Bilingualism and Second Language Acquisition - Literature review Example

Running Head: BILINGUALISM AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION Second Language Acquisition NAME: INSTITUTIONAL AFFILIATIONS INTRODUCTION This case study report focuses on the issues at the intersection of second language acquisition and bilingualism that have proven to have longevity. They are core issues in the field. First, we start by classifying the bilingual individuals. Bilingualism is, however, a complex socio-cultural and psychological linguistic behavior that has multi-dimensional aspects (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993). It is often believed that bilinguals are individuals who have native-like control of two languages. On the other hand also, bilinguals are an individual who are fluent in one language but is unable to produce complete meaningful pronunciations in another language. Classifications of Individual Bilinguals Bilinguals are classified into different categories depending on cognitive, linguistic, developmental, and social dimension as proposed by Bongats et al. (2000). The most common typologies that always appear in the bilingual literature are also discussed. Bilingualism has several dimensions (Bialystok, 2001). Referring the bingualism dimensionality, researchers have often suggested various classifications depending on the kind of dimensions of bingualism that they focus on. As said by Brown et al. (2005), an example is the distinction between dominant and balanced bilinguals that are based on the relationship between the proficiencies of the languages that bilinguals master on (Birdsong, 2000). Those who share similar degrees of proficiency in both languages are referred to as balanced bilinguals, whereas unbalanced (dominant) bilinguals are groups or individuals whose proficiency in one language is greater than that of the other language. Subordinate, coordinate and compound distinction aims at dimensions of how two (or more) or various linguistic codes are organized by individuals and groups. Compound bilinguals have two sets of linguistic codes that are stored in one meaning unit, while coordinate bilinguals have linguistics code that has presumed to be separately organized into two forms of meaning units (Birdsong, 2000). Subordinate bilinguals have linguistics codes in their L2 and are presumed to be interpreted via their L1. Additionally, Brown et al. (2005) suggested that these individual variables, bilinguals can be categorized based on different social variables. However, some researchers focused on how L2 affected the retention of L1. Bilinguals that can enhance their L2 without failing to get L1 proficiency are known as additive bilinguals, while those whose L2 was obtained or learned at the expense of failing to acquire their L1 are also referred to in the join literature (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993). The complexity of the second element comes from the fact that these bilingual dimensions are continuous and not only categorical constructs (Bialystok, 2001). One cannot come up with clear boundaries between different kinds of bilinguals within a dimension. One can clearly define note that bilingualism is a very complex and dimensional linguistic behavior. By acknowledging this complexity, it means that we would like to focus on some of the main bilingualism issues and second language acquisition that have emerged from such typologies (Birdsong, 2000). The foremost issues in conceptualizing and assessing bilingual group and individual language proficiency are also discussed. Factors which have significant impact on the success or failure of the language learner Sociocultural factor: Language can exist in a cultural vacuum, and because there are two cultures that are exactly identical, second language or foreign language learners will inevitably face cultural confrontations on their learning ways (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993). It does not; however mean that learners have to leave their own culture so as to eschew the potent al cultural collision. The key thing that is required to do is to accumulate the knowledge that pertains the target culture in order to develop cross-cultural awareness. In the process of undertaking the second or foreign language, learners will face internal and external obstacles. According Allen et al. (1999), internal factors include personality, personality attitude or self-esteem while external factors involve all cultural and social conditions that are associated with the whole environment in which language study occurs. Various linguistic agree upon the fact that language is an innate faculty that is not artifact. But as far as pragmatics is concerned, one mostly safely says that language separated from socioculture, as cultural factors are normally reflected in our professional and daily communication (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993). To further show the close relationship between language and culture, some Chinese scholars, undertook a survey of native Chinese speakers and native English speakers on what items they always associate with the term “food” in 1999. The outcome exactly shows the inseparability between culture and language. Really, language is deeply rooted in the culture where it operates. Apart from “food”, several other examples are frequently employed by English teachers in China to describe the difference between these two languages and their relevant cultures. “Dog” for example is not a word that always passes a derogatory connotation in western societies. It is not possible to learn a foreign or a second language without studying the people’s culture that it represents. If the target and the source culture one are the same, it will be comparatively easy for a learner to acquire the second language, for he/she can feel at ease with the target culture. For example, various researches show that learning duration for German of French students to learn English is always shorter compare to that experienced by East Asian learners. Culture is quite complex because it involves several ingredients, such as gender, religion social customs etc (Birdsong, 2000). In solving this problem, multiculturalism must be natured or cultivated in learners’ mind, which indicates that learners are needed to be provided with appropriate content of non-discriminatory cultural ideas and information because it can assist better understand the foreign or second language, and form the correct attitudes towards it (Birdsong, 2000). Personality Factor: These include self-esteem, inhibition, anxiety and empathy. Self-esteem is a psychological term used to reflect a person’s general appraisal or evaluation of his or her own worth. Self-esteem involves beliefs and emotions such triumph, despair, shame and pride. According Allen et al. (1999) a person’s self-esteem may be seen in their behaviors, for example, in shyness, assertiveness, confidence or caution (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993). However, self-esteem can also refer specifically to a specific dimension or a global extent. According to researchers, students who feel good about themselves are more likely to become successful in acquiring the second language. As suggested by Allen et al. (1999), there are compiled summaries of many studies and pointed out several indicated that self-esteem is the outcome rather than the cause of academic achievement. In addition, researchers from the University of California undertook an extensive review of the research on the relationship between achievement and self-esteem, concluding that self-esteem can be modified through direct instructions that can lead to achievement gains. Inhibition is almost the same as self-esteem. The weaker the self esteem the stronger the inhibition to protect the weak ego. It was analyzed that students with thick, perfectionist boundaries realize that language learning more hard than those learners with thin boundaries who favor the tolerance of ambiguity and attitude of openness. Due to the defense mechanism outlined above, these mistakes can be faced as threats to the self. However, it can be argued that the learners enter classroom with those defences already built and no much can be done to eliminate them. Integrative Motivation: As suggested by Brown et al. (2005), there is always a belief that integrative motivation is related to second language proficiency in whereby intake is available, in the Canadian Anglophone and ESL situation in the United States. Allen et al. (1999) suggested that these outcomes with eighty-three tenth-grade students of French. Also, they concluded that the integrative motivation was especially important for the development of communicative skills, while aptitude was quite important in the acquisition of second language skills acquired through direct instructions. In the same setting, researchers confirmed the importance of integrative motivation in grades between 7 and 11 French classes in Montreal. The Interaction between L1 and L2 Another very important unique factor that needs to be considered in SLA is the effect of learners’ first languages. How do individual’ L1s influence their L2 acquisition processes? In the 50 years time ago, researchers have taken different views of the function of L1 in SLA. In the early 1960s, employing contrastive analysis, it was strongly believed that L1 had major influence over L2 acquisition. Over the heyday of behaviorism, language acquisition was considered to be a form of behavioral formation, and it was said that the learners’ L1 behaviors interfered with their L2 behavior (Birdsong, 2000). Allen et al. (1999) suggested that the results of transfer on several aspects of language proficiency in academic contexts have achieved substantial attention in the literature, reflecting a developing concern about educational achievement among language-minority learners in a variety of countries. Allen et al. (1999) suggested that most studies have reported that academic-related skills and experience greatly developed in L1 are related to those in L2 (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993). A growing number of studies on early literacy acquisition among bilinguals have indicated that there are relationships between several literacy sub skills in L1 and L2 in particular. Relationships between L1 and L2, for example, were found in receptive vocabulary knowledge, cognates morphological and cognate’s knowledge word recognition and reading comprehension and reading strategies used in L1 and L2 (Bialystok, 2001). Cummins’s independence hypothesis, stating that academic proficiency in L2 and L1 are interdependent, provided a theoretical framework for comprehending the mechanism in academic contexts of bilingual proficiency. These underlying proficiencies composed of conceptual and procedural and conceptual knowledge and skills, enables bilinguals to transfer academic skills between different languages (Birdsong, 2000). This transferability may be affected by differences in language structures and orthographic systems and structures, for a review of transfer among adult L2 readers. According Allen et al. (1999) threshold hypothesis attempted to explain the underlying mechanisms leading to individual differences in terms of negative and positive cognitive impacts among bilinguals. Researchers’ original proposal stated that bilingual individuals can enjoy cognitive and