Alejandro E. Brice, Ph.D., CCC-SLP
Associate Professor
Valdosta State University
[email protected]
Mythbusting Regarding the Bilingual Brain
and Language
The bilingual speaker is not two monolinguals in one person
(Grosjean, 1989); therefore:
!
Language skills should be appraised in terms of bilingual and
NOT monolingual standards.
!
Bilingualism is the norm worldwide.
!
Contact between a bilingual speaker’s two languages is
common and frequent. Grosjean stated that, “The coexistence
and constant interaction of the two languages in the bilingual
has produced a different but complete linguistic entity” (p. 6).
!
The bilingual develops competencies in both their languages to
the extent that is required by his/her environment.
1
What is Language Transference?
!
Language transference is the ability to transport
information from the native language to the
second language. For example, language
transfer is the ability to ferry and transport
language knowledge from Spanish to English
or from English to Spanish.
What is Language Interference?
!
Interference is when L1 (e.g., Spanish) intrudes
upon learning English. Spanish syntax may
be superimposed onto English (e.g., "The ball
red is mine.") This superimposition may
occur at any language level (i.e.,
phonologically, morphologically,
semantically, syntactically, or pragmatically).
2
!
!
Dynamic interferences (Grosjean, 1989)
are when the interferences are
temporary intrusions.
Static interferences (Grosjean, 1989)
are more lasting traces of L1 on L2, e.g,
foreign accent.
What is language mode?
!
!
Language mode (Grosjean, 1989) refers
to what extent is L1 or L2 are active. A
second language cannot be completely
deactivated.
Hence, language mode refers to the
continuum of activation of both
languages.
3
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
L1 Active------------------------------>
L2 Inactive---->
L1 Inactive--->
L2 Active------------------------------->
L1 Active-------------------------------->
L2 Active---------------->
L1 Active--------------->
L2 Active-------------------------------->
L1 Active-------------------------------->
L2 Active-------------------------------->
Spanish-English Phonetics
Phoneme place and manner productions
4
Place
Bi-liabial Labiodental
Interdental
Alveolar
Alveolpalatal
Palatal
Velar
Manner
Stop voiceless
p
pill
p
papel
Stop voiced
k
kill
k
caso
d
dill
g
gate
g
gato
t
tasa
b
bill
b
beso
Place
t
till
d
dedo
Bi-liabial Labiodental
Inter-dental
Alveolar
Alveol-palatal
s
sip
!
ship
Palatal
Velar
Manner
Fricative
(Obs-truent)
Voice-less
f
fine
ß
Habana
vino
ver
Voiced
f
finca
!
thin
!
s
sabor
zeta,
zorro
(Spain)
v
vine
"
then
z
zip
#
pleasure
5
Place
Bi-liabial Labiodental
Interdental
Alveolar
Alveolpalatal
Palatal
Velar
Manner
Nasal
m
man
m
mano
n
nadar
Tap/flap
$
n
no
n
no
ñ
niño
sin!
r
dar
saber
Place
Bi-liabial Labiodental
Interdental
Alveolar
Alveolpalatal
Palatal
Velar
Manner
Affricate
voiceless
t!
choke
t!
chico
Affricate
voiced
d#
joke
6
Spanish-English Phonology (Whitley, 2002).
Some consonants occur in Spanish
that do not occur in English.
!
Spanish contains the tap /r/ and the
trill /R/. The tap is less frequent. A
shortened trill is the most frequent.
An elongated trill is also found.
!
!
!
!
Spanish vowels and consonants are simpler than English having
fewer vowels and consonants. Spanish has 19 consonants and
2 semivowels (glides) while English has 24 vowels and 2
semivowels (Stockwell & Bowen, 1965).
Spanish does not contain the following sounds in the final
position of words: /p, b, f, v, tƒ, m/.
Spanish words tend to end with: /r, s, d, n, l,/ and vowels.
7
!
Consonant clusters are few in
Spanish(Stockwell & Bowen, 1965).
Consonant clusters do not begin with /s/ in
Spanish.
Phonological variations of Carribean Spanish
(which may apply to other dialects of Spanish)
as noted by Hammond (1989) include:
!
Syllable final, word final aspiration of /s/.
!
General word final sound deletion.
8
!
!
!
!
