Understanding the Spanish heritage language speaker/learner

EuroAmerican Journal of Applied Linguistics and Languages Special Issue, Volume 2, Issue 2, December 2015, pages 1-10 ISSN 2376-905X DOI pending www.e-journall.org Understanding the Spanish heritage language speaker/learner DIEGO PASCUAL Y CABO*, JOSH DELAROSA-PRADA 1 Texas Tech University Received 1 December 2015; received in revised form 23 December 2015; accepted 27 December 2015 ABSTRACT EN While the linguistic traits and specific needs of heritage speakers have been recognized for several decades, academic interest in the different dimensions of this type of bilingualism has increased exponentially in the last ten years. Because of this, significant progress has been made in all areas of inquiry. From formal/theoretical investigations into the mental architecture of the heritage language to explorations of social factors, as well as other pedagogical concerns, numerous research strands are currently shaping our understanding of the field. With this in mind, the goal of this introduction is twofold. First, we aim to provide an overview of the themes and discussions that are currently taking place in the field of Spanish heritage-speaker bilingualism. To this end, we will consider key issues pertaining to a wide variety of areas including, but not limited to, sociolinguistic attitudes, identity, language competency, and language instruction. Secondly, in so doing, the critical presentation and discussion of each of these areas will also serve to contextualize the articles included in this special issue. Key words: HERITAGE SPEAKERS, HERITAGE LANGUAGE LEARNERS, SPANISH IN THE UNITED STATES, BILINGUALISM. ES Mientras que los rasgos lingüísticos y las necesidades específicas de los hablantes de herencia se reconocieron ya hace décadas, el interés académico en las diferentes dimensiones de este tipo de bilingüismo ha aumentado exponencialmente en los últimos diez años. Por eso, se ha avanzado de manera considerable en todos los ámbitos de investigación. Desde investigaciones formales y teóricas acerca de la arquitectura mental de una lengua de herencia, hasta la exploración de factores sociales y otras cuestiones pedagógicas, el actual estado de la cuestión está definido por múltiples ámbitos de investigación. Con respecto a esto, el objetivo de esta introducción es doble. Por una parte, queremos ofrecer una panorámica de los temas y debates actuales en el campo del bilingüismo de los hablantes de español como lengua de herencia. Así, se considerarán cuestiones centrales en el estudio de actitudes lingüísticas, identidad, competencia lingüística y enseñanza de la lengua. Por otra parte, la presentación crítica y la discusión de cada una de estas áreas servirá para contextualizar los artículos incluidos en este número especial. Palabras clave: HABLANTES DE LENGUAS DE HERENCIA, APRENDIENTES DE LENGUAS DE HERENCIA, ESPAÑOL EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS, BILINGÜISMO. IT Mentre le caratteristiche linguistiche e le necessità specifiche dei parlanti di una lingua ereditaria sono state riconosciute da decenni, l’interesse accademico per le diverse dimensioni di questo tipo di bilinguismo è aumentato in modo esponenziale negli ultimi dieci anni. Per questo, c’è stato un progresso significativo in tutti gli ambiti di ricerca. Dalle ricerche formali e teoriche sull’architettura mentale di una lingua ereditaria, all’esplorazione dei fattori sociali e altre questioni pedagogiche, questo campo è attualmente influenzato da molteplici linee di ricerca. Con questo presente, questa introduzione ha un doppio scopo. In primo luego, si vuole offrire una visione panoramica dei temi e dibattiti attuali nel campo del bilinguismo dei parlanti di spagnolo come lingua ereditaria. Si considereranno, con questo obiettivo, questioni centrali nello studio delle attitudini linguistiche, identità, competenza linguistica e insegnamento della lingua. In secondo luogo, la presentazione critica di ognuna di queste aree servirà per contestualizzare gli articoli inclusi in questo numero speciale. Parole chiave: PARLANTI DI LINGUE EREDITARIE, APPRENDENTI DI LINGUE EREDITARIE, SPAGNOLO NEGLI STATI UNITI, BILINGUISMO. * Contact: diego.pascual@ttu.edu © Pascual y Cabo 2015. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. PASCUAL Y CABO & DELAROSA-PRADA 1. General introduction With Europe and the United States as its main research hubs, the field of heritage/minority language studies has recently sprung to the forefront of linguistic inquiry. Revolving around the study of the home language of families and ethnic groups residing in large, linguistically diverse communities, the attention of European scholars has centered on languages such as Arabic, Cantonese/Mandarin, Bengali, Berber, Punjabi, or Turkish (see e.g., Creese & Blackledge, 2011; Dirim & Auer, 2003; Li Wei, 2011) among other languages. Within that context, joint efforts have further developed the notion of multilingualism as it relates to multiculturalism. Focusing on the dynamics of family language policies and ethnolinguistic minority complementary schools, three main strands of research can be traced: one with educational applications (e.g., Baker, 2003), one with an emphasis on the identity-interaction interconnection (e.g., Blackledge, 2008; Blommaert, 2001), and a third one with formal/theoretical approaches to language acquisition and bilingualism (e.g., Flores & Barbosa, 2014; Kupisch, Lein, Barton, Schröder, Stangen, & Stoehr, 2014; Meisel, 1994a, 1994b; Müller & Hulk, 2001). Analogous research strands have also been developed in the United States, the focus of this special issue. Considering the profound impact of recent migration trends, most attention has been directed to the Spanish language. This is unsurprising, given that with some 55 million Hispanics2, the United States is home