The Effect of the First Language Mother Tongue on Acquiring and Using the Second Language: A Case Study on Arab Immigrants in the United States

Abstract

Studies on second language acquisition reveal that younger children acquire second languages faster than older children and adults. Bialystok and Hakuta claim that “children are better second language learners than adults because their brains are specially organized to learn language” (p. 176). Studies still have debates regarding the optimum age for acquiring a second language and the effect of mother tongue on the fluency of second languages. The researcher conducted this study to investigate the effect of the Arabic mother tongue on Arab immigrants’ fluency in using English as a second language in the United States. The researcher used primary resources, interviewing 22 Arab immigrants in the United States, and secondary resources through literature review relevant to language acquisition. The data analysis of this study reveals that Arab immigrant children and adults encounter various challenges in using English in communicative situations. The study provides some recommendations for raising bilinguals at home.

1. Introduction

While living in the United States for more than 9 years, I have noticed that in contrast to Arab young children immigrants in the United States, Arab adults and old children immigrants lack the accuracy and fluency of using English with native-English speakers in communicative situations. Adults and old children immigrants speak English with an Arabic version, where their English is strongly affected by their Arabic mother tongue; their grammar is mostly awkward and influenced by unmarked Arabic grammar; their structure is marked and influenced by unmarked Arabic syntactical structures; the pronunciation of words also is affected by their Arabic pronunciation.

Many studies, in fact, support my own noticing, assigning the challenges that adults and old children encounter while learning and using a second language to several factors, among which are lack of communication with native speakers, the effect of mother tongue interference, code-switching, thinking in their mother tongue while speaking English, and some others. Specialists and researchers in the field of language acquisition strongly believe that younger people are better at acquiring and using second languages for some physical and psychological factors. For instance, Shin [1] argues that

it is common to see young immigrant children speaking pretty good English within only several months of being placed in American schools whereas some adult immigrants struggle to put together simple sentences in English even after many years of living in the U.S. Moreover, younger children seem to have an easier time learning another language than older children and adolescents. (p. 10)

Bever [2] also emphasizes the idea of “the younger, the better in acquiring and using a second language,” where he believes that:

There is ample individual evidence that the older one is the harder it is to master a second language well enough so that a native speaker cannot detect that one is a foreigner. I think that there is very little argument about such facts: it clearly is the case that people who learn a new language after age 20 rarely do so with the proficiency of people who start learning before age 10. This difference persists even after many years of exposure to the language. (p. 179)

Various studies and research attribute the failure of adults and old children to use the second language simultaneously and naturally to some physical factors and psychological factors. As for the physical factors, they attribute language acquisition to physical operations that happen in the brain, namely the division of the brain into two parts after the critical period. As for the psychological factors, they attribute language acquisition to the process of acquiring language in the brain, which transfers this abstract knowledge to the mind in the form of thought. The mind transfers this thought in the brain into speech or utterance for communication with others in the community.

2. Literature review

In this part of the study, I am presenting the literature review relevant to the topic of the study.

2.1 Bilingualism

Mey [3] estimates the number of living languages in the world to be 6809 (see Table 1), and Shin [1] estimates the number of languages in the world between 6000 and 7000 used in about 190 countries. The widespread use of languages indicates the widespread of bilinguals in communities worldwide. In other words, bilingualism has become a common phenomenon in a large number of multilingual communities. For instance, 216 languages are spoken in India, with at least 10,000 speakers for each language; 25 languages are spoken in South Africa; and 20 languages are spoken in Mozambique.

Continent	Total living languages	Percentage (%)
The Americas	1013	14.9
Africa	2058	30.2
Europe	230	3.4
Asia	2197	32.3
The Pacific	1311	19.2
Total	6809	100

Table 1.

Geographic distribution of languages ([3], p. 240).

The questions that might be raised in the context of bilingualism are: Why should people be bilingual in this global world, as English is the lingua franca for almost all people? Is it necessary that English native speakers be bilinguals? If yes, what second language native-English speakers should learn? To answer these questions, we will base mainly on the US Census Bureau’s (2005–2009) [4] estimation of the bilinguals in the United States, which is estimated at nearly 55 million; that is almost one-fifth of the total population. In Europe, France is considered as the home of the biggest Muslim population, with almost 4.7 million, speaking at least two languages [5], and more than 15 million people in Germany have an immigrant background and speak at least another language in addition to German. Auer [6] estimates that almost half of the world’s population are bilinguals; whereas, Shin [7] estimates the number of bilinguals in the world as two-thirds of the whole world’s population.

The word “bilingualism” is the combination of three morphemes: “bi,” which is a Latin word, meaning “two”; “lingual”, which is a Latin word, meaning “language”; and “ism,” which is a Greek prefix, meaning theory, system, or practice. Accordingly, “bilingualism” means “practice two languages,” and this practice requires a person to be familiar with the two language systems or theories. The person who practices the two languages’ systems or theories is called “bilingual.”

