Talk:Multilingualism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Linguistics. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top This article is on a subject of top-importance within Linguistics.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] Compound and Coordinate Bilingual definitions

The definitions compound and coordinate appear mixed up. Understanding the idiosyncrasies of connotation is an advanced skill, while the beginning student is limited to what their dictionary maps the word to. Therefore the beginning student is treating a word in each language as the same concept until they learn the subtleties. This is complete opposite of what the article suggests.

[edit] Requested move

Introductory description has "multilingualism" bolded instead of "multilingual", which is nonexistent. Also, a noun may be more appropriate as an article title than a qualitative adjective.

[edit] Voting

  • Support per request. --70.25.168.90 09:43, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Support use nouns. --Tysto 23:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

[edit] Result

Moved. WhiteNight T | @ | C 03:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Africa

Would ambilingualism be more common in certain parts of Africa, or is that just a prejudice, and code-switching would actually prevail? 惑乱 分からん 14:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Media:Block quote

Blockquote

[edit] Headline text

== Dreadful article! ==

This is a bloody dreadful article, covering too much and still not being very intelligible. We should always attempt to write articles in such a way that they can be understood by people who do not have degrees in the subject. Anyone landing here because he or she searched for "bilingual", meaning someone who is totally fluent in two languages (there are extremely few who master three or more languages equally well, although there are many who can communicate well in 8-10 languages), find themselves drowning in terms like "Multilingualism at the societal level" (what's wrong with the established adjective "social", suddenly?), and lists of areas in the world where more than one language is spoken. Written by predominantly English speakers with none or limited knowledge of other languages, the article seems to equate bilingualism with the ability to make yourself understood (however limited) by someone speaking another language.

I therefore suggest letting bilingualism (i.e. the ability to speak at at least two languages at native level) once again become an article in its own right instead of a redirect, covering this specific theme and referring readers to this broader article, for more in-depth linguistic speak. Thomas Blomberg 02:23, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

For now, I'll stay out of the discussion of whether bilingualism should be its own article. I agree that there is a tendency for these articles to focus on situations in which English is one of the languages involved and to use too much technical jargon.
With that said, clumsy as the use of "societal" may be, it isn't the same thing as "social." The latter generally means simply "involving interactions among persons," which the former usually describes "that which pertains to a society as a whole." One way to improve the sentence (which seems to have been removed in the intervening months) might be something like this:
  • Multilingualism within a society ...
or this:
  • Multilingualism across a society ...
There are other possibilities, of course, but I think I've made my point. This is an issue that comes up often when one reads critical theory, which is some of the most semantically impenetrable stuff around. For a project such as Wikipedia, it's important that we look for ways to break these ideas down into their component parts whenever possible, and when a word is unquestionably a distinct concept, try to explain that concept in the simplest terms justifiable. Lawikitejana 00:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] list of countries and other stuff

That list of countries/regions where several languages are spoken was getting a bit mess looking, I though. I grouped the places by geographical area, with the exception of a few certain territories. The division is just a rough draft. It needs work. Also, several countries have too much info, the list became out of shape. Perhaps this list should be spinned off to a separate page. Hmmm...

OK, I made that list on a separate page. I just cut and pasted it. Please help with it.DDD DDD 12:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone above complained that the article was heavy with technical terms. That seems fair. Also, the article seems to be saying that bilinguals are on a continuum from only 1 language known to completely/perfectly having two (or more languages). That seems appropriate to me.

On second thought, maybe there should be fewer technical terms.DDD DDD 12:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Promoting bilingualwiki.com

I've just deleted the sentence

Since the year 2000, even parents who speak a foreign language are raising their children from birth to speak that language, such that their children are bilingual from birth and have greater facility learning other languages in the future. Reasons to have done so: 1. It's somehow contradictory with the sentence placed immediatly before it: It is possible, although rare, for children to have and maintain more than one first language.

2. It doesn't seem very logical that the year 2000 means something like an edge, and that before that date children almost always weren't multilingual, while being now. To state something like that, it should at least cite a source. And I think that even then, it could still be objectable.

