The topic of competence in more than one
language is large and complex; because it is both an individual and a societal
phenomenon it has an extensive literature within sociolinguistics and the
sociology of language.
The issue of language in education at the turn of
the millennium remains heavily contested. Argument which is directed against
bilingual education is not new. An examination of education shows the strange way
in which history repeats itself. More than sixty years ago Malherbe complained
about the way in which the detractors of bilingual education then made claims
about the educational advantages of what were known as unilingual schools
despite comprehensive evidence which demonstrated the linguistic, academic and
social advantages of bilingual schools. Malherbe’s observations then are
equally applicable today:
“Unfortunately, most of these
claims are made on a priori grounds and are not backed by objective data
or scientific proof. In fact, the vehemence with which they are propounded is
generally in inverse proportion to the amount of scientifically reliable data
which can be adduced in support of these views. Assertion alone does not
necessarily verify a statement (Malherbe 1943: 38).”
The failure of language and educational policy where
the two are not closely inter-related in multilingual settings is legendary.
International research and experience shows conclusively that no language
policy will ever succeed unless an accompanying plan is implemented; neither
will it succeed if there is an accompanying plan which is at variance with the
goals. Furthermore, a language in education policy will not succeed unless it
is integrated with and in synchrony with the national education policy and plan
(or a new curriculum). Chumbow asserts, further, that the place of language
planning is within the ‘National Development Plan’ (Chumbow, 1987:22).
Approaching bilingualism and multilingualism from a
communication perspective sheds light on a phenomenon which otherwise would
appear static and asocial. Merriam-Webster’s online thesaurus defines bilingualism
as ‘the ability to speak two languages: the frequent oral use of two
languages’ and multilingual as ‘of, containing, or expressed in several
languages’ and ‘using or able to use several languages’. The apparent simplicity
of these definitions is, however, deceiving for a number of reasons. First,
they fail to make the distinction between bilingualism as a collective
characteristic defining nations and bilingualism as a person’s competence in
one or more languages. As we will see below, that distinction is crucial to our
understanding of bilingualism as the product of the interplay between
individuals and their context.
Second, defining bilingualism at a national level entails,
in itself, a number of difficulties. Since there are approximately 5000
languages distributed in 200 countries, most would be characterized by a state
of relative bilingualism.
The third set of definitional problems is related to
individual bilingualism or bilinguality (Hamers and Blanc 2000). A
bilingual person could be the one that can speak two languages perfectly.
Others would, however suggest that even a minimal knowledge of both languages
is enough to qualify as a bilingual.
The following elaborates on each of the questions
raised by these definitional problems. To be sure though, when speaking of bi-
or multilingualism, we not only speak of languages in contact, but also of the
people from varied cultural origins using these languages. Bilingualism is,
therefore, an intercultural communication (IC) phenomenon (Acculturation
Processes and Communication). While bilingualism and multilingualism have not
been themes exploited in the literature on IC (Gudykunst & Mody, 2002).
Researchers of language acquisition have tended to
focus their efforts on questions like how the process of language learning
differs for bilinguals and monolinguals. The debate over bilingualism has been
framed too often in terms of its potentially damaging effect upon children’s
educational outcomes.
In
trying to understand the bilingualism and multilingualism, I will focus on: What is the bilingualism and multilingualism?, what is
the circumstance that led to his/her bilingualism and multilingualism?, and what is
the potential and effects of bilingualism and multilingualism in education?
2.
BILINGUALISM
A bilingual individual, generally, is
someone who speaks two languages. An ideal or balanced bilingual speaks each
language as proficiently as an educated native speaker. This is often referred
to as an ideal type since few people are regarded as being able to reach this
standard. Otherwise, a bilingual may be anywhere on a continuum of skills.
a.