A bilingual, according to Grosjean [8], is “a fully competent speaker/hearer; he or she has developed competencies in the two languages and possibly a third system that is a combination of the two” (p. 471). The bilingual may use the two languages separately or together at the same time, as in the case of code-switching. The use of separate languages or code-switching from one language to another depends on the contexts and the purposes. Yet, bilinguals use the two languages and their linguistic and cultural systems unequally.

Yip [9] classifies bilingual children into two: passive bilinguals, who can understand more than one language and use only one, and replacive bilinguals, who acquire language A first and language a second, which replaces language A as the first language. In the latter case, the language a is not the second language, but it becomes the second first language to the bilingual. This means that both language A and language a are the first language of the bilingual.

However, research and studies [10, 11] found that bilinguals have smaller vocabulary in both languages than monolinguals. This indicates that vocabulary size functions as a substitute for the representational center of the languages the bilingual is constructing to understand both languages as complete systems. This understanding, as Stubbs [12] believes, helps bilinguals “speak different languages, but they do not perceive the world differently when they switch from one language to another” (p. 359).

Bilinguals, based on Grosjean and Li [13], “usually acquire and use their languages for different purposes, in different domains of life, with different people. Different aspects of life often require different languages” (p. 12). So, a bilingual has the ability to use different systems of languages in different contexts with different people to achieve specific purposes. A bilingual, as Grosjean [14] describes, is not two monolinguals in one person; rather, a bilingual is one person with two language systems. Hence, a bilingual can code-switch easily from one language to another in various cultural domains.

Bilingual children acquire more than one language either simultaneously (at the same time) or consecutively (one before the other). McLaughlin (as cited in [15]) shows that the difference between simultaneous and consecutive bilingualism is related to the age of acquiring a second language. If the child acquires the second language before three, the child acquires the second language simultaneously. If the child acquires the second language after three, the child acquires the second language consecutively.

Bilinguals’ acquisition of a second language is based on several factors, including innate ability to acquire languages, age, and environment. It is worth noticing that acquiring a second language in some degree is genetic. Just as some people are better than others in painting, music, science, football, math, history, and the like, some children are more gifted than others at acquiring second languages.

Pearson [16] symbolizes acquiring the first language as learning to walk and acquiring the second language as learning to ride a bike. Some children can walk perfectly, but they fail to ride a bike. Also, learning to walk does not entail learning to ride a bike. Some other circumstances might play an effective role in learning how to ride a bike. For example, the child might not have a bike to ride, the road is unsafe to ride a bike, a balance problem in riding the bike, and others. Thus, acquiring a second language differs from one child to another and from one context to another.

According to Johnson (Cited in [17]), with two linguistic systems, specific experience assists bilinguals to be aware of the arbitrary relationship between linguistic utterances and their associated meanings. This experience helps bilinguals to construct specific types of executive structures, which lead the bilinguals’ performance to do several kinds of tasks. The executive structures can be classified into control or task executives and logo-logical or infra-logical structures. Control executives are responsible for monitoring the internal resources and allocation of cognitive activities. Task executives monitor how people interact with their surroundings. Logo-logical executives are genetic, whereas infra-logical executives are situation-bound.

Based on the relationship between linguistic forms (signifiers) and their semantic meanings (signified), bilinguals can be classified into three types: A, B, and C. Type A indicates bilinguals who combine one signifier (word) from each language with one separate signified (meaning) from each language. Type B indicates bilinguals who combine two signifiers as a single compound with two separate units of signifies. Type C indicates to bilinguals who acquire the second language with the help of the first language; that is, bilinguals use the familiar signifiers in their first language to understand the meaning of the signified word in the second language [18].

2.2 Language acquisition

Krashen and Terrell (Cited in [19]) define acquisition as “developing ability in a language by using it in natural communicative situations” (p. 18). Chomsky [20] defines language acquisition as “the transition from the state of the mind at birth, the initial cognitive state, to the stable state that corresponds to the native knowledge of a natural language” (p. 8). Whereas Herrell and Jordan [21] define language acquisition as something “gradual, based on receiving and understanding messages, building a listening (receptive) vocabulary, and slowly attempting verbal production of the language in a highly supportive, non-stressful situation” (p. 2). According to Olivares [22], researchers define language acquisition as a process “by which our minds appropriate the sounds, symbols, and representations that constitute a language” (p. 5).

Language acquisition, then, is a process of selecting a specific option, which meets the speaker’s experiences in life, out of multiple options produced in the speaker’s mind [20]. Bakhtin [23] associates language acquisition with generic forms, which strongly justifies why some children are more fluent speakers of the second language than other children are. It takes only 2 or 3 months at most for some immigrant children to use English in reality, and it sometimes takes up to 1 year for other immigrant children to use language fluently. So, genes play an essential role in addition to the social environment and some other factors.