to the second largest Hispanic population in the world after only Mexico, with over 122 million inhabitants. In addition to these already large numbers are the undocumented immigrants who cannot be accurately counted by census reports, but who play a central role as part of the U.S. Hispanic community. The vitality of this community has become undeniable across all dimensions of society (e.g., politics, economy, education, and the media). For example, in recognizing its growing importance in U.S. society, great efforts are currently being made to attract the Hispanic population via bilingual/bicultural campaigns and advertisings (eMarketer, 2009; McCabe, Weaver, & Corona, 2013; Meneses, 2011). This also holds true for media and entertainment, where Hispanics have progressively moved to the forefront (e.g., as attested by the Latin@ presence in films and TV shows) and, while songs entirely sung in Spanish are not the rule, Spanish-English code-switching has made its way into mainstream popular music. According to most recent reports, the three largest Hispanic communities in the United States are Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and Cubans, with increasing numbers of Dominicans and Central Americans (United States Census, 2014), for whom places such as New York, Los Angeles, or Miami have traditionally been preferred destinations. Over time, these cities have become epicenters of large intergenerational Hispanic communities, from naturalized immigrants and their U.S.-born children to newly arrived families looking for a better future. In some of these areas, knowledge of Spanish is not only important, it is necessary to be able to function in certain social settings (e.g., Lynch, 1999; Silva-Corvalán & Lynch, 2008). However, other areas that have not traditionally been associated with large Latino communities have recently, in a progressive manner, become centers of affluence for Hispanic groups. For example, a number of states such as Alabama, Nevada, North Carolina, or Georgia have experienced significant growth in the number of Hispanic residents in the last years. This trend is not expected to stop any time soon. In fact, according to most census estimations, by 2060, the number of Hispanics in the United States will reach the figure of 128.8 million, thereupon constituting over 0% of the nation s population (United States Census, 2014). Based on this increase and its effect on the expanding importance of the Spanish language to U.S. society, as well as the role of the United States as an international economic powerhouse, we can only surmise the upcoming centrality of U.S. Spanish as a language variety in itself. In the United States, the Spanish language axiomatically coexists with English. Yet, even in this context of language contact, most Spanish-speaking immigrants who come to the United States as adults maintain a Spanish-dominant linguistic profile and may or may not acquire English (e.g., Alba, Logan, Lutz & Stults, 2002). Their offspring, however, having been born/raised into a language contact situation, will become dominant speakers of the societal language (English in this case) while their home-language linguistic systems will naturally differ from those of monolingually-raised individuals (e.g., Pascual y Cabo & Rothman, 2012; Rothman & Treffers-Daller, 2014). These U.S.-born children, as well as those child-immigrants who In this text, the terms Latino and Hispanic will be used interchangeably, to refer to people whose country of origin, or that of their ancestors, make up the Spanish-speaking countries of North, Central, and South America. 2 2 E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10 UNDERSTANDING THE SPANISH HERITAGE SPEAKER/LEARNER arrive in the United States at an early age, are widely referred to in the literature as heritage speakers (hereafter HSs) or heritage language learners (HLLs). We now turn to a detailed discussion of these terms. 2. From heritage speakers to heritage language learners 2.1 Heritage speakers In the context of the United States, the term HS makes reference to someone raised in a home where a non-English language is spoken, who speaks or merely understands the heritage language, and who is to some degree bilingual in English and the heritage language (Valdés, 2000, p. 1). As noted in previous research3, the most noteworthy characteristic associated with HSs in general is that, despite being exposed to the heritage language naturalistically and from birth, they end up exhibiting linguistic patterns that do not match those considered age-appropriate in monolingually-raised individuals. For example, among others, HSs grammars have been shown to be particularly sensitive to cross-linguistic interference with regards to tense and aspect (e.g., Silva-Corvalán, 1994, 2014), mood (e.g., Montrul & Perpiñán, 2011; Pascual y Cabo, Lingwall, & Rothman, 2012), gender agreement (e.g., Montrul, Foote, & Perpiñán, 2008), null subject pronouns (e.g., Montrul, 2002, 2007; Polinsky 1997; Silva-Corvalán, 1994), or case marking (e.g., Montrul & Bowles, 2009; Montrul & Sanchez-Walker, 2013; Pascual y Cabo, 2013). These domains (and more) have been shown to surface as a simplified version of the monolingual linguistic system, or as a grammar that when measured against age-matched monolingual speakers of the same language/dialect could be deemed as not having reached full development (e.g., Montrul, 2008; Silva Corvalán 1994)4. This course of acquisition has been generally referred to in the literature as incomplete acquisition (Montrul, 2002, 2008; O Grady, Lee, & Choo, 2001; Polinsky, 2007), a notion that has generated substantial debate in the last few years (e.g., see Pascual y Cabo & Rothman, 2012; Pires & Rothman, 2009; Putnam & Sánchez, 2013)5. Notwithstanding generalizations, HSs cannot be thought of as a homogeneous group, nor be easily