No description available.

No description available.

The daily practice of bilingual language control has been argued to affect both lexical processing and non-verbal executive control in bilingual speakers. On the one hand, bilingualism may slow down lexical processing in both languages. On the other hand, bilinguals have been said to show cognitive advantages compared to monolinguals, for example on inhibition and switching tasks. However, this ‘bilingual advantage’ is hotly debated, can often not be replicated, and language groups have been poorly matched on background variables in previous studies. Furthermore, I examined the reliability of the literature and found evidence for the existence of a publication bias (Chapter 3). This over-representation of positive studies compared to studies with null or negative findings hinders a reliable interpretation of the actual effects of bilingualism. The current thesis therefore aimed to examine possible effects of bilingualism on both lexical processing and executive control. Specifically, I investigated the effects of an understudied, but important feature of bilingualism: language use. Effects of bilingualism have been argued to be largest in older adults. Chapter 4 presents a study discussing inhibition and possible effects of age across various tasks. I show that inhibitory control and age effects depend on task-specific features, including the type of interference, type of stimuli, and processing speed. Next, I present a study (Chapter 5 and 6) examining the relation between bilingualism and both lexical processing and executive control in older adults. Importantly, bilingual and monolingual groups were matched on background variables including immigrant status. I furthermore compared a group of active to inactive bilinguals to assess effects of language use. On a lexical processing task, bilinguals had a disadvantage compared to monolinguals. This effect was modulated by language use, implying that not only language proficiency but also actual language use are needed to explain lexical effects of bilingualism. However, the non-verbal executive control tasks showed no consistent effects of bilingualism or language use on inhibition or task switching. Thus, this study did not replicate positive effects on executive control in older adults. Between-subject comparisons remain problematic as groups can never be matched perfectly. Furthermore, these designs cannot assess a causal effect of bilingualism. Therefore, I conducted another study using behavioural and EEG measurements to test for causal effects of language switching on task switching (Chapter 7). When young bilinguals completed a language-switching task prior to a verbal task-switching paradigm, they showed larger switching costs than after a monolingual naming task. However, this effect of language switching was not found for non-verbal task switching. Language switching may thus have a negative impact on verbal switching, but these effects did not extend to non-verbal executive control. Together, these studies suggest that bilingualism and language use affect lexical processing, but there was no evidence for effects of bilingualism and language use on non-verbal executive control in younger or older adults. In combination with other failed replications and the biased literature, this questions the reliability of cognitive benefits associated with bilingualism. However, executive control is not a unity and its manifestation depends on task-specific features. This task impurity, together with the degree to which participant groups are matched, may explain the inconsistency with which effects of bilingualism on executive control have been observed.

The importance of using the target language (TL) in the FL classroom is ingrained in the minds of most language teachers e.g., the Direct Method, Audiolingualism, and the Communicative Method. However, few studies have examined how TL and first language (L1) are being used in the FL classroom (Duff & Polio, 1990, 1994; Macaro, 2001; Levine, 2003). Even less research has been done regarding the purpose(s) for which the L1 and TL are being used in the classroom and the types of discourse for which the L1 and TL are being employed by teachers and students. There is, however, a growing number of researchers who have begun to question the exclusion of the L1 from the classroom (Guthrie, 1984; Cook, 2001; Macaro, 2001; Turnbull, 2001).This study was carried out at the University of Arizona. Sixteen first- and second-year Spanish classes were video- and audio-recorded over the course of three observations. Additionally, over 500 students participated in a pre- and post-listening test as well as a survey regarding perceptions of L1 and TL use in the classroom and beliefs about language use. This study also investigated in what types of discourse the L1 and TL are being employed and some of the motivations behind this usage. Also, explored are the differences between native and non-native instructors of the TL.The results showed that while there was a strong positive correlation between the instructors' use of the L1 and the students' use of the L1, this did not adversely affect the listening gains in the classroom. Also, it was found that both the students and the instructors were able with a high degree of accuracy to predict the L1 and TL of the instructors in the classroom. Finally, there were no significant differences between the classes with native speaking instructors of the TL and those who were non-native speaking instructors of the TL. This study contributes to a better understanding of actual classroom language usage, the motivations behind L1 and TL use, and the students' and teachers' perceptions of the role of the L1 and TL in the classroom.