Language acquisition may occur simultaneously or successively. In the case of simultaneous acquisition, children acquire the two languages at the same time. So, neither language is seen as first and the other as second as both languages are considered as first. Yet, one language is considered as the strongest and the other as the weakest [9]. In simultaneous acquisition, children are exposed to two languages from birth; that is, when immigrants are born in another country different from their parents’ country. In the case of successive language, children acquire the first language first and acquire the second language later in another context after a period of time. In successive acquisition, children are exposed to the second language after a period of time of their first language acquisition.

However, first language acquisition is different in some aspects from second language acquisition. The two types of acquisition differ in the early stages and phases of the acquisition. In second language acquisition, previously acquired linguistic competence is activated as a result of grammatical competence transformation from the first language. Also, the sequences of acquisition in both languages are not identical. In first language acquisition, children develop patterns to acquire both phonological and grammatical aspects of language. In second language acquisition, one aspect of language might dominate over the other [24]. So, in second language acquisition, children are more probably stronger in fluency over accuracy.

Meisel [24] shows the difference between first language acquisition and second language acquisition in that “parameterized grammatical knowledge is acquired, in part, by triggering the setting of parameters to specific values in L1, whereas in L2 only learning of the corresponding surface phenomena is possible” (p. 107). So, the development of grammatical structure in children’s first language acquisition is differentiating properties in the first language due to the development of grammatical structures directed the rules of the universal grammar.

Halliday [25] believes that children acquire their first language through continuous processes of constructing meaningful knowledge due to the use of language in different situations for different meaningful contexts. Therefore, children’s main source for acquiring their first language and its functional use in different situations is through the use of words in meaningful contexts. Diaz-Rico [26] sees that the main difference is in the time of acquisition. In contrast to first language acquisition, second language acquisition happens over a long period of time, called “critical period.” This critical period indicates the time when children acquire and use language easily and successfully.

When children early acquire a second language, they become as fluent as or more fluent in that language than they are in their first language [16]. Based on many studies, a child’s brain is capable of acquiring any language used in the world. For example, a baby, who was born in Guatemala, can acquire Swedish when the baby is living in the Swedish community. A child’s brain is capable of learning up to seven different languages at the same time [27] because, as Baker [28] claims, “children are born ready to become bilinguals and multilinguals” (p. 35). King and Mackey [29] justify that “all babies come into the world with a gift for languages” (p. 38).

Krashen (Cited in [30]) distinguishes language acquisition, which refers to the subconscious process of acquiring language through informal settings without paying attention to language rules and forms, from language learning, which refers to the conscious process of learning language through formal settings with paying attention to language rules and forms. Weaver [31] sees that language acquisition is a subconscious process that helps people acquire the functional rules and vocabulary of a language. Hence, according to Bardies [32], language acquisition requires that people associate meanings and sounds according to the syntactic and phonological rules of that language.

Furthermore, many studies show that there are fundamental similarities in the processes of acquiring first language and second language. Thus, researchers advise that studying processes of second language acquisition requires studying processes of first language acquisition and seeing the effects of mother tongue in acquiring and using the second language [33].

The discussion above reveals that children acquire language more effectively and easily in early ages, and it becomes challenging in adulthood or late ages of childhood. Language acquisition in early ages is attributed to some internal and external factors. The internal factor is relevant to the physical construction of the brain. At some time of the child’s ages, the brain has the capability of acquiring as many as available languages. This period of time is called “critical period,” which starts from birth and lasts up to a specific period of age till puberty, as some scholars believe.

2.3 Critical period hypothesis

Critical period is an important period of time in which people acquire language. Lenneberg produced the concept “critical period hypothesis” for first language acquisition in 1967, which sees that “language acquisition must occur before puberty in order for the speaker to reach native-like fluency” ([34], p. 19).

Lenneberg clarifies that innate behavior can grow at a certain period of time, which is called the window of opportunity. If this innate feature is not developed within this window opportunity, it fails to be developed at later times. If a child were isolated from the community till after the critical period, the child would fail to master his mother tongue. The window of opportunity will close in front of children who are not triggered to use their innate behavior in a community [33]. In this regard, Skinner [35] explains that “a man who has been alone since birth will have no verbal behavior, will not be aware of himself as a person, will possess no techniques of self-management, and with respect to the world around him will have only those meager skills which can be acquired in one short lifetime from nonsocial contingencies” (p. 123).

Pearson [16] agrees with Skinner that a man who lives alone will lose his mother tongue. For example, in 1970s, a father in Los Angeles kept his daughter isolated from people in a small room tied to a chair for 12 years. He kept feeding and clothing her, but he was not speaking to her. When the police found her, they took her to the hospital for treatment and having therapy sessions. After long time of therapy sessions, she could speak, but her articulation of words was unclear. Though she gained hundreds of words, her grammar structure was incorrect. For example, she was saying sentences, such as “Man man bicycle have” and “Want Curtiss piano play” (pp. 106–107).

About this case and similar others, Gordon [33] says:

there have been some tragic circumstances when children who had been lost, isolated, or confined did not grow up surrounded by human speech. Those situations are inadvertent experiments which have enabled scientists to observe what happens if a human child is deprived of language learning. Children who become victims of these situations are called feral children from the Latin word “ferus” meaning “wild” (p. 52).

