Tables
2.3Percentage accuracy and reaction times (RT) in the picture-naming and picture-word matching tasks in English and Dutch
2.4Genitive of negation match rates across generations and languages
3.3Corpus-based analysis of the diachronic advance of a-marking with animate and inanimate objects in Spanish. Percentage of DOM by object and by century
3.4DOM in Old Spanish: Cross-classification of animacy hierarchy and definiteness scale
3.5DOM in Modern Spanish: Cross-classification of animacy hierarchy and definiteness scale
3.6DOM in Spanish: Cross-classification of animacy hierarchy and definiteness scale
3.7Distribution of the Spanish preposition a, the Hindi postposition ko and the Romanian preposition pe in the syntax
4.1Predicted levels of difficulty by language type for the L2 acquisition of DOM systems
4.2Counts and mean percentage production of a-marking omission errors with animate direct objects and a-overmarking with inanimate direct objects
5.3Target sentences included in the Spanish bimodal acceptability judgment task
5.4Target sentences included in the Hindi bimodal acceptability judgment task
5.5Target sentences included in the Romanian bimodal acceptability judgment task
6.1Percentage of US speakers age 25 and older, by educational attainment
6.3Self-rated bilingual proficiency and proficiency in Spanish
6.5Heritage speakers’ reasons for wanting to improve Spanish and what needs improvement by type of bilingual
6.6Patterns of language used by the simultaneous bilingual heritage speakers (n = 32) between birth and 5 years of age
6.7Spanish heritage speakers’ patterns of language use ages 6–10 (elementary school years)
6.8Spanish heritage speakers’ patterns of language use ages 11–13 (middle school years)
6.9Spanish heritage speakers’ patterns of language use ages 14–17 (high school years)
7.2Self-rated bilingual proficiency and proficiency in Hindi
7.3Preferred language among the Hindi-English bilinguals in the United States
7.4Heritage speakers’ reasons for wanting to improve Hindi and what needs improvement by type of bilingual
7.5Patterns of language use by the Hindi heritage speakers (n = 32) between birth and 5 years of age
7.6Hindi heritage speakers’ patterns of language use ages 6–10
7.7Hindi heritage speakers’ patterns of language use ages 11–13
7.8Hindi heritage speakers’ patterns of language use ages 14–17
8.2Self-rated bilingual proficiency and proficiency in Romanian
8.3Preferred language by the Romanian–English bilinguals in the United States
8.4Heritage speakers’ reasons for wanting to improve Romanian and what needs improvement by type of bilingual
8.5Romanian heritage speakers’ patterns of language between birth and 5 years of age
8.6Romanian heritage speakers’ patterns of language use during elementary school (ages 6–10)
8.7Romanian heritage speakers’ patterns of language use during middle school (ages 11–13)
8.8Romanian heritage speakers’ patterns of language use during high school (ages 14–17)
9.1Characteristics of the heritage speakers and sources of language input from birth to age 5
9.2Number and percentage of individuals in each group whose mean acceptability ratings for ungrammatical unmarked DOM animate, specific direct objects were above the highest individual mean acceptability rating for speakers of the languages in the homeland
9.3Comparison of biographical variables among first generation immigrants
9.5Latin American groups’ self-rated and measured proficiency
9.6Summary of main findings and potential factors affecting DOM erosion
9.7Spanish, Hindi, and Romanian in the United States in the exoteric–esoteric continuum
