成为一名双语/多语者

IF 0.3 Q4 PEDIATRICS
R. Kaipa, Roha Kaipa
{"title":"成为一名双语/多语者","authors":"R. Kaipa, Roha Kaipa","doi":"10.1055/s-0042-1743529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"More than half the world’s population is bilingual.1 About 20% of the population in the United States and Canada speak a language at home other than English.1,2 Bilingualism is far more prevalent in Europe, with approximately 56% of the population across all the European Union countries reporting functionally bilingual.3 Although bilinguals make up a significant percentage of the world’s population, the topic of bilingualism has been a baffling area of research for many years. It is mainly due to the misconceptions about children/ individuals who are bilingual. Speaking two or more languages affects the developing minds, or bilingual children find it confusing to learn two languages are some popular misconceptions about bilinguals that continue to persist.4 But research in this area has suggested otherwise. For example, Peal and Lambert compared the performance of French monolinguals to English-French bilinguals on a battery of tests.5 The authors found that the bilinguals outperformed monolinguals on language tasks. Although surprising, this finding has been confirmed in several follow-up studies that suggest bilingual children are at an advantage across a range of linguistic and nonlinguistic skills.6 The advantages of bilingualism do not just stop in childhood. It continues well past into adulthood as well.7 Unfortunately, despite the surmounting evidence concerning the advantages of bilingualism, the misconceptions surrounding bilingualism have continued to gain ground, leading people to believe that a monolingual approach is a better way to raise not only typically developing children but also children with language deficits. In many countries where bilingualism or even multilingualism is the norm (e. g., India), there is a biased perspective that children with language disorders cannot learn multiple languages. Thus, children with language disorders in such countries are often made to choose amonolingual approach to their educational instruction and intervention. The area of research is further complicated by several external variables such as the interaction of the first language (L1) and second language (L2) in bilingual children, the age of the exposure to L2, the amount of exposure to L2, and so on. As researchers, we must continue to untangle these myths and misconceptions to understand the true nature of bilingualism. In this special issue of “Language Development and Disorders inMultilingual Children,”wehave assembled a total of six articles, including original research, case studies, and reviews that highlight the different facets of bilingualism and multilingualism. Tran et al surveyed the language practices at home among 151 Vietnamese-Australian parents.8 The survey findings revealed that about a third of the participants (35.6%) had a family language policy, and 72.5% of those consistently implemented their policy. The authors emphasize that without support from the government, most of the Vietnamese-English bilingual children in Australia are at risk of abandoning the consistent use of Vietnamese over the use of the dominant language, English. Freeman and Schroeder, in their review, present important strategies that should be considered when using norm-referenced tests to assess language skills in bilingual children.9 The authors also present alternatives to norm-referenced tests, including dynamic assessment measures, nonword repetition, language sampling, nonlinguistic cognition, and parent report. Srikar et al in their paper present a combination of literature review as well as four case vignettes.10 The first half of their article reviews previous literature that could potentially contribute to the decision-making process while selecting language(s) for intervention for childrenwith autism spectrum disorders who are exposed tomore than one language. The second half of the article presents four case vignettes that highlight the challenges faced by clinicians in the language selection process for intervention in a country like India. Rego et al measured the lexical knowledge of typically developing Konkani-English speaking bilingual children as a function of L1 and L2 and age.11 The findings indicated that the vocabulary size of the participants in both languages increased as a function of their age. However, the influence of L1 over L2 or vice versa on lexical knowledge could not be established. Mohan et al investigated if the nature of the L1 written script influenced the L2 literacy skills in two groups of bilingual children. Interestingly, the authors found that the","PeriodicalId":41283,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Child Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Being a Bilingual/Multilingual\",\"authors\":\"R. Kaipa, Roha Kaipa\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0042-1743529\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"More than half the world’s population is bilingual.1 About 20% of the population in the United States and Canada speak a language at home other than English.1,2 Bilingualism is far more prevalent in Europe, with approximately 56% of the population across all the European Union countries reporting functionally bilingual.3 Although bilinguals make up a significant percentage of the world’s population, the topic of bilingualism has been a baffling area of research for many years. It is mainly due to the misconceptions about children/ individuals who are bilingual. Speaking two or more languages affects the developing minds, or bilingual children find it confusing to learn two languages are some popular misconceptions about bilinguals that continue to persist.4 But research in this area has suggested otherwise. For example, Peal and Lambert compared the performance of French monolinguals to English-French bilinguals on a battery of tests.5 The authors found that the bilinguals outperformed monolinguals on language tasks. Although surprising, this finding has been confirmed in several follow-up studies that suggest bilingual children are at an advantage across a range of linguistic and nonlinguistic skills.6 The advantages of bilingualism do not just stop in childhood. It continues well past into adulthood as well.7 Unfortunately, despite the surmounting evidence concerning the advantages of bilingualism, the misconceptions surrounding bilingualism have continued to gain ground, leading people to believe that a monolingual approach is a better way to raise not only typically developing children but also children with language deficits. In many countries where bilingualism or even multilingualism is the norm (e. g., India), there is a biased perspective that children with language disorders cannot learn multiple languages. Thus, children with language disorders in such countries are often made to choose amonolingual approach to their educational instruction and intervention. The area of research is further complicated by several external variables such as the interaction of the first language (L1) and second language (L2) in bilingual children, the age of the exposure to L2, the amount of exposure to L2, and so on. As researchers, we must continue to untangle these myths and misconceptions to understand the true nature of bilingualism. In this special issue of “Language Development and Disorders inMultilingual Children,”wehave assembled a total of six articles, including original research, case studies, and reviews that highlight the different facets of bilingualism and multilingualism. Tran et al surveyed the language practices at home among 151 Vietnamese-Australian parents.8 The survey findings revealed that about a third of the participants (35.6%) had a family language policy, and 72.5% of those consistently implemented their policy. The authors emphasize that without support from the government, most of the Vietnamese-English bilingual children in Australia are at risk of abandoning the consistent use of Vietnamese over the use of the dominant language, English. Freeman and Schroeder, in their review, present important strategies that should be considered when using norm-referenced tests to assess language skills in bilingual children.9 The authors also present alternatives to norm-referenced tests, including dynamic assessment measures, nonword repetition, language sampling, nonlinguistic cognition, and parent report. Srikar et al in their paper present a combination of literature review as well as four case vignettes.10 The first half of their article reviews previous literature that could potentially contribute to the decision-making process while selecting language(s) for intervention for childrenwith autism spectrum disorders who are exposed tomore than one language. The second half of the article presents four case vignettes that highlight the challenges faced by clinicians in the language selection process for intervention in a country like India. Rego et al measured the lexical knowledge of typically developing Konkani-English speaking bilingual children as a function of L1 and L2 and age.11 The findings indicated that the vocabulary size of the participants in both languages increased as a function of their age. However, the influence of L1 over L2 or vice versa on lexical knowledge could not be established. Mohan et al investigated if the nature of the L1 written script influenced the L2 literacy skills in two groups of bilingual children. Interestingly, the authors found that the\",\"PeriodicalId\":41283,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Child Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Child Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1743529\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Child Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1743529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

世界上一半以上的人口会说两种语言在美国和加拿大,大约有20%的人口在家里说英语以外的语言。双语在欧洲更为普遍,在所有欧盟国家中,大约56%的人口是双语者虽然双语者占世界人口的很大比例,但多年来,双语问题一直是一个令人困惑的研究领域。这主要是由于对双语儿童/个人的误解。说两种或两种以上的语言会影响心智发育,或者双语儿童觉得学习两种语言很困惑,这是一些关于双语者的普遍误解,这些误解一直存在但这一领域的研究表明,情况并非如此。例如,皮尔和兰伯特在一系列测试中比较了法语单语者和英法双语者的表现作者发现,双语者在语言任务上的表现优于单语者。这一发现虽然令人惊讶,但在后续的几项研究中得到了证实。这些研究表明,双语儿童在一系列语言和非语言技能方面都具有优势双语的优势不仅仅止于儿童时期。它也会一直持续到成年不幸的是,尽管有大量证据表明双语的优势,但围绕双语的误解仍在继续,导致人们认为单语方法不仅是培养正常发育儿童的更好方法,也是培养语言缺陷儿童的更好方法。在许多以双语甚至多语为常态的国家(例如印度),存在一种偏见,认为有语言障碍的儿童无法学习多种语言。因此,这些国家的语言障碍儿童往往被迫选择单语方法进行教育指导和干预。这一研究领域因几个外部变量而进一步复杂化,如双语儿童的第一语言(L1)和第二语言(L2)的相互作用、接触L2的年龄、接触L2的量等等。作为研究人员,我们必须继续解开这些神话和误解,以了解双语的真正本质。在本期“多语儿童的语言发展和障碍”特刊中,我们汇集了六篇文章,包括原创研究、案例研究和综述,突出了双语和多语的不同方面。Tran等人调查了151名越南裔澳大利亚父母在家里的语言习惯调查结果显示,约三分之一(35.6%)的参与者有家庭语言政策,其中72.5%的人一直在执行他们的政策。作者强调,如果没有政府的支持,澳大利亚的大多数越南语-英语双语儿童都有可能放弃一贯使用越南语,而不是使用主导语言英语。Freeman和Schroeder在他们的综述中提出了在使用规范参照测试评估双语儿童语言技能时应该考虑的重要策略作者还提出了规范参考测试的替代方案,包括动态评估措施、非词重复、语言抽样、非语言认知和家长报告。Srikar等人在他们的论文中提出了文献综述和四个案例的结合他们文章的前半部分回顾了以前的文献,这些文献可能有助于在选择干预语言的决策过程中,为接触多种语言的自闭症谱系障碍儿童提供帮助。文章的后半部分介绍了四个案例,突出了临床医生在像印度这样的国家进行干预的语言选择过程中面临的挑战。Rego等人测量了典型发展的说Konkani-English的双语儿童的词汇知识与第一语言和第二语言以及年龄的关系研究结果表明,参与者的两种语言词汇量都随着年龄的增长而增加。然而,尚不能确定母语对二语或反之对词汇知识的影响。Mohan等人调查了两组双语儿童的母语书面文字的性质是否会影响第二语言读写技能。有趣的是,作者发现
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Being a Bilingual/Multilingual
More than half the world’s population is bilingual.1 About 20% of the population in the United States and Canada speak a language at home other than English.1,2 Bilingualism is far more prevalent in Europe, with approximately 56% of the population across all the European Union countries reporting functionally bilingual.3 Although bilinguals make up a significant percentage of the world’s population, the topic of bilingualism has been a baffling area of research for many years. It is mainly due to the misconceptions about children/ individuals who are bilingual. Speaking two or more languages affects the developing minds, or bilingual children find it confusing to learn two languages are some popular misconceptions about bilinguals that continue to persist.4 But research in this area has suggested otherwise. For example, Peal and Lambert compared the performance of French monolinguals to English-French bilinguals on a battery of tests.5 The authors found that the bilinguals outperformed monolinguals on language tasks. Although surprising, this finding has been confirmed in several follow-up studies that suggest bilingual children are at an advantage across a range of linguistic and nonlinguistic skills.6 The advantages of bilingualism do not just stop in childhood. It continues well past into adulthood as well.7 Unfortunately, despite the surmounting evidence concerning the advantages of bilingualism, the misconceptions surrounding bilingualism have continued to gain ground, leading people to believe that a monolingual approach is a better way to raise not only typically developing children but also children with language deficits. In many countries where bilingualism or even multilingualism is the norm (e. g., India), there is a biased perspective that children with language disorders cannot learn multiple languages. Thus, children with language disorders in such countries are often made to choose amonolingual approach to their educational instruction and intervention. The area of research is further complicated by several external variables such as the interaction of the first language (L1) and second language (L2) in bilingual children, the age of the exposure to L2, the amount of exposure to L2, and so on. As researchers, we must continue to untangle these myths and misconceptions to understand the true nature of bilingualism. In this special issue of “Language Development and Disorders inMultilingual Children,”wehave assembled a total of six articles, including original research, case studies, and reviews that highlight the different facets of bilingualism and multilingualism. Tran et al surveyed the language practices at home among 151 Vietnamese-Australian parents.8 The survey findings revealed that about a third of the participants (35.6%) had a family language policy, and 72.5% of those consistently implemented their policy. The authors emphasize that without support from the government, most of the Vietnamese-English bilingual children in Australia are at risk of abandoning the consistent use of Vietnamese over the use of the dominant language, English. Freeman and Schroeder, in their review, present important strategies that should be considered when using norm-referenced tests to assess language skills in bilingual children.9 The authors also present alternatives to norm-referenced tests, including dynamic assessment measures, nonword repetition, language sampling, nonlinguistic cognition, and parent report. Srikar et al in their paper present a combination of literature review as well as four case vignettes.10 The first half of their article reviews previous literature that could potentially contribute to the decision-making process while selecting language(s) for intervention for childrenwith autism spectrum disorders who are exposed tomore than one language. The second half of the article presents four case vignettes that highlight the challenges faced by clinicians in the language selection process for intervention in a country like India. Rego et al measured the lexical knowledge of typically developing Konkani-English speaking bilingual children as a function of L1 and L2 and age.11 The findings indicated that the vocabulary size of the participants in both languages increased as a function of their age. However, the influence of L1 over L2 or vice versa on lexical knowledge could not be established. Mohan et al investigated if the nature of the L1 written script influenced the L2 literacy skills in two groups of bilingual children. Interestingly, the authors found that the
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信