Cover not available
Article published In:
Pedagogical Linguistics
Vol. 4:2 (2023) ► pp.159–194

Why are they so similar?

The interplay of linguistic and extra-linguistic variables in monolingual and bilingual learners of English

ORCID logo | Justus-Liebig-University Giessen | Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Trondheim
ORCID logo | University of Hamburg | Izmir Democracy University
ORCID logo | University of Hamburg
This study investigates the relationship between (extra)linguistic variables and proficiency in a foreign language. Based on 1,403 secondary school students in Germany (age 12/13 and 14/15), we assess whether proficiency in German, if applicable also Russian or Turkish, cognitive ability, school type, gender, socio-economic status, self-concept, motivation, and self-assessment function differently in predicting English language proficiency when monolingual German learners of English (n = 849) are compared to their bilingual peers (Russian-German: n = 236; Turkish-German: n = 318). Two comprehensive structural equation models capture the multitude of factors influencing foreign language acquisition and contribute to the discussion on multilingual advantages or effects. The results reveal that most variables are statistically significant, but the models function comparably across the three language groups with only minor contrasts regarding effect sizes. We submit that the three language groups are more similar than different and that the heritage languages Russian and Turkish add comparatively little to predicting English language proficiency.
Keywords: English proficiency, heritage bilingualism, L3 acquisition, multilingual advantages, structural equation modelling
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Research questions
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2The instruments
      • 3.2.1English proficiency (response variable)
      • 3.2.2Proficiency in the majority language German and the heritage languages Russian and Turkish
      • 3.2.3Cognitive ability
      • 3.2.4Socio-economic status
      • 3.2.5Gender
      • 3.2.6School type
      • 3.2.7Age (year of birth)
      • 3.2.8Attitudes (self-concept, motivation, self-assessment)
      • 3.2.9Descriptive statistics
    • 3.3Data analysis
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Research question 1: Which linguistic and extra-linguistic variables add significantly to explaining the variance in English proficiency across bilingual and monolingual learners of English?
    • 4.2Research question 2: How does heritage language proficiency contribute to explaining the variance in English proficiency of Russian-German and Turkish-German bilinguals?
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Interdependence and language dominance
    • 5.2Extra-linguistic variables override language effects
    • 5.3Implications for the institutional environment
    • 5.4Limitations
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 17 January 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.21016.lor
References
Ardasheva, Y., Tretter, T. R., & Kinny, M.
(2012) English language learners and academic achievement: Revisiting the threshold hypothesis. Language Learning, 62 1, 769–812. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, P.
(2010) Code-switching/mixing. In R. Wodak, B. Johnstone & P. E. Kerswill (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of socioloinguistics (pp. 460–478). Los Angeles: SAGE.Google Scholar
Berthele, R., & Udry, I.
(2019) Multilingual boost vs. cognitive abilities: Testing two theories of multilingual language learning in a primary school context. International Journal of Multilingualism. Advance online publication. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berthele, R., & Vanhove, J.
(2020) What would disprove interdependence? Lessons learned from a study on biliteracy in Portuguese heritage language speakers in Switzerland. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23 1, 550–566. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E.
(2018) Bilingualism and executive function. What’s the connection? In D. Miller, F. Bayram, J. Rothman & L. Serratrice (Eds.), Bilingual cognition and language: The state of the science across its subfields (pp. 283–305). Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020) Null results in bilingualism research: What they tell us and what they don’t. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, 1 1, 8–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bonfieni, M.
(2018) The bilingual continuum: Mutual effects of language and cognition. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh]. Edinburgh Research Archive. [URL]
Bono, M., & Melo-Pfeifer, S.
(2020) English and heritage languages from a multilingual perspective: Challenges and possibilities for integration. In F. Anastassiou & G. Andreou (Eds.), English as a foreign language: Perspectives on teaching, multilingualism and interculturalism (pp. 1–19). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Böttger, H.
(2020) English lernen in der Grundschule. Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brandt, H., Lagemann, M., & Rahbari, S.
(2017) Multilingual development: A longitudinal perspective – Mehrsprachigkeitsentwicklung im Zeitverlauf (MEZ). European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5 1, 347–357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brehmer, B., Steinbach, D., & Arifulin, V.
(2021) Heritage languages and the ʻmultilingual boostʼ: Intercomprehension skills of Russian and Polish heritage speakers in Germany. Multilingua, 40 1, 839–858. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J.
(2003) The additive effect of bilingualism on third language acquisition: A review. International Journal of Bilingualism 71. 71–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J., & Valencia, J.