tagged/identified as such given the vast array of characteristics that make up and determine their respective individual profiles. For example, the different sociolinguistic realities in which HSs are immersed during the first years of their lives (i.e., timing of exposure to the societal language) have been documented to have a deterministic effect on their linguistic outcomes (e.g., Müller & Hulk, 2001; Pascual y Cabo & Gómez Soler, 2015). Considering this, the field of HS bilingualism has undoubtedly sustained an attention shift from the somewhat uniform monolingual model of language knowledge to a multilingual one, bringing to bear new applications for old models and theories (e.g., see Benmamoun, Montrul & Polinsky, 2013, for an overview). For example, as discussed, HSs can be found along a continuum of linguistic dominance/proficiency, whereby some may hardly be able to communicate in the HL, while others may pass as monolingual speakers. Generally speaking, the differing levels of HL attainment achieved result from a variety of reasons which include, but are not limited to, family language policies and attitudes towards the heritage language, access (or lack thereof) to formal education in the in the HL, generation of immigration, age of onset of bilingualism6, limited exposure to the HL along with limited opportunities to use it productively, or simply, voluntary lack of engagement during the formative years. We refer the reader to Pascual y Cabo (2015) for a current overview of research findings in the field of Spanish heritage speaker bilingualism from a formal point of view and to Potowski and Lynch (2014) for an overview from a sociolinguistic and pedagogical perspective. 4 As noted in previous research, HS linguistic outcomes can also diverge from monolingual grammars to the same and sometimes even more drastic extent as traditional L2 learners despite the fact that acquisition of the HL usually takes place naturalistically and in early childhood (e.g., Montrul 2011). In fact, traditional L2 learners have been documented to have some advantages over HSs (e.g., writing skills, metalinguistic awareness) (e.g., Mikulski & Elola, 2011; Montrul, 2010; Montrul & Perpiñán, 2011). 5The notion of incomplete acquisition as it refers to HS bilingual development has been challenged on the basis that HSs competence, while often different from monolingual speakers competence in the same language, is not incomplete, but simply different for reasons related to the realities of the environment in which HSs grow up. We refer the reader to Pascual y Cabo & Rothman (2012) for more on this issue. 6 Speakers whose majority language acquisition occurred alongside the acquisition of the HL are considered simultaneous bilinguals. On the other hand, speakers whose first exposure to the majority language occurred after the structural basis of the HL was acquired, at about the age of 4-5, when they first start attending school, are considered sequential bilinguals. 3 E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10 3 PASCUAL Y CABO & DELAROSA-PRADA Such heterogeneity is best captured in Polinsky and Kagan s (2007) broad/narrow categorization. A narrow definition of Spanish HSs would include those individuals who, having grown up in a household where Spanish was spoken, have acquired the language and can use it productively even if they are still clearly dominant in the societal language. A broader stance on HSs, on the other hand, would necessarily embrace anyone, who, with or without linguistic knowledge, has a cultural ancestry connection to the language. The adoption of one definition or the other depends largely on the specific goals and questions posited by the researchers themselves. For example, in the case of studies that aim to examine linguistic competence in the strict sense, adopting a narrow definition appears more fitting. On the other hand, the broad definition could be adopted for studies that aim to examine other important issues such as the negotiation of identity or the teaching and assessment of particular topics (see for example Reznicez-Parrado; Camus & Adrada-Rafael, this issue). Regardless of the precise definition adopted, as we see it, one of the most puzzling aspects of heritage speaker bilingualism is the widespread intra- and inter-speaker variability observed. That is, the same HS can be seen accepting and/or producing the same grammatical property (i.e., tense, aspect, mood) in different ways that may or may not always follow the descriptions found in the theoretical literature (Montrul, 2009). In turn, the ramifications that this variability triggers transcend into other domains beyond the purely linguistic ones (i.e., myths, prejudice, and stigma [Potowski, 2010]). Undoubtedly, this raises questions regarding HSs linguistic and cultural identities, as well as their needs—and abilities—in the classroom. These issues are addressed in the next section. 2.2. Heritage language learners Prior to entering kindergarten, HSs exposure to the societal language is usually minimal and thus, many of them are only able to communicate in their home language. From the start of school on, however, (at least) two important changes are observed. First, it is common for U.S. educational programs to have English proficiency as their goal, and so education and socialization with peers is carried out almost exclusively in the societal language (Lukes, 2015). Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, opportunities to not only be exposed to, but also to use the HL become gradually reduced to the home/family environment. Combined, these changes contribute to the observed linguistic shift. That is, HSs go from Spanish HL-monolingualism to a state of bilingualism that eventually allows them to function in an English-speaking system. As this process takes place during important formative years for the children, it is also not uncommon to observe the more extreme case, in which monolingualism in the majority language is the end result. Years later, however, in recognizing the richness and the added value associated with their heritage (among other reasons), many of these HSs start attending Spanish classes at the high school or college level7. At this point, they become reacquainted with their home language/culture and are considered heritage language learners (HLLs). Thus, as we see it, while HSs are (to some degree) users of the heritage language, HLLs are by definition learners/students of the HL, no matter their linguistic proficiency (or lack thereof in the case of receptive HLLs). As discussed, given their linguistic and educational background, most HLLs can communicate in the HL,8 but experience difficulties (to varying degrees and in varying ways) when it comes to using the standardized conventions of the written language (i.e., literacy), as well as with the sociolinguistic demands of certain formal contexts. For example, because HSs are not usually educated in the HL, it is common for them to lack the linguistic resources required to navigate academic registers (e.g., Beaudrie, Ducar, & Potowski, 2014). Thus, in the HL classroom, HSs needs are necessarily different from those of the traditional second language learner (e.g., Beaudrie et al., 2014). That said, more often than not, these two types of students are placed together into mixed-classes with little regard to their respective needs, a practice that is usually not beneficial to either learner type (e.g., Beaudrie et al., 2014). Even though recognition of the pedagogical and educational needs associated with the profile of the HLLs is nothing new (see e.g., Guadalupe Valdés, 1999; or Ana Roca, 1997), only within the last decade or so have actions been It should be noted that many HSs also attend Spanish classes before they go to college. For example, programs that focus on dual language instruction in K-8 schools have been documented to address HSs needs and make a positive impact in their lives (Lindholm-Leary, 2013). 8 It is true, however, that in the most extreme cases of HL loss, learning a HL can be (almost) like learning a foreign or a third language (Polinsky, 2015). 7 4 E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10 UNDERSTANDING THE SPANISH HERITAGE SPEAKER/LEARNER taken at a larger scale to meaningfully address such needs (e.g., Beaudrie et al., 2014; Beaudrie & Fairclough, 2012; Correa, 2011; Potowski, 2005; Potowski & Carreira, 2004). But the recognition, and to some extent, the celebration of those traits that make HS bilingualism an exciting field for scholars and practitioners does not necessarily extend to most realms of U.S. society, where monolingualism and monoculturalism are still the norm. From solidly anchored misconceptions about bilingualism to bilingual programs promoting monolingualism (Bartlett & García, 2010), misinformation has not only made its way into education and language policy in the United States, but it seems to be deeply rooted in the people s conceptualization of what language(s) must be like. Illustrative of this is Potowski s (2010) list of myths related to being bilingual, which captures some of the general (mis)perceptions of what it means to be a heritage language speaker/learner in the United States. Among other false and preconceived ideas, Potowski lists the myths that (i) immigrants fail to learn English, (ii) they do not fit in with the American ways, and (iii) language diversity is a problem that threatens national unity. Partly due to these unsupported beliefs about language and bilingualism, and partly due to the perceived low socio-economic status of most Spanish-speaking immigrants, pervasive negative attitudes about the presence of Spanish in the United States can be observed (e.g., Montes-Alcalá, 2000). As mentioned earlier, this sort of groundless attitudes is not new and has found its way into (language) policy decisions since the early stages of the making of the United States. However, this aversion toward the use of languages other than English, and this minting of a national identity through the rejection and stigmatization of linguistic diversity, has resurfaced only relatively recently. In fact, the second half of the 20th century witnessed a sense of linguistic tolerance (e.g., the Voting Right Act of 1965amended in 1975or the Bilingual Education Act of 1968). This sort of understanding allowed for some languages other than English to be taught, mainly in after-school or weekend programs (Garcia-Preto, 2005). These programs, normally referred to as ethnic community schools , were devised by ethnolinguistic minorities to educate their children in the heritage language more often than not with cultural and religious practices at the core. A study by Joshua A. Fishman by the name Language Loyalty in the United States (1966) categorized these schools in three types: day schools providing linguistic, cultural and religious instruction; afternoon schools, or supplementary schools, meeting two or more weekday afternoons throughout the school year; and weekend schools normally meeting on Saturdays or Sundays. In an attempt to educate students in their home language, these programs strived to promote biliteracy and bilingualism in times when bilingual education was banned in thirty-one states. Out of these efforts, Coral Way School (Miami, FL) stands as the oldest public bilingual school in the United States. Its curriculum was built on the linguistic abilities brought in by the students themselves, with an emphasis on developing bilingualism, biliteracy, and biculturality, while promoting self-esteem, respect, and discipline (Pellerano, Fradd, & Rovira, 1998). This holistic view of bilingualism, however, is still uncommon and a subtractive bilingualism take on