The Mysteries of Bilingualism. Francois Grosjean

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ century, one by Zubrzycki (2019) and one some 13 years before by Sia and Dewaele (2006). Zubrzycki wanted to replicate the Sia and Dewaele study, which asked speakers of at least two languages: “Are you bilingual?” According to the answer they gave, they were placed in the “bilingual” or “non-bilingual” group, and it was shown, among other things, that the self-assessment of second language (L2) proficiency was higher in the “bilingual” group than in the “non-bilingual” group. This was true overall, but also for the four basic skills: Speaking, listening, reading and writing. Zubrzycki conducted the same kind of study but with a slightly different question, “Do you consider yourself bilingual?” He found practically identical percentages to Sia and Dewaele for those who labeled themselves as bilingual or not, and very similar assessment results.

      Interestingly, Zubrzycki (2019) added an open-ended question to his study: “How would you define the term bilingual?” It was very similar to Grosjean’s (1982) first question, and it is worth examining the answers more closely. As concerns those who self defined as “non-bilinguals,” nearly 80% formulated a restrictive definition of bilingualism. Zubrzycki does not give percentages but he reports that the main criterion put forward was equal proficiency in two languages, implying thereby a native-like command of the L2 with no traces of one language when using the other and, in particular, no traces of a foreign accent. Other elements which appeared in the definitions were items such as “native level,” “native speaker,” “mother tongue,” and “native language.” And some also said that the bilingual is required to have been raised in a bilingual family or to have had a long-term stay in the L2 environment.

      Of those who self defined as “bilinguals,” however, over 70% were less restrictive in their answers. Among the criteria expressed, we find feeling comfortable when using the L2, and reaching a level at which communication becomes natural and effortless. There was also the ability to communicate effectively in all domains of language use and in a wide range of social contexts. Finally, a number of definitions underlined everyday use of two languages.

      Thus, over a span of some 40 years, quite similar results have been obtained from lay people, with a slight difference between those who are, or who self define as, bilingual, and the others. Zubrzycki concludes that a monolingual view of bilingualism – the bilingual should be two monolinguals in one person (criticized by Grosjean 1985) – is still deeply entrenched in the lay person’s perception of what it means to be bilingual. Will a similar tendency be found in dictionary definitions? They reflect the meaning of words based on current usage but they are also the work of lexicographers many of whom have some linguistic training. We now turn to this.

      What Dictionaries Say

We looked up the words “bilingual” and “bilingualism” in a number of dictionaries that can be found on the internet. Many of them are well established, such as Longman, Oxford Advanced Learner’s, Cambridge English, American Heritage, Collins COBUILD, Chambers, Merriam-Webster, etc. Others are newer, such as Dictionary.com and Wiktionary. For the word “bilingual,” we restricted ourselves to the meaning pertaining to the bilingual person, and did not include those pertaining to a bilingual activity, event, or item, as in bilingual education, bilingual conference, bilingual book, etc. Out of a total of 11 definitions we examined, ten underlined the ability to speak two languages fluently. Of these, seven indicated speaking two languages equally well (e.g., Cambridge English: “able to use two languages equally well”) or with nearly equal fluency (e.g., American Heritage: “using or able to use two languages, especially with equal or nearly equal fluency”), and three stressed speaking two languages fluently or extremely well (e.g., Macmillan: “able to speak two languages extremely well”). Only one definition of the 11 did not have fluency as a criterion. It was that of Wiktionary, a more recent dictionary, which stated: “having the ability to speak two languages.” We should note that no definition indicated using two languages on a regular basis, nor did any include more than two languages. In addition, none mentioned dialects in their definitions. Thus, dictionaries seem to reflect closely what lay people state, at least those who do not consider themselves to be bilingual (see the previous section).

      We also looked up “bilingualism” in the same 11 dictionaries. Surprisingly, three of them (Oxford Advanced Learner’s, American Heritage, and Longman) did not have an entry for the word. Three of the eight that did underlined the ability to speak two languages, two of them adding equally well (e.g., Cambridge English: “the fact of being able to use two languages equally well”). This is proportionally less than for the meaning of “bilingual.” And five definitions mentioned language use. Two of these mentioned use by itself (e.g., Macmillan: “the use of two languages by a person or a group”); two mentioned ability and use (e.g., Merriam-Webster: “the ability to speak two languages,” as well as, “the frequent use… of two languages”); and one, Google dictionary, indicated the one or the other possibility: “fluency in or use of two languages.” Again, none indicated two or more languages, and none added dialects to languages. In sum, the definitions of “bilingualism” put much less emphasis on language fluency and made more room for language use. But overall, dictionary definitions follow the lay persons’ view of what “bilingual” and “bilingualism” mean. We can now turn to experts who study bilingualism.

      What Language Scientists Say

      Do language scientists have a different view of what it means to be bilingual? Some have indeed put the emphasis on language fluency (which they also term language proficiency or language knowledge), but over the years we have seen a gradual movement away from the very restrictive definition proposed by Bloomfield (1933) who stated that bilingualism is the “native-like control of two languages.” This stance was still present with Thiery (1978) who wrote that “a true bilingual is someone who is taken to be one of themselves by the members of two different linguistic communities, at roughly the same social and cultural level.” Movement away from this position can already be seen with Hakuta (1992) who simply talks of control of languages: “a bilingual individual is someone who controls two or more languages.” At the time, Haugen (1969) was one of the rare exceptions who stated that fluency did not need to be that high. He stated that bilingualism begins “at the point where the speaker of one language can produce complete, meaningful utterances in the other language.”

      Since the turn of the century, those who use fluency or proficiency as the main criterion have been much less demanding of bilinguals. They are aware that the majority of bilinguals do not have equal proficiency in their languages, many have an accent in at least one of their languages, and many acquired their other language(s) at different points in life, and not just as children. They use their languages for different purposes, in different domains of life, to accomplish different things and so their level of proficiency in a language depends on their need for that language (Grosjean 2013).

      This is starting to be reflected in the definitions proposed. For example, Luna, Ringberg, and Peracchio (2008) state that bilingualism is the “ability to communicate relatively well – including the ability to speak, understand, read, and write – in two different languages.” And De Houwer (2019) actually goes all the way to simply accepting an ability to comprehend two languages. She defines a bilingual interlocutor as “a person who is in principle able to understand two (or more) language varieties at levels that are minimally appropriate for a given life stage.” Finally, some researchers have decided to remain neutral on the topic of fluency. Thus, Li Wei (2007), states that a bilingual is “someone with the possession of two languages,” and similarly Dewaele, Housen and Li Wei (2003) write that bilingualism is “the presence of two or more languages.”

Various theoretical positions on bilingualism, such as Grosjean’s holistic view (Grosjean 1985, 1989) as well as Cook’s (1991) multi-competence of speakers of two or more languages, have left greater room for language use as a definitional factor. It had started appearing in the last century with Weinreich (1953) who stated that bilingualism is “the practice СКАЧАТЬ