Heritage languages are commonly spoken by immigrants and their children, but they can also be spoken in their own territories when national regional languages and indigenous languages share space with a majority language. This study discusses how the terms heritage language and heritage speakers may apply to situations of stable bilingualism, such as historical minority languages and aboriginal languages.
Approach:
The study is an argumentative essay or opinion article.
Data and analysis:
The data are published studies that describe the linguistic knowledge of speakers of minority languages in different territories.
Findings/conclusions:
In a general sense, the acquisition, ultimate attainment, and intergenerational transmission patterns of immigrant heritage languages and regional minority languages are similar. However, important differences between specific sociopolitical situations, identity, and attitudes toward language use may render the characterization of a particular language as a heritage language in its own territory relative to many individual factors in different regions.
Originality:
Using Catalan and Basque in Spain, Even and Sakha in Russia, and Irish and Welsh in Ireland and the United Kingdom, we consider whether and how the acquisition of these languages in their territories could be taken as cases of heritage language acquisition at the individual level, similar to immigrant situations. Many of the acquisition processes and outcomes are similar in the two contexts.
Significance/implications:
This study contributes to debates on how to best characterize and study bilinguals, whose native or home language is a minority language.
AalberseS.MuyskenP.BackusA. (2019). Heritage languages. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
2.
AlarcónL.HurtadoI.MontrulS.Pasetto OvelarK. (2025, June16–19). Structural maintenance and within language innovations in Spanish as a heritage language: Accusative clitic doubling [Poster presentation]. The Heritage Language Summer Institute, Madison, WI.
3.
AustinJ. (2007). Grammatical interference and the acquisition of ergative case in bilingual children learning Basque and Spanish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(3), 315–331.
4.
AustinJ. R. (2020). Chapter 2. differential object marking in the speech of children learning Basque and Spanish. In MardaleA.MontrulS. (Eds.), The acquisition of differential object marking (pp. 51–75). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
5.
BavinE. L. (2013). The acquisition of ergative case in Warlpiri. In BavinE.StollS. (Eds.), The acquisition of ergativity (pp. 107–132). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
6.
BavinE. L. (2022). The acquisition of Warlpiri. In SlobinD. I. (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 309–371). Psychology Press.
7.
BenmamounE.MontrulS.PolinskyM. (2013). Defining an “ideal” heritage speaker: Theoretical and methodological challenges Reply to peer commentaries. Theoretical Linguistics, 39(3–4), 259–294.
8.
BonfiglioT. P. (2010). Mother tongues and nations: The invention of the native speaker. De Gruyter Mouton.
9.
CarreiraM. (2004). Seeking explanatory adequacy: A dual approach to understanding the term “heritage language learner.”Heritage Language Journal, 2(1), 1–25.
10.
Coşkun KunduzA. (2022). Heritage language acquisition and maintenance of Turkish in the United States: Challenges to teaching Turkish as a heritage language. Dilbilim, 38, 41–60.
11.
EscobarA. M. (2007). Migración, contacto de lenguas encubierto y difusión de variantes lingüísticas. Revista internacional de lingüística iberoamericana, 5(2 (10)), 93–107.
12.
EtxebarriaE.MontrulS. (2025). Interface vulnerability in bilingual grammars?: Spanish production of null and overt subjects in Basque-Spanish bilingual children and adults. Isogloss: Open Journal of Romance Linguistics, 11(2), 1–32.
13.
EzeizabarrenaM. J. (2012). The (in) consistent ergative marking in early Basque: L1 vs. child L2. Lingua, 122(3), 303–317.
14.
GathercoleV. C. M. (2014). Bilingualism matters: One size does not fit all. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38(4), 359–366.
15.
GathercoleV. C. M.ThomasE. M. (2009). Bilingual first-language development: Dominant language takeover, threatened minority language take-up. Bilingualism, 12(2), 213–237.
16.
GordonS.MeirN. (2024). English as a heritage language: The effects of input patterns and contact with Hebrew. International Journal of Bilingualism, 28(3), 353–373.
17.
GrenobleL. A.OsipovB. (2023). The dynamics of bilingualism in language shift ecologies. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 13(1), 1–39.
18.
HarrisJ. (2008). The declining role of primary schools in the revitalisation of Irish. Aila Review, 21(1), 49–68.
19.
HickeyT. M. (2001). Mixing beginners & native speakers in Irish immersion: Who is immersing whom?Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 443–474.
20.
HindleyR. (2012). The death of the Irish language. Routledge.
21.
HornbergerN. H. (1988). Language planning orientations and bilingual education in Peru. Language Problems and Language Planning, 12(1), 14–29.
22.
JaffeA. (2015). Defining the new speaker: Theoretical perspectives and learner trajectories. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2015(231), 21–44.
23.
JohannessenJ. B. (2015). Attrition in an American Norwegian heritage language speaker. In SalmonsJ.JohannessenJ. B. (Eds.), Germanic heritage languages in North America: Acquisition, attrition and change (pp. 46–71). John Benjamins.
24.
Kondo–BrownK. (2005). Differences in language skills: Heritage language learner subgroups and foreign language learners. The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 563–581.
25.
KornfiltJ. (2018). Turkish and the Turkic languages. In ComrieB. (Ed.), The world’s major languages (pp. 536–561). Routledge.
26.
LeivadaE.Rodríguez-OrdóñezI.CoutoM. C. P.PerpiñánS. (2023). Bilingualism with minority languages: Why searching for unicorn language users does not move us forward. Applied Psycholinguistics, 44(3), 384–399.
27.
LewisW. G. (2008). Current challenges in bilingual education in Wales. Aila Review, 21(1), 69–86.
28.
Lloyd-SmithA.KupischT. (2023). Methodological challenges in working with Indigenous communities. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 13(1), XX.
29.
MontrulS. (2008). Incomplete acquisition in BIlingualism: Re-examining the age factor. John Benjamins.
30.
MontrulS. (2013). El bilingüismo en el mundo hispanohablante [Bilingualism in the Spanish-speaking world]. John Wiley & Sons.
31.
MontrulS. (2016). The acquisition of heritage languages. Cambridge University Press.
32.
MontrulS. (2023). Native speakers, interrupted. Cambridge University Press.
33.
MontrulS.FooteR.PerpiñánS. (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.
34.
MontrulS.PolinskyM. (2021). Heritage languages, heritage speakers, heritage linguistics. In MontrulS.PolinskyM. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of heritage languages and linguistics (pp. 1–10). Cambridge University Press.
35.
MontrulS. A.BhattR. M.BhatiaA. (2012). Erosion of case and agreement in Hindi heritage speakers. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2(2), 141–176.
36.
Muāgututi’aG. T. (2018). Recovering ergativity in Heritage Samoan [Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa].
37.
MüllerN.MuckleyS. A.Antonijevic-ElliottS. (2018). Where phonology meets morphology in the context of rapid language change and universal bilingualism: Irish initial mutations in child language. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics, 33, 3–19.
38.
MurasugiK. (2012, April21–22). Ergative and antipassive structures in bilingual Inuktitut speakers [Poster presentation]. Conference on Formal Approaches to heritage Languages, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.
39.
Nic FhlannchadhaS.HickeyT. M. (2021). Where are the goalposts? Generational change in the use of grammatical gender in Irish. Languages, 6(1), Article 33.
40.
Ó GiollagáinC. (2011). Breac-Chríocha na hEitnitheangeolaíochta agus an Forás Oideachais sa Mhionteanga. Comhar, 5, 5–9.
41.
Ó GiollagáinC.CharltonM. (2015). Nuashonrú ar an staidéar cuimsitheach teangeolaíoch ar úsáid na Gaeilge sa Ghaeltacht: 2006–2011. Údarás na Gaeltachta [Gaeltacht Development Authority].
42.
Ó GiollagáinC.Mac DonnachaS.Ní ChualáinF.Ní ShéaghdhaA.O’BrienM. (2007). Comprehensive Linguistic Study of the Use of Irish in the Gaeltacht: Complete Report (Report Prepared for the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht by Acadamh na hOllscolaíochta Gaeilge, NUIG, with Institiúid Náisiúnta um Anailís Réigiúnach agus Spásúil). Maynooth: NUI Maynooth.
43.
O’GradyW.HeatonR.BulalangS. (2023). The roots of endangerment. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 13(1), 10–1075.
44.
O’RourkeB.PujolarJ. (2013). From native speakers to “new speakers”–problematizing nativeness in language revitalization contexts. Histoire Épistémologie Langage, 35(2), 47–67.
45.
PerpiñánS. (2017). Catalan-Spanish bilingualism continuum: The expression of non-personal Catalan clitics in the adult grammar of early bilinguals. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 7(5), 477–513.
46.
PerpiñánS. (2018). On convergence, ongoing language change, and crosslinguistic influence in direct object expression in Catalan–Spanish bilingualism. Languages, 3(2), Article 14.
47.
PerpiñánS.Soto-CorominasA. (2022). Existential constructions in bilingual Catalan and bilingual Spanish: Different types of crosslinguistic influence. In GongY.KpogoF. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 46th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 643–656). Cascadilla Press.
48.
Peytaví DeixonaJ. (2021). Catalan language in French Catalonia today: A case of revernacularisation? A path between identity recovery and linguistic heritage. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 42(10), 969–981.
49.
PfaffC. W. (1993). Turkish language development in Germany. In ExtraG.VerhoevenL. T. (Eds.), Immigrant languages in Europe (pp. 119–146). Multilingual Matters.
50.
PolinskyM. (1997). American Russian: Language loss meets language acquisition. In Formal approaches to Slavic linguistics (Vol. 4, No. 370–406). Michigan Slavic Publications.
51.
PolinskyM. (2006). Incomplete acquisition: American Russian. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 14, 191–262.
52.
PolinskyM. (2018). Heritage languages and their speakers. Cambridge University Press.
53.
RodinaY.WestergaardM. (2015). Grammatical gender in Norwegian: Language acquisition and language change. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 27(2), 145–187.
54.
Rodríguez-OrdóñezI. (2016). Differential object marking in Basque: Grammaticalization, attitudes and ideological representations [Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign].
55.
Rodríguez-OrdóñezI. (2019). The role of linguistic ideologies in language contact situations. Language and Linguistics Compass, 13(10), Article e12351.
56.
Rodríguez-OrdóñezI. (2020). The acquisition of differential object marking in Basque as a sociolinguistic variable. In MardaleA.MontrulS. (Eds.), The acquisition of differential object marking (pp. 105–131). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
57.
Rodríguez-OrdóñezI. (2022). The role of frequency in the acquisition of structured variation: The case of Basque ergativity. International Journal of Bilingualism, 26(5), 656–672.
58.
RothmanJ. (2009). Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 13(2), 155–163.
59.
SánchezL. (2003). Quechua-Spanish bilingualism. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
60.
SchmidtA. (1985). The fate of ergativity in dying Dyirbal. Language, 378–396.
61.
ShainC.TonhauserJ. (2010). The synchrony and diachrony of differential object marking in Paraguayan Guaraní. Language Variation and Change, 22(3), 321–346.
62.
Sherkina-LieberM. (2011). Knowledge of Labrador Inuttitut functional morphology by receptive bilinguals [Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto].
63.
Sherkina-LieberM.Pérez-LerouxA. T.JohnsA. (2011). Grammar without speech production: The case of Labrador Inuttitut heritage receptive bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14(3), 301–317.
64.
Silva-CorvalánC. (1994). Language contact and change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford University Press.
65.
SongM.O’GradyW.ChoS.LeeM. (1997). The learning and teaching of Korean in community schools. Korean Language in America, 2, 111–127.
66.
SopataA.RinkeE.FloresC. (2023). How unique is the linguistic situation of endangered language speakers?Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 13(1), 100–105.
67.
ThomasE.GathercoleV. (2007). Children’s productive command of grammatical gender and mutation in Welsh: An alternative to rule-based learning. First Language, 27, 251–278.
68.
ValdésG. (2000). Introduction. Spanish for native speakers. In AATSP professional development series handbook for teachers K-16 (pp. 1–20).
69.
WileyT. G. (2014). The problem of defining heritage community languages and their speakers: On the utility and limitations of definitional constructs. In WileyT.PeytonJ.ChristianD.MooreD.Na LiuS. (Eds.), Handbook of heritage, community, and Native American languages in the United States (pp. 19–26). Routledge.
70.
WoolardK. A. (2018). Language, identity, and politics in Catalonia. The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 25(1), 21–40.