The objectives of this study were to examine if pre-stroke proficiency predicts post-stroke lexical semantic performance in Spanish-English bilingual persons with aphasia (PWA) and identify patterns of impairment in this population. A language use questionnaire was administered to 27 Spanish-English bilingual PWA to measure pre-stroke proficiency in both languages. Standardized language assessments in Spanish and English were administered to measure post-stroke lexical semantic performance in both languages. A principal component analysis was conducted on the language use questionnaire measures, revealing Daily Usage, Education, Exposure, and Language Ability Rating as factors that contribute to a person’s proficiency in their first language (L1), and Age of Acquisition, Daily Usage, Family Proficiency, Education, Exposure, Confidence and Language Ability Rating as factors that contribute to a person’s proficiency in their second language (L2). Regression analyses revealed that pre-stroke proficiency significantly predicted post-stroke lexical semantic performance, most strongly in English than in Spanish. Two distinct patterns of impairment emerged within the participants: parallel impairment and differential impairment. Overall, these results confirm that pre-stroke language proficiency is a key determiner of performance on standardized language assessments post-stroke, such that the higher proficiency pre-stroke, the higher performance on standardized tests post stroke. This pattern was more clear when English was L1 or L2 relative to when Spanish was L1 or L2. These results have important implications for assessment and diagnosis of aphasia in bilingual individuals particularly when clinicians need to select the language of assessment.

The current research investigated the ways language was used by mainstream primary school teachers and language learners whose native language was other than the official language of instruction. The setting of the study was the island of Cyprus, where the mainstream population’s language, Standard Modern Greek, is taught as the educational first language to native speakers of the Greek Cypriot dialect. At the same time, Standard Modern Greek is taught as an additional language to non-native Greek speakers. The main aim of the study was the investigation of the teachers’ and language learners’ use of language in the multilingual schools, to provide information regarding the way participants managed to ‘get along’ socially and academically. Upon examination of this use, the existence of the sociolinguistic phenomenon of bidialectism (the coexistence of two varieties), presented a further complication. The investigation was set within a sociocultural framework, following a neo-Vygotskyan perspective. The investigation was approached through a multiple case study conducted in three first grade primary school classrooms in Cyprus, in which ten language learners and three mainstream teachers were observed for more than 1500 minutes in the classroom and in the playground area. The study was also supported by interviews with the teachers and the GAL learners. In addition, interviews using the young learners’ drawings and persona dolls were conducted to investigate the perspectives of the children. The originality of the study was reflected in the variety of the research methods used, the inclusion of young children in the research, the consideration of bidialectism, the reflection upon both socialising and educational purposes through the use of language and, finally, the different settings where the participants were observed. The results of the study revealed that the instructors used the various linguistic varieties to achieve educational goals through the communication process, in that way prioritising communication over a preferred language. It also became clear that the teachers’ use of language was shown to prioritise communication rather than language learners’ socialisation in a preferred language culture. Moreover, teachers seemed to use the unofficial variety more often than any other linguistic variety as one of the most powerful means of communication they had with the language learners. Similarly, language learners were observed using the unofficial variety almost exclusively while the official variety use was observed only inside the classroom and only in activities that were related to written texts. Also, the playground area was observed to allow young learners to use language more freely, without worrying about mistakes and thus a much more extensive use of verbal speech was noticed. Finally, language learners seemed to use the language first and foremost to become equal members of their school and their class, while their use of language for educational purposes through communication was not a priority as it was for the teachers. None of the previous studies reviewed in the field managed to apply such a rich methodological design, include young students’ voices and examine the language use taking into account the bidialectal phenomenon.