Lenneberg’s hypothesis about critical period extends from early childhood till puberty, but the critical age of this period is not specified exactly. Also, as first language acquisition principles are similar to the second language acquisition principles, I can apply this hypothesis on second language acquisition, too. This indicates that acquiring a second language takes place in early childhood. In this vein, Steiner and Hayes [27] argue “when it comes to learning languages, experts generally agree that earlier is better. A baby’s brain is prewired to learn multiple languages” (p. 9).Also, Pearson [16] believes that young children are gifted in language acquisition. Children can discover sounds of language, structure, and words before they are 2 years old. Infants use language without thinking of what they are saying or doing. As for using grammar, Gordon [33] sees that children can use grammar in their first language when they are 5 years old.

Herrell and Jordan [21] see that children acquire languages easily at home. Also, Goodman [36] notices that children acquire their first language easily in a short period of time through practicing language with others in a community. In contrast, children encounter many difficulties when they learn their first language, namely writing, in school. Children suffer in learning their first language in school even when their teachers are well qualified, armed with good material for teaching.

However, children have the capacity to acquire language easily because language acquisition is innate. Children are born with competence to acquire and learn any language, both first and second. Though all children share almost the same competence of universal rules, which help in acquiring or learning language, each child has a different experience in acquiring or learning languages. This justifies why some children acquire or learn a language faster than others [37].

Children are better than adults in acquiring or learning a second language because their brains are prepared to acquire and learn languages [38]. Some scientists attribute the children’s ability to acquire and learn a second language to psychological and social factors. Unlike children, adults are not immersed in communicative situations, where they use a second language with native speakers. Also, adults fear of making mistakes, which children do not pay attention [16].

Pearson [16] defines the critical period as “an optimal period for learning during which stimulation produces a desired effect and after which stimulation no longer produces the same effect” (p. 310). Chomsky [37] admits that there is a specific age for acquiring a language. However, there is a controversial issue about the specific age existing in the critical period. Several scholars have an agreement that the critical age in the critical period ends at the age of 6 or 7 years at most. In contrast, others see that the critical period lasts till the age of 10, when the children’s brains are still primed for acquiring languages.

According to Lenneberg [39] (Cited in [40]), language acquisition takes place before the age of 5. In this age, the brain can function well in acquiring languages. Long [41] specifies that the critical age is under 6. Field [42] agrees that this age is the optimum age for second language acquisition. Krashen [43] specifies this age to be included in 5 years. Pinker [44] specifies the age of 6 as the critical age for acquiring language. Rowe and Levine [45] specify this period till the age of 7.

Selecting the age under seven as the critical age for second language acquisition is enhanced and justified by Tokuhama-Espinosa [46], who has stated that:

children, generally speaking, under the age of seven are not inhibited by making mistakes in public. Language is a game, a code to play with. When children make a mistake in pronunciation or do not know the right word in a situation, they ask or make it up, or use something close to what they need. If and when they are corrected, they accept it as part of the rules to the game and move on. (p. 27)

According to Tokuhama-Espinosa, children after the age of 6 or 7 start thinking of what they are saying. They try to avoid embarrassment taking place because of committing mistakes while speaking. They become self-conscious of what they are saying. Of course, this makes the process of acquiring or using language complicated and systematic. Children start thinking of their speech and ways of speaking, which contradicts the fact that language is something people do without thinking. This indicates that older children and adults are guided by their mother tongue when using the second language.

2.4 Effect of mother tongue on using a second language

Though the concept “mother tongue” is used to refer to an individual’s first language, other concepts, such as “first language” and “community language,” are also used to mean “mother tongue.” Lieberson (Cited in [47]) presents the definition of “mother tongue” adopted by the United Nations as the “language usually spoken in the individual’s home in his early childhood, although not necessarily used by him at present.” (p. 19). According to this definition, an individual’s mother tongue is not necessarily his mastered used language. Malherbe (Cited in [47]) notes that white children in South Africa, who have Zulu nannies, speak Zulu much better than their English or African mother tongues.

Also, studies show that people’s native language is affected in some ways by the new language of the countries, where they had stayed for long time. The most obvious effects are shown in difficulty in remembering words and phrases in native language [48]. According to Cunningham [48], “the success of a period abroad depends to a great extent on how well the accompanying family adapts to their new surroundings” (p. 11). About dominating the second language over the mother tongue, Pearson [16] shows his experience in using French as a first language over his English mother tongue as:

I felt transformed when I discovered a larger world through living in another language. Because I could speak to the French in their language, I heard stories from people whose unique lives I would never have been able to imagine at home in New York. I found myself more outgoing when I was speaking French and even surprised myself by writing poetry in that language – which is not something I typically did in English. (p. xvi)

Pecenek [49] conducted a study on two Turkish brothers, A is eight and B is five, about the acquisition of Italian. The brothers did not speak Italian when they arrived in Italy in September 2002. They started learning Italian in school in October 2002. Their parents provided the same language opportunities for them, and they stayed in Italy for 4 years, living in the same linguistic and cultural settings. After 1 year, B was speaking Italian in school and with his friends; A was still encountering difficulties in speaking Italian, though he could understand Italian. In the second year, B shifted to Italian as a dominant language. For example, he forgot to name the months of the year in Turkish; he named them in Italian. Whereas A still used Turkish words to speak Italian. After 4 years, A was still keeping his Turkish language, but he was not fluent in Italian; B showed difficulties in speaking Turkish, but he was fluent in Italian.

