DOES BILINGUAL = BETTER-LINGUAL ?
INTRODUCTION
In her personal narrative, Learning Sindhi...A Nuisance in my Childhood, A Connection in my Future, Shivanii narrates an incident when she forthrightly realizes the importance of learning her mother tongue and its integral role in aiding her to maintain her routes with their culture. In her text, Shivanii narrates an incident where her father, who is adamant that she speaks to him in her mothertongue, Sindhi, stops talking to her and refuses to converse with her in any language other than Sindhi. Stuck in a moment of confusion and hussle, Shivanii replies to him saying, “I tengo hambre. Mukhe comida cape.” (Manglani 2); a statement which is a mix of English, Spanish and Sindhi.
Reading this statement made by Shivanii a number of questions were raised in my mind, what caused this confusion of languages to take place? Was it because Shivanii was confused between the three languages? If so, does attempting to learn and/or converse in multiple language put an individual at a disadvantage? Would Shivanii have been less confused learning a second language, at school, which was her mother tongue and spoken by her family members at home as well, unlike Spanish? This led me to reseach the question: “To what extent does bilingualism impact cognitive skills in individuals?”, through the medium of my Project Three, Annotated Bibliography.
In this annotated bibliography, I have cited and analyzed three sources in order to pursue the question I have raised. The first source examines different factors impacting the cognitive skills in bilingual individuals while the second source goes on to evaluate various researches to prove an interlink between bilingualism and cognition while the third source puts forth an integral point relating to whether enough research has been done to answer the question being raised.
SOURCE 1
Cummins, James. "Linguistic Interdependence and the Educational Development of Bilingual Children." Review of Educational Research 49.2 (1979): 222-251.
In his article Linguistic Interdependence and the Education of Bilingual Children, James Cummins puts forth the thesis that an academically and cognitively beneficial form of bilingualism can be achieved only on the basis of adequately developed first language skills. Exploring the “development interdependence” (Cummins 222) hypothesis, Cummins talks about the interdependence between the competence for a second language on an individual’s competance for their first language, at the time when they are learning their second language. His “threshold” hypothesis puts forth the claim tha there exist various threshold levels of linguistic competence an individual must reach in order to avoid to “cognitive disadvantages” and to achieve the “cognitive advantages” received by a bilingual individual. He goes on to elaborate on his idea of an integrated model of the educational outcome of bilingualism being “a function of... background, child input and educational treatment factors.” (Cummins 222). Exploring the impact of socio-cultural factors, school program factors and linguistic factors Cummins concludes that there is a need for a theoritical framework in order to encourage complete immersion and submersion into the language.
Cummins authorises his claims by providing vieiws of authoritative organisations such as the UNESCO. When referring to the perspectives of other authors, he always uses a positive tone and there are a limited number of places where he uses the method of coutering to forward his views. Hence, while Insurin and Altarriba provide a number of researches to forward their own views and draw a conclusion and Hornby mainly forwards as well as counters the views of other authors, Cummins, using a more positive approach works to get his point across to the audience. In his text, Cummins suggests that “recent "positive" studies...suggest that under some conditions, access to two languages in early childhood can accelerate aspects of cognitive growth” (Cummins 229) however, looking at Shinvanii’s illustration, it can be seen that although she has learnt Spanish, a second language since an early age, she still faced a “cognitive disadvantage”. However, as Cummins states “if a bilingual child attains only a very low level of competence in the second (or first) language, interaction with the environment through that language, both in terms of input and output, is likely to be impoverished.” (Cummins 230) and this is reflected in Shivanii’s case where although she is bilingual, in the sense that she could converse in two languages, English and Spanish however, since Spanish was not one of her first languages and she did not utilise her language skills to converse with people in the environment she had grown up with i.e. her kin, it could be said that her input and output in relation to the second language was “impoverished”. Hence, had she been as fluent in Sindhi as she was in Spanish and had learnt it at school, along with Cummins’ “school program” factors, the “socio-cultural” factor he mentions would have come in to play as she would have practised this language at home with her family and thereby been at a “congitive advantage”.
Comparing Cummins’ research to Hornby, it can be see that although Hornby enlists a number of researches and analyses them to convey his point across to his audience, Cummins adopts a method of enlistsing three min factors which relate biligualism and their effect on an individual and analyses them. Cummins’ analysis on the different factors affecting billingualism contribute to my study as the debate on whether bilingual aids congition is something that he explores under each of these factors and hence, acts as a significantly imporatnt source to my study.
SOURCE 2
Hornby, Peter A. Bilingualism: Hornby, Peter A. Bilingualism: Psychological, Social and Educational Implications. New York : Academic Press Inc. , 1977.
In his book Bilingualism: Psychological, Social and Educational Implications Hornby aims to induce amongst his readers’ awareness and appreciation of the scope and complexity of current thinking in bilingualism by brining together historical developments, theoretical controversies and research findings in the disciplines of of psychology, linguistics and education and relating them to the effect bilingualism may have on an individual and and his or her society. Hornby aims to discover "which characteristics of a bilingual setting lead to its being viewed as a source of enrichment and diversity...rather than as a source of confusion, conflict and frustration." (Hornby ix) In his Introductory Chapter, Hornby provides his readers with a classification of the different types of bilingualism by providing the views of different researchers relating to the definition of bilingualism. For the purpose of this research, Bloomfield's (1933) definition of bilingualism will be used i.e. " the term should be applied only to those individuals who possess "nativelike" ability in both languages."
In order to accomplish his aims Hornby uses a civil tone to portray the views of others. Forwarding and countering these views, he forms an authoritative base for his arguments. Reflecting on Cummins' threshold hypothesis, Hornby talks about the importance of an assurance to
minority groups that their home language should be given a strong reading and writing base before or along with the introduction of the national language and describes it as a "potentially productive hypothesis to test" (Hornby 18). Hence, a slight interlink between Cummins and Hornby's views can be noticed. Shivanii’s father mimics this ideology of Hornby’s when he comes across as "adamant" on making her speaking their dyinglanguage. However, Hornby goes on to compare the different conclusions various researchers have deduced during their research projects. Referring to Peal and Lambert's study, he talks about their conclusion that "bilinguals were characterized by a more differentiated intelligence subtest profile than their monolingual comparison group." (Hornby 29) which he furthers by connecting to Anisfield's findings that contradicted those of Peal and Lambert's by concluding that bilinguals did not have superior cognitive skills when compared to monolinguals leading to Hornby's conclusion that "the response characteristics of bilinguals are a matter of response rather than basic ability difference." Hornby states that "only when both languages are spoken by individuals important to the child that the child rises to the challenge of becoming bilingual." However, this does not stand through in Shivanii's case as while both her parents can converse in Sindhi, she is unable to and end up at a cognitive disadvantage, mixing up the three languages while attempting to speaking in Sindhi.
In Chapter Three, Hornby forwards the views of authors such as Lambert, Darcy and Peal to illustrate his views. Borrowing the findings of Peal and Lambert’s study, he extends their findings to draw on a conclusion that with the provision of more evidence, the efficiency of the different proposed mechanisms by the researchers whose data he has illustrated and extended will become clearer. Hence, it is noticed that Hornby illustrates the point he is making by forwarding the views of authors/researchers including Lambert, Darcy, Peal, Anisfield and Torrance among others and cites each one of their views by citing them using the MLA system, thereby authorizing his claims. Thus, borrowing their data he extends it to apply it to the questions he aims to explore i.e. the psychological, social and educational implications of bilingualism.
SOURCE 3
Isurin, Ludmila and Altarriba, Jeanette. Memory, Language, and Bilingualism . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
In his article Freeman draws on the thesis that in the solution the second language acquisition (SLA) field has perennially adopted when there are conflicting views to seek a larger frame, one that acknowledges the contributions of both perspectives, "individual/cognitive and social/contextual" (Freeman 773). Freeman expects both perspective to be productive for future understanding and believes that there will be a point where both views cross paths and will prove productive in the understanding of second language acquisition. Rather than providing a biased view, Freeman aims to portray both sides of the bilingual debate and provide a reason for why reconciliation among both sides is
impossible. Looking at different theories and researches, Freeman leaves his audience with an open-ended conclusion requesting his audience "not to maintain old walls, or construct new one, but instead to open up to new spaces." and anticipating that "the field of inquiry (in bilingualism) will once again broaden and move on."
Through out his narrative Freeman forwards and counters the views of a number of linguists and researchers. Drawing upon Long (1997) and Kasper's (1997) mutual view that second language acquisition occurs through participation, it can be seen that had Shivanii participated more in conversations in Sindhi, she could have improved her second language skills and avoided being at a "cognitive disadvantage" in the case she illustrates in her narrative. Referring to Firth and Wagner, he suggests that "communications are not simply a transfer of information in a 'normal', that is native speaker equivalent, manner" thereby contradicting the view portrayed by Shivanii's father in his narrative as he tries to enforce and persuade his daughter to converse in their native language which he believed, as did Shivanii towards the end of her narrative, that speaking her native language would help keep her grounded to her culture.
Hence, it can be seen that Freeman’s thought process and methodology is different from that of the authors of the other two sources used and hence, adds a completely different perspective to the research indicating that with time, there is scope for more research and hence more coherent and definite answers to the question being researched.
CONCLUSION
Looking at these different sources, it can be seen that to a large extent bilingualism plays an extremely significant positive role in impacting one’s cognitive skills however, as pointed out by Cummmins, external factors such as cultural and educational background do play a vital role in influencing this notion, Examining and analyzing these different sources holding rather diverse views, larger questions relating to the extent to which the notion of “bilingualism is better” holds true. To what extent can linguistics aid in a person’s cognitive skills, how many languages may a person learn until the “cognitive disadvantages” start to surface, or if any will surface can be raised as well as a larger question as to whether it is the educational program or socio-cultural factors that impact the cognitive skills of a bilingual individual may be raised.
In her personal narrative, Learning Sindhi...A Nuisance in my Childhood, A Connection in my Future, Shivanii narrates an incident when she forthrightly realizes the importance of learning her mother tongue and its integral role in aiding her to maintain her routes with their culture. In her text, Shivanii narrates an incident where her father, who is adamant that she speaks to him in her mothertongue, Sindhi, stops talking to her and refuses to converse with her in any language other than Sindhi. Stuck in a moment of confusion and hussle, Shivanii replies to him saying, “I tengo hambre. Mukhe comida cape.” (Manglani 2); a statement which is a mix of English, Spanish and Sindhi.
Reading this statement made by Shivanii a number of questions were raised in my mind, what caused this confusion of languages to take place? Was it because Shivanii was confused between the three languages? If so, does attempting to learn and/or converse in multiple language put an individual at a disadvantage? Would Shivanii have been less confused learning a second language, at school, which was her mother tongue and spoken by her family members at home as well, unlike Spanish? This led me to reseach the question: “To what extent does bilingualism impact cognitive skills in individuals?”, through the medium of my Project Three, Annotated Bibliography.
In this annotated bibliography, I have cited and analyzed three sources in order to pursue the question I have raised. The first source examines different factors impacting the cognitive skills in bilingual individuals while the second source goes on to evaluate various researches to prove an interlink between bilingualism and cognition while the third source puts forth an integral point relating to whether enough research has been done to answer the question being raised.
SOURCE 1
Cummins, James. "Linguistic Interdependence and the Educational Development of Bilingual Children." Review of Educational Research 49.2 (1979): 222-251.
In his article Linguistic Interdependence and the Education of Bilingual Children, James Cummins puts forth the thesis that an academically and cognitively beneficial form of bilingualism can be achieved only on the basis of adequately developed first language skills. Exploring the “development interdependence” (Cummins 222) hypothesis, Cummins talks about the interdependence between the competence for a second language on an individual’s competance for their first language, at the time when they are learning their second language. His “threshold” hypothesis puts forth the claim tha there exist various threshold levels of linguistic competence an individual must reach in order to avoid to “cognitive disadvantages” and to achieve the “cognitive advantages” received by a bilingual individual. He goes on to elaborate on his idea of an integrated model of the educational outcome of bilingualism being “a function of... background, child input and educational treatment factors.” (Cummins 222). Exploring the impact of socio-cultural factors, school program factors and linguistic factors Cummins concludes that there is a need for a theoritical framework in order to encourage complete immersion and submersion into the language.
Cummins authorises his claims by providing vieiws of authoritative organisations such as the UNESCO. When referring to the perspectives of other authors, he always uses a positive tone and there are a limited number of places where he uses the method of coutering to forward his views. Hence, while Insurin and Altarriba provide a number of researches to forward their own views and draw a conclusion and Hornby mainly forwards as well as counters the views of other authors, Cummins, using a more positive approach works to get his point across to the audience. In his text, Cummins suggests that “recent "positive" studies...suggest that under some conditions, access to two languages in early childhood can accelerate aspects of cognitive growth” (Cummins 229) however, looking at Shinvanii’s illustration, it can be seen that although she has learnt Spanish, a second language since an early age, she still faced a “cognitive disadvantage”. However, as Cummins states “if a bilingual child attains only a very low level of competence in the second (or first) language, interaction with the environment through that language, both in terms of input and output, is likely to be impoverished.” (Cummins 230) and this is reflected in Shivanii’s case where although she is bilingual, in the sense that she could converse in two languages, English and Spanish however, since Spanish was not one of her first languages and she did not utilise her language skills to converse with people in the environment she had grown up with i.e. her kin, it could be said that her input and output in relation to the second language was “impoverished”. Hence, had she been as fluent in Sindhi as she was in Spanish and had learnt it at school, along with Cummins’ “school program” factors, the “socio-cultural” factor he mentions would have come in to play as she would have practised this language at home with her family and thereby been at a “congitive advantage”.
Comparing Cummins’ research to Hornby, it can be see that although Hornby enlists a number of researches and analyses them to convey his point across to his audience, Cummins adopts a method of enlistsing three min factors which relate biligualism and their effect on an individual and analyses them. Cummins’ analysis on the different factors affecting billingualism contribute to my study as the debate on whether bilingual aids congition is something that he explores under each of these factors and hence, acts as a significantly imporatnt source to my study.
SOURCE 2
Hornby, Peter A. Bilingualism: Hornby, Peter A. Bilingualism: Psychological, Social and Educational Implications. New York : Academic Press Inc. , 1977.
In his book Bilingualism: Psychological, Social and Educational Implications Hornby aims to induce amongst his readers’ awareness and appreciation of the scope and complexity of current thinking in bilingualism by brining together historical developments, theoretical controversies and research findings in the disciplines of of psychology, linguistics and education and relating them to the effect bilingualism may have on an individual and and his or her society. Hornby aims to discover "which characteristics of a bilingual setting lead to its being viewed as a source of enrichment and diversity...rather than as a source of confusion, conflict and frustration." (Hornby ix) In his Introductory Chapter, Hornby provides his readers with a classification of the different types of bilingualism by providing the views of different researchers relating to the definition of bilingualism. For the purpose of this research, Bloomfield's (1933) definition of bilingualism will be used i.e. " the term should be applied only to those individuals who possess "nativelike" ability in both languages."
In order to accomplish his aims Hornby uses a civil tone to portray the views of others. Forwarding and countering these views, he forms an authoritative base for his arguments. Reflecting on Cummins' threshold hypothesis, Hornby talks about the importance of an assurance to
minority groups that their home language should be given a strong reading and writing base before or along with the introduction of the national language and describes it as a "potentially productive hypothesis to test" (Hornby 18). Hence, a slight interlink between Cummins and Hornby's views can be noticed. Shivanii’s father mimics this ideology of Hornby’s when he comes across as "adamant" on making her speaking their dyinglanguage. However, Hornby goes on to compare the different conclusions various researchers have deduced during their research projects. Referring to Peal and Lambert's study, he talks about their conclusion that "bilinguals were characterized by a more differentiated intelligence subtest profile than their monolingual comparison group." (Hornby 29) which he furthers by connecting to Anisfield's findings that contradicted those of Peal and Lambert's by concluding that bilinguals did not have superior cognitive skills when compared to monolinguals leading to Hornby's conclusion that "the response characteristics of bilinguals are a matter of response rather than basic ability difference." Hornby states that "only when both languages are spoken by individuals important to the child that the child rises to the challenge of becoming bilingual." However, this does not stand through in Shivanii's case as while both her parents can converse in Sindhi, she is unable to and end up at a cognitive disadvantage, mixing up the three languages while attempting to speaking in Sindhi.
In Chapter Three, Hornby forwards the views of authors such as Lambert, Darcy and Peal to illustrate his views. Borrowing the findings of Peal and Lambert’s study, he extends their findings to draw on a conclusion that with the provision of more evidence, the efficiency of the different proposed mechanisms by the researchers whose data he has illustrated and extended will become clearer. Hence, it is noticed that Hornby illustrates the point he is making by forwarding the views of authors/researchers including Lambert, Darcy, Peal, Anisfield and Torrance among others and cites each one of their views by citing them using the MLA system, thereby authorizing his claims. Thus, borrowing their data he extends it to apply it to the questions he aims to explore i.e. the psychological, social and educational implications of bilingualism.
SOURCE 3
Isurin, Ludmila and Altarriba, Jeanette. Memory, Language, and Bilingualism . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
In his article Freeman draws on the thesis that in the solution the second language acquisition (SLA) field has perennially adopted when there are conflicting views to seek a larger frame, one that acknowledges the contributions of both perspectives, "individual/cognitive and social/contextual" (Freeman 773). Freeman expects both perspective to be productive for future understanding and believes that there will be a point where both views cross paths and will prove productive in the understanding of second language acquisition. Rather than providing a biased view, Freeman aims to portray both sides of the bilingual debate and provide a reason for why reconciliation among both sides is
impossible. Looking at different theories and researches, Freeman leaves his audience with an open-ended conclusion requesting his audience "not to maintain old walls, or construct new one, but instead to open up to new spaces." and anticipating that "the field of inquiry (in bilingualism) will once again broaden and move on."
Through out his narrative Freeman forwards and counters the views of a number of linguists and researchers. Drawing upon Long (1997) and Kasper's (1997) mutual view that second language acquisition occurs through participation, it can be seen that had Shivanii participated more in conversations in Sindhi, she could have improved her second language skills and avoided being at a "cognitive disadvantage" in the case she illustrates in her narrative. Referring to Firth and Wagner, he suggests that "communications are not simply a transfer of information in a 'normal', that is native speaker equivalent, manner" thereby contradicting the view portrayed by Shivanii's father in his narrative as he tries to enforce and persuade his daughter to converse in their native language which he believed, as did Shivanii towards the end of her narrative, that speaking her native language would help keep her grounded to her culture.
Hence, it can be seen that Freeman’s thought process and methodology is different from that of the authors of the other two sources used and hence, adds a completely different perspective to the research indicating that with time, there is scope for more research and hence more coherent and definite answers to the question being researched.
CONCLUSION
Looking at these different sources, it can be seen that to a large extent bilingualism plays an extremely significant positive role in impacting one’s cognitive skills however, as pointed out by Cummmins, external factors such as cultural and educational background do play a vital role in influencing this notion, Examining and analyzing these different sources holding rather diverse views, larger questions relating to the extent to which the notion of “bilingualism is better” holds true. To what extent can linguistics aid in a person’s cognitive skills, how many languages may a person learn until the “cognitive disadvantages” start to surface, or if any will surface can be raised as well as a larger question as to whether it is the educational program or socio-cultural factors that impact the cognitive skills of a bilingual individual may be raised.