The promotion of Kiswahili is one of the main goals of the policies of the East African Community. However, only a limited amount of research has been conducted on the perception and application of the language outside of the traditionally Kiswahili-speaking countries of Tanzania and Kenya. Especially in Uganda, the third largest country of the region, there is a lack of understanding for the role of the language in public communication. This article presents data on the use of Kiswahili in everyday communication and discusses the language attitudes and language ideologies of the people in Northern Uganda’s largest city. It shows that, despite generally positive attitudes towards the language, there is little to no use for it in public communication. The results of the study, combined with perceived negative attitudes from other parts of the country towards the implemented policies, question the effectiveness of the proposed measures for promoting Kiswahili within the present parameters of the specific context’s language ecologies, as well as the country in general.

<p>In our ever more international world, the English language plays an important role. This is</p><p>also reflected in its prominent position as a core subject in the Swedish school system. It is</p><p>therefore important that English teachers offer students an environment in which they have</p><p>the best possible opportunities to be successful in reaching the goals specified in the</p><p>syllabuses. One variable in a successful foreign language classroom is the teacher's usage</p><p>ofthe target language.</p><p>This study is about English teachers' views on the issue of target language usage in the</p><p>classroom, versus usage of the mother tongue. In this study, at Upper Secondary level, the</p><p>interviews show that the teachers are, more or less, in agreement that the target language</p><p>should be used all the time in the classroom. There are, however, occasions in which the</p><p>interviewed teachers do not work according to their own beliefs and methods and revert to</p><p>using Swedish. The main such occasions can briefly be said to be: explanation of grammar,</p><p>non-subject related "mentor's issues" and classroom management issues. In addition, this</p><p>study argues that the governing documents, previous research, as well as well-known</p><p>theories on the subject support a high usage of the target language by the teacher.</p>

In our ever more international world, the English language plays an important role. This is also reflected in its prominent position as a core subject in the Swedish school system. It is therefore important that English teachers offer students an environment in which they have the best possible opportunities to be successful in reaching the goals specified in the syllabuses. One variable in a successful foreign language classroom is the teacher's usage ofthe target language. This study is about English teachers' views on the issue of target language usage in the classroom, versus usage of the mother tongue. In this study, at Upper Secondary level, the interviews show that the teachers are, more or less, in agreement that the target language should be used all the time in the classroom. There are, however, occasions in which the interviewed teachers do not work according to their own beliefs and methods and revert to using Swedish. The main such occasions can briefly be said to be: explanation of grammar, non-subject related "mentor's issues" and classroom management issues. In addition, this study argues that the governing documents, previous research, as well as well-known theories on the subject support a high usage of the target language by the teacher.

In light of the 2010 recommendation of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages that teachers use the target language (TL) "as exclusively as possible," teachers face the necessity of promoting target language use and assessing how their language choices influence their students. The purpose of this study was to analyze teachers' perspectives and practices of whether to use students' first language or the target language. Data from over 100 foreign language teachers, predominantly those in the K-12 sector, were collected through a survey in order to measure how teachers manage the phenomenon of language choice. The findings were analyzed descriptively, categorically, and inferentially to find relationships among teachers in general, as well as within subgroups of participants. Findings indicate that teachers felt using the target language was more of a challenge for academic purposes because of their belief that they should be conducted in the TL. Academic tasks were also reported involving a greater quantity of speech functions, which made them more difficult to complete in the target language. Additional findings showed that teachers in general were most often influenced by student attitudes, motivation, and proficiency as well as their own attitudes, motivation, and proficiency. For certain subgroups, however, when teachers focused more on their own proficiency, motivation, training and experience they were more likely to reach 90% TL use or more. Furthermore, it was found that promoting the target language effectively equated with incorporating many strategies that supported TL goals. The most prevalent techniques found for promoting TL use were preparing for making input comprehensible, giving praise and recognition, and explaining its importance at the beginning of the year. Recommendations for increasing the ability of teachers to face the challenges of TL use are to simplify and increase the academic, social, and managerial purposes for which it can be used, prioritize and focus on the most influential factors of language choice (LC) within teachers' control, and form and promote a plan for TL use built upon a foundation of most effective techniques and practices for optimizing language choices.