In:Multilingual Acquisition and Learning: An ecosystemic view to diversity
Edited by Elena Babatsouli
[Studies in Bilingualism 67] 2024
► pp. 500–528
Chapter 19Morphological awareness in L2 Italian children with a migrant background
Published online: 30 May 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.67.19mel
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.67.19mel
Abstract
Research on morphological awareness in bilingual children has generated conflicting evidence, with
studies reporting bilingual gains and others finding poorer performance relative to monolinguals. In this study, we
explored further this issue by testing 54 school-aged children speaking Italian as an L2 on a broad domain of
morphology and by means of nonword tasks, with the aim to reduce potential vocabulary effects on morphological
abilities. One group of monolingual Italian-speaking children and two groups of bilingual L2 Italian children (with
Romanian and Albanian as L1s) took part in the experiment. Results evidenced similar performances in most tasks, but
limited underachievement was found in bilinguals, especially in the Albanian-Italian speaking children. This bilingual
gap can be explained by the genealogical and typological distance between the L1 and the target language. Crucially,
it disappears once vocabulary and exposure factors are taken into account.
Keywords: morphological awareness, Wug Test, vocabulary, bilingualism, L2 Italian children
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Metalinguistic awareness in bilingualism: Advantages in MA?
- 1.2Bilingualism and vocabulary: Disadvantages in MA?
- 2.The current study
- 2.1The empirical focus: Italian morphology
- 2.2Some notes on Albanian and Romanian morphology
- 3.Methods
- 3.1Participants
- 3.2Materials
- 3.3Procedure and scoring system
- 3.4Data analysis plan
- 4.Results
- 4.1Preliminary measures
- 4.2Analysis 1: Group accuracy in each task
- 4.3Analysis 2: Comparing noun- vs. verb-based morphology
- 4.4Analysis 3: Comparing conjugation classes
- 4.5Analysis 4: Addressing the role of vocabulary
- 4.6Analysis 5: The role of exposure to L2 Italian
- 5.Discussion
- 6.Conclusion
- 7.Author Contribution
Acknowledgements Notes References
References (47)
Barac, R., & Bialystok, E. (2012). Bilingual
effects on cognitive and linguistic development: Role of language, cultural background, and
education. Child
Development, 83(2), 413–422.
Bialystok, E. (2009). Bilingualism:
The good, the bad and the indifferent. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 12, 3–11.
Bialystok, E., & Barac, R. (2012). Emerging
bilingualism: Dissociating advantages for metalinguistic awareness and executive
control. Cognition, 122(1), 67–73.
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I., & Luk, G. (2008). Lexical
access in bilinguals: Effects of vocabulary size and executive control. Journal
of
Neurolinguistics, 21(6), 522–538.
Bialystok, E., Luk, G., Peets, K. F., & Sujin, Y. A. N. G. (2010). Receptive
vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism:
Language and
Cognition, 13(4), 525–531.
Bialystok, E., Peets, K. F., & Moreno, S. (2014). Producing
bilinguals through immersion education: Development of metalinguistic
awareness. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 35(1), 177–191.
Carlisle, J. F. (1995). Morphological
awareness and early reading achievement. In L. B. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological
aspects of language
processing (pp. 189–209). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Clahsen, H., & Jessen, A. (2019). Do
bilingual children lag behind? A study of morphological encoding using
ERPs. Journal of Child
Language, 46(5), 955–979.
Cojocaru, D. (2003). Romanian
grammar. Slavic and East European Language Research Center (SEELRC), Duke University.
Cummins, J. (1978). Bilingualism
and the development of metalinguistic awareness. Journal of Cross-cultural
Psychology, 9(2), 131–149.
Deacon, S. H., Kieffer, M. J., & Laroche, A. (2014). The
relation between morphological awareness and reading comprehension: Evidence from mediation and longitudinal
models. Scientific Studies of
Reading, 18(6), 432–451.
Deacon, S. H., & Kirby, J. R. (2004). Morphological
awareness: Just “more phonological”? The roles of morphological and phonological awareness in reading
development. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 25(2), 223–238.
Dressler, W. U., & Thornton, A. M. (1996). Italian
nominal inflection. Wiener Linguistische
Gazette, 57–59, 1–26.
Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (2000). Peabody – test di vocabolario recettivo – P.P.V.T.-R. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test –
Revised. Omega.
Fejzo, A. (2021). The
contribution of morphological awareness to vocabulary among L1 and L2 French-speaking
4th-graders. Reading and
Writing, 34, 659–679.
Fowler, A., & Liberman, I. Y. (1995). The
role of phonology and orthography in morphological
awareness. In L. Feldman (Ed.), Morphological
aspects of language
processing (pp. 157–188). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2012). Development
of morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge in Spanish-speaking language minority learners: A parallel
process latent growth curve model. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 33(1), 23–54.
Kuo, L. J., & Anderson, R. C. (2006). Morphological
awareness and learning to read: A cross-language perspective. Educational
Psychologist, 41(3), 161–180.