The
Definition of Bilingualism
For all students, it is important to
see that researchers use a wide variety of definitions of individual
bilingualism. There are very strict and very demanding psycholinguistic
definitions, such as Bloomfield's (1933) claim that a bilingual should
possess "native-like control of two or more languages". Others, such
as Weinreich (1953) and Grosjean (1997) propose definitions that are based
on language use rather than language competence. Before showing students the
range of definitions of bilingualism, it can be very helpful to formulate their
own definition in writing. We can subsequently collect these definitions and
discuss them. This often leads us to formulate very original views on the issue
and it generates an interest in the definitions given by the experts in the
field, which are to be presented and discussed subsequently.
b. Bilinguality
Acquiring
and using a language other than the first language learned is a matter of fact
in most areas of the world. A distinction is usually made between simultaneous
and successive bilingualism. In the first case, both languages are acquired
simultaneously whereas in the second case, the second language is acquired
later in life. The first description of simultaneous bilingualism is attributed
to Ronjat (1913) who observed the linguistic development (in French and German)
of his son Louis from birth to age 4. Ronjat concluded positively about the
development of his son. Since then, numerous studies have been made of
simultaneous bilingualism and generally confirm what the early studies found:
children developing both languages simultaneously from an early age are able to
differentiate their languages at an early stage and are not at any disadvantage
in terms of language acquisition compared to their monolingual peers. It is
important to note, however, that achieving such a state of ‘balanced
bilingualism’ is subject to the existence of contextual factors favoring the
equal status of the languages, their equal valuing by the parents, the
availability of a language community for each languages as well as individual
factors such as positive attitudes toward bilingualism and the languages.
These
factors are also present, under other labels in numerous IC theories. The importance
of a network representing each language is expressed in Kim’s (1986) representation
of the relation between second language (L2) competence and individual communication
networks. Specifically, she relates network heterogeneity and the relative importance
of outgroup members in the network to the achievement of outgroup communicative
competence (Communication Networks).
The
factors affecting successive bilingualism (the acquisition of L2 after L1 has been
established) are by and large identical to those affecting simultaneous
bilingualism. Research results underline the importance of such factors as
linguistic aptitude, learning strategies and personality factors such as
introversion. These aspects find little correspondence in the IC literature.
Pioneering work on the question of motivation does, however, cross many of the
IC paths. Gardner and Lambert (1972) originally proposed that motivation is,
with linguistic aptitude, the factor determining L2 competence. They further
showed that L2 motivation was closely linked to attitude toward the L2 community
and an interest in becoming similar to valued members of that group, a tendency
which they labeled ‘integrativeness’. Originally aimed at describing the Canadian
situation, over three decades of research have shown that L2 motivation, as affectively
based in intergroup attitudes, is a determining factor in L2 competence in numerous
settings across the world. And this connects with aspects of the IC theories described
above. Since the original research, many alternative motivational models have been
created (Clément & Gardner 2001). In all cases, however, the affective
basis of the motivation is linked to contextual factors (Language Attitudes in
Intergroup Contexts).
Besides intergroup
attitudes, the more recent literature has supported the importance of L2
confidence as a determinant of L2 behavior and competence. L2 confidence
corresponds to the belief in being able to react adaptively to situations involving
the use of a second language. It is related to positive self-ratings of
competence and a lack of anxiety when using the second language (Clément 1980).
It originates from situations where contact with the L2 community is both
frequent and pleasant. Thus, while positive attitudes may orient the individual
towards the L2 community, intercultural contact generates the confidence
required for L2 interaction and, in so doing, promotes L2 competence as well as
other aspects as well as others consequences of L2 acquisition to be discussed
below (MacIntyre et al. 1998).
c.
Societal Bilingualism
Many
descriptions of bilinguality may convey the impression that the phenomenon is individually
based or at, best, relevant to dyadic interactions. The above reference to the attitudinal
context of bilingual development and L2 acquisition, however, situates it at
the intersection of individual and societal processes. This question has,
therefore, come to be a key issue for government authorities in a number of
countries. Language planning has been the political and administrative
instrument used to promote and protect languages according to predetermined
societal options. Accordingly, the State may determine the goals of language
education, the medium of interaction with government agencies, tribunals and
schools, and the relative visibility of different languages in public and commercial
signs – the linguistic landscape. These actions are often premised on the idea that
a minority situation will not only entail the loss of L1 but may also result in
the disappearance of entire cultural groups.
