| Abstrakt: |
The present study examines the role of maternal years of education and family language policy (FLP) in monolingual and bilingual children's acquisition of Hebrew plural morphology. The case of the Hebrew plural system is especially interesting when examining the influence of the above factors on morphological performance, given that it demands both a mastery of morphological rules (characterized by a high degree of transparency in Hebrew) and a lexicon-based mastery of exceptions. Participants were 146 children, 74 bilinguals (heritage language: Russian; societal language: Hebrew) and 72 Hebrew monolinguals, aged 5–8 (kindergarten, first grade, and second grade), from the same schools and neighborhoods. A Hebrew pluralization, sentence completion task that included 99 items from two categories: fully regular words whose plural forms are based on a morphological rule and non-regular words whose plural forms (also) require lexical and/or morpho-lexical knowledge. The parents of the bilingual children filled out a questionnaire with questions on background variables (e.g., maternal education) and language practice in both languages by different family members and language use at home. The findings indicated that maternal education contributes differently and distinctly to the linguistic performance of children from different linguistic backgrounds. For monolingual children, an increase in the number of years of maternal education is associated with an increase in the likelihood of success in the lexical and morpho-lexical aspects of Hebrew. By contrast, for bilingual children, no significant contribution of maternal education to children's performance was found. For bilingual participants, their performance in the lexical and morpho-lexical aspects of the Hebrew plural system was consistently influenced by FLP across all school settings—increased use of Russian at home was associated with a lower likelihood of success in the societal language. FLP characteristics were not found to be related to maternal education. These findings have clinical implications for both assessment and intervention processes when working with bilingual children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