Leivada, E., Westergaard, M., Duñabeitia, J., & Rothman, J. (2021). On
the phantom-like appearance of bilingualism effects on neurocognition: (How) should we
proceed? Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 24(1), 197–210.
Lenth R (2023). emmeans:
Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means (R package version
1.8.4-1. Retrieved on 18 December 2023 from [URL]
Melloni, C., & Vender, M. (2022). Morphological
awareness in developmental dyslexia: Playing with nonwords in a morphologically rich
language. PLOS
ONE, 17(11), e0276643.
Melloni, C., Vender, M., & Delfitto, D. (2019). Inflectional
morphology: Evidence for an advantage of bilingualism in Albanian-Italian and Romanian-Italian bilingual
children. In R. Slabakova, J. Corbet, L. Dominguez, A. Dudley, & A. Wallington (Eds.), Explorations
in second language acquisition and
processing (pp. 238–250). Cambridge Scholars.
Nagy, W., Berninger, V. W., & Abbott, R. D. (2006). Contributions
of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle-school
students. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98(1), 134.
Newmark, L., Hubbard, P., & Prifti, P. R. (1982). Standard
Albanian: A reference grammar for students. Stanford University Press.
Orsolini, M., Fanari, R., & Bowles, H. (1998). Acquiring
regular and irregular inflection in a language with verb classes. Language
& Cognitive
Processes, 13, 425–464.
Paradis, J., Nicoladis, E., Crago, M., & Genesee, F. (2011). Bilingual
children’s acquisition of the past tense: A usage-based approach. Journal of
Child
Language, 38(3), 554–578.
Park, J., Wiseheart, R., & Ritter, M. (2014). The
roles of the speed and accuracy of morphological processing in the reading comprehension of Spanish-speaking
language minority learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and
English
Literature, 3(1), 12–27.
Piccinin, S., & Dal Maso, S. (2022). Sviluppare la consapevolezza morfologica: Linee guida per un intervento
didattico. Studi di
Glottodidattica, 3, 85–94.
(2023), Investigating
factors affecting reading comprehension in second-generation pupils: The role of morphological
skills. Lingue e
Linguaggio, XXII(1), 117–142.
Pirrelli, V., & Battista, M. (2000). On
the interaction of paradigmatic and syntagmatic stem alternation in Italian
conjugation. Acta Linguistica
Hungarica, 47(1–4), 289–314.
R Core
Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for
statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
Ramirez, G., Chen, X., Geva, E., & Luo, Y. (2011). Morphological
awareness and word reading in English language learners: Evidence from Spanish- and Chinese-speaking
children. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 32(3), 601–618.
Raven, J., Court, J. H., & Raven, J. C. 1998. Raven
manual, Section 1 (General overview) and Section 2 (Coloured progressive
matrices). Oxford Psychologist Press.
Rispens, J. & De Bree, E. (2015). Bilingual
children’s production of regular and irregular past tense
morphology. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 18(2), 290–303.
Shahar-Yames, D., Eviatar, Z., & Prior, A. (2018). Separability
of lexical and morphological knowledge: Evidence from language minority
children. Frontiers in
Psychology, 9, 1–15.
Singson, M., Mahoney, D., & Mann, V. (2000). The
relation between reading ability and morphological skills: Evidence from derivational
suffixes. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary
Journal, 12, 219–252.
Sparks, E., & Deacon, H. S. (2015). Morphological
awareness and vocabulary acquisition: A longitudinal examination of their relationship in English-speaking
children. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 36, 299–321.
Stella, G., Pizzioli, C., & Tressoldi, P. (2000). PEABODY – Test di vocabolario recettivo – P.P.V.T. – R. Peabody picture vocabulary test –
revised. Omega Edizioni.
Stella, V., & Job, R. (2001). Le sillabe PD/DPSS. Una base di dati sulla frequenza dell’italiano
scritto. Giornale Italiano di
Psicologia, 3, 633–639.
Tong, X., Deacon, S. H., Kirby, J. R., Cain, K., & Parrila, R. (2011). Morphological
awareness: A key to understanding poor reading comprehension in
English. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 103(3), 523.
Vender, M., Garraffa, M., Sorace, A., & Guasti, M. T. (2016). How
early L2 children perform on Italian clinical markers of SLI: A study of clitic production and nonword
repetition. Clinical Linguistics and
Phonetics, 30(2), 150–169.
Vender, M., Hu, S., Mantione, F., Savazzi, S., Delfitto, D., & Melloni, C. (2021). Inflectional
morphology: Evidence for an advantage of bilingualism in
dyslexia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism, 24(2), 155–172.
Vender, M., Mantione, F., Savazzi, S., Delfitto, D., & Melloni, C. (2017). Inflectional
morphology and dyslexia: Italian children’s performance in a nonword pluralization
task. Annals of
Dyslexia, 67, 401–426.
Verhoeven, L., Voeten, M., & Vermeer, A. (2019). Beyond
the simple view of early second language reading: The impact of lexical
quality. Journal of
Neurolinguistics, 50, 28–36.
