Annotated Bibliography of Publications in German

Direkt zum Inhalt Anmelden | English | Français

Multilingualism Research in German: Annotated Bibliography

This annotated bibliography is designed to provide non-German speaking scolars interested in tri- and multilingualism with an overview of the current state-of-the-art in German language research. Although the papers were published in German, the authors do not necessarily focus on the learning of German as a foreign language or even on German native speakers; the scope of the publications is much broader, as obvious by the varied categories into which this bibliography is divided.

compiled by Nicole Marx

The following list of publications in the German language pertaining to TLA and multilingualism is divided into five basic categories, which, due to their nature, overlap somewhat. The discussion includes:

  • I. Models and State-of-the-Art (Section I): A description of general papers, including those proposing models of multilingualism
  • II. Empirical studies (Section II): Research projects carried out to date on multilingualism and the learning of tertiary languages
  • III. Socio-Cultural Considerations (Section III): Deals with demographic considerations of tri- and multilingualism
  • IV. Educational Aspects of Multilingualism (Section IV): Practical considerations involving the teaching and learning of further foreign languages
  • V. Political Aspects of Language (Section V): Multilingualism in the broader political context

If you have additional titles to add to this list, please contact us!


This is a “catch-all” category to describe papers which discuss multilingualism in general, refer to research desiderata, or propose models reflecting on the acquisition of more than two languages. Especially in the past five years, various models of multilingualism have been forwarded; these range from models of the multilingual mental lexicon to more comprehensive proposals dealing with the interaction of multiple language systems in the mind of a single person. Because the categories are not clear-cut, further references to general themes and models are made in the section focusing on empirical studies.

GROSEVA, M. 1998b. ‘Dient das L2-System als ein Fremdsprachenlernmodel?’ [Does the L2 system serve as a foreign language acquisition model?] in B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiärsprachen. Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 21-30.

From a psycholinguistic perspective, this paper introduces and discusses the „foreign language acquisition model“ (FLAM), and then reports on a study of the learning of German as an L3 or L4 by Bulgarian schoolchildren. Transfer and interference effects from the L2 (English) are concentrated on.

HUFEISEN, B. 2000. ‘Deutsch als Tertiärsprache’ [German as a tertiary language.] in L. Götze et al. (eds.): Handbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache Bd. 1. Berlin: de Gruzter.

Here, the author discusses the uniqueness of learning a third or further foreign language, focusing on the learning of German as an L3.

HUFEISEN, B. 1998. ‘L3 – Stand der Forschung – Was bleibt zu tun?’ [L3 state-of-the-art: what remains to bedone?] in B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiärsprachen. Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 169-184.

Here, the current state of research is discussed, including an overview of the terminology used in the field, the research methods employed, and the need for further research into the learning of a third language.

JESSNER, U. 1998. ‘Bilingualismus und Drittspracherwerb: Dynamische Aspekte des Multilingualismus auf individueller Ebene’ [Bilingualism and third language acquisition. Dynamic aspects of multilingualism at the level of the individual speaker.] in B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiärsprachen. Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 149-158.

and P. HERDINA 1996. ‘Interaktionsphänomene in multilingualen Menschen: Erklärungsmöglichkeiten durch einen systemtheoretischen Ansatz’ [Interaction phenomena in multilinguals: Explanatory possibilities through a system-theoretical approach.] in A. Fill (ed.): Sprachökologie und Ökolinguistik. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 217-230

HERDINA, P. and U. JESSNER 1999. ‘Perspektiven der Spracherwerbsforschung’ in L. Ohnheiser, M. Kienpointer and H. Kalb (eds.): Sprache in Europa. Sprachsituation und Sprachpolitik in europäischen Ländern. Innsbruck. 477-489.

HERDINA, P. and U. JESSNER 1997. ‘Dynamisierung des Fremdsprachenerwerbs durch Mehrsprachigkeit’ [Dynamic foreign language learning through multilingualism.] In: Stegu, M. and R. de Cillia (eds.): Fremdsprachendidaktik und Übersetzungswissenschaft. Beiträge zum VERBAL – Workshop 1994. New York: Lang. 45-61.

These papers introduce the "Dynamic Model of Multilingualism“ (DMM), a psycholinguistic model which views language learning as a psychodynamic process involving various constants (such as cognitive capacity and language ability) in interaction with other factors, such as motivation. It is emphasised that the multilingual system is not merely a type of double or treble monolingualism and that language acquisition cannot be viewed as linear processes as suggested by traditional research. (See Section 2.1.)

LINDEMANN, B. 1998. ‘L2-L3 und ihre zwischensprachliche Interaktion. Probleme und Herausforderungen in bezug auf Untersuchungsdesigns’ [L2-L3 and their interlingual interaction. Challenges of research designs]in B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiärsprachen. Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 159-169.

This article discusses research methods currently being used in L3 research, and suggests methods which should be used in order to provide a more complete view of the L3 learning process.

MEIßNER, F. 1999. ‘Das mentale Lexikon aus der Sicht der Mehrsprachigkeitsdidaktik.’ [The mental lexicon through the perspective of multilingualism didactics.] Grenzgänge 6,12: 62-80.

