I just came across a couple of articles that talk about the correlation between speaking multiple languages and slower rates of cognitive decline in aging adults. Specifically, one study showed that bilingualism was linked to higher executive function performance in older adults and another study suggested that speaking more than one language prevented the onset of dementia by an average of 4.5 years. I found this particularly interesting when put in the context of the larger debate over whether bilingual education is a good idea. This article nicely summarizes both sides of the debate. It seems to me that the core argument against bilingual education is a practical one: encouraging a bilingual education for non-native English speakers wastes valuable resources since these children will inevitably grow up to speak English anyway. Yet when it comes to wealthier school districts teaching mostly native English speakers, it seems that the research comes more into play. Learning a second language in school is considered academically-enriching and promotes long-term cognitive health, as mentioned above. So why the discrepancy? Valerie Strauss, the author of the article linked above, argues that this reflects a monolingual bias in the United States. Could we be subconsciously biased toward promoting multilingualism when the second language is not English, but averse to preserving non-native English speakers' first language simply by virtue of that language not being English, despite the growing evidence of the universal health benefits of multilingualism? I would love to hear other peoples' thoughts!
This is a super interesting debate. Honestly, it's a touch question to answer. Being bilingual myself, I would say that I have benefited from growing up with a second language. Of course I have no idea how it's benefited me in terms of aging. However, I have noticed that I pick up other languages far easier than friends who grew up monolingual. I never considered bilingualism to be a crutch or a form of "linguistic isolation" as the paper mentions, but perhaps that's because the language I spoke outside of English isn't commonly spoken in the United States. That being said, the argument against bilingualism has its merits, mainly practicality. Perhaps a bilingual program in Spanish would be possible, but I would venture to say it would be nearly impossible to support bilingual program for students who speak less common native languages. Given that the author's argument for bilingual education is based on the idea that students learn best in their native languages does this not pose a problem?
ReplyDeleteInherently, I think that most bilingual speakers have a preferred language, the one that they are educated in, or the one that they use the most frequently. For this reason, I feel that the problem is somewhat difficult to avoid. Studies have found that children are more proficient at language tasks in the language they are educated in, for example. These issues make designing a system that doesn't have a language preference very difficult. That being said, I think a good system would implement second language learning as early as possible, in order to capitalize on the positive cognitive benefits that exist there.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think this debate on bilingual education reflects a sort of arrogance we have in our country; language is very much a part of both culture and nationalism, and we are, many of us, proud to be Americans. Having travelled rather extensively, I almost take it for granted that people worldwide speak English, either as a first or second language. It has, in recent decades, become the closest thing we have to a universal world language.
ReplyDeleteBringing this back to the domestic issue in discussion, Americans might perceive the learning of a second (non-English) language to be okay but the continual teaching of a non-English first language to be detrimental, because of this nationalism. A native English speaker likely identifies, first-and-foremost, with the American culture. However, perpetually teaching a non-English first language as an equal to English might be unconsciously viewed as a threat on society and an affirmation that America might not be the greatest country on Earth. Now, whether that is true or not I leave up to you; this is merely my opinion on how these opposing perceptions on bilingual education might have arisen.
I find it natural that any country will have a bias toward the quotidian languages used within its borders. It is expected, for example, for someone to learn German when thinking of going to Germany, or Spanish when traveling to Costa Rica. Moreover, when it comes to seeking residency in a given country, the language requirement becomes much more strict because of its necessity in day-to-day affairs, so that some will make significant efforts to learn it before moving to the new land.
ReplyDeleteI think this is where the monolingual bias can lie: all countries are associated with their respective set of languages, so that learning a new language can be seen as an effort to be able to speak to them, the people outside their respective borders. As a result, learning a new language within one's borders can seem impractical, especially if there is only one language commonly spoken, or official languages have been declared.
This is where the United States faces a difficult situation: though it is internationally recognized as an English-speaking country, it does not have an official language. One of its historical selling points has been its inclusion of all languages and cultures, so that people from all over the world would come and add their heritage to the heterogeneous mosaic we call American culture, the so-called "melting pot". The heat that initiated the melting, however, was the English language, which all immigrants were expected to learn in order to assimilate to American culture. In this way, English in the United States is the glue, so to speak, that holds the aforementioned mosaic together. As such, though learning multiple languages can be practical in order to ease communication between cultural groups within the United States, taking English away from the spotlight can be seen as a threat to the union this country is seeking to maintain.
The United States clearly suffers from a severe case of monolingual bias. To a certain degree it's not our nation's fault. We inherited it from the British who were a conquering island nation. Unlike Europe, the United states does not have contiguous nations surrounding our borders (except for Mexico) so the need to teach and learn multiple languages never took root here. All that aside, I'm curious to know if there have been any studies indicating lower rates of dementia in Europeans versus Americans. And among Europeans if the rate of dementia lower among Scandinavians than their southern European counterparts? Scandinavians tend to speak more languages on average than the French, Spanish or Germans. How compelling that would be if such data existed.
ReplyDeleteI would really like to see the research methods that were used to reach the conclusion that language promotes mental health and slows aging. If the method was simply collecting statistics on bilingual speakers and contrasting them with monolingual people, then I would really question the validity of this assertion, especially if the study is done in the United States.
ReplyDeleteThere are simply too many confounding variables. In European tradition, being able to speak more than the vernacular, especially fluency in French and Latin, is associated with the educated and the upper class. Not surprisingly, the educated and wealthy are those who live more enlightened lives and live longer. However, language is a way to stimulate the mind and mental activities have a direct correlation with mental health. But to make too much out of this relationship could be quite a stretch.
In many parts of the world, being multilingual may frequently entail a tumultuous life of a migrant worker. Moving into new areas for work and quickly adapting to the new vernacular because of necessities rather than education can be very detrimental to health and well-being. I think few people would argue that these people live a mentally stimulating life that safeguards them from Alzheimer's.
It seems that all there exist tremendous and irrefutable benefits of second-language acquisition. However, this post does not examine the negative side effects of language acquisition, if any should occur. One study from Wisconsin and Northwestern indicate that the properties of the second language being acquired can have negative feedback effects on native language. It suggests that while learning Spanish has a positive effect on English writing, learning Mandarin may have a statistically significant negative association with English writing. Another study from Stanford found negative effects on native language retention associated with second language acquisition (English) in the United States by immigrants. Still, it seems the net benefits of second language acquisition are greater than the costs, but those costs should not be inherently discounted.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bilingualism.northwestern.edu/bilingualism-psycholinguistics/files/vm5.pdf
http://psych.stanford.edu/~babylab/pdfs/sdarticle.pdf
I think that in the US, there is a bias toward promoting multilingualism when the learned languages are not English because this phenomenon is a natural manifestation of patriotism as long as English is the first language that one learns. This assumption implies that the students will always revert to English as their default or preferred language, constructing a sort of linguistic hierarchy, as English becomes more prevalent in global communication. From experience, learning another language, for me Spanish, does create a more enriching academic environment and allows me to exercise certain parts of my brain that would have been neglected otherwise. Learning foreign languages also provides insights into the history and culture of other groups of people. I don’t think that there is a conscious aversion to preserving non-native English speakers’ languages, but rather this phenomenon is fueled by facilitation of communication in the country if everyone could speak the same language, which also suggests a biased hierarchal preference for language use in the nation.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting point. America undoubtedly has a monolingual bias. As a Lebanese citizen, it always slightly humors me that most Lebanese people speak between two and three languages when Americans tend only to speak english.
ReplyDeleteMy argument would be that Americans dont need to learn any other language. They have the universal tongue so there is no functional value other than the potential delaying of dementia -- but there are probably less time consuming practices that yield similar health benefits.
However, when you really think about it you realize that Americans were originally a hodge podge of Germans, French, English and Dutch people so it is shocking that a country with such a diverse linguistic origins has completely settled on one language. This could, of course, be a function of time. It would be interesting if we could identify whether elements of other major languages (from the settlement) have influenced "American English" at all or if they completely disappeared. In this sense, America is quite an exceptional case study of linguistic heterogeneity over time.
This is super interesting because like many have mentioned, it is something so engrained in our society. I do think that asking if multilingualism is good is a pretty broad question. I believe that there are many factors that come in to play when trying to analyze whether multilingualism is a good or bad things. For instance, how do we interact (as a society) with multilingualism in the work place? at school? I took a class on linguistic diversity in the classroom last Spring and it brought to light the many benefits but also drawbacks of integrating different languages into classroom. I think it really boils down to the process implemented to "embrace" multilingualism.
ReplyDeleteBesides the benefits to each individual in terms of brain health and longevity, the United States also has a national interest to promote bilingualism. The Federal government supports programs to encourage multilingualism, particularly the learning of languages of special interest to U.S. foreign policy. For example, one such program sponsored by the U.S., Department of State, The Critical Languages Scholarship Program (http://www.clscholarship.org/about), offers fully funded overseas language programs for American undergraduate and graduate students. The languages the scholarship supports, such as Hindi, Indonesian, Korean, Turkish, Arabic, Persian, and Russian, have particular importance in terms of U.S. international relations. The existence and funding of such programs raises the question of why learning such languages is not encouraged earlier in public education. Given that we know that younger people learn new languages more easily, it would seem that governmental efforts for encouraging critical language learning would be better directed at promoting instruction in an elementary or secondary school setting. Thoughts?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHaving attended a bilingual school for many years, I can only emphasize how enriching a second language can be - especially when you can use it often and get real utility out of it. But, even if you cannot directly apply it (say you are learning Russian in America, and you do not plan on visiting Russia), there is something very enriching about being able to speak a language and learn about the culture simultaneously. In my bilingual school, I would take History and Geography in French. Learning about French history in the French language adds a dimension to the learning that brings you much closer to the material. The argument that bilingualism delays dementia onset is striking, but even more striking to me is the chance to be truly engrossed by a subject because you share a fundamental link to it through language. In the long-run, I can only imagine that you learn the material better, remember it better, and enjoy it considerably more.
ReplyDeleteI want to point out that delaying the onset of dementia can be one reason of studying a second language, but it shouldn’t be THE reason that people study language/children are sent to bilingual schools. I find the one research about dementia and second language insufficient. People grow their brain by lots of methods. I think by methods such as learning new skills, doing social activities, or playing games that requires thinking, people can promote their mental health. And acquiring a language is only a small subset of learning new skills, and we are not clear from one study whether we can improve mental health more significantly if we spend the same amount of time learning a second language doing other things.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, I think language brings a lot of other benefits and the time for learning a second language would be worthwhile.
Like many of the previous commentators, I grew up in a bilingual environment. First, English-Portuguese, then, English-Spanish. And, I have no doubt this exposure was positive for all the reasons listed above. However, just for fun, I'll highlight some of the things that I found difficult about my multilingualism. Perhaps, I have always felt I have never gained mastery of one language, instead, I have gained the slightly-below-mastery of three. As a result, many times I have found myself making mistakes both in speaking and writing in which I borrow words and phrases from one language within the context of the other. This is especially true of my Spanish-Portuguese interaction as they are very similar in many senses. Thus, in school, I would sometimes say or write things in my Spanish classes in Portuguese -- many times, much to my embarrassment. All in all, I feel this confusion is an inherent element of multilingualism and one of the downfalls of it. Nonetheless, this small downside can in no sense be compared to the extreme benefits of learning different languages!
ReplyDeleteI never understood the benefits of bilingualism until I started learning my third language. It was then that I realized that languages not only open up communication channels that promote understanding and empathy between cultures, but also provide a massive new dimension into the understanding of everyday things. There are beautiful subtleties between the French "étonné", the Spanish "sorprendido", and the English "surprised". One of the saddest things of the world system today is that this overarching understanding, this cultural empathy, is not desirable from the perspective of sovereign states. In terms of policy, bilingualism need not exist.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it is interesting that the economic climate is shifting this perspective. With rising powers such as China, Russia and Brazil, business people gravitate towards multilingualism. I am optimistic and hope that as a more interconnected world arises, this empathy also grows and generates a virtuous circle of cultural understanding.
There is much to be said about the state of English as the world's language. There is no doubt that this is true. However, in my opinion the value of multilingualism lies in the world of tomorrow more than in the world of today.
Your blog post brings up an interesting topic of bilingualism and its benefits. My first reaction to such data is that there might be some underlying factor and that the actual knowledge of two languages is not the causal factor, but the correlation seems so strong that it cannot be so easily disregarded. The topic of it being taught in school's and such is an important thing to discuss, but I admit I'm more interested in why the connection between being bilingual and these benefits exists.
ReplyDeleteIs knowing a language such a powerful and demanding thing that it makes your brain "stronger" in a mental workout sense? I imagine it takes a good amount of cognitive ability to know full lexicons and grammars of multiple languages, and perhaps such could play a role. I've also heard a good amount of talk on how language can shape your thoughts, and perhaps the ability to shape your thoughts in several ways plays a role into one's mental performance. I'd love to see research being done on such a topic!