Under
the concepts of additive and subtractive bilingualism, Lambert (1978) proposed
that language learning outcomes could be very different for members of majority
and minority groups. Notably, subtractive bilingualism would refer to a
situation where members of a minority group would come to loose their first
language as a result of learning the second one. Additive bilingualism, on the
other hand, refers to situations where members of a majority group acquire L2
without losing L1. This notion of relative group status was subsequently
formalized by Giles et al. (1977) under the concept of ethnolinguistic vitality
(Ethnolinguistic Vitality and Communication) which encompasses demographic
representation of the communities, their institutional representation and the
socio-economic status of their members. Ethnolinguistic vitality is linked to a
family of language phenomena and the results obtained to date show a consistent
relation between these structural factors and first language retention and competence
among minority group members.
d.
Social and
Cognitive Consequences
A
relevant issue here is the idea that positive benefits from L2 acquisition and
usage will only be achieved to the extent that the first language and culture
are well established within the individual (Clément 1980; Hamers & Blanc, 2000).
This presupposes a familial, educational, and social context which allows the
development and transmission of the first language and culture. Although such
conditions may be present for majority group members, they may not characterize
the situation of minority group members, immigrants, refugees, and sojourners.
The relative status of the first and second language speaking groups and the
linguistic composition of the community are here key determinants of the
linguistic and cultural outcomes of second language acquisition.
Specifically,
as suggested by identity-based IC theories (Gudykunst & Mody, 2002), there
is an intimate link between communicative processes and individual identity. To
the extent that the context brings about a loss of the first language, it will
also bring about a loss of the first cultural identity. Noels and Clément
(1996) have in fact shown this to be the case among minority group members but
not among majority group members. The systemic relationships between societal
conditions, and language loss, therefore, risk bringing about results that are
opposite to the intended goal of bilingualism programs.
A
similar argument may be proposed as concerns cognitive consequences of bilingualism.
It was originally thought that bilingualism would produce negative consequences
for cognitive functioning. The study by Peal and Lambert (1962), however, showed
that the bilinguals scored higher than monolinguals on verbal and non-verbal intelligence
tests and showed a more diversified intelligence structure. According to these authors,
bilinguals have the ability to manipulate two symbolic systems and thus analyze
semantic features in greater detail. Subsequent studies have resulted in the
conclusion that bilinguals have greater metalinguistic awareness and cognitive
flexibility, that is, they are better able to distinguish the symbol from its
specific meaning which gives them an advantage in most school-type cognitive
abilities.
According
to Hamers and Blanc’s (2000) sociocultural interdependence hypothesis, positive
cognitive outcomes will result only in situations where both the first and
second languages are valued. In conclusion, the picture emerging, whether taken
from the perspective of IC theories or from the point of view of theories
dealing specifically with bilingualism and bilinguality show a phenomenon that
is tightly interwoven with social factors pertaining to the community at hand.
Whereas IC theories are generally formulated in more abstract terms than
bilingualism theories, they do not cover some specific aspects, such as linguistic
and cultural attrition or cognitive enhancements, which have been the prime focus
of interest in societies valuing cultural diversity. In either camp, most
theories attempt, however, to explain these phenomena through complex
multi-tiered mechanisms. They vary in emphasis and epistemological style but
none of them makes predictions that are diametrically opposite to the others.
e. Cognitive advantage to
Bilingualism
(1) Old Misconception
Early research suggested that
learning two languages in childhood was detrimental to a child's cognitive abilities.
This was due to the idea that the two languages were learned independently and
the knowledge of learning one did not transfer into the other. It was thought
that as more was learned in one language, less could be learned in the other.