1998. ‘Transfer beim Erwerb einer weiteren romanischen Fremdsprache: Das mehrsprachige mentale Lexikon’ [Transfer in the learning of a further Romance language: The multilingual mental lexicon] in F. Meißner and M. Reinfried (eds.): Mehrsprachigkeitsdidaktik. Konzepte, Analysen, Lehrererfahrungen mit romanischen Fremdsprachen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. 45-67.

Levelt’s formulator model for speaking is discussed with respect to multilinguals. Both papers deal with the multilingual mental lexicon and how interlingual connections are built between different languages. Suggestions for the prevention of negative transfer are made in the 1998 paper; the 1999 paper concentrates more on the theoretical side of the mental lexicon. Both papers are written from a psycholinguistic perspective.

WANDRUSZKA, M. 1994. ‘Wie sind unsere Menschensprachen beschaffen?’ [How are languages formed?] Moderne Sprachen 38,1: 1-17.

1991. „Wer fremde Sprachen nicht kennt…“. Das Bild des Menschen in Europas Sprachen. [„Whoever knows no foreign languages…”. The human picture in Europe’s languages.] München: Piper.

1987. ‘Die Muttersprache als Wegbegleiterin zur Mehrsprachigkeit’ [The mother tongue as a companion to multilingualism] in E. Oksaar (ed.): Soziokulturelle Perspektiven von Mehrsprachigkeit und Spracherwerb. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. 39-53.

1986. ‘Wege zur Mehrsprachigkeit in unseren Schulen’ [Ways to multilingualism in our schools] in H. Wittje and B. Narr (eds.): Spracherwerb und Mehrsprachigkeit. Festschrift für Els Oksaar zum 60. Geburtstag. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. 223-233.

1984. Das Leben der Sprachen. Vom menschlichen Sprachen und Gesprächen. [The life of languages. On human languages and conversation.] Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlagsanstalt.

1981. ‘Über das Lernen mehrerer Sprachen’ [On the learning of many languages.] in: W. Kühlwein and A. Raasch (eds.): Sprache: Lehren-Lernen. Bd. 1 der Kongreßberichte der 11. Jahrestagung der GAL in Darmstadt. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. 11-22.

1979. Die Mehrsprachigkeit des Menschen. [Human multilingualism.] München: Piper.

1969. Sprachen: Vergleichlich und unvergleichlich. [Languages. Comparable und incomparable.] München: Piper.

An especially prolific writer on the subject of multilingualism, Wandruszka’s works range from discussions of negative transfer between (foreign) languages to more socio-cultural and political considerations of multilingualism. He was one of the first German-Speaking (Austrian) researchers to deal extensively with these topics.



The papers in this section describe empirical studies focusing on the learning of a third – or later – language. Although a small number of researchers began turning to the question of the acquisition of subsequent foreign languages as early as the 1970s, the majority of work has been published since 1990. And while until quite recently most studies have involved the search for and explanation of interlingual interference phenomena in the L3 stemming from languages other than the L1, today many researchers are concentrating on more the positive effects of previous foreign language learning experience, and to considerations such as language awareness and the use of learning strategies in third language acquisition.

DENTLER, S. 2000. ‘Deutsch und Englisch – das gibt immer Krieg’ [German and English – they’re always at war] in S. Dentler, B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiär- und Drittsprachen. Projekte und empirische Untersuchungen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 77-97.

1998. ‘Zur Systematizität und Prognostizierbarkeit lexikalischer Inteferenzen’ [On the systematicism and prognosability of lexical interferences] in B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiärsprachen. Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 31-46.

These papers discuss a study on the influence of English as the L2 in the oral and written production of learners of German (with L1 Swedish): the results are discussed in more detail in the 2000 publication. The language levels at which the L2 is salient are discussed, and the author presents a cognitive explanation for transfers from the L2 into the L3. As well, the determining factors for language transfer are discussed.

ECKE, P. and C. HALL 2000. ‘Lexikalische Fehler in Deutsch als Drittsprache: Translexikalischer Einfluß auf drei Ebenen der mentalen Repräsentation.’ [Lexical errors in German as a third language: Translexical influence on three levels of mental representation.] Deutsch als Fremdsprache 37,1: 30-36.

The authors propose in their psycholinguistic paper that lexical errors made by Spanish learners of German (with advanced knowledge of English) are due to a “parasitical” strategy, such that new words are associated with and incorporated into already existing networks. The authors conclude that the L2 has a larger influence on production in the L3 than does the L1.

ERNST, G. 1975. ‘Zur Fehleranalyse in einer Spätfremdsprache’ [On error analysis in a late foreign language] in W. Hüllen, A. Raasch and F. Zapp (eds.): Lernzielbestimmung und Leistungsmessung im modernen Fremdsprachenunterricht. Frankfurt: Diesterweg. 84-104.

This article addresses the issue of learning a later foreign language (Italian) vs. the learning of an earlier foreign language. The author also discusses the occurrence of negative transfer, both from the L1 (German) and from the L2 (either English, French, or Latin). Interference is determined to occur generally from closely related languages at the word form level.