(1994) Additive trilingualism: Evidence from the Basque Country. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15 1, 197–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B.
(2013) A first course in factor analysis. New York: Psychology Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cummins, J.
(1979) Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bi-lingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49 1, 222–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Pedagogies of choice: Challenging coercive relations of power in classrooms and communities. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 12 1, 261–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danesh, J., & Shahnaazari, M.
(2020) A structural relationship model for resilience, L2 learning motivation, and L2 proficiency at different proficiency levels. Learning and Motivation, 72 1, 101636. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Angelis, G.
(2007) Third or additional language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Bruin, A., Treccani, B., & Della Sala, S.
(2015) Cognitive advantage in bilingualism: An example of publication bias? Psychological Science, 26 1, 99–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DeLuca, V., Rothman, J., Bialystok, E., & Pliatsikas, C.
(2019) Redefining bilingualism as a spectrum of experiences that differentially affects brain structure and function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116 1, 7565–7574. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Demircioglu, J.
(2010) Zur Vorverlegung des Fremdsprachenunterrichts am Beispiel des Englischunterrichts in der Grundschule: Evaluative Argumente. Bildung und Erziehung, 63 1, 489–504. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donnelly, S., Brooks, P. J., & Homer, B. D.
(2015) Examining the bilingual advantage on conflict resolution tasks: A meta-analysis. In D. C. Noelle, R. Dale, A. Warlaumont, J. Yoshimi, T. Matlock, C. D. Jennings & P. P. Maglio (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 596–601). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
(2019) Is there a bilingual advantage on interference-control tasks? A multiverse meta-analysis of global reaction time and interference cost. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 26 1, 1122–1147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z.
(1998) Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31 1, 117–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K.
(1998) Ten commandments for motivating language learners: Results of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2 1, 203–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dünkel, N., Heimler, J., Brandt, H., & Gogolin, I.
(eds.) (2018) Mehrsprachigkeitsentwicklung im Zeitverlauf. Ausgewählte Daten und Ergebnisse. Authors: Bonnie, R. J., Brandt, H., Dünkel, N., Feindt, K., Gabriel, C., Gogolin, I., Klinger, T., Krause, M., Lagemann, M., Lorenz, E., Rahbari, S., Schnoor, B., Siemund, P., & Usanova, I. Hamburg (University of Hamburg), Mimeo.Google Scholar
Edele, A., Kempert, S., & Schotte, K.
(2018) Does competent bilingualism entail advantages for the third language learning of immigrant students? Learning and Instruction, 58 1, 232–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elsner, D.
(2018) Institutional foreign language learning – teaching English at different levels. In C. Surkamp & B. Viebrock (Eds.), Teaching English as a foreign language. An introduction (pp. 17–37). Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuller, J. M.
(2020) English in the German-speaking world: Immigration and integration. In R. Hickey (Ed.), English in the German-speaking world (pp. 165–184). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ganzeboom, H. B. G., De Graaf, P. M., & Treiman, D. J.
(1992) A standard international socio-economic index of occupational status. Social Science Research, 21 1, 1–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gogolin, I., Klinger, T., Lagemann, M., Schnoor, B., in collaboration with Gabriel, C., Knigge, M., Krause, M., & Siemund, P.
(2017) Indikation, Konzeption und Untersuchungsdesign des Projekts Mehrsprachigkeitsentwicklung im Zeitverlauf (MEZ). MEZ Arbeitspapier Nr. 1. Hamburg (Universität Hamburg). Available at: [URL] (accessed 3 March 2021).
Gogolin, I.
(2021) Multilingualism: A threat to public education or a resource in public education? – European histories and realities. European Educational Research Journal, 20 1, 297–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gogolin, I., Hansen, A., McMonagle, S., & Rauch, D.
(Eds.) (2020) Handbuch Mehrsprachigkeit und Bildung. Wiesbaden: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grotjahn, R.
(2013) C-test. In M. Byram & A. Hu (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of language teaching and learning (pp. 180–181). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Heller, K., & Perleth, C.
(2000) Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4. bis 12. Klassen, Revision: KFT 4–12. Göttingen: Beltz Test.Google Scholar
Hellrung, M., Hugk, N., Mora, O., Waschk, A., Penon, K., & Hillen, P.
(2017) Methodenbericht. MEZ – Mehrsprachigkeitsentwicklung im Zeitverlauf. Erhebung in den Jahrgangsstufen 7 und 9. 1. Messzeitpunkt – Januar bis März 2016. Hamburg: IEA Hamburg. Available at: [URL] (accessed 5 March 2021).
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R.