/r/ and /l/ substitution in some dialects fo
Spanish.
Vocalization of word final liquids.
Word final /n/ verlarization.
Alteration of /t!/ and /!/.
Frequency of Occurrence of Spanish and
English Sounds (Nash, 1977)
Spanish
Sound
/s/
/n/
Frequency
17.08%
12.27 %
English
Sound
/t/
/n/
Frequency
12.66 %
11.46 %
/r/ tap
9.95 %
/®/
8.32 %
/t/
/k/
/l/
/m/
8.30 %
8.3 %
6.72 %
6.53 %
/l/
/s/
/z/
/m/
7.69 %
7.47 %
6.53 %
4.74 %
/j/
5.97 %
/!/ “th”
4.61 %
9
Spanish
Sound
/b/
/p/
/w/
/g/
/RR/ trill
/f/
/h/
/t!/
Spanish
Sound
/ñ/
Frequency
4.99 %
4.02 %
2.18 %
1.24 %
0.93%
0.90%
0.64%
0.56%
Frequency
0.53 %
English
Sound
/k/
/w/
/b/
/h/
/v/
/f/
/p/
/"/ “ing”
Frequency
4.30 %
3.67 %
3.48 %
3.26 %
3.17 %
2.86 %
2.35 %
2.20 %
English
Sound
/j/
/g/
Frequency
2.01 %
1.57 %
/$/ “th”
0.97 %
/!/
/d#/
0.88 %
0.88 %
/#/
0.16
10
Frequency of Occurrence of Spanish
Vowels
Vowel
Frequency
/e/ “en”
32.80 %
/a/ “alto”
30.38 %
/o/ “oro”
21.56 %
/i/ “ir”
10.48 %
/u/ “un”
4.23 %
General, Universal Phonological Truths
Fricatives are harder than nasals or stops.
Consonants in syllable onsets are easier than syllable
final positions.
The form of these processes differs from language to
language. And that the differences in processes are
determined by the language itself.
11
Normal Spanish Phonological Development
Diamond
1983
Martinez
1986
3:6-3:11
CSR
1 Yes
Tap/trill
2 Yes
RiveraUmpierre
1988
3&4
Paulson
1991
2:4 to 4:2
Goldstein
& Iglessias
1996
3 yr olds
G&I
1996
4 yr olds
Summary
2 Yes
1 Yes
1 Yes
2 Yes
5/6 Yes
1 yes
2 Yes
Post-Voc.
Singleton
3 Yes
Lateral /l/;
liquids
4 Yes
Yes
Stridency
deletion
4 Yes
Yes
Weak syl.
Red.
5 Yes
3/6 Yes
2 Yes
3 Yes
4 Yes
4 Yes
3 Yes
3/6 Yes
3/6 Yes
3 Yes
3/6 Yes
stopping
Final cons.
deletion
!
1 Yes
Hence, the following noted processes
seem to be most affected by Spanish
dialect and interlanguage phonological
interference:
1. CSR- dialect, interference.
2. Postvocalic omission- dialect.
3. Stridents- interference.
4. /l,r/ -dialect, interference.
12
Spanish-English Morphology
Ellis (1987) postulated that learners of Spanish
generally progressed through four sequential stages
of syntactic acquisition. These consisted of:
n Development of basic syntactic knowledge such as
Subject-verb-object order,
n Acquisition of variant word order,
n The development of morphological knowledge, and
n Acquisition of knowledge and information governing
complex sentence structure.
Anderson (1995) reported the following
regarding Spanish sentence types:
!
!
At 2:6 a Spanish speaking child will
demonstrate negatives, questions,
imperatives and embedded sentences.
Children as young as two years of age use
rising intonation to indicate yes/no questions.
13
!
!
Spanish wh-question forms are also seen at
this age [qué (what); quién (who); donde
(where)].
At two and half years of age, Spanish
speaking children also exhibited instances of
other question forms [para qué (for what);
cuando (when); por qué (why); como (how)].
Some Spanish morpho-syntactic sequencing
rules.
! Vowel quality. Length and stress affects
morphology. “No” is short.
! Vowel add “s”, consonant add “es”.
14
Position of adjectives. Quantifiers go before the
noun, qualifiers go after the noun.
Basic sentence pattern similarities and differences.