education is generally enforced upon HSs across most of the United States. Yet, with growing sensitivity to the different realities brought about by a globalizing society, a more accepting stance on bilingualism and more flexible views on the values of bi-/multiculturalism, appear to be emerging. Resulting from this, and from recognizing HSs as a specific language learner profile, bilingual education programs have begun to employ more dynamic approaches to bilingual language development, learning, and teaching. Given this context, higher education institutions have started to tackle HSs specific needs by means of creating and developing HL programs (e.g., Beaudrie, 2011, 2012; Tecedor & Mejia, 2015). Briefly put, these initiatives are being forged to afford students increasing opportunities to use the HL in new social contexts, to challenge dominant social hierarchies, to construct positive linguistic and cultural identities, and to serve as a site for HL literacy-development. Proof of this new perspective on HLLs and a more cognizant/better informed understanding of their (linguistic) needs is the growing numbers of HLspecific programs at U.S. universities (Beaudrie, 2011, 2012; Tecedor & Mejia, 2015), as well as the proliferation of resources, conferences, and workshops centered on heritage speaker/learner issues. This special issue contributes to this growing body of work, by underscoring the scope and relevance of Spanish heritage speaker bilingualism, and by illustrating the applicability of the topics tackled within this field. In the following section we specify how the articles in the special issue address these topics. 3. The articles in this special issue The five articles included in this special issue of the EuroAmerican Journal of Applied Linguistics and Languages contribute to a very active field of research that is still evolving and that continuously brings to light new and old questions regarding not just language (e.g., its nature, its acquisition, its maintenance), but E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10 5 PASCUAL Y CABO & DELAROSA-PRADA also identity (e.g., student views on re-learning the heritage language, the role they assign to their home variety, affective factors), as well as the most effective pedagogical practices (e.g., service learning, translanguaging, optimal use of technology, mixed-learning, task-based curricula). As a whole, this special issue provides the reader with a rich and wide overview on Spanish-English HS bilingualism and builds on what already is an important body of scholarship (among many others, see Beaudrie et al., 2014; Beaudrie & Fairclough, 2012; Colombi & Roca, 2003; Montrul, 2008; Potowski, 2005; Potowski & Carreira, 2004; Potowski & Lynch, 2014; Roca, 2000; Valdés, 2001). Individually, each of the articles included herein highlights and captures the essence of current debates taking place in the field. Their contribution is significant, not only in that they develop new and relevant insights to the continuous development of our understanding, but also in that they lead the way to other questions that future research will need to address. For example, Vergara Wilson and Ibarra s Understanding the inheritors: The perception of beginning-level students toward their Spanish as a Heritage Language Program contributes to current trends on HS research by offering a student-informed perspective on heritage language education, thereby bridging heritage speaker attitudes and curriculum design. Relatedly, Perara-Lunde and Melero-García s Identidades gramaticales: perspectivas estudiantiles hacia el aprendizaje y uso de gramática en una clase de SHL ( Grammar Identities: Student perspectives toward grammar use and grammar learning in a SHL ), discusses heritage learners attitudes towards grammar and its teaching, and their sensitivity towards register variation. In an examination of heritage speakers attitudes about the so-called Spanglish (and other forms of US Spanish), Reznicek-Parrado s Spanglish : Bringing the academic debate into the classroom. Towards critical pedagogy in Spanish heritage instruction , reports on the paradoxical disconnect exhibited between HLLs practices and their negative judgments about the practices in which they themselves report engaging. This disconnect raises questions not only about the ways in which students internalized ideologies go unquestioned in the classroom, but also about the potential repercussions, with regards to the students identity development, of using this term. In their article Spanish heritage language learners vs. L learners: What CAF reveals about written proficiency, Camus and Adrada-Rafael take a cognitive perspective and compare traditional second language learners with HSs with regards to their writing abilities (Mikulski & Elola, 2011). Particularly, they examine an understudied construct, namely CAF (complexity, accuracy, and fluency) and conclude that, at high levels of proficiency, HLLs are able to outperform L2 learners. This finding contradicts what previous studies have found when examining lower levels of proficiency. Rodríguez and Reglero s article, Heritage and L2 processing of person and number features: Evidence from Spanish subjectverb agreement, delves into the processing (dis)advantages of early bilingualism. The data presented is of importance to current examinations of HS bilingual development as it provides evidence that, despite exhibiting differences with Spanish monolingual speakers, HSs process basic grammatical structures similarly to those speakers. Such a finding adds credence to the position that HSs, despite exhibiting a great deal of intra-speaker variability and even performance asymmetries with regards to their monolingual peers, do not necessarily have deficient grammars (e.g., Pascual y Cabo & Rothman, 2012). In addition to the five articles summarized above, this special issue includes critical reviews of three recently published books: (i) Heritage language teaching: Research and practice (by Sara Beaudrie, Cindy Ducar and Kim Potowski; reviewed by Florencia Giglio Henshaw); (ii) Bilingual language acquisition: Spanish and English over the first six years (by Carmen Silva Corvalán; reviewed by Carmen Ruiz Sánchez); and (iii) Bilingualism in the Spanish-speaking world: Linguistic and cognitive perspectives (by Jennifer Austin, María Blume, and Liliana Sánchez; reviewed by Maria Fionda). As was also the case with the articles, these three books were chosen for their impact on and contribution to the field of Spanish as a heritage/minority language. 