FRANCESCHINI, R. 1999. ‘Das Generieren von Italienisch bei Deutschsprachigen: Hinweise auf ein mehrsprachiges Netz beim Aktivieren von Zwei- und Dreisprachigen’ [The generation of Italian by German speakers: Indications for a multilingual network in bi- and multilinguals] in G. Kleiber et al. (eds.): Kognitive Linguistik und Neurowissenschaften. Tübingen: Narr. 91-105.

This study, one of the few discourse analysis studies in multilingualism research, involved Swiss-German adults who were unexpectedly addressed in Italian; they were thus forced to create a path to language interaction “online” to Italian (the L3), which had been learned at school. The L2 (French) was generally co-activated in the formulation of Italian by these speakers. The author concludes that second languages are closely connected with each other when they are learned in the same general biological time period.

GROSEVA, M. 1998a. ‘Deutsch als L3 bei bulgarischen Lernern. Wichtige Herangehensweisen und Strategien’[German as the L3 by Bulgarian learners. Important procedures and strategies] in B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiärsprachen. Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 133-144.

Groseva discusses a study on the learning of German by L2- and L3-learners (those with English as an L2) with L1 Bulgarian, and contrasts the errors made by these two learner groups. Specific strategies used by L3-learners are explained (i.e. code switching and overgeneralisation).

HACH, C. et al. 1978. ‘Fehleranalyse und Interimsprache.’ [Error analysis and interlanguage.] Jahrbuch DaF 4: 116-127.

This paper focuses on the methodology and problems of error analysis, and then describes an error analysis on the learning of an L3 (German) by children with Danish as the L1 and English as the L2. Intermediate students were found to make the most transfer errors from the L2.

HOMBITZER, E. 1971. ‘Das Nebeneinander von Englisch und Französisch als Problem des Fremdsprachenunterrichts’ [The co-occurrence of English and French as a problem in foreign language teaching] in H. Christ (ed.): Probleme der Korrektur und Bewertung schriftlicher Arbeiten im FSU. Berlin: Cornelsen-Velhagen und Klasing. 21-34.

This is one of the earliest papers to discuss the effects of the L2 and L3 on each other, and was one of a series of school studies. Although the author concentrates on interferences, the possibility of positive transfers is also mentioned. The author concludes that interlingual transfers should be encouraged in order to support the development of partial systems of the languages.

HUFEISEN, B. 1998a. ‘Individuelle und subjektive Lernerbeurteilungen von Mehrsprachigkeit. Kurzbericht einer Studie’ [Individual and subjective learner judgements of multilingualism] International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, May: 121-135.

In this project Canadian learners of German were questioned on their personal and subjective views about learning more than one foreign language. Both positive and negative opinions were mentioned by the students; on the whole, students judged multilingualism to be a great advantage.

HUFEISEN, B. 1993a. ‘DaF-Unterricht bei Lernenden mit Englisch als erster Fremdsprache.’ [Teaching German to learners with English as the first foreign language.’] Neusprachliche Mitteilungen aus Wissenschaft und Praxis 3: 167-174.

1993b.’ Fehleranalyse: Englisch als L2 und Deutsch als L3. [Error analysis: English as the L2 and German as the L3.] International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, August: 242-256.

1991. Englisch als erste und Deutsch als zweite Fremdsprache. Empirische Untersuchung zur fremdsprachlichen Interaktion. [English as the first and German as the second foreign language. An empirical study on foreign language interaction.] Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

The 1991 publication, a seminal study focusing on the learning of German as an L3 after English as the L2 by non-Indoeuropean foreign students in Germany, was the first systematic study on the learning of German as an L3 after English as an L2. The author was able to determine in which areas and to what extent the L2 resulted in errors in the written production of the L3. Some suggestions are made on how the use of English can improve the learning of German by these students.

JESSNER, U. 1998. ‘Metalinguistisches Denken beim Drittsprachgebrauch. Bilingualismus ist kein zweifacher Monolingualismus’ [Metalinguistic thinking in the L3. Bilingualism is not merely a double monolingualism] in A. James (ed.): Aktuelle Österreichische Beiträge zum Fremdspracherwerb. Wien: Praesens.

Jessner discusses, from a psycholinguistic perspective, a case study of a trilingual adult with L1s of Italian and German, and L3 English. Because connections between all three languages were shown during the think-aloud protocol, the author suggests that multilinguals depending on the task will generally create connections in the mental lexicon which include all languages that are spoken.

KJÄR, U. 2000. ‘Deutsch als L3. Zur Interimsprache schwedischer Deutschlerner (unter Berücksichtigung des Einflusses des Englischen als L2)’ [German as the L3. On the interlanguage of Swedish learners of German (under consideration of the influence of English as the L2)] in S. Dentler, B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiär- und Drittsprachen. Projekte und empirische Untersuchungen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 41-56.

Kjär reports on an error analysis of written production in German (the L3) by learners with Swedish as an L1 and English as an L2. Negative transfers between the L1-L3 and the L2-L3 are described.

KNIFFKA, G. 1999. ‘„Katze essen Fisch“, „Fisch essen Katze“. Einige Anmerkungen zur Grammatikvermittlung im L3-Unterricht.’ [“Cat eat fish,” “fish eat cat.” Some comments on grammar teaching in the L3-classroom.] Fremdsprache Deutsch 20: 31-35.

