Cited by 150Language Development and DisordersReading and Literacy DevelopmentPhonetics and Phonology Research

Early bilingualism, language transfer, and phonological awareness

Open access
VERHOEVEN, LUDO·2007·Applied Psycholinguistics

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relations between early bilingualism and phonological awareness in a sample of 75 Turkish–Dutch bilingual kindergarten children living in The Netherlands. In a longitudinal design, the children's first (L1) and second (L2) language abilities were measured at the beginning and end of kindergarten. At the end of kindergarten, the children's metalinguistic skills within the domain of phonological awareness were also assessed. Linear structural equation modeling was used to examine the types of intralingual (language-specific) and interlingual (language-transfer) processes over time. In addition, just how the patterns of bilingual development related to the children's later phonological awareness was examined. Turkish was found to be the dominant language on both measurement occasions. In addition to the expected longitudinal relations, there was evidence for transfer from L1 to L2. Two interrelated phonological factors emerged: phonotactic awareness and phonemic awareness. Variation in the two types of children's phonological awareness was predicted by both L1 and L2 abilities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0142716407070233

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The findings are unlike longitudinal studies which reported that positive cross-language correlations between vocabulary skills in emergent bilingual children became smaller or dropped with increasing age or grade.

    “These findings corroborate our hypothesis, but are unlike those from longitudinal studies which reported that positive cross-language correlations between vocabulary skills in emergent bilingual children became smaller or dropped with increasing age or grade (Leseman, 2000; Solari et al., 2014; Verhoeven, 2007; see also Branum-Martin et al., 2009).”

    From Linguistic interdependence of receptive vocabulary skills in emergent bilingual preschool children: Exploring a factor-dependent approach (2019) · cites this paper as Verhoeven, 2007

    The ‘Interdependencies between L1 and L2 development’ section reports moderate cross-language relations at each of two kindergarten measurements, but does not say those relations became smaller. The ‘Patterns of bilingual development’ section says the gap between Turkish and Dutch scores declined over time; that is a difference in scores, not a decline in cross-language correlations. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Bialystok, E. (1993). Metalinguistic awareness: The development of children's representations of language. In C. Pratt & A. F. Garton (Eds.), Systems of representation in children (pp. 211- 233). New York: Wiley.
  2. Bialystok, E., & Ryan, E. B. (1985). Metacognitive framework for the development of first and sec- ond language skills. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition and human performance (pp. 207-252). New York: Academic Press.
  3. Bruck, M., & Genesee, F. (1995). Phonological awareness in young second language learners. Journal of Child Language, 22, 307-324.
  4. Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  5. Campbell, R., & Sais, E. (1995). Accelerated metalinguistic (phonological) awareness in bilingual children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13, 61-68.
  6. Clements, G. N., & Sezer, E. (1982). Vowel and consonant disharmony in Turkish. In H. van der Hulst & N. Smith (Eds.), The structure of phonological representations (Part II, pp. 213-256). Dordrecht: Foris.
  7. Cummins, J. (1983). Heritage language education: A literature review. Toronto: Ministry of Education.
  8. Cummins, J. (1984). Wanted: A theoretical framework for relating language proficiency to academic achievement among bilingual students. In C. Rivera (Ed.), Language proficiency and academic achievement (pp. 2-19). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  9. Cummins, J. (1989). Language and literacy acquisition in bilingual contexts. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 10, 17-31.
  10. Cummins, J. (1991). Conversational and academic language proficiency in bilingual contexts. AILA Review, 8, 75-89.
  11. De Groot, A. M. B., Delmaar, P., & Lupker, S. J. (2000). The processing of interlexical homographs in translation recognition and lexical decision: Support for nonselective access to bilingual memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 397-428.
  12. Driessen, G., van der Slik, F., & de Bot, K. (2002). Home language and language proficiency: A large- scale longitudinal study in Dutch primary schools. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 20, 175-194.
  13. Goswami, U. (2000). Phonological and lexical processes. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Rosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 251-268). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  14. Hakuta, K., & R. M. Diaz (1985). The relationship between degree of bilingualism and cognitive ability: A critical discussion and some new longitudinal data. In K. D. Nelson (Ed.), Children's language (pp. 319-344). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  15. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1997). Beyond modularity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  16. Lewis, G. L. (1986). Turkish grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  17. MacWhinney, B. (2004). A unified model of language acquisition. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 49-67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  18. Mann, V. A. (1991). Phonological abilities: Effective predictors of future reading ability. In L. Rieben & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Learning to read (pp. 121-133). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  19. Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. A. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In M. L. Kamil (Ed.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. 111, pp. 269-284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  20. Oller, K., & Eilers, R. (Eds.). (2002). Language and literacy in bilingual children. Clevedon: Multi- lingual Matters.
  21. Pearson, B. Z., Fernandez, M. C., & Oller, D. K. (1993). Lexical development in bilingual infants and toddlers: Comparison to monolingual norms. Language Learning, 43, 93-120.
  22. Reynolds, A. G. (1991). The cognitive consequence of bilingualism. In A. G. Reynolds (Ed.), Bilingual- ism, multiculturalism, and second language learning (pp. 145-182). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  23. Rubin, H., & Turner, A. (1989). Phonological awareness in young second language learner. Journal of Child Language, 22, 307-324.
  24. Snow, C. (1991). The theoretical basis for relationships between language and literacy in development. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 6, 5-10.
  25. Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  26. Troia, G. A. (1999). Phonological awareness intervention research: A critical review of the experimental methodology. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 28-52.
  27. Tunmer, W. E., Herriman, M. L., & Nesdale, A. R. (1988). Metalinguistic abilities and beginning reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 134-155.
  28. Van Hell, J. G., & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 780-789.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
VERHOEVEN, L.
Affiliations
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
VERHOEVEN, LUDO
Venue
Applied Psycholinguistics
Published
2007-06-11
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
425-439
ISSN
  • 0142-7164 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1817
OpenAlex
W2102077921
Cited by
150
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
FWCI
7.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied Psycholinguistics (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
Keywords
early bilingualism, phonological awareness, language transfer, kindergarten children, phonemic awareness, metalinguistic skills

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review