This gives the idea of there being a total amount of language acquisition, and
so the pieces learned in each language together have to add up to this total.
For this reason parents and teachers tried to force children to only learn one
language instead of cultivating the ability to learn both.
The consensus among linguists, as
well as the general public today, however, is leaning towards the opposite; the
idea that knowledge in the two languages would be kept separate instead of
influencing each other is rejected as irrational by many. For example, a child
who has learned the concept of adding and subtracting in one language would not
need to re-learn the concept in another language. By that same token, a child
who has learned to recognize that spoken language can be broken up into words,
which can be represented in writing in one language, is not going to need to be
re-taught the idea of writing representing spoken language.
(2) Enhancing
effects in Children
When a child is fluent in two
languages, they know more than one word for the same object or concept. Current
research leads to the belief that this can add to the cognitive flexibility of
the child. The different connotations and ideas around a word has in the
different languages the child knows allows the child to build a more complex
understanding of the word at a younger age.
In the book In Other Words by Ellen
Bialystok and
Kenji Hakuta (1994), the authors talk about the idea that "the knowledge
of two languages is greater than the sum of its parts." Basically the idea
they are striving towards is that the benefits from being bilingual go much
further than simply knowing two languages. Because the structures and ideas of
the two languages are so different it forces the child to think in more
complicated ways than if they were learning only one language. Among the
benefits of language acquisition is the increase of metalinguistic awareness, that is, a greater sensitivity to
language in general and a greater awareness of meaning and structure in
language. One reason this is speculated to be true is that multilingual
children receive more linguistic input, requiring a greater amount of language
analysis on the part of the child.
On the other hand, Cummins suggested
that if L1 (first language learned) has not reached a certain threshold of competence,
the child may develop "semi-lingualism" or "limited
bilingualism", a situation of lower linguistic competence in the various
languages acquired, in comparison to monolingual children.(Jim Cummins:1979).
(3)
Inhibitory
control
A study done by Ellen Bialystok and
Michelle Martin (2005) showed that bilingual children have better
inhibitory control for ignoring perceptual information. The theory is that
children who are bilingual are constantly sorting out extra perceptual
information. For every object and action they have two words, one in each
language, they could use. However, they need to choose which one to use based
on the context they are in and the rules that apply to that context. This
ability enhances the ability of bilinguals to selectively pay attention to
appropriate information and inhibit focusing on other information. Through a
card sort task, this research showed that this does seem to be the case.
(4) Impact on
literacy
A study done by Ellen Bialystok,
Gigi Luk and Ernest Kwan (2005) showed the impact of knowing
one language and writing system on learning another. They compared a group of
monolinguals and three groups of bilinguals, with different relationships
between English and the second language: for Spanish-English bilinguals the
languages are similar and they are both written alphabetically in the same
script, for Hebrew-English bilinguals the languages are different but they are
both written alphabetically (phonetic Hebrew) in different scripts, for
Chinese-English bilinguals both the language and the writing system are
different.
The results showed that
Spanish-English and Hebrew-English biliterates had the highest levels of literacy.
Their interpretation of the results is that bilingualism has two effects on
early acquisition of literacy: (1) a general understanding of reading and its
basis in a print system and (2) the potential for transfer of reading
principles across languages. All bilinguals showed an advantage in these areas
over monolinguals, but the more similar the two languages the larger the
advantage.
e.
Bilingual education
Bilingual education involves teaching academic content in two languages, in a native
and secondary language with varying amounts of each language used in accordance
with the program model. The following are several different types of bilingual
education program models:
·
Transitional Bilingual Education. This involves education in a
child's native language, typically for no more than three years, to ensure that
students do not fall behind in content areas like math, science, and social
studies while they are learning English. The goal is to help students
transition to mainstream, English-only classrooms as quickly as possible, and
the linguistic goal of such programs is English acquisition only.