This study examined the learning of German by Malaysian native speakers with English as an L2, who were attending a language course in Germany. The English abilities of the students helped them to progress more quickly in the learning of German, and a contrastive methodology (whereby both the L1 and the L2 were included in class) proved to be helpful.

LINDEMANN, B. 2000a. ‘„Da fällt mir immer zuerst ein englisches Wort ein.“ Zum Einfluß der ersten Fremdsprache beim Übersetzen ins Deutsche’ [“I always think of an English word first.” On the influence of the first foreign language during translation into German] in S. Dentler, B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiär- und Drittsprachen. Projekte und empirische Untersuchungen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 57-65.

Studied translation errors from Norwegian (L1) into German (L3) by students who had previously learned English as an L2. Influence from English was found especially amongst beginning students. The author recommends a greater use of English in translation classes than has previously been the case.

LINDEMANN, B. 2000b. ‘Zum Einfluß der L1 und L2 bei der Rezeption von L3-Texten.’ [On the influence of the L1and L2 during the reception of L3-texts.] Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht [Online] 5:1.

Lindemann discusses a study on the reception of texts in the L3 (German) by learners with L1 Norwegian and L2 English. Learners make use of both the L1 and the L2 during comprehension, and the first two languages seem to be equally important to learners when translating L3 texts. This may be due to the fact that all three languages belong to the same language family.

LÜBKE, D. 1977. ‘Dokumentation der Fehlergenese in französischen Klassenarbeiten.’ [Documentation of the error sources in French class tests.] Die neueren Sprachen 76: 93-102.

Lübke reports on an error analysis of the production of French by German schoolchildren who had already learned English. The author discusses only negative transfer, which was typical for the time, but does point out that errors can stem from both the first and the second language.

LUTJEHARMS, M. 1999. ‘Tertiärsprache und Sprachbewusstheit.’ [Tertiary language and language awareness.] Fremdsprache Deutsch 20: 7-11.

Lutjeharms discusses the role of language awareness in the learning of a tertiary language. Subjects were from the Netherlands and had French as an L2, English as an L3, and German as an L4, and were questioned on the roles of their various languages when learning German. Most students reported consciously using their other languages when learning a new one.

MARX, N. 2000. ‘Denglisch bei nicht-indoeuropäischen Muttersprachlern?’ [Denglisch amongst non-Indoeuropean mother speakers?] Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht [Online] 5,1.

Marx reports on an error analysis of the written production in German (the L3) by university students in Germany with non-Indoeuropean first languages and English as an L2. Negative transfers in the L3 from the L1 and the L2 were compared as to frequency and the area of occurrence.

MEIßNER, F. and BURK, H. 2001. ‘Hörverstehen in einer unbekannten romanischen Fremdsprache und methodische Implikationen für den Tertiärsprachenerwerb.’ [Listening comprehension in an unknown Romance language and methodological implications for tertiary language learning.] Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenforschung 12,1: 63-102.

Meißner and Burk describe a study on listening comprehension abilities (in an unknown foreign language, Spanish) of German students with English as an L2 and knowledge of at least one other Romance language. The subjects were able to develop a “spontaneous grammar” for Spanish using their knowledge of other languages, and were successful in understanding the listening text.

MICHIELS, B. 1998. ‘Die Rolle der Niederländischkenntnisse bei französischsprachigen Lernern von Deutsch als L3. Eine empirische Untersuchung.’ [The role of Dutch amongst French-speaking students of German as an L3. An empirical study.] Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht (Online) 3,3.

Michiels discusses the results of a large error analysis on the interaction of an L2 (Dutch) on the learning of an L3 (German) by French native speakers. The percentage of L2-L3 interactions was deemed quite large, whereby intermediate learners showed the smallest number of negative transfers from the L2.

MIßLER, B. 1999. Fremdsprachenforschung und Lernstrategien. Eine empirische Untersuchung. [Foreign language research and learning strategies. An empirical study.] Tübingen: Stauffenburg.

This psycholinguistic study questioned how previously acquired knowledge of and experience with other foreign languages affects the use of FL learning strategies, and specifically which differences exist between mono- and multilinguals in learning further foreign languages. The author found that the frequency of use of learning strategies as well as the type of strategies used varied according to the specific language learning experiences of the individual.

MÜLLER-LANCÉ, J. forthcoming. Zugänge zum Wortschatz romanischer Sprachen. [Admission to the vocabulary of Romance languages.] Tübingen: Stauffenburg.

This volume describes a large-scale psycholinguistic study on the connections between languages in the mental lexicon of foreign language learners (Romance language students). Triangulation of research methods (including a multilingual word association test, translation tests and a listening comprehension test) was used.

MÜLLER-LANCÉ, J. 1999. ‘Zur Nutzung vorhandener Fremdsprachenkompetenzen als Transferbasis für romanische Mehrsprachigkeit – ein empirischer Versuch und seine psycholinguistische Relevanz.’ [On the use of foreign language competencies as a transfer base for Romance language multilingualism – an empirical study and its psycholinguistic relevance.] Grenzgänge 12,6: 81-95.

This study questioned the ability of German university students to determine the meaning of unknown (Romance-language) foreign vocabulary. The results showed that the students, who were studying Romance languages, generally made use of their best-known foreign language, but only if this was English or another Romance language.

STEDJE, A. 1976. ‘Interferenz von Muttersprache und Zweitsprache auf eine dritte Sprache beim freien Sprachen – ein Vergleich.’ [Interference of the L1 and L2 on a third language during free speaking – a comparison.] Zielsprache Deutsch 1: 15-21.

One of the first error analyses of speaking in a third language, this paper studied how L3 German was influenced by L1 (Finnish) and L2 (Swedish). The author found that Finnish students produced many forms in German that were influenced by the L2, especially in vocabulary; the grammar was found to be less affected by the L2 than by the first language.

VOGEL, T. 1992. ‘„Englisch und Deutsch gibt es immer Krieg“.’ [“English and German are always at war.”] Zielsprache Deutsch 23,2: 95-99.

This paper represents one of the few longitudinal studies on the learning of an L3. The subject was a Chinese native speaker who had already learned English and was learning German in Germany. The author discusses the language areas which seem to be most susceptible to transfer from the L2, and suggests that part of the L2 and L3 mental lexicons overlap.

de VRIENDT, S. 1972. ‘Interferenzen einer ersten Fremdsprache beim Erlernen einer zweiten’ [Interferences from a first foreign language while learning a second] in G. Nickel (ed.): Papers from the International Symposium on Applied Contrastive Linguistics. Stuttgart, 11-13.10. 1971. Bielefeld: Cornelsen. 43-50.

The author studied interlingual interference in an L3 (German) amongst French native speakers with Dutch as an L2. More negative transfer was found in production than in perception, and in oral as opposed to written production. The author suggests that a close relationship between two languages allows for a quicker understanding of the new language, but also results in more interference.

WELGE, P. 1987. ‘Deutsch nach Englisch. Deutsch als dritte Sprache’ [German after English. German as the third language] in S. Ehlers et al. (eds.): Regionale Aspekte des Grundstudiums Germanistik. München: Iudicium. 189-225.

The author focuses on the learning of German as the third language in China, where students almost always learn English first. Specific areas of negative transfer from the L2 are mentioned, and regional textbooks and teaching materials for this language constellation are discussed.



While the majority of papers and volumes dealing with trilingualism focus on empirical research or pedagogical considerations, some authors turn to the effects of societal conditions, and how these affect the learning and mediation of foreign and second languages. This area is in fact somewhat underrepresented in the published research; however, the themes that are addressed are also often considered in papers focusing on pedagogical aspects of third language learning.

BAUER, H. (Ed.) 1989. Deutsch als zweite Fremdsprache in der gegenwärtigen japanischen Gesellschaft. [German as the second foreign language in present-day Japan.] München: Iudicium.

A descriptive study on the learning and teaching of German in Japan.

BURKE, H. et al. 2001. ‘Was Studierende über ihre Schulsprachen denken: Ein Beispiel quantitativer Lernerforschung’ [What university students think about their school languages: an example of a quantitative learner study] in D. Abendroth-Timmer and G. Bach (eds.): Mehrsprachiges Europa. Festschrift für Michael Wendt zum 60. Geburtstag. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. 111-129.

This study discusses the results of a questionnaire on foreign language learning amongst German students. Learning sequence and preference for the various foreign languages are discussed.

FEIGENBAUM, S. 1999. ‘Fremdsprachenunterricht in Israel.’ [Foreign language teaching in Israel.] Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenforschung 10,1: 29-52.

This paper offers a sociolinguistic view of the various languages in Israel and their instruction in the school and university system. Some problems which arise due to this unique language situation are discussed.

HAGLUND-DRAGIC, M. 2000. ‘L3-Deutsch im schwedischen Bili-Projekt’ [L3-German in the Swedish Bili-project] in S. Dentler, B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiär- und Drittsprachen. Projekte und empirische Untersuchungen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 67-76.

The author describes an on-going bilingual school project in Sweden, involving German as the language of instruction in three subjects.

SHRISHAIL, S. 1996. ‘Individuelle Mehrsprachigkeit und Fremdsprachenerwerb: Plädoyer für eine kontextspezifische Faktorenforschung anhand des E-4 Modells.’ [Individual multilingualism and foreign language acquisition: a plea for a context-specific research of factors using the E-4 model.] Forum Deutsch 1: 27-32.

The author discusses German as a foreign language in India, concentrating on the sociocultural background of its learners. The E-4 model is introduced, according to which four factors are of prime importance in learning a foreign language: environment of learning, efficiency of the learner, exposure to TL, and the engagement and effort of the learner.



The second major area of interest in publications on third language learning involves pedagogical and methodological considerations: how can foreign languages best be taught to specific learner groups, and how can language learners be trained to use productive learning strategies? The papers in this section focus on these questions, offering practical suggestions for the structuring of the third language classroom and for the coordinated planning of foreign languages in the school system.

AGAFONOVA, L. 1997. ‘Zur Frage des Lehrens und Lernens vom Deutschen als zweiter Fremdsprache nach dem Englischen in den neuen Schultypen in Rußland (Oberstufe).’ [On the question of teaching and learning German as a second foreign language after English in the new school system in Russia (high school).] Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht [Online] 2,3.

This study investigated the learning of German (L3) by Russian speakers with English as an L2. The author offers numerous suggestions on how the L2 can be of use in German class, while also warning of various difficulties that may be encountered.

ARNTZ, R. 1999. ‘Modulare Vermittlung von Fachsprachen – ein Weg zur romanischen Mehrsprachigkeit’ [Modular mediation of technical vocabulary – a path to Romance multilingualism] Grenzgänge 6,12: 30-43.

This article discusses how modular-based technical language courses can make use of knowledge of other foreign languages to improve understanding in the new one. The Hildesheim model is illustrated, in which three modules are focused on: receptive competencies, active competences and translation abilities.

BAUSCH, K. and HEID, M. (eds.) 1990. Das Lehren und Lernen von Deutsch als zweiter oder weiterer Fremdsprache: Spezifika, Probleme, Perspektiven. [The teaching and learning of German as a second or further foreign language: specifics, problems and perspectives.] Bochum: Brockemeyer.

This is an edited volume containing papers dealing with aspects of teaching German as a second or later foreign language in European schools. While results of various empirical studies are reported on, and societal aspects involved in learning German as a foreign language are discussed by some authors, the main focus is on the tendencies and problems of schoolchildren learning German after English (or, in the case of England and Ireland, after French).

BERGER, M. 1999. ‘Übungsvorschläge für „Deutsch nach Englisch“.’ [Exercise suggestions for „German after English.”] Fremdsprache Deutsch 20: 22-25.

This article provides six concrete exercises geared towards Italian schoolchildren who have already learned English and are beginning German. The exercises at this stage focus on lexical knowledge and pass over orthography and pronunciation.

DIKOVA, V., MAVRODIEVA, L. and STANKULOWA, K. 2001. ‘Curriculum für Deutsch als zweite Fremdspache in der bulgarischen allgemeinbildenden Oberschule.’ [Curriculum for German as a second foreign language in Bulgarian high schools.] Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht (Online) 5,3.

The authors offer specific learning goals for German as an L3, and provide detailed teaching plans for the L3 classroom. Suggestions for the further development of this area are also given.

FEIGENBAUM, S. 2000. ‘Präfigierte Verbformen in der Wortschatzarbeit und in Leseübungen’ [Prefixed verb forms in vocabulary work and reading exercises] in S. Dentler, B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiär- und Drittsprachen. Projekte und empirische Untersuchungen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 143-153.

Feigenbaum discusses the learning of verbs with inseparable prefixes amongst students of German as an L3. These students appear to have more difficulties with such verbs, and the author suggests exercises which may help students with this problem.

GÜLER, G. 2000. ‘Deutsch als zweite Fremdsprache im schulischen Fremdsprachenunterricht in der Türkei: Perspektiven für die Didaktik und Methodik des Deutschen als zweite Fremdsprache in der Deutschlehrerausbildung.’ [German as the second foreign language in the Turkish school classroom.] Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht [Online] 5,2. .

This article provides some suggestions for the improvement of German-as-an-L3 teaching in Turkey, where English is almost always learned as the first foreign language. The use of authentic texts in the classroom as well as university seminars are recommended to prepare German teachers for this situation.

HUFEISEN, B. 1994. Englisch im Unterricht Deutsch als Fremdsprache. [English in German class.] München: Klett Edition Deutsch (Kleine Reihe DaF).

Hufeisen discusses general pedagogical and methodical considerations for German-as-an-L3 (or later foreign language), and reviews teaching materials which incorporate students’ English skills in the learning of German. This publication also contains extensive vocabulary lists to help the German teacher categorize and illustrate similarities in the two languages to the students.

JANOVSKY, U. 2000. ‘Französisch im DaF-Unterricht’ [French in German language class] in S. Dentler, B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiär- und Drittsprachen. Projekte und empirische Untersuchungen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg. 169-189.

The author explains how learning German can be made easier for students with French as an L2 (i.e. students from African countries). Syntax, synonyms and finally false friends are discussed.

KALLENBACH, C. 1998. ‘„Da weiß ich schon, was auf mich zukommt.“ L3-Spezifika aus Schülersicht’ [“I already know what’s going to happen”. L3-specifics from the student’s viewpoint] in B. Hufeisen and B. Lindemann (eds.): Tertiärsprachen. Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg,. 47-57.

This paper represents an interview study with German schoolchildren who had already learned English and French, and who were at the time learning Spanish. Student answers showed that the learning of a further foreign language was accomplished in connection with previous knowledge acquired in earlier foreign language learning.

KLEIN, H. 1999. ‘Interkomprehension in romanischen Sprachen.’ [Intercomprehension in Romance languages.] Grenzgänge 6,12: 17-29.

Klein claims in this papers that the desiderata of “intercomprehension“ has three perspectives: a goal of receptive multilingualism, the acquisition of partial competencies, and the use of similarities between languages. Here, the model of intercomprehension is discussed with regard to Romance languages.

KUHS, K. and W. STEINIG (eds.) 1998. Pfade durch Babylon. Konzepte und Beispiele für den Umgang mit sprachlicher Vielfalt in Schule und Gesellschaft. [Pathways through Babylon. Concepts and examples for dealing with language variety in school and society.] Freiburg: Fillibach.

This edited book is a collection of articles on the teaching of foreign languages in the school context. The papers range from a discussion of the educational political aspects of teaching languages to pedagogical-methodical considerations, and focus on the bilingual classroom in Germany.

MEIßNER, F. 2000. ‘Zwischensprachliche Netzwerke. Mehrsprachigkeitsdidaktische Überlegungen zur Wortschatzarbeit.’ [Interlingual networks. Multilingual didactical considerations on vocabulary exercises.] Französisch heute 1: 55-67.

The author considers the usefulness of various transfer bases from other languages for foreign language teaching, and offers some examples of how interlingual networks can be formed in the mind of the student.

MÜLLER, A. 1993. ‘Sprachenfolge Englisch – Französisch: Chancen und Risiken des Transfers.’ [Language sequence English – French: opportunities and risks for transfer.] Praxis des neusprachlichen Unterrichts 40,2: 117-122.

Both positive and negative consequences of having already learned English for teaching French to German schoolchildren are discussed in this article, and the author provides some suggestions of how the teaching of French in this situation can be improved.

MÜLLER, A. 1999. ‘Vergleichsweise einfach.’ [Comparitively easy.] Praxis des neusprachlichen Unterrichts 46,3: 273-281.

German students are constantly required to switch between three languages (German, English and French) during the school day, and this can create difficulties. The author recommends comparative grammar teaching in order to provide a basis for language awareness.

NEUNER, G. 1999. ‘„Deutsch nach Englisch“. Übungen und Aufgaben für den Anfangsunterricht.’ [“German after English.” Exercises and assignments for beginners.] Fremdsprache Deutsch 20: 15-21.

1996. ‘Deutsch als zweite Fremdsprache nach Englisch. Überlegungen zur Didaktik und Methodik und zur Lehrmaterialentwicklung für die „Drittsprache Deutsch“.’ [German as a foreign language after English. Didactical and methodical considerations for the development of teaching materials for the “third language German”.] Deutsch als Fremdsprache 4: 211-217.

The author discusses the traits of German-as-an-L3 and the various aspects of a pedagogical plan for teaching German after English. Examples for the classroom are provided.

REINFRIED, M. 1999. ‘Innerromanischer Sprachtransfer.’ [Inter-Romance language transfer.] Grenzgänge 6:12: 96-125.

1998. ‘Transfer beim Erwerb einer weiteren romanischen Fremdsprache’ [Transfer during the acquisition of a further Romance language] in F. Meißner and M. Reinfried (eds.), Mehrsprachigkeitsdidaktik. Konzepte, Analysen, Lehrererfahrungen mit romanischen Fremdsprachen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 23-43.

The author recommends intensive practice of interlingual transfer strategies when students are learning more than one foreign language, and offers some suggestions for a course which aims at multilinguals and receptive competencies. In the second article, both negative and positive transfer is discussed, and “parallel processing” is promoted.

RIEGER, C. 1999. ‘Lernstrategien im Unterricht „Deutsch als zweite Fremdsprache“.’ [Learning strategies in “German as a second foreign language”.] Fremdsprache Deutsch 20: 12-14.

Rieger discusses the conscious use of learning strategies in tertiary language teaching and offers suggestions on how and where such strategies can be operationalized.

SCHILD, W. 1993. ‘Englisch als zweite Fremdsprache.’ [English as the second foreign language.] Praxis des neusprachlichen Unterrichts 4: 349-353.

The situation of English as the second foreign language amongst German schoolchildren with Latin or French as an L2 is discussed in this paper, and some pedagogical suggestions are provided.

ZAPP, F. 1979. ‘Verzahnung von Zweit- und Drittspracherwerb’ [Co-ordinating second and third language acquisition] in G. Walter and K. Schröder (eds.): Englisch. München: Oldenburg. 9-14.

1983. ‘Sprachbetrachtung im lexikalisch-semantischen Bereich: Eine Hilfe im Zweit- und Drittspracherwerb.’ [Language considerations in lexico-semantics: a help in second- and third language acquisition.] Der fremdsprachliche Unterricht 17: 193-199.

These papers represent an early plea for a foreign language teaching method which allows students to develop the ability to rationally – or even in self-study – learn a further foreign language. The author discusses the help that emphasising similar language rules, international vocabulary, and the connection with previously learned material gives to the learner.

ZYBATOW, L. 1999. ‘Die sieben Siebe des EuroComRom für den multilingualen Einstieg in die Welt der slavischen Sprachen.’ [The seven sieves of EuroComRom for the multilingual entry in the world of Slavic languages.] Grenzgänge 6,12: 44-61.