! Declarative. Follows S-V-O arrangement.
! Interrogative. Inversion is not necessary.
Many questions in Spanish are done through
rising intonation.
! Mexican Spanish uses more reflexive verb
forms than other Spanish forms.
Spanish semantics and syntax
(language alternations)
15
Code switching and code mixing.
Code switching and code mixing. It is the language
alternation or switching between two or more codes. It
can structurally be divided into two categories, i.e., code
switching (CS) and code mixing (CM).
CS, technically, is the alternation of codes
across sentence boundaries, hence intersentential alternation. In code switching the
teacher may say, “Ya, se acabó (It is over). Siéntate
(Sit down). The time is up.”Another example is
where the child may say, “Ahora es buena hora para
dormir (It is now a good time to sleep). Turn off the
lights”
16
CM is the alternation within a sentence, at the word,
or within a word level. Hence, it is intra-sentential
alternation.A code mixed example is where the
teacher may say, “Each book es uno”. Another
example is where the child may incorporate words or
phrases into her or his English from the other
language. She or he may say, “La voy a poner en un
frying pan (I am going to put it into a frying pan).”
Code switching or code mixing can be evidenced
along the entire continuum of proficiency.
Continuum of Code Switching and Code Mixing
Low Code Switching
Abilities
High Code Switching
Abilities
1. Mixes because of
lack of vocabulary in
L1 and L2.
1. Is able to switch
and mix with ease
between L1 and L2.
2. Difficulty switching 2. Uses code
between L1 and L2.
switching/mixing as a
3rd language form.
17
Indicators of possible deficiencies in code
switching (Brice, Roseberry-McKibbin, & Kayser,
1997).
These indicators may consist of
1. Long pauses indicating word searching and
retrieval difficulties,
2. Inability to switch and mix between the two
languages with ease,
3. An over preponderance to use one language.
Poplack (1980) identified four characteristics of successful code
switching. Hence, the opposite of these (presented below) may
indicate deficiencies with CS/CM
1. Rough transition between languages with false starts,
2. Marked awareness of the alternation between the languages,
3. Alternations or switches at the nouns or word level only, and
4. Alternations used for communicating untranslatable items
only.
18
!
!
Loan or Borrowed words - when a word becomes
integrated into the base language (e.g., le weekend;
le car; la computadora). The borrowed/loan word can
take on separate pronunication and meaning (e.g.,
footbal->futbol; baseball-> beisbol; yankee-> yanqui)
(Brice, 2002; Grosjean, 1989).
Speech Borrowing - idiosyncratic
borrowing, i.e., particular to an
individual or community. For example,
El roofo esta leakeando.
19
Brice (2000) in a classroom study of bilingual language
found that:
!
!
!
!
CS and CM occurs with high frequency even in environments where
English is preferred. Thus, CS and CM appear to be normal and
expected behaviors as seen in ESL/ESOL classrooms.
CS is more evident than CM. Most likely due to the fact that switching
languages is linguistically simpler than embedding aspects of two
languages.
CM to English is most likely to occur as the students are Spanish
proficient and embedding English word elements into their Spanish is
one stage in English acquisition.
Code switching and code mixing are normal occurrences as exhibited
by the teacher, teacher aide and students.
Semantics:
When do young bilingual children differentiate between their 2
languages at the word level?
It appears from the numerous studies (Brice & Wertheim,
2004/2005; Genesee, Nicoladis, & Paradis, 1995; Lanza, 1992;
Pearson & Fernandez, 1994; Pearson, Fernandez, Lewedeg, &
Oller, 1997; Pearson, Fernandez, & Oller, 1995) that
words in both languages (doublets ortranslation equivalents)
act as a bridge (showing positive transference) between the
dominant and less dominant languages that children (ages 1830 months of age) spoke (Spanish and English).
20
It has been found that young bilingual children can understand and
use two languages independently of each other as early as 18
months of age. In addition, translation equivalents (words
common to both languages) TEs appear to be normal
occurrences in the children’s vocabulary.
In the Brice and Wertheim (2004/2005) study, the children with
strong preference in one language tended to show fewer
occurrences of TEs. The children who did not show such an
extreme preference (i.e., more of a balance between the two
languages; e.g., participants one, four, eight and nine) showed a
higher occurrence of TEs. It appears that as children gain
higher proficiency in the second language, they are more apt to
use translation equivalents. Hence, transference at the word
level increases with L2 proficiency.