·
Two-Way or Dual Language Immersion Bilingual Education. These programs
are designed to help native and non-native English speakers become bilingual
and biliterate. Ideally in such programs in a U.S. context, half of the
students will be native speakers of English and half of the students will be
native speakers of a minority language such as Spanish. Dual Language programs
are less common in US schools, although research indicates they are extremely
effective in helping students learn English well and aiding the long-term
performance of English learners in school. Native English speakers benefit by
learning a second language. English language learners (ELLs) are not segregated
from their peers.
·
Another form of Bilingual Education is a type of Dual Language program that has
students study in two different ways: 1) A variety of academic subjects are
taught in the students' second language, with specially trained bilingual
teachers who can understand students when they ask questions in their native
language, but always answer in the second language; and 2) Native language
literacy classes improve students' writing and higher-order language skills in
their first language. Research has shown that many of the skills learned in the
native language can be transferred easily to the second language later. In this
type of program, the native language classes do not teach academic subjects.
The second-language classes are content-based, rather than grammar-based, so
students learn all of their academic subjects in the second language.
·
Late-Exit or Developmental Bilingual Education. Education is in the
child's native language for an extended duration, accompanied by education in
English. The goal is to develop literacy in the child's native language first,
and transfer these skills to the second language.
3. MULTILINGUALISM
Multilingualism as used in this report is to be
understood within the framework of European Commission documentation: … the
ability of societies, institutions, groups and individuals to engage, on a
regular basis, with more than two languages in their day-to-day lives. (EC
2007:6)
This broad definition embraces the distinction made
by the Council of Europe between ‘multilingualism’ and ‘plurilingualism’, where
multilingualism refers more to social organization, and plurilingualism to an
individual repertoire of linguistic competence. Multilingualism refers here
exclusively to the presence of several languages in a given space,
independently of those who use them: for example, the fact that two languages
are present in the same geographical area does not indicate whether inhabitants
know both (Council of Europe: 2007a:17)
Multilingualism is the act of using, or
promoting the use of, multiple languages, either by an individual speaker or by a community of speakers.
Multilingual speakers outnumber monolingual speakers in the world's population. The generic term
for a multilingual person is polyglot. Multilingualism is becoming a social phenomenon governed
by the needs of globalization and cultural openness.
a. The
Definition of multilingualism
One group of academics argues
for the maximal definition which means speakers are as proficient in one
language as they are in others and have as much knowledge of and control over
one language as they have of the others. Another group of academics
argues for the minimal definition, based on use. Tourists who successfully
communicate phrases and ideas while not fluent in a language may be seen as
bilingual according to this group.
However, problems may arise with
these definitions as they do not specify how much knowledge of a language is
required for a person to be classified as bilingual. As a result, since most
speakers do not achieve the maximal ideal, language learners may come to be
seen as deficient and by extension; language teaching may come to be seen as a
failure.
Since 1992, Vivian Cook has argued that most
multilingual speaker’s fall somewhere between minimal and maximal definitions.
Cook calls these people multi-competent.
b.
Multilingual Individuals
A multilingual person, in a broad definition, is one who can
communicate in more than one language, be it actively (through speaking,
writing, or signing) or passively (through listening, reading, or perceiving).
More specifically, the terms bilingual and trilingual are
used to describe comparable situations in which two or three languages are
involved. A multilingual person is generally referred to as a polyglot. Poly (Greek)
means "many", glot (Greek) means
"language".
Multilingual speakers have acquired
and maintained at least one language during childhood, the so-called first
language (L1).
