Developing in Two Languages: Korean Children in America (Child Language and Child Development) - Softcover

Shin, Sarah J.

Softcover

ISBN 10: 1853597465 ISBN 13: 9781853597466

Publisher: Multilingual Matters, 2004

Synopsis

Immigrant parents are frequently advised by teachers, doctors and speech therapists to stop speaking the native language at home so as not to confuse children with input from two languages. However, this view is not supported by empirical linguistic and social evidence. This book sheds light on some of the common myths around being bilingual and explores the processes of dual language development among Korean children growing up in the United States. The book sensibly argues that the bilingualism of linguistic minority children is a resource to be cultivated, not a problem to be overcome. In addition, it explores various educational, social and economic pressures which hamper intergenerational transmission of heritage languages, and discusses factors that contribute to successful bilingual raising of children in spite of these pressures. A welcome addition to the growing literature on bilingual development, this book offers useful suggestions for parents, teachers and policy makers who are interested in promoting the development and maintenance of bilingual competence in linguistic minority children.

About this title

About the Author

Sarah J. Shin is Professor of Education at the University of Maryland Baltimore County, USA. She is an expert in bilingualism, heritage language education and TESOL teacher training, and the author of Bilingualism in Schools and Society (Routledge) and Developing in Two Languages (Multilingual Matters).

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

Developing in Two Languages

Korean Children in America

By Sarah J. Shin

Multilingual Matters

Copyright © 2005 Sarah J. Shin
All rights reserved.

ISBN: 978-1-85359-746-6

Contents

Acknowledgments, vii, 
Introduction, 1, 
1 The Development of Childhood Bilingualism, 13, 
2 Koreans in the United States, 41, 
3 Methods, 67, 
4 Codeswitching as a Communicative Resource, 82, 
5 Dual Language Development, 107, 
6 Pressures for Language Shift, 128, 
7 Developing and Maintaining Heritage Languages, 149, 
References, 166, 
Appendixes, 179, 
1. Abbreviations, 179, 
2. Transcription Conventions, 180, 
3. Yale System of Romanization, 181, 
4. Questionnaire for Parents, 182, 
Author Index, 189, 
Subject Index, 192, 

CHAPTER 1

The Development of Childhood Bilingualism

Bilingualism is a fact of life for the majority of the world's population. Indeed it is estimated that about two-thirds of the world's population is bilingual (Baker & Prys Jones, 1998). There are anywhere between 5000 and 6000 languages in the world today (Grimes, 2000) and only about 190 countries in which to house them (World Almanac, 2003), which indicate how widespread language contact within individual countries must be. Although the ability to use two or more languages is, therefore, more common than monolingual competence (Mackey, 1967), bilingualism has traditionally been treated as a special case or a deviation from the monolingual norm (Romaine, 1995: 8). Most linguistic research has tended to focus on monolinguals and has treated bilinguals as exceptions. For instance, Chomsky's (1965: 3) theory of grammar is concerned primarily with 'an ideal speaker–listener, in a completely homogeneous speech-community, who knows its language perfectly.' Given the emphasis on describing the linguistic competence of the ideal monolingual speaker, bilingualism has necessarily been regarded as problematic, an impure form of communication by people who do not seem to know either language fully.

Strictly speaking, it would be difficult to find someone who thinks bilingualism is downright bad. After all, one can reasonably argue that knowing two languages is always better than knowing one. Indeed many people think that bilingualism (or multilingualism) is a sign of intellectual prowess and sophistication – those who have competence in several languages are often regarded with envy and admiration. However, unlike in many European and African countries where it is considered a valuable asset, bilingualism in the United States is often treated as a problem and a stigma. This is because those who are bilingual in the US are usually poor and from immigrant and/or racial minority backgrounds. The attitude of the Anglo-American majority and of the general public is that individuals of language minority backgrounds should be rapidly integrated into English-speaking mainstream society. The bilingualism of immigrant populations indicates that they are (still) speaking their minority languages, which is interpreted as resistance to a full integration into American society. As Grosjean (1982: 66) put it: 'The pressure to Americanize and to become monolingual in English has led the country into a bizarre paradox: most Americans, many of whose families are originally of a foreign language background, prove to be extremely incompetent in learning and speaking foreign languages.' Obviously not all bilingualism is alike. Indeed, while the bilingualism of majority English-speaking populations is prized and appreciated, the bilingualism of minority groups is considered a liability.

Compared to other language-related disciplines, bilingualism is a relatively new field of study and currently rather poorly understood. Systematic studies of childhood bilingualism, in particular, are severely lacking compared to studies of the development of monolingual children. We currently know relatively little about why and how some children become bilingual while others do not. Much more research would be required of different groups of children who take different routes to bilingualism in childhood and ways in which their bilingualism is perceived and valued in different ways. This chapter highlights what I see as most salient and also most problematic in the study of bilingual children. Any research into the bilingual development of children must not only entail the linguistic, pragmatic and cognitive development of children but also needs to be firmly rooted in its social and cultural context. However, as we shall see, much of the available research on childhood bilingualism is limited in scope – for example, studies often treat children's bilingualism as purely a phenomenon of language acquisition and give little regard to the social context in which the two languages are acquired (De Houwer, 1995; Genesee, 1989). In addition, few studies precisely describe their subjects' linguistic history or exposure patterns, which are necessary for cross-study comparisons (Schieffelin, 1994).