4. Some concluding remarks Unquestionably, the last decade has been a time of dedicated research in the field of what is broadly defined as Spanish as a heritage language. Key developments have been made in all areas of inquiry and, as a result, our understanding of complex issues that were once considered unrelated has advanced dramatically (as attested by the breadth of topics covered in the articles included in this special issue). That said, as we continue to shape our understanding of such complex issues, new questions of relevance to the field emerge. With an eye on the dynamic and ever-expanding landscape of the field, we would like to suggest more communication and collaboration across subdisciplines and theoretical viewpoints. It is precisely this sort of interdisciplinary examination that will create opportunities to not only see and understand our research 6 E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10 UNDERSTANDING THE SPANISH HERITAGE SPEAKER/LEARNER interests from different angles, but also to make them relevant and accessible to each other. By doing this, we will challenge view-points on issues that may have become (or may be in danger of becoming) stagnant and rigid. It is this kind of cross-field collaboration/examination that will contribute to making significant headway in our search for answers to our questions, whatever they may be. References Alba, Richard, Logan, John, Lutz, Amy & Stults, Brian (2002). Only English by the third generation? Loss and preservation of the mother tongue among the grandchildren of contemporary immigrants. Demography, 39(3), 467-484. Baker, Colin (2003). Biliteracy and transliteracy in Wales: Language planning and the Welsh national curriculum. In Hornberger Nancy (Ed.), Continua of biliteracy. An ecological framework for educational policy, research, and practice in multilingual settings (pp. 71-90). Clevendon, United Kingdom: Multilingual Matters. Bartlett, Lesley & García, Ofelia (2011). Additive schooling in subtractive times. Dominican immigrant youth in the heights. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press. Beaudrie, Sara (2011). Spanish heritage language programs: A snapshot of current programs in the southwestern United States. Foreign Language Annals, 44(2), 321-337. Beaudrie, Sara (2012). Research on university-based Spanish heritage language programs in the United States: The current state of affairs. In Sara M. Beaudrie & Martha Fairclough (Eds.), Spanish as a heritage language in the United States: The state of the field (pp. 203-221). Washington, District of Columbia: Georgetown University Press. Beaudrie, Sara, & Fairclough, Martha (Eds.). (2012). Spanish as a heritage language in the United States: The state of the field. Washington, District of Columbia: Georgetown University Press. Beaudrie, Sara, Ducar, Cynthia, & Potowski, Kim (2014). Heritage language teaching: Research and practice. Columbus, Ohio: McGraw-Hill Education. Blackledge, Adrian (2008). Language ecology and language ideology. In Nancy H. Hornberger (Ed.) Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 2923-2936). New York, New York: Springer. Blommaert, Jan (2001). Investigating narrative inequality: African asylum seekers' stories in Belgium. Discourse & Society, 12(4), 413-449. Benmamoun, Elabbas, Montrul, Silvina, & Polinsky, Maria (2013). Heritage languages and their speakers: Opportunities and challenges for linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 39, 129-181. Creese, Angela & Blackledge, Adrian (2011). Separate and flexible bilingualism in complementary schools: Multiple language practices in interrelationship. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5),1196-1208. Colombi, M. Cecilia & Roca, Ana (2003). Insights from research and practice in Spanish as a heritage language. In Colombi, Cecilia / Ana Roca (Eds.) Mi lengua: Spanish as a heritage language in the United States (pp. 1-21). Washington, District of Columbia: Georgetown University Press. Correa, Maite (2011). Advocating for critical pedagogical approaches to teaching Spanish as a heritage language: Some considerations. Foreign Language Annals, 44(2), 308-320. Auer, Peter & Dirim, Inci (2003). Socio-cultural orientation, urban youth styles and the spontaneous acquisition of Turkish by non-Turkish adolescents in Germany. In Androutsopoulos, Jannis K. & Alexandra Georgakopoulou (Eds.) Discourse construction and youth identities (pp. 223-246). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. eMarketer (2009, August 11). Hispanics online: Young, mobile and bilingual. Research and markets. Retrieved from http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/d6ea11/hispanics_online (accessed in November 2015) Fishman, Joshua (1966). Language loyalty in the United States: The maintenance and perpetuation of nonEnglish mother tongues by American ethnic and religious groups. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton & Co. Flores, Cristina & Barbosa, Pilar (2014). When reduced input leads to delayed acquisition: A study on the acquisition of clitic placement by Portuguese heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 18(3), 304-325. E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10 7 PASCUAL Y CABO & DELAROSA-PRADA Garcia-Prieto, Nydia (2005). Latino families. In McGoldrik, Monica, Giordano, Joe, & Nydia Garcia-Prieto (Eds.) Ethnicity and Family Therapy (3rd ed., pp. 153-162). New York, New York: Guildford Press Kupisch, Tanja, Lein, Tatjana, Barton, Dagmar, Schröder, Dawn Judith, Stangen, Ilse, & Stoehr, Antje (2014). Acquisition outcomes across domains in adult simultaneous bilinguals with French as weaker and stronger language. Journal of French Language Studies, 24(03), 347-376. Lindholm-Leary, Kathryn J. (2013) Dual language instruction in the U.S. Americas Quarter, Update on Policy 7, 97-98. Lukes, Marguerite (2015). Latino immigrant youth and interrupted schooling: dropouts, dreamers and alternative pathways to college. Bristol, United Kingdom: Multilingual Matters. Lynch, Andrew (2000). The subjunctive in Miami Cuban Spanish: Bilingualism, contact, and language variability (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation.) Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota. Lynch, Andrew & Potowski, Kim (2014). La valoración del habla bilingüe en los Estados Unidos: Fundamentos sociolingüísticos y pedagógicos en Hablando bien se entiende la gente. Hispania, 97(1), 32-46. McCabe, Mary Beth, Corona, Ramón & Weaver, Richard (2012). Sustainability for Hispanics in California: Do they really care? Global Conference on Business & Finance Proceedings, June 7(2), 543-554. Meisel, Jürgen (Ed.) (1994a). Bilingual first language acquisition: French and German grammatical development (Vol. 7). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing. Meisel, Jürgen (1994b). Code-switching in young bilingual children. Studies in second language acquisition, 16(04), 413-439. Meneses, Walter (2011). Effectively reach U.S. Hispanic consumers: 50 million plus and growing. Meneses Research, San Diego, California. Mikulski, Ariana & Elola, Idoia (2011). Spanish heritage language learners allocation of time to writing processes in English and Spanish. Hispania, 94 (4), 715-733. Montes-Alcalá, Cecilia (2000). Attitudes towards oral and written codeswitching in Spanish-English bilingual youths. In Roca, Ana (Ed.), Research on Spanish in the U.S. (pp. 218-227). Somerville, Massachusetts: Cascadilla. Montrul, Silvina (2002). Incomplete acquisition and attrition of Spanish tense/aspect distinctions in adult bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 5(1), 39-68. Montrul, Silvina (2008). Incomplete acquisition in bilingualism: Re-examining the age factor. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing. Montrul, Silvina (2009). Knowledge of tense-aspect and mood in Spanish heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 239-269. Montrul, Silvina (2010). How similar are adult second language learners and Spanish heritage speakers? Spanish clitics and word order. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31(01), 167-207. Montrul, Silvina, Foote, Rebecca, & Perpiñán, Silvia (2008). Gender agreement in adult second language learners and Spanish heritage speakers: The effects of age and context of acquisition. Language Learning, 58(3), 503-553. Montrul, Silvina & Bowles, Melisa (2009). Back to basics: Incomplete knowledge of differential object marking in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(3), 363-383. Montrul, Silvina & Perpiñán, Silvia (2011). Assessing differences and similarities between instructed heritage language learners and L2 learners in their knowledge of Spanish tense-aspect and mood (TAM) morphology. Heritage Language Journal, 8(1), 90-133. Montrul, Silvina & Sánchez-Walker, Noelia (2013). Differential object marking in child and adult Spanish heritage speakers. Language Acquisition, 20(2), 109-132. Müller, Natascha & Aafke, Hulk (2001). Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual language acquisition: Italian and French as recipient languages. Bilingualism: Language and cognition 4(1), 1-21. O Grady, William, Lee, Miseon, & Choo, Miho (2001). The acquisition of relative clauses by heritage and nonheritage learners of Korean as a second language: A comparative study. Journal of Korean Language Education, 12(2), 283-294. Pascual y Cabo, Diego (2013). Agreement reflexes of emerging optionality in heritage speaker Spanish. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation.) Gainesville, Florida: University of Florida. Pascual y Cabo, Diego (2015). Issues in Spanish heritage morphosyntax. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 8(2), 389-401. Pascual y Cabo, Diego & Gómez Soler, Inmaculada (2015). Preposition stranding in Spanish as a heritage language. Heritage Language Journal, 12(2), 186-209. 8 E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10 UNDERSTANDING THE SPANISH HERITAGE SPEAKER/LEARNER Pascual y Cabo, Diego, Lingwall Anne, & Rothman, Jason (2012). Applying the interface hypothesis to heritage speaker acquisition: Evidence from Spanish mood. In Biller, Alia K., Chung, Esther Y. & Amelia E. Kimball (Eds.) Proceedings of the 36th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Somerville, Massachusetts: Cascadilla. Pascual y Cabo, Diego & Rothman, Jason (2012). The (Il)logical problem of heritage speaker bilingualism and incomplete acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 33(4), 450-455. Pellerano, Cristina, Fradd, Sandra & Rovira, Lourdes (1998). Coral Way elementary school: A success story in bilingualism and biliteracy. Discover, 3, 1-6. Pires, Acrisio & Rothman, Jason (2009). Disentangling contributing variables to incomplete acquisition competence outcomes: What differences across Brazilian and European Portuguese heritage speakers tell us. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 211-238. Potowski, Kim (2005). Fundamentos de la enseñanza del español a hispanohablantes en los EE. UU. Madrid, Spain: Arco Libros. Potowski, Kim & Lynch, Andrew (2014). Perspectivas sobre la enseñanza del español a los hablantes de herencia en los Estados Unidos. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching, 1(2), 154-170. Polinsky, Maria (2015). When L1 becomes an L3: Do heritage speakers make better L3 learners? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18, 163-178. Polinsky, Maria & Kagan, Olga (2007). Heritage languages: In the wild and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1(5), 368-395. Potowski, Kim & Carreira, Maria (2004). Teacher development and national standards for Spanish as a heritage language. Foreign Language Annals, 37(3), 427-437. Potowski, Kim (2010). Language Diversity in the United States. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Putnam, Michael & Sánchez, Liliana (2013). What s so incomplete about incomplete acquisition?: A prolegomenon to modeling heritage language grammars. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 3(4), 478-508. Roca, Ana (1997). Retrospectives, advances, and current needs in the teaching of Spanish to United States Hispanic bilingual students. ADFL Bulletin, 29, 37-43. Roca, Ana (2000). Heritage learners of Spanish. In Guntermann, Gail (Ed.), Teaching Spanish with the five C’s: A blueprint for success (pp. 91-106). Boston, Massachusetts: Cengage Learning. Rothman, Jason (2009). Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 155-163. Rothman, Jason & Treffers-Daller, Jeanine (2014). A prolegomenon to the construct of the native speaker: heritage speaker bilinguals are natives too!. Applied linguistics, 35(1), 93-98. Schmidt, Ronald (2002). Racialization and language policy: The case of the U.S.A. Multilingua, 21, 141-162. Silva-Corvalán, Carmen (1994) Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles. New York, New York: Oxford University Press. Silva-Corvalán, Carmen (2014). Bilingual language acquisition: Spanish and English in the first six years. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. Silva-Corvalán, Carmen & Lynch, Andrew (2008). Los mexicanos. In López Morales, Humberto (Ed.) Enciclopedia del español en los Estados Unidos (pp. 104-111). Madrid, Spain: Instituto CervantesSantillana. Tecedor, Marta, & Mejia, Brenda (2015). Spanish as a heritage language in US higher education, presented at the II Symposium on Spanish as a Heritage Language. Texas Tech University. Valdés, Guadalupe (2000). Bilingualism and language use among Mexican Americans. In Lee McKay, Sandra & Sau-ling C. Wong (Eds). New immigrants in the United States (pp. 99-136). New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. Valdés, Guadalupe (2001). Heritage language students: Profiles and possibilities. In Peyton, Joy, Ranard, Donald & Scott McGinnis (Eds.), Heritage languages in America: Preserving a national resource (pp. 37-80). McHenry, Illinois: The Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems. Valdés, Guadalupe (2001). Learning and not learning English: Latino students in American schools. New York, New York: Teachers College Press. Wiley, Terrence & Valdés, Guadalupe (2000). Editors' introduction: Heritage language instruction in the United States: A time for renewal. Bilingual Research Journal, 24(4), iii-vii. Wei, Li (2011). Moment analysis and translanguaging space: Discursive construction of identities by multilingual Chinese youth in Britain. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1222-1235. E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10 9 PASCUAL Y CABO & DELAROSA-PRADA Diego Pascual y Cabo, Texas Tech University Diego.pascual@ttu.edu EN Diego Pascual y Cabo is an Assistant Professor of Hispanic Linguistics and the Director of the Spanish Heritage Language Program at Texas Tech University. His primary research interests are heritage speaker bilingualism and second language acquisition. ES Diego Pascual y Cabo es profesor contratado de lingüística española y director del programa de español como lengua de herencia en la Texas Tech University. Sus principales áreas de investigación son el bilingüismo de los hablantes de herencia y la adquisición de segundas lenguas. IT Diego Pascual y Cabo è professore universitario di linguistica spagnola e direttore del programma di spagnolo come lingua ereditaria della Texas Tech University. I suoi ambiti di ricerca principali includono il bilinguismo dei parlanti di una lingua ereditaria e l’acquisizione di lingue seconde. Josh DeLaRosa-Prada, Texas Tech University J.delarosa-prada@ttu.edu EN Josh DeLaRosa-Prada, MAFLT, MA, is an instructor and a researcher in the Bilingualism and Second Language Acquisition Lab at Texas Tech University, where he is completing a PhD in Hispanic Linguistics. His interests are in the area of heritage speaker bilingualism, bridging language cognition, social identity, and multilingual interaction. ES Josh DeLaRosa-Prada posee un master en la enseñanza de lenguas extranjeras y otro en lingüística aplicada es instructor e investigador en el laboratorio de bilingüismo y adquisición de segundas lenguas de la Texas Tech University, donde está finalizando sus estudios de doctorado en lingüística española. Sus intereses de investigación incluyen el bilingüismo de los hablantes de una lengua de herencia y el contacto entre cognición lingüística, identidad social e interacción multilingüe. IT Josh DeLaRosa-Prada ha ottenuto un master nell’insegnamento di lingue straniere e uno in linguistica applicata ed è istruttore e ricercatore nel laboratorio di bilinguismo e acquisizione di seconde lingue della Texas Tech University, dove sta completando I suoi studi di dottorato in linguistica spagnola. I suoi interessi di ricerca includono il bilinguismo dei parlanti di una lingua ereditaria, e il contatto tra cognizione linguistica, identità sociale e interazione multilingue. 10 E-JournALL 2(2) (2015), pp. 1-10