The model of intercomprehension with a focus on the Slavic languages is discussed. Examples are provided based on the “sieves” of the EuroCom project (international vocabulary, panslavic vocabulary, etc.), and the author discusses how these sieves can be used to promote passive multilingualism in Slavic languages.



The final group of papers deals with language-political aspects, an increasingly important area in light of the changing political situation in Europe. In many countries, English is seen as a somewhat ominous entity threatening to replace the traditional teaching of other languages in European schools due to its value as a “lingua franca.” In this context, some authors plead for a further extension of the teaching of foreign languages in order to help prevent the decay of other, less commonly used languages (cf. in this context the edited volume Pfade durch Babylon as well).

ABENDROTH-TIMMER, D. and G. BACH (Eds.) 2001. Mehrsprachiges Europa. [Multilingual Europe). Tübingen: Günter Narr.

This edited volume discusses the current situation of foreign language teaching in European schools and calls special attention to the difficulties with which educators and curriculum planners are confronted when determining foreign language programmes. Special consideration is given to the status of English as the new lingua franca and the fear that it will replace other foreign languages in the school curriculum.

KÖNIGS, F. 2000. ‘Mehrsprachigkeit statt Sprachenlosigkeit! Überlegungen zur Bedeutung von Mehrsprachigkeitskonzepten für Deutsch als Fremdsprache.’ [Multilingualism instead of speechlessness! Thoughts on the importance of multilingualism concepts for German as a foreign language.] Lateinamerikanischer Germanistenkongress, Caracas 2000.

2000. ‘Dann auch konsequent! Curriculare, methodische und fremdsprachenpolitische Implikationen der Mehrsprachigkeit’ Akzent Deutsch (Sonderheft): 43-48.

Königs discusses the meaning of multilingualism for Europe and Latin America, and considers the problem of heterogenous learner groups in the language classroom in particular. Six theses are proposed for foreign language teaching, such as the inclusion of metacognitive learning phases, the use of previously acquired knowledge in learning, and the promotion of self-study outside of the classroom. In the second article, ten theses of multilingualism and its promotion in present-day Europe are offered.

KÖNIGS, F. and D. WOLFF 2000. ‘Perspektiven für Deutsch als Fremdsprache nach der Jahrtausendwende. Podiumdiskussion.’ [Perspectives for German as a foreign language after the millennium change. Podium discussion.] Akzent Deutsch (Sonderheft): 30-41.

This podium discussion centred on the political reasons for the decay of German as a foreign language in Eastern Europe, as well as the dangers that the current emphasis on English may present. Finally, a new definition of multilingualism is offered, which takes into consideration the presence of English amongst foreign language learners.

KREMNITZ, G. 1999. ‘Mehrsprachigkeit in der EU: Träume und Realitäten.’ [Multilingualism in the EU: dreams and realities.] Grenzgänge 6,12: 6-16.

This paper discusses the future of multilingualism in Europe, especially with respect to the increased importance of English as a lingua franca. The resulting political problems are detailed.

KRUMM, H. 1999. ‘Sprachenvielfalt im Deutschunterricht. Grundsätze und Beispiele.’ [Language diversity in German class. Basics and examples.] Fremdsprache Deutsch 20: 26-30.

1995. ‘Das Erlernen einer zweiten oder dritten Fremdsprache im Rahmen von Mehrsprachigkeitskonzepten’ [Learning a second or third foreign language within the constraints of multilingualism concepts] in R. Wodak and R. de Cillia (eds.): Sprachenpolitik in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Wien: Passagen. 195-208.

The author recommends a “curricular multilingualism”, that is, a carefully thought-out plan of the language sequence for schoolchildren. In this view, languages do not need to be artificially separated, neither in the student’s head nor in the classroom. The basic assumptions of this approach are discussed (e.g., words from other languages can be helpful, etc.). In the 1995 article, the differences between monolingualism, bilingualism and trilingualism are also discussed.

MEIßNER, F. 2000. ‘Aufgabenfelder der Didaktik der romanischen Sprachen – zwischen Französischunterricht und sprachenteiliger Gesellschaft.’ [Practice areas in the didactic of Romance languages – between French class and language society.] FLuL 29: 37-53.

Meißner stresses the need to contribute to the construction of a society with a highly-developed individual polyglottism, and offers suggestions on where further research is needed.

MEIßNER, F. and M. REINFRIED 1998. ‘Mehrsprachigkeit als Aufgabe des Unterrichts romanischer Sprachen’[Multilingualism as the task of Romance language instruction] in F. Meißner and M. Reinfried (eds.): Mehrsprachigkeitsdidaktik. Konzepte, Analysen, Lehrererfahrungen mit romanischen Fremdsprachen. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. 9-22.

The authors offer a theoretical overview of multilingualism, especially with respect to receptive competencies, and its promotion in the school system. The authors recommend that students in the European Schools first learn their mother tongue, then a language from another language family, and then English as the L3.

STOYE, S. 2000. Eurocomprehension: Der romanistische Beitrag für eine europäische Mehrsprachigkeit. [Eurocomprehension: The Romance language contribution to a European multilingualism.] Aachen: Shaker.

This volume discusses the fundamentals of the EuroComRom model, focusing on how (Romance) languages can be learned in conjunction with one another.