3. It seems that it was added to promote the website bilingualwiki.com because it links to the article on that site (which is, btw, proposed to be deleted for being only promo for the site). No one would link to such a content-less article without clear intentions to promote the site. --Pfc432 05:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish and Portuguese Speakers as Receptive Bilinguals

In the section on receptive bilingualism, it seems to limit the concept to those who are living in a multilingual environment, such as Spanish-speaking immigrants in Japan, where the local language (in this case, Japanese) is prized over a heritage language (Spanish). This seems to dishonestly limit the concept if receptive biliguals must merely be able to understand but not be able to produce the language. Speakers of Spanish, while not being able to write or speak Portuguese without instruction, are able to understand it. This is also true among speakers of some Scandivian langauages. Does this count as receptive bilingualism? I am not sure, and the article is not clear. --chemica 04:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Correction please?

This sentance doesn't make any sense to me:

"Being a bilingual does not necessarily mean that you can speak e.g English and American."


Can the person who wrote it (or someone who understands what they were trying to say) correct it, please?


This means that being bilingual could mean that e.g. you speak French and German or Serbian and Romanian, not necessarily German and English, French and English or Serbian and English, etc....

[edit] lists and the article

I am not convinced that a list of countries, regions, cities, towns, villages, hamlets, neighbourhoods, streets, ... belongs in this article. When we start listing places, the list soon becomes too unwieldy. We inhabit a big world, with many different regions. To fairly list all multilingual regions in this article would result in an article that is simply to long. I had previously removed the cities listed and suggested they belong on the list of multi-lingual regions that the multilingualism article links to. I still believe they should go there. Also, the article remains incomplete on so many levels. I think we should be attempting to edit the language in the article and agree on the language in the article before we begin the list of lists of multilingual regions. That being said, I took the time several months ago to write a complete list of multilingual countries (according to each countries wiki page) on the French wiki... DDD DDD 03:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


More than ever, I am convinced that this list of cities does not belong in this article, it is simply becoming too long and people are adding anything they want. Scanning it, I saw that Quebec City was listed. Unbelievable. I lived in Quebec City for 4 years in the mid-90s. It was in know way ever a multilingual (French-English) city and I find it insulting that someone added it to the list. Take a look at Census Canada data. The government agency counts 810 speakers of English and French in Quebec City. See [[1]] DDD DDD 14:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


I finally moved that list of cities to the List of multilingual countries and regions as was (with a bit of an edit of that intro paragraph). Here's the paragraph again before I edited: "In many cities around the globe, two or more languages are spoken at a high frequency by the huge majority of the population, creating truly multi-lingual cultures. While there are many cities, such as New York City, where dozens of languages can be heard, there are only a few were the wide spread number of multi-lingual speakers makes multi-lingualism a part of everyday life. The following list is just a small example:"

First sentence, I object to the language 'many cities', 'huge majority', 'truly multi...' If we are going to indicate that there are many cities, and start listing them, we could end up with a list of a thousand cities. Huge majorities? In all the cities on that list, do huge majorities speak several languages? Hmm... That 'truly'-word seems not very neutral - as opposed to 'truly-monolingual'? Or? Does anyone agree with me on that?

Second sentence, the paragraph continues "while there are many cities such as NYC'. Well, no. I doubt that. In the English-speaking world, there is London, NYC and Toronto where are plethora of languages can be heard everday as you walk down the street. From other cultures, you could probably add Paris, Moscow maybe, and ??? That's not being cultural-centric or anything on my part, but that's based on the English, French and Russian empires for the case of London, Paris and Moscow. And then modern emigration patterns for the two cities in the Americas (Yes, I know I am over-simplifying causes and results of emigration/immigration). So that's a list of maybe five cities or slightly more, which does not add to 'many cities'. Then the sentence continues 'there are only a few... where multilingualism [is] a part of everyday life'. And then the list includes 26 cities as of August 28th. That is not a few. Sorry. And why make the contradictory sentence that there are many like NYC but few not multilingual, when, as the list shows, it seems to be the opposite.

The article on multilingualism makes the point that mulitlingual socities may be those where they are officially multilingual but with many monolingual speakers or the opposite, a monolingual society with multilingual speakers. Then, this mini cities article tries to argue for something 'truly' multilingual. It seems contradictory to me and not staying neutral. Both types of multilingualism (officially mulitlingual or monolingual) are valid.

India is a multilingual country wih a plethora of languages spoken. The List of multilingual countries and regions, Indian languages, and List of national languages of India already discuss India's multilingualism. Does this list of cities need to include six Indian cities (Bangalore, Chennai, Delhi, Mangalore, Mumbai and Trivandrum)?

The same goes for Canada (Montreal and Ottawa) and Switzerland (Biel, Fribourg and Zurich) - two other countries known for their multilingualism.

The List of multilingual countries and regions also indicates that Miami government recognizes English, French Creole and Spanish. This list of cities wants to argue, these 'languages are spoken at a high frequency by the huge majority of the population'. Is this true? Do a huge majority of people in Miami speak these 3 languages? And do we need to repeat Miami again?

I still have my doubts that this list of cities is necessary at all. But if it is to be maintained, it should be on the List of multilingual regions... And some standards need to be applied. As of today, I see very little standards on that list. If we are going to create a list of multilingual cities, let's creat one that is good and not too long and unwieldy.

And what kind of standards to we need to apply? Where do we base our information on? The wiki pages for those cities? Or something else?DDD DDD 02:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. The list is a hodge-podge. Criteria must be set out at the beginning of the article for what Multi-lingual cities are defined as in this list, and the criteria should be strict enough to mean something, and of course, the list should reflect these criteria. Malnova 02:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] English, English, English and English

Is the purpose of this article to pretend that English is spoken everywhere? What justifies including English as a community language in Bruxelles, Zürich or Tel Aviv?

Another reason I prefer leaving out the languages spoken in that never ending list of cities...and simply sticking with the official list of multilingual regions.DDD DDD 03:39, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
It probably has to do with the international community in those cities, because they are important international political or financial capitals. Bruselles, for example is the center of EU activity, and English is an important language in the EU. I'm not so sure about Zurich or Tel Aviv, but from what I've heard of the later, English abounds there because of its many tourists.—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
English is indeed very common in Brussels. --Gronky (talk) 10:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cognitive advantlingualism

Under "Cognitive Proficiency," there is a section that suggests Cognitive Advantlingualism be merged with this article. However, Wikipedia does not have a page called Cognitive Advantlingualism (nor does a search for it turn up any results). I suggest deleting said suggestion.

[edit] Definition section

From the "Definition of multilingualism" section:

As a result, since most speakers do not achieve the maximal ideal, language learners may come to be seen as deficient and by extension, language teaching may come to be seen as a failure.

I have trouble following this line of logic. Is maximal fluency the only acceptable goal in language teaching? --Kjoonlee 13:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I think in the context of the whole paragraph, it is clearly stated that maximal fluency is NOT the only acceptable goal.

However, problems may arise with these definitions as they do not answer the question regarding how much knowledge of a language is required to be classified as bilingual. As a result, since most speakers do not achieve the maximal ideal, language learners may come to be seen as deficient and by extension, language teaching may come to be seen as a failure. One does not expect children to "speak chemistry" like Nobel prize winners or to have become a professional athlete by the time they have left school, yet anything less than fluency in a second language by graduating school children is somehow inadequate.DDD DDD 13:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect from Linguistic diversity

I noticed "linguistic diversity" redirects here, but this does not seem to make much sense - even a redirect to linguistic typology would seem more natural, but I think an article of its own is needed on this topic. So I'd suggest replacing the redirect with a stub for further expansion.--AAikio 09:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trash can picture

The trash can picture shows an example of multilingualism for the sake of multilingualism without real utility. The Vietnamese sign is incorrect, since it uses the wrong tone mark. The sign uses the grave accent when an acute accent is required, rendering the word unpronounceable in Vietnamese. DHN 01:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merging Polyglot into this article

It was proposed in August 2007 that Polyglot (person) be merged into Multilingualism#Multilingualism within an individual. Please discuss, decide and resolve this issue.--Laughitup2 (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Merge. The Polyglot (person) article was created as a futile attempt to list "polyglots" without defining what a polyglot was and without setting up any criteria for the language skills needed in order to master a language. It initially contained a long list of unreferenced dubious claims. After removing all the unreferenced claims, there are now only three "polyglots" left, all with some references, but none with reliable references. Polyglot (person) was nominated for deletion by me in April 2006, but it survived. A merger is a good alternative to deletion. Mlewan (talk) 20:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
There was apparently not opposition, so I went ahead and performed a partial merge. The text needs to be cleaned up much more, so feel free to take out the broom sticks. Mlewan (talk) 10:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
there are now only three "polyglots" left, all with some references, but none with reliable references -- Uku Masing had the source from the foreign ministry of Estonia. How much more official and reliable, can a thing be? :-)
But then again, that's probably why he is the only visible claim left on this page. Oh and concerning This means that it is very difficult to judge the actual achievement of claims like for Uku Masing an Estonian linguist, who was claimed to be fluent in approximately 65 languages. Masing did work professionally on very language-related subjects for all his life, so at least in his case the fluency is very well documented. But yes, most of the available data - the "reliable sources" - are in estonian language, thus not easily accessibly for 99% of the readers and editors of this article.
To give you just one random example, then - http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache:-jq4vNG7_-sJ:tjaani.eelk.ee/doc/masing_leksikon.rtf+%22Uku+Masing%22+keeled&hl=et&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=ee
It's one of the long list of articles which are more specific about what languages he knew. (The list is roughly this - all the indo-european languages of Europe (except South Slavic ones), all notable semitic languages, Sumerian, japanese, persian, tibetan, sanskrit, various uralic languages (especially samoyedic and finnic ones) and then he also knew several polynesian languages and some mayan ones.)
Anyway, point being - of course it's hard to judge fluency-claims with absolute certainty, however!, relative certainty can be reached. Merely the fact that one can translate from a language and that those translations are considered good by other specialists should act as a sort of "proof" for fluency-claims. Thus I think that possible listings of "highest claims" should not be brushed aside totally (as they appear to be right now). Just the reliability and how-well-they-are-documented should be studied very carefully and any additions without any good sources should be deleted immediately. Ones with sources should be studied before dismissed. But still, lists of all sorts of things is one of the virtues (rather than vices) of wikipedia. At least for me. :) Androg (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hyperpolyglot

What happened to that article? Did somebody "merge" it with this one? There's not a single appearance of the word "hyperpolyglot" here, a pity. --Taraborn (talk) 22:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Prestigious?

This article often speaks of prestigious language. What is meant by this? --Abdull (talk) 10:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I cannot see that the article talks about "prestigious language" but "language that is considered prestigious". There is a big difference. Wealth and prestige often go hand in hand in human society. In a village where there is a wealthy Komi family and a lot of poor Russians, it is possible that some people will consider Komi "prestigious". In the next village, there may be a wealthy Russian family and a lot of poor Komi, and Russian may be considered prestigious. None of the languages is more prestigious than the other, but there may be people who consider one or the other more prestigious. Mlewan (talk) 19:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comparing multilingual speakers

I'm disappointed by the Comparing multilingual speakers section. I'm not enough of an expert on this to be able to improve it (I only have enough skill to delete it :), but it doesn't fit my experience. I dream, think, and talk in my sleep in languages I've learned as an adult, so I will need a bit more proof if I'm to believe I must be doing these things through the intermediary of my first language. --Gronky (talk) 10:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of "polyglots"

I do not want to get into any edit war about the list of polyglots, but I would strongly advice other editors to remove any trace of it, as any such list is unreliable and useless. In, for example, the article about Georg Sauerwein there is no trace of any sources. Ziad Fazah is basically a circus artist with as much credibility as Uri Geller. The only source in the article about Robert Stiller is an expired link to a note from a parliamentary election campaign (!) 2005. And so on. There are not and cannot be any reliable sources for the "number" of languages of any "polyglot".

The section that used to be called "Counting languages" (not perfect header) and now is called "Polyglots" (ghastly header, considering the content), explains why this kind of list is ridiculous. If someone wants to have it, put it at some blog somewhere. Mlewan (talk) 17:13, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

The recently added "polyglot", Emil Krebs, mastered only seven languages according to himself, and there is no reliable and verifiable source that confirms that he even did that. (See the talk page of his article.) I now give this page up, because of the number of unverifiable unsourced claims that keep getting added. If anyone for some reason want my input on anything, please put a comment on my talk page. Thanks. Mlewan (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)