A study conducted on the effects of the mother tongue on immigrant children in the United States showed that children older than nine generally kept their mother tongue as their stronger language when acquiring English as a second language. The study revealed that children younger than nine preferred using English after 1 year after their arrival to the United States. After 3 years, most children preferred English to be their mother tongue. Another study on college students at the University of Miami revealed that only the students who came to the United States after the age of 10 preferred using their original mother tongue at home [16].

Cho and Krashen [50] conducted a study on Korean American college students to see the effect of English on Korean. The study found that the Korean students who were born in the United States or came to the United States before school ages, used English with family members–though they were speaking Korean before joining school. One of the participants explained:

My parents and I do have a communication gap, a communication problem. Not in just a sophisticated way. I can’t even hold a normal conversation with my parents. I just say my thoughts once and I repeat it constantly until they understand… It is frustrating when I’m speaking with my parents and we can’t fully comprehend what we’re trying to say to each other. I hate it when I eat dinner with my parents and they always carry on their own conversation that I can only half understand. (pp. 33-36)

Blakeslee [51] believes a child acquires native-like accent before the age of 5. After that age, the child is affected by his mother tongue, and it becomes difficult to acquire the second language accent. For that reason, Nejadansari and Nasrollahzadeh [34] see that only young children can acquire the native accent of the second language. In a study on language acquisition, Shatz (Cited in [51]) notices that a Japanese child is able to distinguish the sound “r” from “l,” which is absent in Japanese language, before the age of 3.

Young children acquire the second language pronunciation faster and more accurately than adults do. Some studies show that adult learners usually struggle in pronunciation of some English sounds. For example, rolling/r/and tonguing/th/are difficult for adults to master. Thus, even when adult learners are fluent in English, their pronunciation in Japanese, Chinese, German, French, or Arabic is still clear while speaking English [28].

In this regard, Thompson [52] conducted a study on some Russian immigrants in the United States. The findings of this study revealed that the Russian immigrants who arrived in the United States before they were 10 acquired more native-like English accents than those who arrived in the United States after the age of 10. The study revealed that two Russian immigrants came to the United States at the age of 4, yet they did not have a native-like English accent. The study attributed this to the problem that these two immigrants encountered during their critical period hypothesis.

A study on 46 Korean and Chinese native speakers, whose ages ranged from three to 26 years when they came to the United States, revealed that English performance for old children was low compared to those who were young when they first arrived in the United States [53]. DeKeyser [54] reached the same results in a study on 57 Hungarian immigrants.

Another study conducted by Flege, Yeni-Komshion, and Liu in 1999 on 240 Korean immigrants to the United States who spent at least 8 years in the United States, and their ages ranged from 1 year to 23. The results of this study revealed that the effect of the Korean native language on English was clear in the language used by those who came to the United States in old age. The effect of the Korean native language was rarely noticeable in the English used by those who came to the United States in early age [29].

These studies and many others confirm that children acquire a second language more professionally in early childhood because they are more successful in acquiring languages than adults. If children are provided with opportunities to use the second language in their critical periods of time, they become native-like speakers [16, 27].

Yet, studies and research show that bilinguals are stronger in one language than the other, which means that their stronger language is the mother tongue for them. In other words, the language that bilinguals know best is their mother tongue. This idea is asserted by Steiner and Hayes [27], who believe that it is seldom for bilinguals to have the same proficiency in both languages. Hence, the language that bilinguals speak and hear more is their mother tongue.

Several studies and research also reveal that newborns are able to differentiate among different languages. Newborns can distinguish their native language after only 4 days from birth. A study, for example, showed that when Russian infants heard Russian language, they sucked on their pacifiers harder than when they heard French. The infants’ sucking on their pacifiers indicates, as researchers analyze that Russian infants prefer their Russian native language to French. The babies showed their interest in their native language by sucking hard on the pacifiers when they heard the sounds of the Russian language [27].

Other scholars, however, claim that critical age extends till puberty. Patkowski [55] believes that this age is under 15. Penfleld and Roberts (Cited in [34]) see that the best period of age for acquiring a second language falls between 1 year and 10 years. In these periods of age, a child’s brain is still flexible, so language can be transferred easily to the left side of the brain, which is responsible for language functions. Johnson and Newport [53] believe that this age extends to 15.

