Differences in Language Skills: Heritage Language Learner Subgroups and Foreign Language Learners
Abstract
Using both proficiency tests and self-assessment measures, this study investigated (a) whether 3 subgroups of Japanese heritage language (JHL) learners would demonstrate language behaviors distinctively different from those of traditional Japanese as a foreign language (JFL) learners, and (b) which domains of language use and skills would specifically identify such differentiation. Statistical analyses of data collected from 185 JFL and JHL students aged 17–22 indicated that there were striking similarities between the JFL Learner group and 2 JHL groups (JHL students with at least 1 Japanese-speaking grandparent but without a Japanese-speaking parent as 1 group, and JHL students of Japanese descent without either a Japanese-speaking parent or grandparent as the other). In contrast, another group of JHL students (those with at least 1 Japanese-speaking parent) proved to be substantially different from other groups in (a) grammatical knowledge, (b) listening and reading skills, (c) self-assessed use/choice of Japanese, and (d) self-ratings of a number of can-do tasks (Clark, 1981) that represented a wide range of abilities.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Total immersion in a language fosters a strong identification not just with the language's grammar and vocabulary but also with its speakers' shared history and culture.
“Kondo-Brown's (2005) research shows that total immersion in a language fosters a strong identification not just with the language's grammar and vocabulary but also with its speakers' shared history and culture.”
From Heritage Language Maintenance Among Immigrant Youth: Factors Influencing Proficiency and Identity (2024) · cites this paper as Kondo-Brown's (2005)
Students' language proficiency may improve if they are exposed to heritage language programs and extracurricular activities.
“Kondo-Brown (2005) claims that students' language proficiency may improve if they are exposed to heritage language programs and extracurricular activities.”
From Heritage Language Maintenance Among Immigrant Youth: Factors Influencing Proficiency and Identity (2024) · cites this paper as Kondo-Brown (2005)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Comparison of L2–L2 and L2–Heritage Learner Interactions in Spanish Language Classrooms
Bowles, M. A., Adams, R. J., & Toth, P. D. (2014) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/modl.12086 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
Everhart Chaffee, K., Noels, K. A., & McEown, M. S. (2014) · Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching · doi:10.14746/ssllt.2014.4.2.9 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Heritage Language Maintenance Among Immigrant Youth: Factors Influencing Proficiency and Identity
Alshihry, M. A. (2024) · Journal of Language Teaching and Research · doi:10.17507/jltr.1502.18 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
- Authors
- KONDO-BROWN, K.
- Venue
- The Modern Language Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-12
- Volume
- 89
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 563-581
- ISSN
- 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-4781
- OpenAlex
- W1603069033
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 29.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Modern Language Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Multilingual Education and Policy
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Second Language Learning and Teaching
- Keywords
- language proficiency, grammatical knowledge, listening and reading 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