Peoples Democratic Republic of Algeria

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

University of Constantine 1
Faculty of letters and languages
Department of letters and English language

The Effects Of Bilingualism on Cognitive

Development

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement of the BA degree in Applied

Linguistics

Supervisor: Mr. Mokhtar HAMADOUCHE

Presented by:
Ahmed Amine BELLOUM
Charaf Eddine MELIANI
Ibtissem DERBAL
Mahi Eddine CHENNOUF

- May 2014 -

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our gratitude and respect toward our supervisor Mr.
Mokhtar HAMADOUCHE for his valuable guidelines, assistance and precious suggestions
through the realisation of this dissertation.
Sincere thanks are due to Dr. Riadh BELOUAHEM for his helpful assistance and
intellectual generosity along this year, as we are equally grateful to all respectful teachers we
had throughout these last three years at University.
We are also indebted to our families and friends for their encouragement and moral
support for the fulfilment of our studies.
Special thanks go to all persons who collaborated and assisted the preparation and
evaluation of this work.

Abstract

As multiple researchers approached bilingualism from different angles, it has been shown
throughout complex processes that it is a field that must be held with precaution. The
distinction of all elements involved in its study and the understanding of this complex process
has been proved problematic. Yet, with the reported research of numerous linguists and with
more defined methodology it has been possible to distinguish various types of bilingualism
and its relation with mental processes. On the one hand, bilingualism negatively affects the
mind development. Whereas on the other hand it has a positive influence on cognitive
performance. Counterparts have explored the numerous areas around this topic in order to
understand a bit more the developmental mechanism and behaviour of both monolingual and
bilingual individuals. Evidently, the study of bilingualism aims to clarify major titles and
answer inevitable questions that turn around this subject. Therefore, providing exact answers
is inevitably problematic. Yet, positive reports about bilingualism's influence on cognitive
development

outnumber those that suggest negative effects,

elements are of a great impact .

II

where other influencing

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments

Abstract

II

Table of contents

III

General Introduction

Section I: Definition of Items

1.Bilingualism and Bilinguals

2.Typology and Classification of Bilinguals

3.Cognitive Development

11

Section II: The effects of bilingualism on cognitive development

1. Bilingualism and negative cognitive effects

14

2. Bilingualism and cognitive advantages

17

General Conclusion

20

References

22

III

General Introduction

Background of The Study

Merely, bilingualism was born from the contact and communication of individuals
coming from different nations. Where migration and globalization played a great role in the
spreading of this phenomenon.
Bilingualism has been the subject of interest of many linguists. Aiming to understand
the differences between bilinguals and their monolingual peers. In history, In addition to the
research of Peal and Lambert in 1962 that influenced radically most assumptions and beliefs
concerning bilingualism.
Evidence of language proficiency levels in L1 and L2 proved to be important
standards in the study of bilinguals' behaviour, as well as further social factors influencing the
performance and development of individuals.
Further approaches about bilingual influence on cognitive development have been
author of many problematic questions. where some reported negative effects as poor
vocabulary and less proficiency in languages. and other reports better cognitive flexibility .
In sum one must take into consideration the various outcomes and influencing
elements so as to make clearer distinction when investigating the effects of bilingualism on
cognitive development.
This research will focus on possible effects of bilingualism on cognitive development
and to find out which of the positive or negative effects is prominent.

Research Questions and Hypothesis

In order to discuss matters related to bilingualism and its impact on cognitive
development, we set out to answer the following questions:
- What are the different definitions of bilingualism? And why is it defined differently?
- On what basis bilinguals are differentiated and classified ?
- What are possible negative effects of bilingualism on cognitive development ?
- What are the benefits of being bilingual in relation to cognitive abilities and educational/
social development ?
On the basis of these questions, the following hypothesis is put forward:
Bilingualism has more positive effects on cognitive abilities than negative effects .

Section I: Definition of Terms

1.Bilingualism and Bilinguals

During the twentieth century, many approaches had dealt with bilingualism and the
definition of a bilingual - even if it seems easy - it is rather a complex and ambiguous task.
Linguists explored this field from different angles for the purpose of investigating and better
understanding the features and difficulties related to this topic.

Merely, bilingualism is the ability to use two languages. However, defining

bilingualism is problematic since individuals with varying bilingual characteristics may be
classified as bilingual. Therefore, definitions of bilingualism range from a minimal
proficiency in two languages, to an advanced level of proficiency which allows the speaker to
function and appear as a native-like speaker of two languages. It is said that a person may
describe themselves as bilingual but may mean only the ability to converse and communicate
orally. Others may be proficient in reading in two or more languages . Again, a person may
be bilingual by virtue of having grown up learning and using two languages simultaneously.
Or also may become bilingual by learning a second language sometime after their first
language. In sum, to be bilingual means different things to different people (Franson, 2009).

In defining bilinguals, Gottardo and Grant (2008) hold that:

The definition of bilingualism is more complex than a simplistic yes/ no
categorization. Definitions of bilingualism must include the degree of

proficiency in each language and circumstances under which each language

is learned. Even outwardly simple questions such as what it means to
know a language must be considered. Factors that facilitate or hinder
bilingualism must be considered. (p.5)

Further, Butler and Hakuta (2006) in their attempt of defining bilingualism state that :

Bilinguals are often broadly defined as individuals or groups of people who

obtain the knowledge and use of more than one language. However,
bilingualism is a complex psychological and socio-cultural linguistic
behaviour and has multi-dimensional aspects. There is no agreed-upon
definition of bilingualism among researchers. (p.114)

Genesee (2007) argues that a definition of bilingualism should include the age of the
first exposure to language, regularity and the extent of exposure to each language. In that
very same year, Wei listed four concepts which should be taken into consideration in the
definition of a bilingual: first, the age and way of the acquisition of a language ; second,
proficiency level in specific languages; third , domains of language use; and fourth, selfidentification and attitude.

Gottardo, and Grant (2008) also assert that : "carefully defining degrees of
bilingualism in each circumstance and for each learner is important because educational
decisions depend on the accuracy of these definitions" (p.5)

It cannot be but clear that there is no single interpretation able to define bilingualism
and bilinguals. As has been said previously, one must take into account the fact that there is
different points and views from which one can perceive bilingualism. Hence, grasping an
exact detailed and truthful definition of it ,is difficult. One must consider the age factor as
well as the manner and amount of the exposure to the language , and again when and what the
language is used for . To end up with concluding that defining bilingualism requires paying
attention to all susceptible influencing details related to the field .

2.Typology of Bilingualism and Classification of Bilinguals

According to Butler and Hakuta, Bilingualism

have multiple dimensions. These

dimensions are in fact characteristics of individual bilinguals that were observed to differ
from one another. Therefore, it is important to take into account one dimension at the time
which means focussing on a certain one in order to be able to elaborate an adequate
classification of bilinguals . As they assert : " bilingual individuals can be classified on the
basis of different dimensions both at the individual and social levels" (p.118 ).

Again , there are various types into which bilinguals may fall . Seeing individual
bilinguals from different dimensions cleared the existence of more than one type. In the
purpose of classifying those bilinguals into distinct categories, one must concentrate on
specific dimensions so as to elaborate a clearer distinction between them.

Bilingual's classification encompasses numerous categories . We find studies based on

individual's proficiency in language, for instance that of Pearl and Lambert which
distinguished between two types : Balanced and unbalanced or (dominant). Bilinguals of the
first category, or balanced bilinguals are those with similar degree of proficiency in both
languages. And bilinguals of the second category, or unbalanced (dominant) bilinguals, are
those whose proficiency in one language is higher than their proficiency in the other language
(s) . (Pearl and Lambert , 1962).

From another dimension, in 1953, a study based on the organization of linguistic codes in
relation to meaning units. Weinreich classified bilinguals into three categories : the first was
named compound, the individuals of this category possess two distinct sets of linguistic
codes ; each language has its own linguistic code . The second one, as coordinate; this
category

counts individuals with linguistic codes organized separately into two sets of

meaning unites .The third category encloses subordinate bilinguals , in which linguistic
codes in the first language (L1) are presumed to be interpreted through the second language
(L2) and the existent two sets of meaning unites are accessible only through the first
language (L1). (Weinreich, 1953)

Moreover, there is Genesee's study based on the age of acquisition, have set out early
and late bilinguals (Genesee et al,1978). While Hamers and Blanc stated that early bilinguals
acquire both languages in a common family context. whereas Late bilinguals acquire the first
language in their family context and a second language in school . Again, from early
bilingualism derive Simultaneous and Consequential or consecutive bilingualism (Hamers
and Blanc, 1989). The first category regroups bilinguals who simultaneously acquire
equivalent skills in both languages , i.e., learning two languages at the same time. While in the
second category, bilinguals are said to acquire the second language after the first one but with
the acquisition still taking place during childhood . i.e., the acquisition of one language after
another in early age.

Linguists have classified bilingualism and bilinguals into different types according to
observations they collected through research. Based on aspects and emphasis on proficiency,
linguistic codes and meaning units, or again measured to the age of the acquisition of the
languages. All in the aim of understanding bilinguals' development . But also they were able
to define characteristics of Second Language Acquisition (SLA). And possible outcomes
related to levels of proficiency, semantic representation and cultural identities. Moreover, they
observed related issues in educational implications.

Lambert, 1974 based on Functional ability distinguished from the one hand between
Incipient, receptive and productive bilingualism. Again based on the effects of the second
language learning on the retention of the first language from the other hand ,between additive
Bilinguals, those who have the ability enhance their L2 without losing L1 proficiency and
subtractive bilinguals whose L2 was acquired or learned at the expense of losing their L1
(Lambert, 1974-1975).

On the basis of Language status and learning environment, in 1977,

distinguished Folk Bilinguals whose own

Fishman

language does not have a high status in the

society they reside in, from Elite bilinguals who speak a dominant language in a given
society and another language which gives them additional value. also based on dimensions
similar to those proposed by Fishman (1977), Valds and Figueroa in 1994 differentiated
between Circumstantial and Elective Bilinguals.

In addition, Butler and Hakuta (2008) have affirmed :

Dimensions of bilingualism are continuous and not simply categorical constructs.

One cannot draw clear boundaries between different types of bilinguals within a
given dimension. Take, for instance, the dimension of proficiency. There could be
a wide range of combinations of proficiencies in two languages (p.118)

One more item is to be mentioned in this scope, that is the fact that ones bilingual
profile is susceptible to change with the time for the reason that bilingualism is not static but
dynamic, according to Butler and Hakuta (2008) , individual may lose one of the skills'
proficiency in their primary language once they start engaging in more activities in their
second language.

Finally

one must

acknowledge the complexity of bilingualism and that the

classification of individual bilinguals depends much on the

multi-dimensions of this

linguistic behaviour in addition to external influencing circumstances as environmental and

social factors.

Table 1. Classification of Individual Bilinguals :

10

3. Cognitive Performance

It is important to introduce the notion of cognition before getting into further detailed
aspects of the relation between bilingualism and cognitive performance . According to a
dictionary definition of the word cognition it is explained that " it is the mental act or process
by which knowledge is acquired, including perception, intuition, and reasoning". (Collins,
2000).

In other words, Cognitive performance is our ability to acquire and use that
knowledge. However behind such simple terms lays a complex related brain-based skills that
individuals use in the performance of every action without realizing it . Perception through
human senses , intuition, and also decision making and language skills are all parts of
cognition. cognitive processes have less to do with any actual knowledge , but instead are
about our ability to use that knowledge to direct and adapt actions towards goals.

Back in history, Piaget's first publication of his theory of children's cognitive

development took place in the 1920's. Though his work did not become prominent until the
mid-twentieth century, he suggested as well

his own theory about children's moral

development. He recognized that this latter is closely tied to moral development and he was
interested in the way children's thoughts about morality change over time. For this purpose,
he investigated cognitive development in children. (Oswalt, 2008)
11

Piaget's stage theory describes the cognitive development of children. It encloses four
main stages defined by age and mental abilities. The first stage is called The Sensorimotor
Stage. It is the stage in which, infants and toddlers acquire knowledge through their sensory
experiences and their manipulation of objects. Second, The Preoperational stage. At this
stage, kids learn through pretends play but still struggle with logic and taking the point of
view of other people . The Third Stage is The Concrete Operational Stage . kids at this point
of development start to think in a more logical way but their thinking can also be very rigid.
They tend to struggle with abstract and hypothetical concepts. The final stage is The Formal
Operational Stage, it involves an increased logic, the ability to use deductive reasoning, and
the understanding of abstract ideas.(Oswalt, 2008)

Since language skills are all parts of cognition and from the stages of cognitive
performance and development ,in addition to further approaches we found that bilingualism
or multilingualism and cognitive performance are related while one affects the other in
different ways.

According to Bialystok in 2011, bilingualism and cognition-based research highlight

implications in individual processes of cognition in order to show the impact of bilingualism
instead of the way particular languages and combinations of languages influences the thought
processes of their speakers.

12

However, interrogative statements take place in this area of research. The studies
based on individual bilinguals has shown a difference between their cognitive development
and that of their monolingual mates. So as necessary observations about the relation between
bilingualism and cognitive development

13

Section II: The Effects of Bilingualism on Cognitive Development

1. Bilingualism and Negative Cognitive Effects

With the assertion of several previous approaches, Bilingualism has been proved to
affect cognitive performance in a negative way. From previous research, Hamers and Blanc
(2000) point out that, whereas the biographies suggested a well-balanced development of the
bilinguals languages, psychometric tests of the same period claimed that bilingualism had
negative effects on childrens cognitive development. Another conducted study by Hoff et al.
(2011) on bilingual and monolingual children. where monolinguals were only exposed to
English while bilinguals were exposed to by English and Spanish. The research showed that
children who are exposed to two languages simultaneously do not typically acquire each
language at the same rate as children only exposed to one language.

In the early approaches Pintner and Keller (1922) refer to 'linguistic handicap' in
bilingual children, and Saer (1923) to 'mental confusion', claiming that bilingual children had
lower IQ values than their monolingual peers.

in other works E. Bialystok and Craik 2011 reveal that speaking two languages created
retardation in children . And Studies of vocabulary knowledge have reported lower scores for
bilinguals in each language than for monolingual speakers of that language, and this deficit
appears at all ages across the lifespan (Bialystok, 2001).
14

E. Bialystok and Craik (2011) argue that

In a study examining receptive vocabulary scores in English for over

1,700 children between the ages of 3- and 10-years old, monolingual
children obtained higher scores than bilingual children at every age,
even though all the bilingual children were fluent in English and used
it daily at school [Bialystok, Luk, Peets, & Yang, in press]. (p.8)

In addition study reported that dual language input affected both the childrens
grammatical development as well as vocabulary (Hoff et al.2011) .These results agrees with
Bialystoks study on children aged between 3 and 10,investigating their English receptive
vocabulary. Children who spoke English and with another language scored lower on the tests
than their monolingual peers. Despite these results, Bialystok (2010) maintains that

there is no reason to believe that bilingual children have a smaller overall

vocabulary in fact, their combined vocabulary may be larger than that of
monolinguals or that they have poorer communicative ability than
monolinguals, only that their vocabulary is distributed across two languages.
(p. 561 )

15

The negative effects of bilingualism on cognitive development found across research,

are

the proof of the fact that bilingualism can also affect negatively the cognitive

performance. It is also important to clarify that these results were not observed only in
children but in adults as well. What was referred to as mental confusion and linguistic
handicap as well as vocabulary deficiency is essentially related to individuals themselves
i.e. ; not the amount or number of languages. This brings us again to the questions asked
before concerning the effect of language on mind., to come up to conclude that language
deficiency in bilinguals is not directly due to the number of languages one uses but in the
amount and manner a bilingual individual uses it.

16

2. Bilingualism and cognitive advantages

Responses to the question investigating the impact of the number of languages on

human mind emphasized the negative consequences of bilingualism . it was surprising when a
radically different answer was offered by Peal and Lambert (1962); showing that bilingual
francophone children in Montreal outperformed monolingual English-speaking children on a
wide variety of measures.( Bialystok and Craik , p.3.)

In Bilingual Mind, Bialystok and Craik state :" Studies seeking evidence for bilingual
effects on development began with the conservative assumption that any detectable effect of a
linguistic experience would be found in the domain of linguistic competence." (p.3).

Bilingual students were observed to be cognitively more developed , as having

divergent and more creative thinking (Hudson, 1968), having greater meta-linguistic
awareness, asserted by Bialystok as " the explicit knowledge of linguistic structure and the
ability to access it intentionally." In addition to cognitive control of linguistic processes
(Bialystok, 1987 ; Galambos and Hakuta, 1988), and increased communicative sensitivity
(Genesee, Tucker, and Lambert, 1975). But bilinguals must possess age-appropriate levels of
competence in two languages in order to achieve these cognitive advantages.

After the publication of the Peal and Lambert study in 1962, further research was
conducted implying the same results, or a positive effect on childrens cognition caused by
17

bilingualism. Most studies have provided empirical evidence on the cognitive advantage
among bilingual children compared with their monolingual counterparts, particularly in high
control tasks requiring increased cognitive flexibility . This flexibility can be tested with
changing task demands which are unpredictable or novel to the participant (Bialystok, 1999).

Den (2003) defines flexible cognition as:

The dynamic construction and modification of representations and responses based

on information (i.e., similarities, cues, relations) selected from the linguistic and
non-linguistic environment. That is, when there is a range of plausible ways to
understand and respond to a problem, flexible thinkers select patterns that limit this
range. The selected information must change over time as a function of shifting
task demands. That is, as new problems and circumstances are imposed by the
environment, the cognitive focus should shift to new, pertinent information. (pp.
275 276)

and with changing unpredictable or novel task demands this flexibility can be tested .

Again, Based on illustrative experiment by Bialystok and colleagues (2004) involving

several reaction-time (RT) conditions, E. Bialystok stated "The Result suggests that
bilingualism may protect against age-related cognitive decline at least in the ability to inhibit
the disruptive effects of misleading stimuli. "(p.7)

Also positive relationship exists between bilingualism and various abilities. For
example, a positive relationship between bilingualism and the students ability to think
18

abstractly about language (a skill that has been called meta-linguistic ability and is
hypothesized to be related to reading ability in elementary school students). We also found a
positive relationship between bilingualism and nonverbal thinking as measured by a standard
test of intelligence.( Hakuta, 1985)

In a nutshell, Bilingualism is majorly important for many cognitive, social and

psychological reasons. From what has been said before and through several research and
approaches: (Weinreich, 1953) ; (Peal & Lambert, 1962) ; ( Fishman &Figueroa, 1994)
(Hamers &Blanc, 2000) ; ( Butler & Hakuta, 2008) ; ( Hoff et al, 2011). It was demonstrated
that bilingualism's impact on cognitive performance is of a great positive importance. From
cognitive development to more developed creative thinking and meta-linguistic awareness,
Evidently bilingualism has positive effects on cognitive performance.

19

General Conclusion

To sum up what was previously stated, Bilingualism has been proved to be a complex
field with no exact definition or standards, which makes it non measurable without due
clarifications based upon multi-dimensions that finally constitute an easier way to understand
this study . It is similar to related classification of bilingual individuals according to the
typology of bilingualism.

It was shown that bilingualism and cognition were interrelated and affect the cognitive
performance. while early research found that bilingualism affects negatively the cognitive
development. It was the publication of Peal and Lambert's research in 1962 that disregarded
these assertions and improved the way other researchers defined concepts and selected their
subjects accordingly. Particularly , the distinction between types of bilinguals gave hints to
coming approaches and importance to future investigations. It is this distinction that lead
researchers to experiment the differences with clearer definitions and outcomes .

Most research indicated positive effects of bilingualism on cognitive performance

because of the increase of attention and directed methodology of bilingualism. This positive
influence consisted of increased cognitive flexibility when other research demonstrated better
results on tasks requiring high control of language skills. But despite studies illustrating
positive effects of bilingualism on cognitive development, some others indicated negative

20

outcomes . Mostly negative effects appear to affect individuals vocabulary . And have been
reported to have poor vocabulary in comparison to

monolinguals. Also in late literacy

development . when L1 proficiency is not developed at the same time as L2 proficiency.

It can be deduced that, bilingualism is related to complicated set of factors that must be
considered carefully when investigating this field. Concerning its effects on

cognitive

development, it remains the subject of struggles and fascination. Even with data collected up
to this day one cannot yet expand all the sides of bilingualism. Nevertheless, it serves as a
crucial input in stepping closely in direction of better understanding bilingualism.

21

References

GENERAL ISSUES IN BILINGUALISM AND SOUND ACQUISITION. n.d.

<http://www.lotpublications.nl/publish/articles/003219/bookpart.pdf >.
Advances in Applied Psycholinguistics. 1987.
Arnarsdttir, Elin. The Importance of Being Bilingual The effects of bilingualism on cognitive
development and the role of language valorisation. 2012.
Dictionary, English Collins. Cognition. n.d. English Definition &Thesaurus. English
Collins Dictionary. <http://dictionary.reverso.net/englishdefinition/cognitive%20performance.>.
Ellen Bialystok, and Fergus I.M. Craik ,. Cognitive and Linguistic Processing in the Bilingual
Mind. 2011.
Franson, Charlotte. What is Bilingualism. 2 nd May 2003. Copyright NALDIC 2001. May
2014. <http://www.naldic.org.uk/ITTSEAL2/teaching/B1.cfm>.
Gottardo, Alexandra , and Grant, Amy. Defining Bilingualism. 26 Mar 2008. Ensyclopedia
of Lnguage and Literacy Development .
Groot, Judith F. Kroll and Annette M. B. De. Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic
Approaches. Ed. Oxford University Press , 2005.
Hakuta, Kenji. Cognitive Development in Bilingual Education . 1985.
Hakuta, Yuko G. Butler. Kenji. .Bilingualism and Second Language Acquisition. Ed. Tej K.
Bhatia and William C. Ritchie. 2004, 2006 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd, n.d.
Kenji Hakuta, Bernardo M. Ferdman, and Rafael M. Diaz. Bilingualism and cognitive
development : three perspectives. 1987.
McCarty, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas and Teresa L. key Concepts in Bilingual Education. n.d.
Oswalt, Angela. Ed. k. C. E. Zupanic. n.d. may 2014.
<http://sevencounties.org/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=41173&cn=1310>.
. " Piaget's Theory Of Moral Development". Ed. C. E. Zupanick. May 2014.
Stock, William A. "bilingual research journal" 20 (1996): 467.

22