Bilingual Language Users’ Learning Experience: Reflections for Educators and Parents
Grace Wu Lee, grace.w.lee@biola.edu
Introduction
This article recounts the retrospective analysis of a bilingual language user’s learning experience over almost 30 years. My purpose is twofold. The first is a personal conviction. As an ESL teacher, I believe it is imperative for all language teachers to reflect on and examine their own language-learning experiences, which can provide a starting point to better understand and hopefully gain an inside look into how students learn their second language (L2). In turn such understanding will inevitably help us better empathize with and thus assist our students in the challenges of L2 learning. This common ground between the teacher and student, I feel, can serve as an outstanding motivating vehicle in the ESL/EFL classroom. Second, even though I offer only one voice, my hope is that through this analysis teachers and parents of bilingual children will become more aware of the invisible processes that may take place as a result of such children knowing two languages. There are numerous implications, both advantageous and disadvantageous, that I am now personally coming to terms with, especially as I look toward parenthood in a home that could possibly serve as a multilingual environment for children.
This article has two main sections. First I reflect on my experience as a bilingual language user, highlighting two key and recurring aspects: code-switching and language attrition. I also briefly note how motivation and cultural factors have influenced my language learning and consider my strong and weak points as a bilingual, at present and in childhood. Second, I discuss implications that may be of particular interest to teachers and parents of bilingual children. My analysis draws from my evaluations of current bilingual/multilingual research, issues from my personal journal reflections, and points from second language acquisition (SLA) expert Brown (2007).
Terms and Definitions
In order to discuss language learning from a bilingual perspective, I should define some terms. According to Brown (2007), bilingualism is “in essence, learning two first languages” (p. 72). Thus, bilinguals are users of two languages. This is distinct from but connected with SLA, which deals with second or foreign language learning. Brown stated that “the key to success is in distinguishing separate contexts for the two languages” (p. 72). A further distinction is made in bilingualism: “people who learn a second language in such separate contexts can often be described as coordinate bilinguals; they have two meaning systems, as opposed to compound bilinguals who have one meaning system from which both languages operate” (p. 72). At one time, coordinate and compound bilingualism were thought to be completely separate from each other, with no overlap. Cook (2003), however, noted that “more recently it is believed that both types of bilingualism are present to varying extents in the same person; that is to say, in a given individual, some aspects of the two languages may be linked, others may be separate” (p. 489). I take Cook’s position on bilingualism.
Reflections From Childhood to Adulthood
Code-Switching
Code-switching is a phenomenon common to most bilinguals. This “act of inserting words, phrases, or even longer stretches of one language into the other” (Brown, 2007, p. 72) came naturally for me in early childhood. Actually, I cannot recall what it was ever like not to code-switch between Chinese and English. From my earliest childhood memories code-switching was as much a part of my language learning as thinking or breathing; it was something I did almost unconsciously. Interestingly, however, I cannot say which language I used to process with in order to produce language. Generally speaking, children do not have issues with “mixing up languages, regardless of the separateness of contexts for use of the languages” (Brown, 2007, p. 72). Brown (2007) and various studies (e.g., Cook, 2003; Grosjean, 1985; Olmedo, 2003) agreed that bilinguals are not the sum of two monolinguals. In one study, Edwards and Dewaele (2007) concluded that the ability to code-switch is actually evidence of bilingual competence.
My ability to code-switch has gone through several major shifts, particularly between pre K-12 and afterward. I believe this has a lot to do with input/output and the context of learning. During my preK-12 years, I acquired and used more Chinese than English because it was the dominant language spoken at home. Even so, I learned to code-switch early on because my parents did so, especially as my father helped my mother learn English. As I entered K-12, the amount of code-switching was reduced because I spent most of the day at school using English. Code-switching was then limited to only a few hours a day at home. Eventually, I would go from using a majority of Chinese with some English to a majority of English with some Chinese. I believe this shift was gradual.
I imagine that I learned to adapt my language according to the context early on; at school, I used English only and at home I used Chinglish (a combination of Chinese and English). In his study, Olmedo (2003) noted that children’s linguistic abilities demonstrate sensitivity to context and peer language skills and their ability to adapt language in order to be understood and to better communicate. Reyes and Moll (2008) similarly stated that linguistic and social knowledge develops collaboratively within the context of community.
At present, I engage in very little code-switching as I speak English almost all the time at home, work, and school. There are few occasions when I deliberately code-switch, and I do so with some difficulty because I am slowly losing my Chinese. When I speak with my parents, I revert to code-switching because that is their way of communicating with me; it is like a family language. I also engage in code-switching when I am in conversation with Chinese and/or Chinese-American peers, for two main reasons. The first is that my message will be communicated more effectively. There are words in Chinese that do not have English equivalents; for example, there is no English term for san huo which is “negative heat or chi that gets trapped in the body.” In addition, whatever term I have used more frequently becomes my primary linguistic source of reference. Second, I code-switch with English-speaking Chinese as a way to culturally identify with them. In their study, Ramirez-Esparza, Gosling, Benet-Martinez, Potter, and Pennebaker (2006) attributed this phenomenon to the automatic switch of cultural frames that bilinguals typically engage in, assuming that they are also bicultural.
Language Attrition
In recent years, one of the most difficult realities that I have faced as a bilingual is language attrition. I have witnessed a slow and steady decline in my Chinese language skills since late elementary school, which in all honesty grieves and concerns me. Brown (2007) listed several possible factors for language attrition, including native language transfer and interference, neurolinguistic blocking, strength and conditions of initial learning, motivational factors, and cultural identity.
Reflecting upon my own experience, I see three main factors for this language attrition. The first and most obvious has to do with the context and learning environment. Growing up in the Midwest, I was typically the only Asian bilingual student in my class. Without consistent and ample opportunity to use both languages for the majority of the day, it was inevitable that my once-dominant Chinese would be replaced by my currently dominant English. Brown (2007) referred to this process as subtractive bilingualism, where “native language forgetting occurs [when] learners rely more and more on a second language, which eventually replaces their first language” (p. 96). By this definition, even though Chinese and English were once my dual first languages (L1s), English is now my L1; and one would never guess, upon hearing me speak Chinese, that the ancient language used to be my dominant language.
Another factor for my language attrition, I believe, has to do with lack of motivation. Between the ages of 6 and 8, I dreaded Sunday afternoons because I had to attend Chinese school promptly after church. At my parents’ insistence—most likely because they did not want me to lose my Chinese—I attended Mandarin classes, mainly for reading and writing. I recall being bored and seeing little relevance in memorizing and writing sets of Chinese characters hundreds and hundreds of times. I had little, if any, motivation to learn Chinese at that age, especially because my parents forced me to study. The only thing that kept me in those dreadful classes was the fear of and love I had for my parents.
Last, I believe that cultural identity can be a major factor in language attrition (and vice versa), particularly for bilingual children. As a bilingual language user, I grew up with a fragile sense of cultural identity; not only was I a speaker of two languages but I was also divided between two cultures. I did not know whether English made me American or whether Mandarin made me Chinese. In high school, I found it easier to ignore my cultural heritage and language altogether. Thus, I experienced a significant amount of language attrition during my teenage years. However, my parents did not let me forget that I was Chinese.
In his study, Priven (2008) addressed this very issue of cultural identity and language attrition. Looking at bilingual children of immigrants, he discussed some negative implications of acquiring a new language, which often comes at the expense of the native language. For example, language attrition is not simply about losing language on an individual level; it has the potential to affect subsequent generations and communities. Finally, though, regarding language attrition, all is not bleak. I believe that even the most severe language attrition can be reversed, given the right conditions—ample input and opportunity for output, immersion in the target culture, and intrinsic/extrinsic motivation. There may be more conditional factors but for now I will share from my experience.
In 2003, I moved to Beijing to teach EFL. One of my goals, while living and working there, was to improve my existing Chinese language skills so that they would be near equal with the locals. I realize this was far-fetched, but it was enough to keep me motivated to learn. I was determined to speak as the local Chinese did and worked at “bringing about certain internally rewarding consequences, namely, feelings of competence and self-determination” (Deci, 1975, cited in Brown, 2007, p. 172). I ended up learning more in 2 years of Chinese language study in China than I did in 4 years of French in high school (when I had extrinsic motivation), mainly because no one was forcing me to study Chinese this time and I was immersed in the target culture. My own intrinsic motivation was the driving “flow” effect. On the basis of my experience, I echo Brown’s (2007) statement that “research supports the ultimate importance of intrinsic involvement of learners in attaining one’s proficiency goals” (p. 174). In my case, all the conditions were present: adequate input and opportunity for output, immersion in Chinese culture, and intrinsic/extrinsic motivation.
Implications for Teachers and Parents of Bilingual Children
If you teach or are a parent of a bilingual child, or hope to be one in the near future, there are numerous books available that you might want to refer to, such as those by Baker (2007), Cunningham-Andersson and Andersson (2004), Harding-Esch and Riley (2003), King and Mackey (2007), and Pearson (2008). In the rest of this article I offer my input on some possible strengths and weaknesses of bilingual language users, as well as some guidance, that may provide some insight into a bilingual child’s language learning. Unless otherwise noted, these thoughts are the result of my retrospection as a bilingual language learner and user.
Possible Advantages and Strengths
Being a user of two languages is not uncommon, and it offers what has been called “the bilingual edge” (King & Mackey, 2007). With the increase of Internet usage and travel and advancement in technology, learning a new language has never been easier. Bilingualism is relevant to almost two thirds of the world, as “knowing and using two languages . . . is the everyday state of the majority of beings” (Cook, 2003, p. 55).
If you are an adult wanting to learn a second language and feel it’s too late to do so, or you’re a teacher or parent of a bilingual child and are concerned about language attrition, know that it is never too late to either learn or slow (even reverse) the effects of language loss. It has long been asserted that the younger the learner, the better the language learning. Authors that share this perspective — Oh, Jun, Knightly, and Au (2002) — suggested that early language exposure, even with minimal or no continued exposure, has lasting benefits. Though there may be some truth to this, it is not the whole truth. Brown (2007) stated, for example, that “perpetuating a younger-the-better myth in arguments about bilingual education and other forms of early language intervention does a disservice to our children and to our educational enterprise” (p. 80).
There are many variables to consider in language learning, as this analysis highlights. One ought to consider the context of the learning environment, as well as motivation, cultural factors, and other considerations. An important thing to keep in mind, however, is that children and adults are different learners. One is not better or more successful at language learning. Each learner is unique, and thus each learner uniquely learns. Furthermore, as an ESL teacher and bilingual language user myself, I echo what Brown (2007) said regarding language learning: “What is more important is meaningfulness. . . . [I]t appears that contextualized, appropriate, meaningful communication in the second language seems to be the best possible practice [a] learner could engage in” (p. 77).
Reyes and Moll (2008) discussed advantages and unique characteristics of bilingualism. Compared with monolingual children, bilingual children not only have cognitive and metalingual advantages but take on stronger self-identity as a result of greater sensitivity to different cultures. Bilinguals bring “funds of knowledge” that are valuable resources in language and literacy. 1 Brown (2007) noted that bilinguals are “more facile at concept formation and have a greater mental flexibility” (p. 72). This is where code-switching becomes a strength and benefit to bilinguals:
[It is] ‘an extremely common practice among bilinguals’ [and an] illustration of ‘skilled manipulation of overlapping sections of two (or more) grammars, and . . . there is virtually no instance of ungrammatical combination of two languages in codeswitching, regardless of the bilingual ability of the speaker’ (Edwards & Dewaele, 2007, p. 222).
As teachers and parents, we therefore need to see the positives in code-switching.
Possible Disadvantages and Weaknesses
As there are possible advantages to bilingualism, there are also possible disadvantages. Priven (2008) claimed it appears that the acquisition of a new language often comes at the expense of the L1. I believe this interference is quite common and I see it in my own language learning. However, not only the acquisition itself but also a number of other factors, which I mentioned earlier, interfere. In addition, Gollan, Montoya, Cera, and Sandovall (2008) tested the “weaker links” hypothesis, which suggests that bilinguals are at a disadvantage compared with monolinguals in speaking abilities because they divide “frequency-of-use between L1 and L2” (p. 787). The premise behind the hypothesis is twofold: (1) bilinguals use each language less frequently because a speaker can use only one language at a time, thus dividing frequency-of-use between the languages, and with passing time, compared with monolinguals, bilingual language patterns will weaken “between semantics and phonology in each lexical system” (p. 788); (2) bilingual speakers are at a disadvantage in relation to monolinguals because they face competition between translation equivalents when retrieving a desired word.
Sometimes, a bilingual’s L1 can interfere with the L2. A problem that I frequently have in Chinese has to do with transferred error. In English, I can ask a negative question and expect a negative answer; for example, “You haven’t eaten yet, have you?” (Response: “No, I haven’t.”) In Chinese, if I ask the same negative question, I am guaranteed to receive a positive response: “Yes.” This “yes” is translated as, “Yes, you’re right. I haven’t eaten yet.” This is a transferred error I often make when speaking Chinese; I will ask something in the syntactic form of English but the response I get is positive. This may or may not be an individual weakness but it is worth mentioning because other learners also struggle with such transfer issues.
Conclusion
As I have tried to show, bilingual language learning and use are complex, and there are both weaknesses and strengths in bilingualism. There are also phenomena unique to bilinguals (or multilinguals), such as code-switching and subtractive bilingualism. For some of these things, research and linguistics may at best offer theories; for others, they can provide concrete answers. I would like to encourage educators and parents of bilingual language users to support bilingual learners in their L2 learning journeys. As Reyes and Moll (2008) declared, “Only the constant support of the home and school, as well as a host of other institutions” will guide our children’s learning and identities in a positive light (p. 156). Overall, I believe there are more advantages to bilingualism than disadvantages, as I hope these reflections reveal.
Grace Wu Lee is completing an MA in intercultural studies with an emphasis in TESOL at Biola University in La Mirada, CA. She has taught ESL/EFL in China, Kazahkstan, and the United States, and enjoys running, traveling, walks with her husband, and people-watching in her free time.
Note
1. Funds of knowledge are the “diverse bodies of knowledge existing in households and communities that develop from [members’] social histories and . . . everyday practices” (Reyes & Moll, 2008, p. 149).
References
Baker, C. (2007). A parents’ and teachers’ guide to bilingualism (3rd ed.). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Longman.
Cook, V. (2003). Linguistics and second language acquisition: One person with two languages. In M. Aronoff & J. Rees-Miller (Eds.), The handbook of linguistics (pp. 488-511). Oxford: Blackwell.
Cunningham-Andersson, U., & Andersson, S. (2004). Growing up with two languages: A practical guide (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Deci, E. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
Edwards, M., & Dewaele, J. M. (2007). Trilingual conversations: A window into multicompetence. International Journal of Bilingualism, 11, 221-242.
Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Cera, C., & Sandovall, T. C. (2008). More use almost always means a smaller frequency effect: Aging, bilingualism and the weaker links hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 787-814.
Grosjean, F. (1985). The bilingual as a competent but specific speaker-hearer. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 6, 467-477.
Harding-Esch, E., & Riley, P. (2003). The bilingual family: A handbook for parents (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
King, K, & Mackey, A. (2007). The bilingual edge: Why, when, and how to teach your child a second language. New York: HarperCollins.
Oh, J. S., Jun, S. A., Knightly, L. M., & Au, T. K. (2002). Holding on to childhood language memory. Cognition, 86, B53-B64.
Olmedo, I. M. (2003). Language mediation among emergent bilingual children. Linguistics and Education, 14, 143-162.
Pearson, B. Z. (2008). Raising a bilingual child. New York: Living Languages/Random House.
Priven, D. (2008). Grievability of first language loss: Towards a reconceptualisation of European minority language education practices. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11, 95-106.
Ramirez-Esparza, N., Gosling, S., Benet-Martinez, V., Potter, J. & Pennebaker, J. (2006). Do bilinguals have two personalities? A special case of cultural frame switching. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 99-120.
Reyes, I., & Moll, L. C. (2008). Bilingual and biliterate practices at home and school. In B. Spolsky & F. M. Hult (Eds.), The handbook of educational linguistics (pp. 147-158). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