From another point of view, Steiner and Hayes [27] believe that it is rare for a bilingual to use the mother tongue and the second language with the same proficiency. The language the child speaks and hears more easily, effectively, and successfully is his mother tongue, and the weaker language is the second language, no matter where he lives. An incident happened to me personally when I was in the United States with my family. My phone rang while I was praying. My daughter, who was born in the United States, replied (باتي يصلينج) “bati ysaling.” “My dad is praying.” As there is no equivalent of the present continuous tense in Arabic, my daughter added “ing” to the verb “pray” in Arabic as a mother tongue interference—her mother tongue is English, as she was born and brought up in the United States.

3. Methodology of the study

In this part of the study, I present the methodology used to fulfill this study.

3.1 Methodology of the study

This study is a qualitative research study. To gather the data for this study, I based on literature review as a secondary resource. For primary resources, I interviewed six Arab immigrant families. I interviewed the participants face-to-face, using both English and Arabic as the languages of the interview. I translated the interviews conducted in Arabic into English, based on my knowledge of translation and my awareness of English and Arabic languages.

I transcribed the participants’ interviews and coded them into categories according to their relevance. Later, I analyzed the coded data based on my interpretation and perception of the topic of the study. I reached findings by analyzing the participants’ interviews, and I presented recommendations based on the findings obtained.

3.2 Problems of the study

During my 9-year living in the United States, I have noticed that the majority of adult and old children Arab immigrants lack both accuracy and fluency in using English in functional situations, even after spending more than 35 years in the United States. In contrast, young Arab immigrant children acquire and use English within a couple of months. My noticing is enhanced by Shin [1], who claims that “we often hear that when it comes to learning a foreign language, it is better to start earlier than later. Compared to adults, children seem to have a much easier time learning a second language” (p. 10).

3.3 Questions of the study

One of the main areas of interest in this study is to stand on the main factors or points that led me to understand the effect of the mother tongue of Arab immigrants on their fluency in speaking English. To reach answers and facts about my above-mentioned interest, I interviewed six Arab families (parents and children, who vary in age to be between four and 19 at the time of the interviews), and I posed a main question and some sub-questions to be answered. The key question of this study is:

• What is the effect of the mother tongue on the Arab immigrants’ performance in using English as a second language in the United States?

To find answers to that key question, I posed some sub-questions as:

• What are the factors that help Arab immigrants acquire and use English as a second language faster and more effectively?

• What is the role of the critical period in using English as native speakers?

3.4 Participants of the study

The participants of this study are six Arab immigrant families. The parents participated in giving some information about the family’s arrival in the United States and their children’s proficiency in using English. The children participants varied in age from 6 to 19 years. The participants’ native language is Arabic, and their second language is English. The reason for selecting the participants from one language minority is to compare the participants with almost the same mental vision about first and second languages. The participants did not study English in their home countries, and they have been in the United States for more than 4 years. All the participants were volunteers and were fully willing to participate in this study. I interviewed only one parent from each family, so I interviewed six parents. I interviewed all the children of the family, aged from 4 until 19.

3.5 Objectives of the study

The main objective of this study is to investigate the effect of the Arabic mother tongue on Arab immigrants’ performance in using English as a second language in the United States. In this study, I am setting out research and presenting information about language acquisition, critical period, mother tongue, and bilingualism. This study is inductive, aiming to study facts and interviewing six Arab immigrant families to reach findings and recommendations related to the effect of the Arabic mother tongue on Arab immigrants’ performance in using English as a second language in the United States.

3.6 Data collection

The primary data sources in this study include interviewing 6 Arab immigrant families—22 participants (6 parents and 16 children). Through the face-to-face interaction with the participants, I could identify important points related to bilingualism and language acquisition. I have already prepared questions related to bilingualism, language acquisition, and the effect of mother tongue on acquiring and using English as a second language in the United States.

These questions were set up in specific order, using clear language and simple words. All participants’ answers and comments were taken into account while collecting the data of the study. The questions were carefully designed to cover aspects of bilingualism, language acquisition, and the effect of mother tongue on using English as a second language in the United States.

I used a tape recorder, which showed neither the participants nor me. I transcribed interviews immediately, and each interview took almost the whole day. Transcribing interviews immediately helped me remember almost all of the speeches in the interview. Transcribing helped me comment on and analyze each participant’s speech individually. Translating the Arabic part into English was done by me based on my knowledge of translation and my acquaintance with Arabic standard language and dialects.

3.7 Data analysis

I followed a qualitative research method to conduct this study, so I based it on primary resources to obtain findings. After gathering the data from interviews, I classified them into meaningful structures. I transcribed the participants’ interviews and memo them into groups according to their relevance and similarities. In order to obtain the findings, I used my interpretation paradigm to analyze the participants’ interviews based on my knowledge of the topic and setting of the study.

Initial analysis of the interviews shows me that the parents’ English use, namely grammar, structure, pronunciation, and word choice, is unclear, although these parents have spent several years in the United States. The parents’ use of English might indicate their unsatisfactory level of English. The participants were selected from six different Arab countries (Algeria, Jordan, Libya, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Somalia). The ratio of the participants is representative to the population distribution of Arab countries, which gives credibility to the study. So, this study might work as a general, authentic study of the Arabic community as a whole.

4. Findings of the study

The findings of the study include excerpts from transcriptions of all 22 interviewees. Facts from the interviews are labeled in tables. In data analysis of the interviews, I am classifying the participants into three groups: adults (parents), old children (those who were older than 9 years when they came to the United States), and young children (those who were younger than 9 years when they came to the United States).

I am referring to the first group (adults) with the letter A, so for the parent from Algeria, I am using the pseudo name AAlgF (Adult Algerian Father). For the second group (old children), I am using the letter O, so the old male child from Iraq will take the pseudo name OIraB (Old Iraqi Boy). The third group (young children) takes the letter Y. So, the young female child from Libya will take the pseudoname YLibG (Young Libyan Girl). Analyzing the interviews shows me the following findings based on the three questions of the study:

4.1 How does mother tongue affect Arab immigrants’ performance in using English as a second language in the United States?

Findings about this question focus on the challenges, if there are any, that adults and old children encounter in using English as a second language in reality with native-English speakers. These findings include:

1. Adults encounter more challenges in acquiring English than children.

   A large number of studies and research shows that adults encounter challenges in acquiring and using a second language. To make sure of this fact, I interviewed six adult Arab immigrants (five fathers and one mother) whose second language is English. The participants have been in the United States for more than 4 years: AAlgF (21 years), AIraF (7 years), ALibM (7 years), ASauF (5 years), ASomF (5 years), and AJorF (4 years). The recordings and interviews show that the participant’s parents’ English is unclear and incorrect in most cases. The participants have incorrect grammar rules, sentence structures, pronunciation, and word meanings. I am presenting some of the parents’ responses to my questions.

   AAlgF: Actually I does not [do not] say [see] any culture hair [here].

   AJorF: I start [started] learn [learning] English before I come [came] to the United State.

   ASauF: Because you want [to] communicate [with] the people and understanding [understand] what you [they] tell. Some people no [do not] like, I mean they do not [feel] comfortable when you speak another, another languages.

   ALibM: YLibB learn [learned] English when [he] start [started] school.

   AIraF: My language is, they, my language, they have rule rules in their languages, but the English, they do not has rule [My language has rules, but English does not have rules].

2. Adults and old children encounter challenges in understanding English language speakers.

   Analyzing the recordings shows that the parents and some of the old children encounter difficulties in understanding some of the questions. For example, AAlgF could not understand six questions, which I explained in different ways. AIraF kept me confused in understanding ten questions, which forced me to use Arabic most of the time to explain these questions. ALibM found difficulties in understanding five questions. AJorF could not understand four questions, so I paraphrased these questions. For ASauF and ASomF, I conducted almost all the interviews in Arabic. See the below example:

   Me: Where did you live in the United States?

   AAlgF: live [lived] in Georgia, Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia and Alexandria, Virginia, and come here to Columbia, Missouri.

   AIraF: You mean now or before?

   ASauF: What?

3. Adults and old children are influential English language speakers because they use Arabic more than English.

   The parents’ and some old children’s English was influential, and it took time for them to answer each question. They were thinking of the grammar and word selection to use before they answered the questions. Thus, their English seemed artificial, and their dialectal accents were dominating over their English accent. In contrast to the parents and old children, all participants, including young children, found it easy to understand all the questions, and their English was fluent and understandable. They were answering without thinking in English grammar or paying attention to word selection. Thus, their English appeared fluent and spontaneous.

4. Adults encounter challenges in speaking English because of being away from English culture.

   The data analysis of this study shows that the participants who have connections with native English speakers can speak English much better than the participants who do not have connections with native-English speakers. In the study, three participants preferred English as the medium for conducting the interview. These participants are (1) AAlgF, who works as a mechanic and he has connections with customers almost every day. (2) AIraF, who is a custodian in a hospital, and he has connections with his colleagues in work and people in the hospital. AJorF is a doctoral student, and he has connections with students and member staff at the university. These participants’ English was acceptable compared to the other participant’s parents. The reason is that these participants were engaged in the English culture through communications with Americans.

   Two participants preferred conducting the interview in both English and Arabic, yet they used Arabic more, and they were asked about the meanings of almost all questions of the interview. These participants are (1) ALibM, who is a housewife and spends most of her time in the house and has limited connections with native-English speakers. ASauF, who is an official in Saudi Arabia and accompanying his wife, who is doing PhD. He spends most of his time at home to take care of children. One participant preferred Arabic as the language of the interview. This participant is ASomF, a refugee with nothing to do. He spends most of his time with his friends from Somalia.

4.2 What are the factors that help Arab immigrants acquire and use English as a second language faster and more effectively?

Findings work to find the effect of acquiring English as a second language on Arab immigrants’ English language. The findings in this facet include:

1. Young children are more apt to language shift than older children and adults.

   Using English more than Arabic and preferring to use English over Arabic caused a language shift in young children. None of the young children could speak Arabic. They failed to tell a story or talk about their day in Arabic language though they did that in English. Old children could use both languages to tell a short story or talk about their day.