(2009) The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In R. R. Sinkovics & P. N. Ghaur (Eds.), Advances in international marketing (pp. 277–320). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
Herdina, P., & Jessner, U.
(2002) A dynamic model of multilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hernández, T. A.
(2010) The relationship among motivation, interaction, and the development of second language oral proficiency in a study abroad context. The Modern Language Journal, 94 1, 600–617. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilchey, M., & Klein, R.
(2011) Are there bilingual advantages on nonlinguistic interference tasks? Implications for the plasticity of executive control processes. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18 1, 625–658. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H., & Jakisch, J.
(2020) Mehrsprachigkeit im Fremdsprachenunterricht. In I. Gogolin, A. Hansen, S. McMonagle & D. Rauch (Eds.), Handbuch Mehrsprachigkeit und Bildung (pp. 195–199). Wiesbaden: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H., & Thoma, D.
(2021) Effects of plurilingual teaching on grammatical development in early foreign-language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 105 1, 464–483. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H., Vogelbacher, M., Kieseier, T., & Thoma, D.
(2019) Bilingual advantages in early foreign language learning: Effects of the minority and the majority language. Learning and Instruction, 61 1, 99–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H.
(2015) Language proficiency in native and non-native speakers. Theory and research. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
IBM Corp
(2017) IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.Google Scholar
International Labour Office
(2012) International Standard Classification of Occupations. ISCO-08. Volume 1: Structure, Group Definitions and Correspondence Tables. Geneva: ILO.Google Scholar
Jaekel, N., Van Ackern, I., Schurig, M., & Markus, R.
(2021) Investigating the transition from elementary to secondary school: student perspectives of the continuum and receptive language proficiency. The Language Learning Journal. Advance online publication. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jessner, U.
(1999) Metalinguistic awareness in multilinguals: Cognitive aspects of third language learning. Language Awareness, 8 1, 201–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Linguistic awareness in multilinguals: English as a third language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) A DST Model of multilingualism and the role of metalinguistic awareness. The Modern Language Journal, 92 1, 270–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jessner, U., & Allgäuer-Hackl, E.
(2020) Multilingual awareness and metacognition in multilingually diverse classrooms. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, 1 1, 66–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klieme, E., Eichler, W., Helmke, A., Lehmann, R., Nold, R., Rolff, H. G., Schröder, K., Thomé, G., & Willenberg, H.
(2006) Unterricht und Kompetenzerwerb in Deutsch und Englisch: Zentrale Befunde der Studie Deutsch-Englisch-Schülerleistungen-International (DESI). Frankfurt am Main: DIPF.Google Scholar
Kline, R. B.
(2011) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Klinger, T., Schnoor, B., & Usanova, I.
forthcoming). Developing multilingual writing skills: Bilingual advantage in foreign language learning. In H. Brandt, M. Krause & I. Usanova Eds. Language Development in Diverse Settings. Interdisziplinäre Ergebnisse aus dem Projekt “Mehrsprachigkeitsentwicklung im Zeitverlauf“ (MEZ) Westport Springer DOI logo
Krumm, H. J., & Reich, H.
(2016) Ansätze zum Mehrsprachigkeitsunterricht. In E. Burwitz-Melzer, G. Mehlhorn, C. Riemer, K. R. Bausch & H. J. Krumm (Eds.), Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 230–234). Tübingen: A. Francke Verlag.Google Scholar
Kultusministerkonferenz (KMK)
(2019) Das Bildungswesen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 2016/2017. Available at: [URL] (accessed 5 March 2021).
Lasagabaster, D.
(1998) The threshold hypothesis applied to three languages in contact at school. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1 1, 119–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) The effect of knowledge about the L1 on foreign language skills and grammar. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 4 1, 310–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lechner, S., & Siemund, P.
(2014) The role of language external factors in the acquisition of English as an additional language by bilingual children in Germany. In H. Paulasto, L. Meriläinen, H. Riionheimo & M. Kok (Eds.), Language contacts at the crossroads of disciplines (pp. 319–345). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Lehtonen, M., Soveri, A., Laine, A., Järvenpää, J., De Bruin, A., & Antfolk, J.
(2018) Is bilingualism associated with enhanced executive functioning in adults? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 144 1, 394–425. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leivada, E., Westergaard, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., & 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, E., Feindt, K., Rahbari, S., & Siemund, P.
forthcoming). The influence of extralinguistic variables on cross-linguistic influence – case studies of bilingual heritage speakers. In H. Brandt, M. Krause & I. Usanova Eds. Language Development in Diverse Settings. Interdisziplinäre Ergebnisse aus dem Projekt “Mehrsprachigkeitsentwicklung im Zeitverlauf“ (MEZ) Wiesbaden Springer
Lorenz, E., Hasai, Y., & Siemund, P.
