Knol M, Assanova D, Smagulova G, Uteubayeva E, Akbaeva G. Prevention of cross-language interference in the context of trilingual education (Russian, Kazakh, and English languages). Sci Herald Uzhhorod Univ Ser Phys. 2024;(56):1434-1443. DOI: 10.54919/physics/56.2024.143bd4
Prevention of cross-language interference in the context of trilingual education (Russian, Kazakh, and English languages)
Marina Knol, Dariya Assanova, Gulnara Smagulova, Elmira Uteubayeva, Gulden Akbaeva
https://doi.org/10.54919/physics/56.2024.143bd4
Abstract
Relevance. The relevance of the study lies in the fact that in the modern world, trilingual education is becoming increasingly common, necessitating the exploration of methods, exercises, and approaches to reduce interference phenomena in language learning.
Purpose. The purpose of the study is to identify factors contributing to cross-language interference in trilingual education and to develop strategies and methods for its prevention and minimisation.
Methodology. To achieve the purpose, the following methods were used: hypothetical-deductive, questionnaire, correlation analysis, and comparative.
Results. Results revealed key factors influencing cross-language interference across Russian, Kazakh, and English languages. They cover various language levels such as vocabulary, grammar, phonetics, as well as sociocultural aspects. The study highlights various methodological strategies and approaches that can be successfully applied to prevent cross-language interference, emphasising the active role of both learners and educators in the prevention process. Comparative analysis of English language instruction within trilingual education revealed that the majority of errors in oral and written language usage were linked to native language interference. It was also established that the degree of development of the relevant skills of students in both groups increased. However, in the first group, the growth rate reached an average of about 50%, while in the second group, the shift ranged from 25% to 38%.
Conclusions. The study concludes that preventing cross-language interference in trilingual education (Russian, Kazakh, and English) requires targeted strategies and methods. Key factors influencing interference include vocabulary, grammar, phonetics, and sociocultural aspects. Effective prevention involves active participation from both learners and educators, with a focus on methodological strategies tailored to the specifics of trilingual education.
Keywords: lexical skills; linguistic system; instructional materials; exercises; speech interaction
Suggested citation
References
- Dietrich-Grappin S, Hufeisen B. Tertiary language didactics 2.0: A review of a multilingual didactics approach and its remodeling in the light of empirical research, translanguaging and compétence plurilingue. Hung Ed Res J. 2023;13(3):328-357.
- Casillas JV. Interlingual interactions elicit performance mismatches not “compromise” categories in early bilinguals: Evidence from meta-analysis and coronal stops. Languages. 2021;6(1):9.
- Sales AJ. Language interference and generative phonology in speech production among Hiligaynon native speakers. REILA: J Res Innov Lang. 2022;4(3):263-264.
- Koptleuova K, Karagulova B, Zhumakhanova A, Kondybay K, Salikhova A. Multilingualism and the current language situation in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Int J Soc Cult Lang. 2023;11(3):242-257.
- Ormanova AB, Anafinova ML. А linguistic interference in information space terms: A corpus-based study in Kazakh. Theory Pract Lang Stud. 2022;12(12):2497-2507.
- Kambatyrova A. Parents’ language ideologies in the context of trilingual education policy in Kazakhstan. Int J Multiling. 2022;19(3):1-17.
- Zhumay N, Tazhibayeva S, Shaldarbekova A, Jabasheva B, Naimanbay A, Sandybayeva A. Multilingual education in the Republic of Kazakhstan: Problems and prospects. Soc Inclus. 2021;9(1):56-62.
- Sarmurzin Y, Amanzhol N, Toleubayeva K, Zhunusova M, Amanova A, Abiyr A. Challenging aspects of Kazakhstan’s trilingual education policy: Evidence from a literature review. Asia Pac Ed Rev. 2023;24(2):277-293.
- Otero MR, Arlego MF. Teaching and learning optics in high school: From Fermat to Feynman. Ed Sci. 2023;13(5):503.
- Peñaloza C, Grasemann U, Miikkulainen R, Kiran S. Modeling bilingualism as a dynamic phenomenon in healthy and neurologically affected speakers across the lifespan: A commentary on “computational modeling of bilingual language learning: Current models and future directions”. Lang Learn. 2023;73(S2):78-82.
- Pan J, Lou L. Research on the phenomenon of “foreign language anxiety” based on individual differences of learners. Creat Ed. 2023;14:1759-1772.
- Meigh KM, Kee E. Dissimilar phonemes create a contextual interference effect during a nonword repetition task. Front Psych. 2020;11:58-59.
- Fujita H, Cunnings I. Interference and filler-gap dependency formation in native and non-native language comprehension. J Exp Psych Learn Mem Cogn. 2022;48(5):702-716.
- Kim N, Brehm L, Sturt P, Yoshida M. How long can you hold the filler: Maintenance and retrieval. Lang Cogn Neurosci. 2020;35(1):17-42.
- Wu Y, Silver RE. Trilingualism, education and ethnic language subjectivities. J Lang Id Ed. 2023.;22(2):123-139.
- Kemala Sari C, Qomariah N, Husein R. The use of trilingual languages by Gayonese and Bataknese teachers in teaching English. KnE Soc Sci. 2021;5(4):189-199.
- Cenoz J, Hufeisen B, Jessner U. Towards trilingual education. Int J Biling Ed Biling. 2001;4(1):1-10.
- Smith G, Vasishth S. A principled approach to feature selection in models of sentence processing. Cogn Sci. 2020;44(12)
- Tsiplakides I, Keramida A. The relationship between teacher expectations and student achievement in the teaching of English as a foreign language. Eng Lang Teach. 2010;3(2):22-26.
- Erling EJ, Moore E. Introduction – Socially just plurilingual education in Europe: Shifting subjectivities and practices through research and action. Int J Multiling. 2021;18(4):523-533.
- Lillo-Martin D, Henner J. Acquisition of sign languages. Annu Rev Linguist. 2021;7:395-419.
- Jäger LA, Mertzen D, Van Dyke JA, Vasishth S. Interference patterns in subject-verb agreement and reflexives revisited: A large-sample study. J Mem Lang. 2020;111:104063.
- Cheng Y, Rothman J, Cunnings I. Parsing preferences and individual differences in nonnative sentence processing: Evidence from eye movements. App Psycholing. 2021;42(1):129-151.
