

Berlin:

Mouton.

sociolinguistic

perspec-

4:215-222.

Language,

ethnicity

and

intergroup

relations.

London:

Press. (1966),

Dialect,

language,

nation.

American

Anthropologist

68:922-935. H o n g K o n g G o v e r n m e n t Office (1985), Report Chinese

immigrants

Horowitz, D . tions.

in the UK.

I n : M. Glazer & D . M o y n i h a n

I. (1981),

tanayak H.

theory.

on the teaching

(1961),

Multilingualism Press, Why

of

(eds.),

Ethnicity.

Cambridge,

rela-

Mass.:

111-140.

T a u g h t mother l a n g u a g e and v e r n a c u l a r t o n g u e .

(ed.),

Oxford University Kaufman,

seminar

(1975), T o w a r d s a general t h e o r y of racial and ethnic g r o u p

Harvard University Press, Illich,

on 3rd

L o n d o n : H o n g K o n g G o v e r n m e n t Office.

and

mother

tongue

In: D.

education.

PatDelhi:

1-39.

organisations

behave

A u s t i n : U n i v e r s i t y of T e x a s .

as

they

do:

An

outline

of a

L a n g u a g e loss and symbolic gain Khleif,

B.

(1980),

127

Language,

ethnicity

and

education

in

Wales.

The

Hague:

Mouton. Lau ν Nichols 414 US 563 1974. Le Page, R .

(1985), Acts

Le Page,

& A.

R.

and

of identity.

London: Cambridge University

Tabouret-Keller

ethnicity.

Journal

(1982),

of

Models and

Press.

s t e r e o t y p e s of

Multilingual

and

Multicultural

recensement

linguistique.

language Development

3:161-192. Levy,

P.

(1962),

La

mort

du

Revue

Nouvelle

18:145-154. Linguistic

Minorities

Project

(LMP)

(1985),

The

other

languages

of

England.

L o n d o n : R o u t l e d g e K e g a n Paul. Martin-Jones,

M. & S .

Romaine ( 1 9 8 6 ) ,

communicative competence.

Semilingualism:

Applied

Linguistics

A h a l f - b a k e d t h e o r y of

7:26-38.

Moerman, M. ( 1 9 6 5 ) , E t h n i c identification in a complex c i v i l i s a t i o n . Lue?

American

P e t e r s e n , W. D.

Rosen, H.

B u r g e s s (1980),

Education M.

in

University Teitelbaum,

Department

region.

& C.

effects

Cambridge,

Europe. Mass.:

Languages

and

dialects

In: M.

Harvard

of London

A.

Hovland

Glazer & University

school

chil-

The

education

of

(1961), and

Social

judgement:

attitude

change.

ethnic

minorities

in

Department.

Assimilation New

Haven,

and

contrast

Conn.:

Yale

Press.

H. & R .

(1979),

guage

(1983),

E d i n b u r g h : Scottish Education

communication

H. T r u e b a & C . Tosi,

Ethnicity.

L o n d o n : Ward L o c k .

Strathclyde Sherif,

On the s u b n a t i o n s of Western

(eds.),

Who a r e the

67:1215-1230.

177-208. & T.

dren. Scottish

(1975),

Moynihan

Press,

Anthropologist

Teaching

H i l l e r (1979), B i l i n g u a l e d u c a t i o n : Barnett-Mizrahi ( e d s . ) , and Linguistic

( 1 9 8 4 ) , Immigration

Trueba,

H.

and bilingual

Barnett-Mizrahi

tion and the professions.

Abstracts (eds.)

In:

20-53.

Mother t o n g u e t e a c h i n g f o r the c h i l d r e n

Tosi, A.

& C.

T h e legal mandate. of m i g r a n t s .

Lan-

12:213-231. education.

(1979),

Oxford: Bilingual

Rowley, Mass.: Newbury

Pergamon.

multicultural House.

educa-

IV SECOND- AND FOREIGN-LANGUAGE LOSS

Foreign-Language Proficiency in the Elderly Kees de Bot 8ι Toke Lintsen University of Nijmegen

1.

