Bilingual lexical skills of school-age children with Chinese and Korean heritage languages in the United States
Abstract
This cross-sectional study investigated the bilingual lexical skills of 175 US school-age children (5 to18 years old) with Cantonese, Mandarin, or Korean as their heritage language (HL), and English as their dominant language. Primary study goals were to identify potential patterns of development in bilingual lexical skills over the elementary to high school time span and to examine the relation of environmental factors to lexical skills. HL and English productive lexical skills were assessed with a Picture Naming and a Verbal Fluency task. English receptive lexical skills were assessed with Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. A survey obtained information about participants’ language use in six environmental contexts. There were age-related significant increases in both HL and English skills. However, English proficiency already had a significant lead over HL proficiency at the youngest age. English receptive lexical skills reached monolingual expectations from age 8, whereas for HL, high school age participants on average only reached the level of early elementary school monolinguals. Although more English use at home at younger ages was associated with stronger English skills, the relation did not exist for older participants. Instead, among older participants, more English use at home was associated with weaker HL skills. Children’s attendance at HL programs and visits to home countries bore little relation to HL proficiency.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Kohnert, K. J., Bates, E., & Hernandez, A. E. (1999) · Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/jslhr.4206.1400 · Cited by 219 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sierens, S., Slembrouck, S., Van Gorp, K., Agirdag, O., & Van Avermaet, P. (2019) · Applied Psycholinguistics · doi:10.1017/s0142716419000250 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jia, G., Chen, J., Kim, H., Chan, P.-S., & Jeung, C.
- Affiliations
- Lehman College (US)
- New York University (US)
- New York University, USA
- The Graduate Center, CUNY (US)
- Corresponding author
- Jia, Gisela
- ORCID
- Chen, Jennifer
- Venue
- International Journal of Behavioral Development
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-06-04
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 350-358
- ISSN
- 0165-0254 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0651
- OpenAlex
- W2333533857
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 3.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Behavioral Development (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Multilingual Education and Policy
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- heritage language, Chinese heritage language, Cantonese, mandarin, English proficiency, picture naming, verbal fluency, receptive vocabulary, home language use, heritage language programs, elementary school students
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