The first language (sometimes also referred to as the mother tongue) is
acquired without formal education, by mechanisms heavily disputed. Children
acquiring two languages in this way are called simultaneous bilinguals. Even in
the case of simultaneous bilinguals one language usually dominates over the
other. This kind of bilingualism is most likely to occur when a child is raised
by bilingual parents in a predominantly monolingual environment. It can also
occur when the parents are monolingual but have raised their child or children
in two different countries or when the parents are monolingual and raise their
child in a society which speaks a language different from their own, which is
common in immigrant populations of Western European countries. It's also
possible (but rare) that children are raised in a multilingual country like the
Netherlands where Dutch is the main language, but also includes the Frisian
language in the northern part of the country. Because of the small surface of
the country most children from Friesland learn Dutch and Frisian withhout
formal education. Also Suriname which speaks Dutch and Papiamento has this
feature.
In linguistics, first language
acquisition is closely related to the concept of a "native speaker".
According to a view widely held by linguists, a native speaker of a given
language has in some respects a level of skill which a second (or subsequent)
language learner can hardly reliably accomplish. Consequently, descriptive
empirical studies of languages are usually carried out using only native
speakers as informants. This view is, however, slightly problematic,
particularly as many non-native speakers demonstrably not only successfully
engage with and in their non-native language societies, but in fact may become
culturally and even linguistically important contributors (as, for example,
writers, politicians and performing artists) in their non-native language. In
recent years, linguistic research has focused attention on the use of widely
known world languages such as English as lingua
franca, or the
shared common language of professional and commercial communities. In lingua
franca situations, most speakers of the common language are functionally
multilingual.
c.
Comparing
multilingual speakers
Even if someone is highly proficient
in two or more languages, his or her so-called communicative competence or
ability may not be as balanced. Linguists have distinguished various types of
multilingual competence, which can roughly be put into two categories:
For compound bilinguals,
words and phrases in different languages are the same concepts. That means that
'chien' and 'dog' are two words for the same concept for a French-English speaker of this type. These speakers are usually
fluent in both languages.
For coordinate bilinguals,
words and phrases in the speaker's mind are all related to their own unique
concepts. Thus a bilingual speaker of this type has different associations for
'chien' and for 'dog'. In these individuals, one language, usually the first
language, is more dominant than the other, and the first language may be used
to think through the second language. These speakers are known
to use very different intonation and pronunciation features, and sometimes to
assert the feeling of having different personalities attached to each of their
languages.
A sub-group of the latter is
the subordinate bilingual, which is typical of beginning
second language learners. The distinction between compound and coordinate
bilingualism has come under scrutiny. When studies are done of multilingual,
most are found to show behavior intermediate between compounds and coordinate
bilingualism. Some authors have suggested that the distinction should only be
made at the level of grammar rather than vocabulary, others use
"coordinate bilingual" as a synonym for one who has learned two
languages from birth, and others have proposed dropping the distinction
altogether (Baetens-Beardsmore, 1974).
Many theorists are now beginning to
view bilingualism as a "spectrum or continuum of bilingualism" that
runs from the relatively monolingual language learner to highly proficient
bilingual speakers who function at high levels in both languages (Garland,
2007).
d. Cognitive proficiency
There is
also a phenomenon known as distractive bilingualism or semilingualism. When acquisition of
the first language is interrupted and insufficient or unstructured language
input follows from the second language, as sometimes happens with immigrant children, the speaker can end up with two languages
both mastered below the monolingual standard.
Literacy plays an important role in
the development of language in these immigrant children. Those who were
literate in their first language before arriving in Japan, and who have support
to maintain that literacy, are at the very least able to maintain and master
their first language.
e.
Multilingual
with Community
Widespread multilingualism is one
form of language contact. Multilingualism was more common in the past than is
usually supposed: in early times, when most people were members of small
language communities, it was necessary to know two or more languages for trade
or any other dealings outside one's own town or village, and this holds good
today in places of high linguistic diversity such as Sub-Saharan
Africa and India. Linguist Ekkehard Wolff esti ates
that 50% of the population of Africa is multilingual.
In multilingual societies, not all
speakers need to be multilingual. Some states can have multilingual policies
and recognize several official languages, such as Canada (English and French).
In some states, particular languages may be associated with particular regions
in the state (e.g., Canada) or with particular ethnicities
(Malaysia/Singapore). When all speakers are multilingual, linguists classify
the community according to the functional distribution of the languages
involved:
§ Diglossia: if there is a structural
functional distribution of the languages involved, the society is termed
'diglossic'. Typical diglossic areas are those areas in Europe where a regional
language is
used in informal, usually oral, contexts, while the state language is used in
more formal situations. Frisia (withFrisian and German or Dutch) and Lusatia (with Sorbian and German) are well-known examples. Some writers
limit diglossia to situations where the languages are closely related, and
could be considered dialects of each other. This can also be observed in
Scotland where in formal situations, English is used. However, in informal situations in many
areas, Scots is the preferred language of
choice.
§ Ambilingualism: a region is called ambilingual if
this functional distribution is not observed. In a typical ambilingual area it
is nearly impossible to predict which language will be used in a given setting.
True ambilingualism is rare. Ambilingual tendencies can be found in small
states with multiple heritages like Luxembourg, which has a combined
Franco-Germanic heritage, or Malaysia and Singapore, which fuses the cultures of Malays, China, and India. Ambilingualism also can manifest
in specific regions of larger states that have both a clearly dominant state
language (be it de jure or de facto) and a
protected minority language that is limited in terms of distribution of
speakers within the country. This tendency is especially pronounced when, even
though the local language is widely spoken, there is a reasonable assumption
that all citizens speak the predominant state tongue (E.g., English in Quebec
vs. Canada; Spanish in Catalonia vs. Spain). This phenomenon can also occur in
border regions with many cross-border contacts.
§ Bipart-lingualism: if more than one language can be
heard in a small area, but the large majority of speakers are monolinguals, who
have little contact with speakers from neighboring ethnic groups, an area is
called 'bipart-lingual'. An example of this is the Balkans.
f.
Potential multilingual speakers
§ Natives under a state in which they
do not share the predominant language, such as Welsh
people within
the United Kingdom.
§ People with a strong interest in a
foreign language.
§ People who find it necessary to
acquire a second language for practical purposes such as business, information
gathering (Internet, mainly English) or entertainment (foreign language films,
books or computer games).
§ Immigrants and their descendants.
Although the heritage language may be lost after one or two generations,
particularly if the replacing language has greater prestige.
§ Children of expatriates. However, language loss of the L1 or L2 in younger
children may be rapid when removed from a language community.
§ Residents in border areas between
two countries with different languages, where each language is seen as of equal
prestige: efforts may be made by both language communities to acquire an L2.
Yet, in areas where one language is more prestigious than the other, speakers
of the less prestigious language may acquire the dominant language as an L2. In time, however,
the different language communities may be reduced to one, as one language
becomes extinct in that area.
§ Children whose parents each speak a
different language, in multilingual communities. In monolingual communities,
when parents maintain a different-parent/different-language household, their
children may become multilingual. On the other hand, in monolingual
communities, where parents have different L1s, multilingualism in the child may
be achieved when both parents maintain a one-language (not the community
language) household.
§ Children in language-rich
communities where neither language is seen as more prestigious than the other
and where interaction between people occurs in different languages on a
frequent basis. An example of this would be the city of Montreal, Canada and some border towns in the Canadian Province
of Québec.
§ Children who have one or more
parents who have learned a second language, either formally (in classes) or by
living in the country. The parent chooses to speak only this second language to
the child. One study suggests that during the teaching process, the parent
also boosts his or her own language skills, learning to use the second language
in new contexts as the child grows and develops linguistically.
§ People who marry into families where
their first language is not commonly spoken.
g. Multilingual Education
Multilingual
Education typically
refers to "first-language-first" education, that is, schooling which
begins in the mother tongue and transitions to additional languages. Typically
MLE programs are situated in developing countries where speakers of minority
languages tend to be disadvantaged in the mainstream education system.