(2021) Multilingual lexical transfer challenges monolingual educational norms: not quite! Multilingua, 401, 791–813. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, E., Rahbari, S., Schackow, U., & Siemund, P.
(2020) Does bilingualism correlate with or predict higher proficiency in L3 English? A contrastive study of monolingual and bilingual learners. Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, 1 1, 185–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, E., Toprak, T. E., & Siemund, P.
(2021) English L3 acquisition in heritage contexts: Modelling a path through the bilingualism controversy. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 57 1, 273–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maluch, J. T., Kempert, S., Neumann, M., & Stanat, P.
(2015) The effect of speaking a minority language at home on foreign language learning. Learning and Instruction, 36 1, 76–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maluch, J. T., Neumann, M., & Kempert, S.
(2016) Bilingualism as a re-source for foreign language learning of language minority students? Empirical evidence from a longitudinal study during primary and secondary school in Germany. Learning and Individual Differences, 51 1, 111–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maluch, J. T., & Kempert, S.
(2019) Bilingual profiles and third language learning: The effects of the manner of learning, sequence of bilingual acquisition, and language use practices. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22 1, 870–822. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
May, S.
(Ed) (2014) The multilingual turn. Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
MEZ – Mehrsprachigkeitsentwicklung im Zeitverlauf
(2014–2019) Projektkoordination: Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Ingrid Gogolin, Universität Hamburg. © MEZ 2017.Google Scholar
(2020a) Testhandbuch Querschnitt. Hamburg (Universität Hamburg, MEZ-Project). Mimeo.Google Scholar
(2020b) Testhandbuch 1. Hamburg (Universität Hamburg, MEZ-Project). Mimeo.Google Scholar
Nichols, E. S., Wild, C. J., Stojanoski, B., Battista, M. E., & Owen, A. M.
(2020) Bilingualism affords no general cognitive advantages: A population study of executive function in 11,000 people. Psychological Science, 31 1, 548–567. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paap, K., Johnson, H., & Sawi, O.
(2015) Bilingual advantages in executive functioning either do not exist or are restricted to very specific and undetermined circumstances. Cortex, 69 1, 265–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peal, E., & Lambert, W.
(1962) The relation of bilingualism to intelligence. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 76 (27), 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Preusler, S., Zitzmann, S., Paulick, I., Baumert, J., & Möller, J.
(2019) Ready to read in two languages? Testing the native language hypothesis and the majority language hypothesis in two-way immersion students. Learning and Instruction, 64 1, 101247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team
(2020) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at: [URL]
Rosseel, Y.
(2012) lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48 (2), 1–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021) The lavaan tutorial. Available at: [URL]. (accessed 11 March 2021).
Saer, D. J.
(1923) The effect of bilingualism on intelligence. British Journal of Psychology, 14 1, 25–38.Google Scholar
Safont Jordà, M. P.
(2003) Metapragmatic awareness and pragmatic production of third language learners of English: A focus on request acts realizations. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 7 1, 43–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sagasta Errasti, M. P.
(2003) Acquiring writing skills in a third language: The positive effects of bilingualism. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7 1, 27–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, M., & Meijers, G.
(1995) English as L3 in the elementary school. ITL: Review of Applied Linguistics, 107/108 1, 59–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanz, C.
(2000) Bilingual education enhances third language acquisition: Evidence from Catalonia. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21 1, 23–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, M. S., & Karayayla, T.
(2020) The roles of age, attitude, and use in first language development and attrition of Turkish-English bilinguals. Language Learning, 70 (S1), 54–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W., Schlagmüller, M., & Ennemoser, M.
(2016) Lesegeschwindigkeits- und Verständnistest für die Klassenstufen 5–12. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Schoonen, R.
(2019) Are reading and writing building on the same skills? The relationship between reading and writing in L1 and EFL. Reading and Writing, 32 1, 511–535. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shmueli, G., & Koppius, O. R.
(2011) Predictive analytics in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 35 1, 553–572. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L.
(2013) Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
Thomas, J.
(1988) The role played by metalinguistic awareness in second and third language learning. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 9 1, 235–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Gelderen, A., Schoonen, R., De Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Snellings, P., Simis, A., & Stevenson, M.
(2003) Roles of linguistic knowledge, metacognitive knowledge and processing speed in L3, L2 and L1 reading comprehension: A structural equation modelling approach. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7 1, 7–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar