511415 SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, BILINGUALISM AND EDUCATION

Question 1

A considerable amount of literature has been published on bilingualism. These studies primarily highlight about specification and criteria that describes people who are bilingual. Macnamara ( p.6,1967), cited by Blanc, Hamers and Josiane (2000), proposes that an individual who acquires minimum capability in one of the four language skills which are listening comprehension, speaking, reading and writing in a language excluding mother tongue is considered as a bilingual. Besides, Blanc, Hamers and Josiane (2000) cites Titone (1972) that a bilingual individual able to communicate second language as following the concepts and structures of the particular language instead of paraphrasing his/her mother tongue language. It is visible that Macnamara and Titone emphasis on the concept and skills of learning the second language in order to explain the bilingual term. In my point of view, I agree with Macnamaras and Titones idea of bilingualism until a certain extend. This is because learning a second language only by focusing on the skills, concepts and structures do not take account of the socialcommunicative dimension. It is an undeniable fact that language is mainly used for conveying messages through communication. Based on my experience as a bilingual individual, learning second language which meets the communicative demands as well as the structure and concept of the language is the best description for a bilingual. This view is supported by Mohanty (1994), cited by Blanc, Hamers and Josaine (2000), that those who meet the communicative demands of the self and society in the daily life during an interaction with other speakers are considered as a bilingual person or communities. Based on the above explanations, I consider myself as a bilinguall as I am capable to of communicating Tamil, Telugu, Malay and English with the concept of Mohanty as well as the idea of Macnamara and Titone.

511415 SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, BILINGUALISM AND EDUCATION

Question 2

It is noticeable that Charlotte Hoffmans bilingual profile is useful as an alternative way of defining bilingualism because it focuses on the individual and does not have set specific definition to fit the bilingual speakers. The framework of Hoffmans bilingual profile emphasis on nine variables includes of both individual and societal elements of bilingualism. To be more specific, Hoffmans profile concentrates on individual, societal and socio-psychological elements to define the term bilingualism. The passage of bilingualism is highlight through the second language acquisition. Thus, the formation of the Hoffmans bilingual profile is focused on how people acquire or learn a second language regardless of language proficiency. This process of learning and acquiring knowledge of second language has been conceptualized into two major models proposed by Ellis (1985) and Lambert (1974) as quoted by Baker (1997). Below are the two models: Ellis (1985) framework SITUATIONAL FACTOR (EXTERNAL)

LINGUISTIC INPUT

LEARNER PROCESSES

SECOND LANGUAGE OUTPUT

INDIVIDUAL LEARNER DIFFERENCES

511415 SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, BILINGUALISM AND EDUCATION

Lamberts (1974) Model Additive Bilingualism Motivation e.g Integrative, Instrumental

Attitudes

Bilingual proficiency

Self-concept

Subtractive Bilingualism

Aptitude

The concepts present in the models above has been synthesized and unified into a holistic bilingual profile proposed by Hoffman. Thus, the following will justify why Hoffmans profile is better alternative of defining bilingualism, simultaneously clarifying its relations to the two models. Firstly, learning second language differs greatly individually. Hoffman (1991) focuses on the language development, functional aspects of language, attitudes, and motivation regardless of the speakers proficiency. All these variables have been previously mentioned by Ellis and Lambert.

511415 SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, BILINGUALISM AND EDUCATION

Ellis Individual Learner Differences Attitude, motivation, learning strategy and personality (age and cognitive style) affects the level of proficiency of second language learning

Lambert Learners attitude, aptitude and motivation are significant in maintaining or restoring language of origin to avoid attrition of learning second language.

It is evident that Ellis framework emphasis on the level of proficiency for learning the second language whereas Hoffman bilingual profile focuses on the first language as well as the second language proficiency. Lambert, on the other hand, proposes that first language plays a significant role in order to master second language which parallel to the Hoffmans sequential relationship of first language and second language learning.

Secondly, the route to bilingualism is very much influenced by the environment. Hoffman (1991) believes that environmental circumstances that surround the bilingual affect their learning of second language. Again, environment factors have been explored by Ellis and Lambert.

Ellis

Lambert

Function of bilingualism influenced by The result of bilingual is either positive or environment negative. 1. Positive Additive bilingual A second language and culture which is acquired with little or no pressures to replace or reduce the

511415 SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, BILINGUALISM AND EDUCATION

first language. 2. Negative-Subtractive bilingual A second language and culture which is acquired with pressure to replace language. or demote the first

It is obvious that Ellis in agreement with Hoffman that environment circumstances surrounding the bilingual influenced the second language learners. Lamberts idea of additive and subtractive bilingual is similar with Hoffmans bilingual profile that explains about language development of first language and second language. In brief, Hoffmans bilingual profile is the ideal outline to define bilingualism because it comprises all the essential function and elements that should be discovered in a second language learner (bilingual learner).

Question 3

Since I am a bilingual person, I feel that Hoffmans bilingual profile helps me to explain my personal bilingualism. When I was young, I learned Tamil and Telugu language all at once which lead me to be a simultaneous bilingualism. (ii) Consequently, code-switch is normal when I am communicating and it is not intentionally done.(v) When I communicate among my family members I make sure they understand what I am trying to convey and speak the words that trigger my mind. Clyne (p. 193,1991) states that it happens when bilingual communicate because the words is promoted by trigger words, which is defined as the intersection of two language words system which
5

511415 SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, BILINGUALISM AND EDUCATION

resulted the speaker failure in the linguistic bearings and keep on communicating in other language. Apart from code switching, I believe that acquiring simultaneous bilingualism enable me to have an additive language instead of subtractive language. Even though I am more proficient in Tamil language, I am happy that I learned Telugu which enable me to preserve both my parents identity in my life.(iii) Aside from Tamil and Telugu languages, I learned English and Malay languages during my school days. This is because the education system in Malaysia requires the students to master these languages (iv). Learning Malay language, specifically, is not only for education purpose because Malaysia is a country that uses Malay language as a national language. In view of fact that Malay language is a national language, the people surrounding me uses Malay language frequently that pressured me to master the language (viii). It was hard to learn Malay language compared to English as my friends usually communicate with me in English. As a result, it takes a longer time for me to attain the proficiency level in Malay language. In an attempt to master my Malay language, I had to attend much tuition classes so that I can able to master and develop at least one of the four language skills as stated by Macnamara (1967). In a nutshell, Hoffmans bilingual profile presents a clear passage of defining the term bilingualism. On top of that, it acts as a guideline for every bilingual as it covers all the variables that must be highlighted in a bilinguals life.

511415 SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION, BILINGUALISM AND EDUCATION

References

Clyne, M. G. (1991). Community languages: the Australian experience. Cambridge: CUP Ellis,R. (1985). Second Language Acquisition. In C. Baker (Ed.), Foundations of bilingual education &bilingualism (pp.95-115). Clev3edon:Multilingual Matters. Hoffmann, C. (1991). An introduction to bilingualism. London: Longman. Lambert, W.E. (1974). ). Second Language Acquisition. In C. Baker (Ed.), Foundations of bilingual education &bilingualism (pp.95-115). Clev3edon:Multilingual Matters. Macnamara, K. (1967). Definitions and guiding principles. In M. Blanc, M. Hamers, &F. Josiane (Eds.), Bilinguality & bilingualism (pp.20-22). New York: Cambridge University Press. Mohanty,A.K. (1994). Definitions and guiding principles. In M. Blanc, M. Hamers, &F. Josiane (Eds.), Bilinguality & bilingualism (pp.20-22). New York: Cambridge University Press. Titone, R. (1972). Definitions and guiding principles. In M. Blanc, M. Hamers, &F. Josiane (Eds.), Bilinguality & bilingualism (pp.20-22). New York: Cambridge University Press.