Components of
Multilingual Education (CME);
§ "Strong
Foundation" -
Research shows that children whose early education is in the language of their
home tend to do better in the later years of their education (Thomas and Collier, 1997). For more information about the
effect of "Language of Instruction".
§ "Strong
Bridge" - an
essential difference between MLE programs and rural "mother tongue
education" programs is the inclusion of a guided transition from learning
through the mother tongue to learning through another tongue.
Related to the emphasis on a child's
mother tongue is the implicit validation of her cultural or ethnic identity by
taking languages which were previously considered "non-standard" and
making active use of them in the classroom. Multilingual Education in that
sense underscores the importance of the child's worldview in shaping his or her
learning.
4.
CONCLUSION
We have explored the bilingualism and
multilingualism an its role in societies and communities, educational,
potentials and so on. Bilingualism and multilingualism are
no danger of disappearing any time soon; it is firmly established both in
America and in countries throughout the world. In fact, no language has ever
held as strong a position in the world as English does today. Some people worry
when they see Spanish showing up on billboards and pay phones, but in a
neighborhood with a high Spanish speaking population, it makes perfectly good
sense for public information and instructions to be printed in both English and
Spanish. This doesn't mean that the English language is in danger. The truth is
that there will probably always be immigrants in the U.S., coming from a wide
variety of countries, who cannot speak English but whose grandchildren and
great-grandchildren will end up being native English speakers. The reason for
this is, again, the fact that it is much easier for children to learn another
language than it is for adults.
In sum, bilingualism isn't a danger either to the English
language or to the bilingual speakers themselves. On the contrary, there are
many advantages to bilingualism, both for the individual and for the society as
a whole. English enjoys tremendous dominance in the U.S. and in the world. But
if history is any indication, there will always be people in the U.S. who
cannot speak English — and they will have grandchildren who do.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bialystok E, Luk G, Kwan E (2005).
"Bilingualism, Biliteracy, and Learning to Read: Interactions Among
Languages and Writing Systems". Scientific Studies of Reading 9 (1):
43–61.doi:10.1207/s1532799xssr0901_4.
Council of
Europe: 2007a. From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education: Guide for
the Development of Language Education Policies in Europe. http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Guide_niveau2_EN.asp
Clément, R.,
& Gardner, R. C. (2001). Second language mastery. In H. Giles, &
P. Robinson (eds.), The New Handbook of Language and Social Psychology London:
Wiley, pp. 489–504. Gallois, C., Giles,
EC : 2007.
Commission of the European Communities, Final Report, High Level group on Multilingualism:
Luxembourg
Grosjean, F.(1997) The
Bilingual Individual. Interpreting 2 (1/2), 163-187.
Gudykunst, W. B.
(1985). A model of uncertainty reduction in intergroup encounters. Journal
of Language and Social Psychology, 4, 79–98.
Giles, H.,
Bourhis, R.Y., & Taylor, D. M. (1977). Towards a theory of language in
ethnic group relations. In H. Giles (ed.), Language, Ethnicity and
Intergroup Relations. New York: Academic Press, pp. 307–348.
Hakuta, Kenji; Bialystok, Ellen
(1994). In other words: the science and psychology of second language
acquisition. New York: BasicBooks. ISBN 0465075657.
Hamers, J. F.,
& Blanc, M. H. A. (2000). Bilinguality and Bilingualism, 2nd edn.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Jim Cummins,
"Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the
optimum age question and some other matters," Working Papers on
Bilingualism, no. 19 (1979), p. 121-129.
Lambert, W. E.
(1978). Cognitive ad socio-cultural consequences of bilingualism. Canadian
Modern Language Review, 34, 537–547.
Malherbe EG 1977 Education in South
Africa Vol. 2 1923–5. Cape Town: Juta & Co.Ltd.
MacIntyre, P.
D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing
willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and
affiliation. Modern Language Journal, 82, 545–562.
Weinreich,
U.(1953) Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems. The Hague.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar