Bilingualism and multilingualism

A multilingual person can basically communicate in more than one language.

More specifically, the terms bilingual and trilingual are used to describe comparable situations in which two or three languages are involved.

Multilingual speakers have acquired and maintained at least one language during childhood, as we have seen, the 'L1'. The first language (or 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 different countries. Due to globalisation and the greater movement of people in the labour market, children may be bilingual before they go to school, thence to learn an additional tongue which becomes their vehicular, scholastic language. Teaching in such contexts, where English is the target language, is now referred to as EAL (English as an Additional Language).

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 never reliably accomplish.. This view is problematic, particularly as many non-native speakers successfully engage with and in their non-native language societies, but may become culturally and 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 a Lingua Franca' (ELF) or the shared common language of professional and commercial communities. In lingua franca situations, most speakers of the common language are functionally multilingual.

Despite controversy over whether early introduction to another language is either beneficial or necessary, the tendency seems to be in favour of starting young (Cenoz 2009).

Cummins' research (1984 & 2000) concluded that the development of competence in the native language serves as a foundation of proficiency that can be transposed to the second language - the common underlying proficiency hypothesis (often referred to as 'CUP'). His work sought to overcome the perception propagated in the 1960s that learning two languages made for two competing aims. The belief was that the two languages were mutually exclusive and that learning a second required unlearning elements and dynamics of the first in order to accommodate the second (Hakuta, 1990). The evidence for this perspective relied on the fact that some errors in acquiring the second language were related to the rules of the first language (Hakuta, 1990).

Another new development that has influenced the linguistic argument for bilingual literacy is the length of time necessary to acquire the second language.

While previously children were believed to have the ability to learn a language within a year, today researchers believe that within and across academic settings, the time span is nearer to five years (Collier, 1992; Ramirez, 1992).

An interesting outcome of studies during the early 1990s however confirmed that students who do successfully complete bilingual instruction perform better academically (Collier, 1992; Ramirez, 1992, Cenoz 2009). These students exhibit more cognitive elasticity including a better ability to analyse abstract visual patterns. Students who receive bidirectional bilingual instruction where equal proficiency in both languages is required perform at an even higher level.

These views have influenced the spread of CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) which is itself an offshoot of immersion education, and have led to a re-think in how we structure the input of languages in the curriculum. In an integrated curriculum, languages are no longer 'over there' as a separate domain. If a student can define (for example) in one of his/her languages, then he/she can probably do it in another. There is no need to treat this is a separate skill either across languages or across other subjects.

In short, the term 'Second Language Acquisition' seems to fall short when faced with the complexity and variety of multilingualism, as do the separate notions of 'acquisition' and 'learning'.

Reflective task 3.1.

Say whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Justify your answers.

1. For successful learning of a foreign language, learners should be exposed to uncontrolled input.

2. There is a direct correlation between what students are taught and what they learn.

3. All learners learn English in a similar way.

4. The distinction between the notions of input and intake may be misleading.

5. In the interaction process students only learn each other's mistakes.

6. Errors should be avoided by all means and learners should be immediately corrected.

7. Motivation is perhaps the most important factor in the learning of a second language.

8. It is questionable whether formal instruction actually helps second language learning.

9. The learning of a second language is mainly a conscious process.

10. Students' interaction through the use of communicative activities is not at all effective as we are dealing with an artificial situation.

3.6. Suggestions for further reading

[1] Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M. (1991). An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. Longman. London.

[2] Lightbown, P. (2006). How languages are learned. (Oxford University Press).

[3] Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

3.7. Web reading

[1] The influence of bilingualism on multilingual acquisition (Cenoz, J. 1997).

Link to webpage:

http://www.google.es/search?hl=en&q=multilingual+learners+cenoz&aq=

f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

[Read: August 25, 2010, GMT-5].

Chapter 4

Second Language Acquisition models: critical review 4.1. Introduction

In this chapter we will review the most important theories of SLA. We will mainly follow Ellis (1985, 1994).

Two main approaches to theory building can be distinguished:

a) the "theory-then-research" approach, and b) the "research-then-theory" approach

The first could be called deductive since we move from the general to the particular, while the second would be inductive as we conduct the research first, and then formulate a particular theory.

More specifically, the first approach (deductive) involves 5 stages:

1. Develop an explicit theory;

2. Derive a testable hypothesis from the theory;

3. Conduct research to test the prediction;

4. Modify (or abandon) the theory if the prediction is not fulfilled; and 5. Test a new prediction if the theory is confirmed.

The second approach mentioned (inductive), however, includes only four stages:

1. Select a phenomenon for investigation;

2. Study its main features;

3. Collect data and look for systematic patterns; and

4. Formalise significant patterns as rules describing natural events.

As mentioned above, no model to our knowledge has been able to provide a comprehensive account of the factors that influence language learning. Some of them will stress the importance of social factors, others will pay more attention to learner factors while still others will concentrate almost exclusively on linguistic issues. An overview of the most significant of these theories is presented in the pages that follow.