metacognitive advantages if they attain native-speaker competence in both languages. If they have not attained, however, such competence in either of the languages, they can fall into a state of semi-lingualism and may not be able to escape negative impacts in their cognitive and academic development. The use of the label semilingualism was first introduced by scholars and its interpretation led to a heated debate (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993). Whatever semilingualism and whatever term is used and refers to, there are indeed individual and group differences in academic Socio-psychological factors: identity and attitude According to Allen et al. (1999), another very important factor affecting outcomes in L2 acquisition is the cluster of socio-psychological factors such as motivation and identity that are developed in a given socio-cultural learning context. As suggested by Brown et al. (2005) language acquisition is embedded in cultures and societies, and language advancement can be considered as an acculturation (Bialystok, 2001). By facing multiple cultural and ethnic values and groups, bilingual individuals and groups can gain unique ethnolinguistic and cultural identities, separate from those of monolinguals. In the earliest attempts in this area, research showed conceptualized socio-psychological variables that underlie the mechanism for bringing about the several impacts of bilingualism. In the researchers’ model, learners’ and children motivations and attitudes influence the degree of language attainment (Birdsong, 2000). Allen et al. (1999) suggested that learners’ language attainment in turn affects one’s identity. According to Allen et al. (1999), additive bilingualism is possible if the learning environment values both the learners’ L2 and L1 and allows them to advance a positive identity with both ethnolinguistic/cultural groups and values. Similarly to this, if the societies do not value the individuals’ L1, the impact would be a subtractive bilingualism (Birdsong, 2000). While other research emphasized that the real social distance between the learner and the target culture and language impacts the acculturation process, some of the research colleagues argue that the seen social distance is important for L2 acquisition as proposed by Bongats et al. (2000). Greater effort has been made to disclose the socio-psychological technique that underlies language acquisition and to identify influential variables for successful L2 acquisition (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993) . CONCLUSION As suggested by Brown et al. (2005), there are a various difficulties and problems in measuring bilingual individuals’ proficiencies in both languages. Proficiency can, therefore, be conceptualized differently depending on one’s way of approach that accounts for language. Consequently, current proficiency assessments measure various aspects of language (Bialystok, 2001). Comparing monolingual native speakers with that of a bilingual individual’s proficiency and across languages introduces various challenges. As proposed by Bongats et al. (2000) it is crucially more important to understand what brings about proficiency and how languages interact with each other (Birdsong, 2000). Identification of this kind has to be conducted in context. Particularly, there is a rapid growing concern among educators with regard Second Language Acquisition 135 and Bilingualism to how best to measure language minority learners’ language proficiencies in academic contexts as proposed by Goetz et al. (2005). Without good identification of constructs for language proficiency in a given context, culturally and contextually cannot be advanced to produce appropriate measurements (Calero-Breckheimer, 1993) . References Bialystok, E. (1991). Language Processing in Bilingual Children, pp. 113–40. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in Development: Language, Literacy, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bialystok, E. and Hakuta, K. (1994). The Psychology and the Science of Second-Language Acquisition. New York: Basic Books. Bialystok, E. and Hakuta, K. (1999). Confounded age: Linguistic and cognitive factors in age differences for second language acquisition. In D. Birdsong (ed.), Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis, pp. 161–81. Pressley, G. E. Mackinnon and T. G. Waller (eds.), Metacognition, Cognition, and Human Performance. Vol. 1: Theoretical Perspectives, pp. 207–52. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–55. Birdsong, D. and Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235–49. Bley-Vroman, R. (1990). The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis, 20, 3–49. Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. London: Allen and Unwin. Bongaerts, T. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 pronunciation: The case of very advanced late L2 learners. In D. Birdsong (ed.), Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bongarts, T (2000). Authenticity of pronunciation in naturalistic second language acquisition: The case of very advanced late learners of Dutch as a second language. Studia Linguistica, 54, 298–308. Brown, K. Malmkjær, and J. Williams (2005), Performance and Competence in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 1–8. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Butler, Y. G. and Gutiérrez, M. B. (2003). Learning climates for English language learners: A case of – students in California. Bilingual Research Journal, 27(2), 207–240. Calero-Breckheimer, A. and Goetz, E. T. (1993). Reading strategies of biliterate children for English and Spanish texts. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 14, 177–204. Read More