2. The mother tongue affects the acquisition of the second language.

   Though the analysis shows that almost all the children’s mother tongue is Arabic, recordings of the interviews show that only old children could speak Arabic, and this affects their fluency in English. The reason might be that these children have already acquired the Arabic language and still remember it as their mother tongue. This fact is confirmed by Pearson [16], who noticed that the immigrants who came to the United States after they were 10 years old use their mother tongue at home.

4.3 What is the role of the critical period in using English as native speakers?

As this study is revolving around the effect of the mother tongue on using a second language, the researcher sees that it is core to investigate about the role of the critical period in using English. Findings include the optimum age for acquiring English as a second language for immigrant Arabs. These findings include:

1. Young children acquire English as a second language faster and more easily than old children.

   The analysis shows that old children still find challenges to speak English, though they have spent several years in the United States and join American public schools. The analysis shows that young children have the ability to use English because they acquired English in early ages.

2. In contrast to adults and old children, young children see English more easily than Arabic.

   The data analysis reveals that all young children use English among themselves. They see that English is much easier than Arabic. In contrast, parents and old children use Arabic more than English. They see that English is very difficult. This seems clear from the parents’ and old children’s responses with “yes” about the difficulty of expressing themselves in English. This information indicates that younger children acquire English faster than older children, who acquire English faster than their parents. Of course, this is true and confirmed by many studies and scholars because children, as King and Mackey [29] argue, are native speakers of the language they use, and they acquire that language easily and fast.

3. School or sibling speakers of English help young children acquire and use English faster.

   As for the optimum age for acquiring English as a second language, the study shows that the younger, the faster and more accurate in learning and using the language. The parents confirmed that it took from 2 to 6 months for their younger children to acquire and use English, whereas it took from 9 months to more than 1 year for children to acquire and use English. The parents’ rate of their English proficiency shows that their younger children speak better than their old children.

   The data analysis shows that younger children acquire English faster than older children. Also, the parents’ order of their children according to their English use indicates that the parents ordered younger children before older ones. In the case of YAlgB, YAlgG, YLibB, and SauD, they delayed in acquiring English because they had not been exposed to English. They started acquiring English when they joined preschool as parents explained, yet they were classified as the best speakers of English in the family.

   In the cases I have here, the young child’s siblings were not speaking English, so the child finds the chance to practice English only at school. If the child’s siblings speak English, the child acquires English from home. About this phenomenon, Fishman [56] affirms that the eldest children in immigrant families learn the second language when they join school. Later-born children learn English at home from their siblings, who bring English with them to home.

5. Recommendations

Based on the participants’ interviews and findings of the study, I am presenting the following recommendations:

1. Parents should expose their children to English culture in early age. Children in early age acquire English proficiency and accent. Omar [57] emphasizes the importance of exposing infants to speech sounds of the two languages so that infants can have early speech perception for both languages. Johnson and Newport [53] had a grammatical judgment test for English language learners who came to the United States between the ages of three and 39. They found that the performance of the learners who came at earlier ages was better than those who came at later ages.

2. Old children, as well as parents, need to be involved completely in the English culture to know how native English speakers use English. They need to practice English in reality as much time as possible. They should use English in multiple cultural contexts. In this regard, Slethaug (Cited in [58]) clarifies that “each culture has its own ideology, advantages, and limitations, and those who enter a new culture need to be aware of and sensitive to it” (p. 426). Also, Omar [59] identifies the functions of language “amongst of which is to communicate with each other in various social contexts” (p. 25).

3. Parents should offer exposure to English at home through having English channels, short stories, news media, and the like because, as Gitlin [60] claims, “people think within the intellectual and cultural currents that surround them – currents with histories, even if the sources cannot be seen from downstream” (p. 200). This, of course, indicates that language expresses one’s culture and identity. In other words, language, as seen by Halliday, is “a socio-semiotic system embedded in its culture and used for functional purposes in various communicative situations” ([61], p. 7).

4. Parents should provide their children with natural exposure to English so that they can practice English in functional contexts. Children will be able to use English and see how English native speakers speak and behave while speaking. It is language use rather than language knowledge that enables children to use both languages functionally. According to Omar [62], people successfully use a language when they think in that language as native speakers do, which requires full engagement in the target language culture. In this regard, Omar [63] (Cited in [58]) argues that “people who live in a same community for a while can communicate and share ideas effectively because they have similar references in realities to the images in the brain” (p. 425).

5. Parents should motivate and encourage siblings to speak English at home because, as Herrell and Jordan [21] believe, children acquire language at home easily when they practice it with siblings. Buros [64] focuses on the role of giving children opportunities to talk with one another in order to acquire language, as children learn more effectively from each other.

6. Parents should make use of their children’s sensitive period to acquire and use language effectively. They should expose their children to English cultural environments in early ages to acquire and use English simultaneously. Language, based on Omar [63], is “a reflection of the culture of the users of that language” (p. 44).