21
Conclusions: It is normal for children to learn two
languages simultaneously. Young children do not
seem to show any signs of confusion in learning both.
Exposing young children with exceptionalities to two
languages does not appear to be detrimental.
Spanish-English Pragmatics (Brice 1992; Brice &
Montgomery, 1996)
Group
American English Pragmatics
Difficulties
Monolingual English
Speaking Language
Disordered
Adolescent Students
1. Expresses Self
2. Establishes Appropiate Greetings
3. Initiates and Maintains Conversations
Bilingual Language
Disordered
Adolescent Students
1. Expresses Self
2. Establishes Appropriate Greetings
3. Initiates and Maintains Conversations
4. Listens Actively
5. Cues the Listener Regarding Topic
Shifts
Bilingual Adolescent
Students
1. Affects Listener’s Behavior Through
Language
2. Listens Actively
22
In Conclusion
!
The bilingual’s interaction between their two languages is
always present in all aspects of language (e.g., phoneticsphonology/morphology/semantics/syntax/pragmatics/literacy),
hence, her or his skills should be viewed as unique and different
from monolingual speakers (Grosjean, 1989).
23
References
Anderson, R. (1995). Spanish morphological and syntactic development. In H. Kayser (Ed.),
Bilingual speech-language pathology. An Hispanic focus (pp. 41-74). San Diego, CA: Singular.
Brice, A. (1992). The Adolescent Pragmatics Screening Scale: A comparison of
language-impaired students, bilingual/Hispanic students, and regular education
students. Howard Journal of Communications, 4, 143-156.
Brice, A. (2000). Code switching and code mixing in the ESL classroom: A study
of pragmatic and syntactic features. Advances in Speech Language Pathology. Journal
of the Speech Pathology Association of Australia, 20(1), 19-28.
Brice, A. (2002). The Hispanic child: Speech, language, culture and education.
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Brice, A., & Montgomery, J. (1996). Adolescent pragmatic skills: A comparison
of Latino students in ESL and speech and language programs. Language, Speech, and Hearing
Services in Schools, 27, 68-81.
Brice, A., Roseberry-McKibbin, C., & Kayser, H. (1997, November). Special
language needs of linguistically and culturally diverse students. Paper presented at the
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Annual Convention, Boston, MA.
Brice, A., & Wertheim, E. (2004/2005). Language differentiation in young bilingual
children. Tejas. Texas Journal of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology, 28, 24-31.
Ellis, R. (1987). Second language acquisition in context. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Genesee, F., Nicoladis, E. & Paradis, J. (1995). Language differentiation in early
bilingual development. Journal of Child Language, 22, 611-631.
Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one
person. Brain and Language, 36(1), 3-15.
Hammond, R., M. (1989). American Spanish dialectology and phonology from current
theoretical perspectives. In P. C. Bjarkman & R. H. Hammond (Eds.), American Spanish
pronunciation (pp. 137-169). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Lanza, E. (1992). Can bilingual two-year-olds code-switch? Journal of Child
Language, 19, 633-658.
Nash, R. (1977). Comparing English and Spanish: Patterns in phonology and orthography. New York,
NY: Regents Publishing Company.
Pearson, B. & Fernandez, S. C. (1994). Patterns of interaction in the lexical growth
in two languages of bilingual infants and toddlers. Language Learning, 44, 617-653.
Pearson, B., Fernandez, S. C., Lewedeg, V. & Oller, D. K (1997). The relation of
input factors to lexical learning by bilingual infants. Applied Psycholinguistics, 18, 41-58.
Pearson, B., Fernandez, S. & Oller, D. K. (1995). Cross-language synonyms in the
lexicons of bilingual infants: One language or two? Journal of Child Language, 22, 345-368.
Poplack, S. (1980). Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en espa–ol: Toward a
typology of code-switching. Linguistics, 18, 581-618.
Stockwell, R.P., & Bowen, J.D. (1965). The sounds of English and Spanish. Chicago, IL: The
University of Chicago Press.
Whitley, M.S. (2002). A course in Spanish linguistics: Spanish/English contrasts
(2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.