INTRODUCTION

In t h i s

article

a description

is g i v e n of

some investigations

into

foreign-lan-

guage p r o f i c i e n c y in e l d e r l y Dutchmen. T h r e e g r o u p s of informants were t e s t e d : a g r o u p of y o u n g e r informants (mean age 37) and a g r o u p of e l d e r l y

informants

(mean

informants

age 72)

were

tested

in German;

another

group

of e l d e r l y

(mean age 75) was tested in F r e n c h . The f i n d i n g s are compared w i t h data from B a h r i c k ' s (1984) s t u d y on l o n g - t e r m retention of Spanish as a f o r e i g n

2. FOREIGN-LANGUAGE

PROFICIENCY

IN THE

ELDERLY

T h e number of studies on f o r e i g n / s e c o n d - l a n g u a g e t h e e l d e r l y is remarkably small. eign-language

attrition

language.

p r o f i c i e n c y and its decline in

Weltens' (1987) review of t h e l i t e r a t u r e on f o r -

shows t h a t

attention

has

merely

been focused

on

g r o u p s u n d e r 25, especially f o r m e r secondary-school pupils and u n i v e r s i t y dents.

age stu-

Empirical data on f o r e i g n / s e c o n d - l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y in the e l d e r l y are

available f r o m several studies by Clyne (1977, 1981) and f r o m t h e by Bahrick

investigation

(1984).

Clyne's w o r k on language loss and language maintenance in Dutch and German m i g r a n t s

in A u s t r a l i a

has been

pioneering

in t h i s

respect.

He

recorded

spontaneous speech in English f r o m 200 postwar Dutch migrants and t h e i r d r e n and 600 German-English Australian-born), their

respective

languages.

number

of e l d e r l y

migrants

guage,

while

number

the

increased (1981:27). to t h e f i r s t

retirement,

value

of

English,

the

(half

of them m i g r a n t s ,

pattern

of

switching

One of t h e outcomes of t e n d e d to become of

transfers

and

and

the other

his research

less f l u e n t

switches

into

in t h e the

the but

T h e most l i k e l y absence "the

of

half

interference

in

was t h a t a second

first

Clyne lists a number of explanations f o r t h i s

language.

ting,

bilinguals

and analyzed

chil-

lan-

language

"reversion"

explanation is t h e change in social set-

children,

phenomena

and

t h e decreased

described

are

not

socio-economic

restricted

to

r e t i r e d o r those whose c h i l d r e n live away f r o m home. T h e y are even f o u n d e l d e r l y migrants active in t h e w o r k f o r c e who are married to English ( C l y n e 1977:50).

Clyne f u r t h e r

suggests t h a t

physiological f a c t o r s may play a p a r t in t h i s

psycho-physiological

the in

speakers"

and

neuro-

reversion p a t t e r n as well.

Elderly

De B o t & L i n t s e n

132 immigrants

c o n s t i t u t e an

specific situation The

most

extensive

undoubtedly learned Each the

was

T h e data

first

remains

tested

the

study. a

For

the

to

six

for

years

periods

purpose

of

of

of

this

in B a h r i c k ' s

show a r e m a r k a b l e sion,

the

for

drop

grammar

vocabulary on

recognition.

effect,

old,

the

of

so t h e r e

to

(group

study

is

Spanish

language

of

is

individuals. profi-

decline exponentially

interval.

After

memory

8).

the

that

for

retention

curves

is

show

speculating

8 in

his s t u d y .

or

a

"It

whether

result

of

provided

for

is

that

in

assuming

too

some

about

possi-

In his early

other

subjects

an

was

com-

to

tell

i t is an age e f f e c t ,

Bahrick's

these

decline

English-Spanish

from

says:

in

comprehen-

No

and

the

subjects

groups,

reading

recall.

oldest

after

these

to y o u n g e r

vocabulary

refrains

not

at t h e

average)

word-order,

Spanish-English

suggests

ground

closely (on

compared

(1984:34)

effect,

age

more

In t h e a n a l y s e s

s c o r e s in g r o u p

50 y e a r s some

of

aspects

Then

is u n i v e r s a l o r p a r t i c u l a r ;

of

retention 733

look

when

recall,

Neisser

about

their

attrition

period for

50 y e a r s

recognition,

himself

a time-in-storage interval

want

English-Spanish

Bahrick

Information

post-training

study

number

scores

idiom

because of

foreign-language

year

retention

we

the different

Bahrick's

unknown". years

in t h e i r

and

whether this downturn cohort

this a 50

who were tested

process

recall,

ble e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r ments

research

(1984:1).

paper

regard to grammar

Spanish-English

found

of

u p t o 30 y e a r s .

study

completion of t h e a c q u i s i t i o n particular with

In

large

w h a t B a h r i c k calls a " f i n a l d e c l i n e "

informants

field

throughout on

future

1985).

show t h a t memory c u r v e s f o r Spanish

three stable

group for

in

(1984)

s c h o o l was t e s t e d

individual

ciency.

study

Bahrick's

in

interesting

(Hyltenstam & Stroud

are

effect1

age

factor

study, at or

yet

but least

a

a a 65

cohort

effect. Although maintain

a

because

his

Bahrick

wanted

particular

level

informants

to of

investigate

the

performance,

rehearsed

so l i t t l e

in t h e a m o u n t o f the

interaction

knowledge forgotten

between

The

behaviour and

aging.

In

in

the

The

in

what

respects

Van

Els's

typology

c e r n s t y p e 1 loss: d a t a t o be

elderly.

rehearsal

to

needed

accomplish

correlations

this

could

be

In o u r s t u d y we w e r e n o t period

of

and

age

proficiency

in

in t h i s

environment

a r o l e in t h e d e f i n i t i o n

to

goal found

interested

non-use,

but

cases

b e l o w is p a r t o f a l a r g e r

main

goal of

this

language

behaviour

(Van

this

Els,

project

p r o j e c t on is

changes

in

where

volume),

the

article

(type 3).

are on

the

larger

important

of t y p e 1 loss a n d t y p e 3 l o s s :

to

what

process project

second-/foreign-language

T h e r e are two

language

t o assess in

f i r s t - l a n g u a g e loss in a f i r s t - l a n g u a g e e n v i r o n m e n t ,

presented

first-language

of

place.

i n v e s t i g a t i o n t o be d e s c r i b e d

extent

failed no

due to a long

foreign-language

rehearsal actually did take

he that

between retention and rehearsal variables.

amount

while

of

conthe

loss

in a

factors that

play

n o n - u s e / l a c k of

contact

F L - p r o f i c i e n c y in t h e e l d e r l y

133

and t h e n u m b e r of languages i n v o l v e d .

For t y p e 3 loss t h e f a c t t h a t a language

has not been used f o r a longer p e r i o d of time m i g h t e x p l a i n t h e o c c u r r e n c e of loss ( a l t h o u g h one m i g h t d o u b t t h e e x p l a n a t o r y

power of n o n - u s e as s u c h ,

cf.

De Bot ε· Weltens 1985). Even in t y p e 1 loss, defined.

it is not always clear how 'lack

of contact'

Changes in t h e social e n v i r o n m e n t may lead to changes in social

t i o n s a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y t o a change of use of t h e language. especially f o r that

should

adult

e l d e r l y people.

speakers

when

Research b y A s h b u r n

communicating

with

rela-

T h i s may be t r u e

& Gordon

elderly

(1981)

residents

of

suggests

rest

homes

make use of a simplified r e g i s t e r s h o w i n g many of t h e f e a t u r e s of b a b y - t a l k foreigner-talk.

be

and

I t could be t h e case t h a t t h e use of such a r e g i s t e r means t h a t

t h e q u a l i t y of language i n p u t f o r t h e e l d e r l y is i m p o v e r i s h e d , w h i c h t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t is a f o r m of lack of c o n t a c t w i t h t h e l a n g u a g e . In n e a r l y evidenced

all t y p e s of language loss more t h a n one language is i n v o l v e d ,

by the other

the elderly

is,

contributions

if it o c c u r s ,

the

to t h e

present

major e x c e p t i o n .

investigated

Language loss

Here t h e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r

o c c u r r e n c e of language loss w o u l d have to be s o u g h t ones normally

book.

in language loss r e s e a r c h ,

particular the

in the

in o t h e r f a c t o r s t h a n in

as

the

amount

of c o n t a c t w i t h t h e language and t h e l e n g t h of t h e p e r i o d of n o n - u s e .

Accord-

i n g l y , i t is not so easy t o compare t y p e 1 and t y p e 3 loss, because t h e f a c t o r s t h a t come i n t o play in t h e t w o t y p e s d i f f e r . ever,

It is s t i l l an open q u e s t i o n ,

t o w h a t e x t e n t f i n d i n g s on f i r s t - l a n g u a g e

how-

loss w i t h age s h o u l d be t a k e n

i n t o account when l o o k i n g at f o r e i g n - l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y in t h e e l d e r l y .

In view of t h e main theme of t h i s book we w i l l o n l y p r e s e n t data on f o r e i g n - l a n guage p r o f i c i e n c y .

F i r s t - l a n g u a g e data are used o n l y to compare g r o u p s .

detailed i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e l a r g e r

p r o j e c t on language b e h a v i o u r in t h e

e r l y is t o be f o u n d in De Bot (1984) and L i n t s e n & De Bot ( i n

3.

THE

3.1.

More eld-

prep.).

INVESTIGATION Informants

For t h e language in t h e e l d e r l y p r o j e c t 100 i n f o r m a n t s , all males w i t h at least 10 years of education and s t i l l l i v i n g in t h e i r own homes ( w i t h o r w i t h o u t a p a r t n e r ) , w e r e selected. A l l of them had had at least t h r e e t o six years of f o r e i g n language test,

training.

the

During

the

i n f o r m a n t s were asked

interview about

that

their

preceded

the

command of o t h e r

Dutch

language

languages.

We

also asked them t o i n d i c a t e w h e t h e r t h e y w o u l d mind being t e s t e d in one of t h e foreign English

languages t h e y 55

times

and

had some mastery o f . German

53

times.

French was mentioned 37 Several

other

languages

times, were

De Bot & Lintsen

134 mentioned,

but not often e n o u g h to be

test each informant bias.

in only one f o r e i g n

included

in the s t u d y .

We decided to

l a n g u a g e in o r d e r to avoid

T h e time lapse between the two test s e s s i o n s

(Dutch

test-retest

- foreign

language)

was at least three m o n t h s . T w e l v e informants were selected for t e s t i n g in man a n d 12 in In

an earlier

stage of the investigation

age 37, n=19, all of them u n i v e r s i t y The

aim of

Ger-

French.

this

test

session

applicability of the s u b t e s t s . were adapted.

Therefore,

was

a younger group

of informants

to collect

some more

information

about

On the b a s i s of these data most of the

data

(mean

staff members) had been tested in German.

from the older a n d

younger groups

the

subtests

in German

can o n l y be compared on the s u b t e s t s that remained the same. 2 3.2.

The

test

T h e test we u s e d is b a s e d on the P a r a d i s / G o l d b l u m ' T e s t of A p h a s i a in B i l i n g u als'.

T h i s test was selected because it a p p e a r s to c o v e r a wide r a n g e of

of p r o f i c i e n c y . ders

in

A l t h o u g h t h i s test was developed to i n v e s t i g a t e

aphasia,

Irigaray

(1973)

applied

a

similar

battery

language of

tests

levels disorin

her

r e s e a r c h on l a n g u a g e in normal and demented e l d e r l y . G i v e n the fact that the D u t c h v e r s i o n of the P a r a d i s / G o l d b l u m test was used in the l a r g e r project to test f i r s t - l a n g u a g e p r o f i c i e n c y , we t h o u g h t it reasonable to u s e an adapted v e r s i o n of the German and guage proficiency. for

morphology,

other h a n d ,

In

a number of respects

syntax

and

(partly)

F r e n c h tests to test the test is rather

lexicon

are

relatively

foreign-lan-

basic:

subtests

simple.

some s u b t e s t s and the part of the test on s p o n t a n e o u s

On

the

speech

are

difficult e n o u g h to get some i m p r e s s i o n of h i g h e r levels of p r o f i c i e n c y as well. T h e D u t c h v e r s i o n of the test u s e d c o n s i s t s of the following (1)

Anamnesis: tional

parts:

in t h i s p a r t personal statistics are g a t h e r e d like age,

history,

languages

learned

at school

and/or

after

school,

residential situation, h e a r i n g and v i s i o n impairments, a n d general (2)

S h o r t - t e r m memory:

educapresent

health.

informants are a s k e d to repeat series of three to nine

digits. (3)

SPMSQ

(Short

Deelman

Portable

Mental

Status

Questionnaire,

Pfeiffer

1975;

see

& Rozema 1984 for the p s y c h o m e t r i c s of the D u t c h v e r s i o n of the

S P M S Q ) : this q u e s t i o n n a i r e is u s e d in o r d e r to s c r e e n all informants in o u r s t u d y on demonstrable n e u r o p s y c h o l o g i c a l (4)

ADIT

(Auditory

Discrimination T e s t ,

Crul

deficits. & Peeters 1976):

included with the aim to detect general and specific (5)

A l a n g u a g e test c o n s i s t i n g of the following - auditory

auditory

subtests:

discrimination;

- repetition of w o r d s , n o n s e n s e w o r d s and s e n t e n c e s ;

t h i s test deficits.

was

F L - p r o f i c i e n c y in t h e e l d e r l y

135

- sentence c o m p r e h e n s i o n ; - grammatical

transformation;

- verbal fluency: (animal

phonological

(the letters:

p,

f,

I) and semantic

fluency

category);

- sentence f o r m a t i o n ; - spontaneous

speech: a 5 m i n u t e m o n o l o g u e / d i s c u s s i o n on any s u b j e c t

i n f o r m a n t wanted to t a l k In t h e German

and

French

the

about.

sessions o n l y

the

tests

mentioned u n d e r

(5)

were

administered. In o r d e r t o get i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t f o r m e r and p r e s e n t p r o f i c i e n c y eign l a n g u a g e , we a p p l i e d a number of had

to

writing,

rate

their

and

reading,

proficiency

on

four

language

w i t h t h r e e scales each,

levels of assumed d i f f i c u l t y .

in t h e

c a n - d o ' scales ( C l a r k 1981). skills:

for-

Informants

speaking,

listening,

d e s c r i b i n g a c t i v i t i e s of

different

To g i v e an example f r o m t h e s p e a k i n g scale:

Is y o u r knowledge of G e r m a n / F r e n c h s u f f i c i e n t f o r : 1. o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t meals d u r i n g y o u r 2. c o n v e r s i n g w i t h f r i e n d s on an e v e r y - d a y 3. discussing social/political The informants very

good)

had t o

to what

matters.

rate on a f i v e - p o i n t

extent they

holidays.

topic.

were

scale ( f r o m 1 = i n s u f f i c i e n t t o 5 =

able t o

had to r a t e t h i s f o r t h r e e moments in t h e i r

perform

these a c t i v i t i e s . 3

Time I:

how was y o u r p r o f i c i e n c y at t h e end of s e c o n d a r y school?

Time I I :

how is/was y o u r p r o f i c i e n c y at t h e peak of y o u r command?

Time I I I :

how is y o u r p r o f i c i e n c y

During the

interview

some i n f o r m a t i o n

They

lives:

now?. was g a t h e r e d

on how t h e y

had

reached

t h e peak of p r o f i c i e n c y and in w h a t s i t u a t i o n s t h e y s t i l l used t h e f o r e i g n

lan-

guage.

4. ANALYSIS There

were

AND

RESULTS

three

groups

(n=12), German/Young the

German

and

the

of

(G/Y) French

informants

in

the

analysis:

(n=19) and F r e n c h / O l d ( F / O ) tests

seemed a p p r o p r i a t e to compare G / O

were

based

and F / O .

on

the

German/Old (n=12).

same

original

We compared G / O

(G/O)

Since both test,

it

and G / Y

on

t h e s u b t e s t s t h a t were identical f o r t h e t w o g r o u p s (see 3 . 1 ) . In o r d e r t o proficiency,

get

some more

an analysis

information

about

was made of e r r o r s

(productive)

in spontaneous

at lexical e r r o r s and grammatical e r r o r s in some more d e t a i l .

foreign-language speech.

We looked

136

De Bot & L i n t s e n

4.7. CIO

vs.

FIO

F i r s t , w e looked at some general T h e age d i f f e r e n c e between

aspects

of t h e informants

t h e two g r o u p s

d i f f e r e n c e s f o r a u d i t o r y discrimination

in t h e s e two g r o u p s .

is not s i g n i f i c a n t ;

neither

and short-term memory.

is a d i f f e r e n c e w i t h r e g a r d to t h e S P M S Q scores on t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e a r e w i t h i n

(Mann-Whitney's

the

are

However,

the

there

U=27.5, p