These difficulties notwithstanding, in the rest of this chapter, I outline the theoretical frameworks that have provided the foundations for the study of Korean American children. First, I discuss some of the common myths around being bilingual and establish a definition of bilingualism that I shall use throughout this book. Then I will review the research that illustrates the interactional value of codeswitching and introduce the sequential framework which will be used in the analysis of the Korean American children's language mixing. I review issues related to language acquisition by children who are exposed to two languages simultaneously from birth (i.e. 'simultaneous acquisition') and by children who are subsequently exposed to the second language later in childhood (i.e. 'successive acquisition'). Related to language acquisition, I discuss language socialization of bilingual children and how language development is influenced by the attitude of family members and school personnel toward the two languages in the child's linguistic repertoire. There is also a brief review of research on bilingual education and the controversies surrounding dual-language education of linguistic minority children. Research findings that emphasize the need for native-language development and maintenance by language minority children will be reviewed. Along this line, I discuss factors that contribute to language shift in the immigrant family and the costs associated with the loss of the heritage language. But first, I turn to a definition of bilingualism.

Definition of Bilingualism

Before embarking on a study of bilingual children, it is necessary to discuss what constitutes bilingualism in individuals. However, the task of defining who is and is not a bilingual is not as simple as it may at first appear. For example, one might reasonably argue that a bilingual is someone who can speak two languages. However, this definition is problematic for a number of reasons. How well should the person speak each of the languages to be considered bilingual? Can we consider someone who is just starting to learn a second language and who, therefore, knows only a few words in the second language bilingual? Is there an absolute minimal proficiency in the second language required in order for someone to qualify as a bilingual? Is a bilingual someone who has equal competence in both languages? But what exactly is meant by equal competence in two languages? What about someone who can understand a second language perfectly but cannot speak it? What about a person who can speak a second language but cannot read it? Can we rely on self-ratings of bilingual competence or should individuals be tested along certain standard measures? Is language proficiency the only criterion for assessing bilingualism or should the circumstances in which the two languages are used also be considered? For example, if a person has strictly separate uses of two languages (e.g. uses one language at work or in school and speaks the other language at home), can s/he be considered a bilingual?

Much of the early literature on bilingualism in the 1950s and 1960s is concerned with the issue of objectively measuring bilingualism in quantitative terms (see Kelly [1969]); see also Romaine [1995] for a summary). Psychologists have used a variety of tests to assess the relative dominance of one language over another. For example, Macnamara (1969) grouped the kinds of tests used to measure bilingual ability into four categories: rating scales, fluency tests, flexibility tests and dominance tests. Rating scales include instruments like language-usage scales, self-rating scales and interviews. In order to obtain a measurement of speakers' self-rating, individuals would be asked to assess their ability in a language in relation to various skills. A balance score is calculated by subtracting the values obtained for one language from those of the other. If the difference is close to zero or zero, the person is considered to be a balanced bilingual. Another kind of language self-assessment is done through the language diary, in which speakers are asked to keep track of the languages they use every day (see Romaine, 1983).

Fluency has generally been given much attention in proficiency rating. A variety of fluency tests have been used to assess language dominance, such as picture naming, word completion, oral reading and following instructions. Lambert (1955) developed a task in which subjects were asked to respond to instructions in both languages. Their response time was taken as an indication of whether they were balanced or dominant in one language. It was assumed that a balanced bilingual should take more or less the same amount of time to respond to instructions in both languages. However, such quantitative measures of the degree of bilingualism often overlook the more qualitative differences in language proficiency such as the individual's linguistic background and patterns of bilingual use in different settings. Romaine (1995) argues that the notion of balanced bilingualism is a mythical one, an artifact of a theoretical perspective that takes the monolingual speaker as its point of reference (for further discussions, see Baker & Prys Jones, 1998; Li, 2000: 5–8).

Is a bilingual two monolinguals in one person?

One of the widely held myths about bilingualism is that a bilingual is a sum of two monolinguals. Zentella (1997: 270) describes this mythical bilingual as 'two monolinguals joined at the neck'. It is often assumed that 'true bilinguals' are those who are equally fluent in their two languages, with proficiency in both languages comparable to those of monolinguals of those languages. In reality, however, bilinguals will rarely have balanced competence in their two languages. Terms such as 'full bilingual' and 'balanced bilingual' represent idealized concepts that do not characterize the great majority of the world's bilinguals. Rarely will any bilingual be equally proficient in speaking, listening, reading or writing both languages across all different situations and domains. However, the monolingual view of bilingualism is so entrenched in popular and scholarly thinking that bilinguals themselves may apologize to monolinguals for not speaking their language as well as the monolinguals do, thus accepting and reinforcing the myth.

In educational circles, the term 'semilingual' has been used to describe bilingual students who appear to lack proficiency in both languages (Martin-Jones & Romaine, 1986; Valadez et al., 2000). Tests that are designed for monolinguals are often used to compare bilinguals' proficiency in either of their languages with that of monolinguals of those languages. These assessments often do not take into account the fact that bilinguals use their two languages with different people, in different contexts and for different purposes. The 'semilingual' view holds that there will be negative consequences for cognitive processing for bilinguals, because of the potential confusion between what monolinguals perceive as two underdeveloped languages. For example, immigrant parents are routinely advised by doctors, speech therapists, teachers and counselors to forbid any other language, apart from English, to be used in their home so as not to 'confuse' the children with input from two languages (see Crepin-Lanzarotto, 1997; see also Chapter 6). However, the argument that bilingual input confuses children is not substantiated since most children growing up in bilingual or multilingual societies learn to use two or more languages with no apparent negative consequences to their cognitive development. Neither is this view supported by empirical social and psycholinguistic evidence.

So who is a bilingual? Grosjean (1985) presents a sociolinguistically sound definition of a bilingual, which I will adopt in this book:

The bilingual is a fully competent speaker/hearer; he or she has developed competencies (in the two languages and possibly a third system that is a combination of the two) to the extent required by his or her needs and those of the environment. The bilingual uses the two languages – separately or together – for different purposes in different domains of life and with different people. Because the needs and uses of the two languages are usually quite different, the bilingual is rarely equally or completely fluent in the two languages. Levels of fluency in a language will depend on the need for that language and will be extremely domain specific. Because the bilingual is a human communicator (as is the monolingual) he or she has developed communicative competence that is sufficient for everyday life. This competence will make use of one language, or the other language (in the form of mixed speech) depending on the situation, topic, the interlocutor etc.'

Grosjean's definition emphasizes that bilingualism must be understood in its own right and that monolingual competence should not be used as a basis for assessing bilingual ability (see also, Grosjean, 1989). Since the bilingual uses the two languages for different purposes in different circumstances, s/he is rarely equally competent in both languages. One language is usually more dominant than the other in different situations or stages of life.

Communicative Value of Codeswitching

One of the ways in which children and adults display their bilingual abilities is through codeswitching, a change of language within a conversation, usually when bilinguals are in the company of other bilinguals. Codeswitching is perhaps the most obvious indication of one's bilingual abilities, since very few bilinguals keep their two languages completely separate (Baker & Prys Jones, 1998). However, monolinguals who hear bilinguals codeswitch may have negative attitudes toward codeswitching and think that it represents a lack of mastery of either language and an impure form of language. Bilinguals themselves may feel embarrassed about their codeswitching and attribute it to careless language habits or laziness (Grosjean, 1982: 148). Codeswitching is often given pejorative names such as 'Spanglish' or 'Tex–Mex' (mixture of Spanish and English by bilingual speakers in the American Southwest) and 'Franglais' (mixture of French and English in parts of French-speaking Canada). In classroom contexts, codeswitching is often discouraged by teachers who think that allowing students to talk in their first language is distracting and robs them of the opportunities to speak English. However, a great deal of research in the past few decades has shown that codeswitching, far from being a communicative deficit, is a valuable linguistic strategy (e.g. De Mejia, 1998; Gumperz, 1982; McClure, 1981; Milroy & Muysken, 1995; Moffatt & Milroy, 1992; Myers-Scotton, 1993; Poplack, 1980; Romaine, 1995; Shin & Milroy, 2000; Timm, 1975; Zentella, 1997).

Perhaps most notable in this regard, Gumperz (1982) argues that codeswitching is a discourse mode or a communicative option, available to a bilingual speaker in much the same way that switching between styles or dialects is an option for the monolingual speaker. Gumperz's work on bilingual interactive strategies contributed greatly to the field of bilingualism by directly contradicting the view that codeswitching represents a deficient knowledge of language, a grammarless mish-mash of two languages. According to Gumperz, codeswitching is a communicative resource that builds on the participants' perception of two contrasting languages and conveys linguistic and social information to other participants in the conversation. In addition, codeswitching indicates the speaker's momentary attitudes, communicative intents and emotions (see also Gal, 1979).

(Continues...)

Excerpted from Developing in Two Languages by Sarah J. Shin. Copyright © 2005 Sarah J. Shin. Excerpted by permission of Multilingual Matters.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

Edition details

• Publisher: Multilingual Matters
• Publication date: 2004
• Language: English
• ISBN 10: 1853597465
• ISBN 13: 9781853597466
• Binding: Paperback
• Edition number: 1
• Number of pages: 208