2 Dimensions and measurement of bilinguality

and bilingualism

In this chapter first we define the relevant dimensions of bilinguality and

bilingualism on the basis of the empirical evidence available in these fields.
In the second part we enumerate the main different measures developed in
order to try to quantify the relevant concepts.

2.1 DIM ENSIONS OF BILINGUALITY AND

BILINGUALISM
When qualifiers are used to describe bilingualism or bilinguality, they
generally focus on one single dimension of these phenomena which are
thereby viewed from a particular angle. If we use some of the classifications
put forward by researchers it is because they seem to us to be relevant to the
dimension under study; however, we must not lose sight of the fact that
bilinguality and bilingualism are multidimensional phenomena which
must be investigated as such. In the past, failure to take into account
simultaneously other dimensions in addition to linguistic ones has all too
often led to incomplete or erroneous interpretations of these phenomena.

2.1.1 Dimensions of bilingmlity

In Chapter 1 we made a distinction between bilingualism and bilingual­
ity. We view bilinguality as the psychological state of an individual who
has access to more than one linguistic code as a means of social com­
munication. This access is multidimensional as it varies along a number
of psychological and sociological dimensions. We have found the follow­
ing dimensions relevant:
(1) relative competence;
(2) cognitive organisation;
(3) age of acquisition;
(4) exogeneity;
(5) social cultural status; and
(6) cultural identity.
(For a summary of these dimensions see Table 2.1.)
25
T able 2.1 S u m m ary table o f psychological dim ensions of bilinguality (H am ers & Blanc, 1989)
D im ension Type of bilinguality
1. according to com petence in both languages (a) balanced bilinguality
(b) dom inant bilinguality
2. according to cognitive organisation (a) com pound bilinguality
(b) coordinate bilinguality
3. according to age o f acquisition (a) childhood bilinguality
(i) sim ultaneous
(ii) consecutive
(b) adolescent bilinguality
(c) adult bilinguality
4. according to presence o f L , com m unity in (a) endogenous bilinguality
environment (b) exogenous bilinguality
5. according to the relative status o f the two (a) additive bilinguality
languages (b) subtractivc bilinguality
6. according to group membership and cultural (a) bicultural bilinguality
identity (b) L , m onocultura! bilinguality
(c) L2 acculturated bilinguality
(d) deculturated hilingualtiy
* F or an explanation o f LA, L * L t, L 2, see p. 372
Com ments*
L V1 com petence = LW2 com petence
L ^ , com petence > or < Lg(J com petence
L ^ j unit equivalent to Lwa unit = one conceptual unit
LW1 unit = one conceptual unit 1
L8/, equivalent = one conceptual unit 2
L i /2 acquired before age o f 10/11
La and L„ = m other tongues
L , - m other tongue: La acquired before 11
La = acquired between 11 and 17
Lj = acquired after 17
presence o f L , com m unity
absence of L , com m unity
L A;t and LB/2 socially valorised -* cognitive advantage
L j valorised at expense L , -* cognitive disadvantage
double m embership and bicultural identity
La(, membership and cultural identity
L ,/- membership and cultural identity
am biguous membership and anom ic identity
 Dimensions of bilinguality and bilingualism 27

(1) The dimension of competence enables us to take into account the

relative nature of bilinguality, since it focuses on the relationship between
two linguistic competences, one in each language. A distinction has been
made between the balanced bilingual who has equivalent competence in
both languages and the dominant bilingual for whom competence in one of
the languages, more often the mother tongue, is superior to his competence
in the other (Lambert, 1955). Balanced bilinguality should not be confused
with a very high degree of competence in the two languages; it is rather a
question of a state of equilibrium reached by the levels of competence
attained in the two languages as compared to monolingual competence.
Equivalent competence should not be equated with the ability to use both
languages for all functions and domains. Dominance or balance is not
equally distributed for all domains and functions of language; each individ­
ual has his own dominance configuration.
(2) Regardless of the state of equilibrium, bilinguality may differ on other
dimensions. For example, age and context of acquisition may lead to
differences in cognitive functioning. Ervin & Osgood (1954) distinguished
between compound and coordinate language systems: in a compound
system two sets of linguistic signs come to be associated with the same set of
meanings whereas, in a coordinate system, translation equivalents in the
two languages correspond to two different sets of representations. This
distinction is schematised in Figure 2.1.
This distinction, often misinterpreted in the literature, has to do with a
difference of cognitive organisation and not with a difference in the degree
of competence, or a difference in the age or context of acquisition. Al­
though there is a high correlation between the type of cognitive organisa­
tion, age and context of acquisition, there is no one-to-one correspondence
between the form of cognitive representation and the age of acquisition;
indeed, an individual who learned both languages as a child in the same
context is more likely to have a single cognitive representation for two
translation equivalents, whereas one who learned an L2 in a context
different from that of his L, will probably have a coordinate organisation,
that is, he will have separate representations for two translation equival­
ents. However, for operational purposes, age and context of acquisition are
often used in order to identify the two types of bilinguals. This misinter­
pretation is often made, even by specialists in bilingual studies who, while
noting the relation between age and context of acquisition and type of
bilinguality, forget that the distinction refers essentially to differences in
semantic organisation in the bilingual (see, for example, Ervin & Osgood,
1954, Fishman, 1964; Gumper?, 1964a; Dodson, 1983). It must be stressed
that this distinction is not absolute but that different forms of bilinguality
are distributed along a continuum from a compound pole to a coordinate
28 Dimensions and measurement

C o o rd in a te bilinguality

L i ‘family 1 -------------- » co n cept FAMILY

L 2 'famille' ------------ ►concept FAMILLE

Figure 2.1 Schematic representation of the compound-coordinate

distinction (adapted from Ervin & Osgood, 1954)

pole: a bilingual person can at the same time be more compound for certain
concepts and more coordinate for others. This distinction is further ex­
plored in Section 7.1.1.1.
(3) The age of acquisition plays a part not only in respect of cognitive
representation but also in other aspects of the bilingual’s development,
particularly his linguistic, neuropsychological, cognitive and sociocultural
development. Age of acquisition combines with other data from the sub­
ject’s language biography, such as context of acquisition and use of the two
languages. Indeed, age and context often go together for instance, early
acquisition of two languages often occurs in the same family context, while
later acquisition of the second language often takes place in a school
context distinct from a family context for the first language.
A distinction must first be made between childhood bilinguality, adoles­
cent bilinguality and adult bilinguality. In the first of these bilingual
experience takes place at the same time as the general development of the
child; in other words this bilingual experience occurs at the time when the
various developmental components have not yet reached maturity and can
therefore be influenced by this experience. In childhood bilinguality one
must distinguish:

(a) simultaneous early or infant bilinguality when the child develops two
mother tongues from the onset of language, which we call LAand L&
as for example the child of a mixed-lingual family; and
(b) consecutive childhood bilinguality when he acquires a second lan­
guage early in childhood but after the basic linguistic acquisition of
 Dimensions of bilinguality and bilingualism 29

his mother tongue has been achieved. In this case and in all other cases
of consecutive bilingual acquisition we refer to the mother tongue as
L, and to the second language as L2.

While the development of simultaneous bilinguality takes place through

informal, unintentional learning, consecutive childhood bilinguality may
occur informally, as in the case of the child of an im m igrant family, b u t m ay
also result from intentional learning, as in certain bilingual educational
programs. Another important difference between simultaneous and con­
secutive bilinguality concerns the form-function mapping: in the case of
simultaneous bilinguality the child has to map two forms onto one func­
tion; we refer to this as compound mapping. In consecutive bilinguality
simple mapping (one linguistic form) occurs before the acquisition of the
second language for the functions acquired already.
(4) According to whether the speech communities of both languages are
present or not in the child’s social environment, we refer to either en­
dogenous or exogenous bilinguality. An endogenous language is one that is
used as a mother tongue in a community and may or may not be used for
institutional purposes, whereas an exogenous language is one that is used
as an official, institutionalised language but has no speech community in
the political entity using it officially. Examples of exogenous languages are
English or French in West, Central and East African countries; a Benin
child from Cotonou, speaking Fon at home and going to a school where
French is the exclusive language of instruction develops an exogenous
bilinguality in Fon and French.
(5) In respect of cognitive development, the type of bilinguality is also
dependent on the sociocultural environment, in particular the relative
status of the two languages in the community. According to whether the
two languages are socially valued in his environm ent, the child will develop
different forms of bilinguality. If the two languages are sufficiently valued,
the child’s cognitive development will derive maximum benefit from the
bilingual experience, which will act as an enriching stimulation leading to
greater cognitive flexibility compared to his monolingual counterpart; on
the other hand, if the sociocultural context is such that the mother tongue is
devalued in the child’s environment, his cognitive development may be
delayed in comparison with a monolingual peer’s; in extreme cases, the
bilingual child may not be able to make up for this delay. The former type
of bilingual experience has been called additive bilinguality; the latter
subtractive bilinguality (I-ambert, 1974). This distinction relates to the
conceptual-linguistic consequences of the sociocultural context of bilingual
development.
30 Dimensions and measurement

(6) Finally, bilinguals can be distinguished in terms of their cultural

identity. A bilingual may identify positively with the two cultural groups
that speak his languages and be recognised by each group as a member: in
this case he is also bicultural. This cultural identity integrating two cultures
is probably, at the socio-affective level, the analogue of additive bilinguality
at the cognitive level. A balanced biculturalism often goes hand in hand
with a balanced bilinguality. However, this is not necessarily the case: in
multilingual societies, for example, a multiple cultural membership can
coexist with varying degrees of dominant bilingual competence. A high
bilingual competence does not always mean a cultural identity with dual
cultural membership; a person may become a fluent bilingual while re­
maining monocultural and identifying culturally with only one of the
groups. Bilingual development can also lead a person to renounce the
cultural identity of his mother-tongue group and adopt that of the second-
language group, in which case he will become an L2-acculturated bilingual.
Sometimes, however, the bilingual may give up his own cultural identity
but at the same time fail to identify with the L2 cultural group, and as a
result become anomic and deculturated (Berry, 1980).
Bilinguality has also been described in terms of language use. Weinreich
(1953) and Mackey (1962) define bilingualism as the alternate use of two or
more languages by the same individual. However, ‘use’ is not a single
dimension but the expression of one or more dimensions of bilinguality.
The notion o f‘use’ means that the bilingual individual has the capacity to
call on either language, and this implies that he must have a minimal
competence in both languages. Use will tell us whether a bilingual person is
more or less dominant in one or the other of his languages for a specific
domain or topic. Dodson (1981) proposes the term ‘preferred language’ to
account for choice of language in a particular situation.

2.1.2 Dimensions of socictal bilingualism

Sociolinguists have shown how monolingual behaviour varies according
to a number of parameters such as, e.g. role relation, relative status of
speakers and languages, topic, domain, etc. (see, for example, Ervin-Tripp,
1964a; Fishman, 1965; Labov, 1966; Fishman, 1972). It can be assumed that
these variables apply to language-contact situations and that the state of
bilinguality interacts with these. The bilingual's language behaviour varies
according to whether he interacts with a monolingual or a bilingual
interlocutor in a unilingual, bilingual or multilingual environment.
When a person bilingual in Lx, LY encounters a monolingual interlocu­
tor in a unilingual community speaking Lx, he will follow the social and
 Dimensions of bilinguality and bilingualism 31

linguistic norms of the Lx community. If he encounters a bilingual person

like himself (Lx, Ly) in a similar setting, the two people can follow the
unilingual norms of either community or they can create their own set of
language norms, as the community defines only the monolingual behav­
iour norms of L*.
In a multilingual community, on the other hand, a set of norms exists
defining bilingual behaviour. For a bilingual community to exist there
must be at least two languages commonly used by some members of the
community. Either the community is com posed of two groups speaking
two different languages as their mother tongue along with a small number
of bilinguals speaking both languages, or a small number of both groups
speaking a third common language, used as a lingua franca; or, as in the
case of an exogenous language, some members of the community speak a
second language that has no or few native speakers in the community. Any
of these languages may be an official language of the community.
Every bilingual community is situated between the two poles of a
continuum, ranging from a set made up of two unilingual groups each
containing a small number of bilinguals, to a single group with a more or
less large number of members using a second language for specific pur­
poses. At one pole most speakers in each group use only one language for
all functions, whereas at the other a varying number of speakers use both
languages but for different purposes. One can distinguish the following
typical cases:

(1) Territorial bilingualism, in which each group finds itself mostly within
its own politically defined territory, with the two (or more) languages
having official status in their own territory; the official status of the
other national language(s) varies considerably from country to coun­
try. Examples of territorial bilingualism can be found in Belgium,
Switzerland, Spain, Canada and India, each country applying the
principle of territorial bilingualism in its own way.
(2) Another case of bilingual communities can be found in multilingual
countries of Africa and Asia where, beside the native languages of
indigenous ethnic groups o r nations, one or more languages of wider
communication exist cutting across these groups and nations native
to none o r few of them; this can be either a lingua franca, which is like
Swahili in Eastern and Central Africa and Tok Pisin in Papua New
Guinea, or a superposed language imposed by political decision-mak­
ing which introduces an exogenous language, normally inherited from
a colonial past and used only in certain official domains, as is the case
with French or English in several African countries.
32 Dimensions and measurement

(3) Finally, a bilingual community can be described as diglossic, that is,

two languages are spoken by a variable section of the population, but
they are used in a complementary way in the community, one lan­
guage or variety having a higher status than the other and being
reserved for certain functions and domains. Examples of diglossic
bilingualism are the use of Spanish and Guarani in Paraguay and of
French and Creole in Haiti. In these cases both languages have a
significant group of native speakers in the com m unity.
Let us stress that monolinguality is more commonly found in economi­
cally dominant groups whereas the members of minority or subordinate
groups tend to be bilingual or multilingual. Minority does not necessarily
imply numerical inferiority, but refers rather to a subordinate status in
the community. However, a subordinate group can use its numerical
superiority to impose its own language norms through language-planning
legislation which aims at ending the subordinate status of that group; in
this case the formerly dominant group undergoes a minorisation process.
To the extent that a community’s ethnolinguistic duality is officially
recognised, the community sets up a number of institutions in order to
manage the use of both languages. Inside these institutions members of
the different language groups may use one language, which can be a
language of the community, a lingua franca, or an exogenous language;
alternatively, several languages from the community may be used to a
varying extent, as for example when two members of different language
groups speak to each other in their respective languages; in this case each
understands but does not necessarily speak the other’s language, or if
they do not understand each other’s language they make use of an
interpreter.
The various dimensions of bilinguality and bilingualism which we have
briefly defined bring out the multidimensional nature of these phenom­
ena. We have called upon notions taken from a variety of disciplines:
psychology, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, sociology and linguistics.
Bilingualism must be approached as a complex phenomenon which sim­
ultaneously implies a state of bilinguality of individuals and a state of
languages in contact at the collective level. Therefore, this phenomenon
should be studied at several levels of analysis: individual, interpersonal,
intergroup and societal. Even though the several disciplines involved in
the study of bilingualism have developed different methodologies, they all
share the problem of operationalising and measuring the concepts they
make use of. In the next section we will discuss some of the measures
developed by the various disciplines to quantify the dimensions of bilin­
guality and bilingualism.