Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rngvg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-03T13:18:26.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The description of bilingualism*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

William F. Mackey
William F. Mackey*
Affiliation:
Laval University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Bilingualism is not a phenomenon of language; it is a characteristic of its use. It is not a feature of the code but of the message. It does not belong to the domain of “langue” but of “parole.”

If language is the property of the group, bilingualism is the property of the individual. An individual’s use of two languages supposes the existence of two different language communities; it does not suppose the existence of a bilingual community. The bilingual community can only be regarded as a dependent collection of individuals who have reasons for being bilingual. A self-sufficient bilingual community has no reason to remain bilingual, since a closed community in which everyone is fluent in two languages could get along just as well with one language. As long as there are different monolingual communities, however, there is likelihood of contact between them; this contact results in bilingualism.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , Spring 1962 , pp. 51 - 85
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

This framework of description is based on the conclusions of my article on the definition of bilingualism in the Journal in 1956 (see note 6 below). During the 1960 International Seminar on Bilingualism in Education, I had an opportunity of discussing this with students of bilingualism in different parts of the world who encouraged me to elaborate this into a general framework for the description of bilingualism. I am grateful to the members of this seminar for their encouragement, criticism, and helpful suggestions. I also thank the Canadian National Commission for UNESCO for making it possible for me to attend this seminar, which was held in Aberystwyth in August 1960.

References

1 It is important not to confuse bilingualism—the use of two or more languages by the individual—with the more general concept of language contact, which deals with the direct or indirect influence of one language on another resulting in changes in “langue” which become the permanent property of monolinguals and enter into the historical development of the language. Such foreign influences may indeed be due to past periods of mass bilingualism, as in the case of the Scandinavian element in English. But bilingualism is not the only cause of foreign influence; the presence of words like coffee and sugar in English does not argue a period of English-Arabic bilingualism. Language contact includes the study of linguistic borrowing.

2 Marouzeau, J., Lexique de la terminologie linguistique (Paris: Geuthner, 1951)Google Scholar.

3 Bloomfield, L., Language (New York: Holt, 1933), p. 56 Google ScholarPubMed.

4 Haugen, E., The Norwegian Language in America: a study in bilingual behaviour, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1953). Vol. 1 (The Bilingual Community), p. 7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Diebold, A. R. Jr., “Incipient Bilingualism,” Lang. 37 (1961), p. 111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Mackey, W. F., “Toward a Redefinition of Bilingualism,” JCLA 2 (1956), p. 8 Google Scholar.

7 Mackey, W. F., “Bilingualism,” Encyclopædia Britannica (1959 ed.)Google Scholar.

8 We must not confuse “bilingual description” with the “description of bilingualism.” “Bilingual description” is a term which has been used to denote the contrastive analysis of two languages for the purpose of discovering the differences between them. This is also known as “differential description.” Differential description is a prerequisite to the analysis of one of the most important characteristics of bilingualism—interference.

9 Peal, E. and Lambert, W. E., The Relation of Bilingualism to Intelligence. Multigraphed ed. (Montreal: McGill University, 1961)Google Scholar.

10 For a study of test making, see Lado, R., Language Testing (London: Longmans, 1961)Google Scholar.

11 Examples of this are the Canadian “visites interprovinciales,” a description of which may be found in “French or English—with Pleasure!” in Citizen 7.5 (1961), pp. 1–7.

12 Ronjat, J., Le développement du langage observé chez un enfant bilingue (Paris: Champion, 1913)Google Scholar.

13 Pavlovitch, M., Le langage enfantin: l’acquisition du serbe et du français par un enfant serbe (Paris, 1920)Google Scholar.

14 Leopold, W. F., Speech Development of a Bilingual Child. 4 vols. (Chicago and Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1939-1949)Google Scholar.

15 Grammont, M., Observation sur le langage des enfants, Mélanges Meillet (Paris, 1902)Google Scholar.

16 Mackey, W. F., “Bilingualism and Education,” Pédagogie-Orientation 6 (1952), pp. 135–147 Google Scholar.

17 Mackey, W. F. and Noonan, J. A., “An Experiment in Bilingual Education,” English Language Teaching 6 (1952), pp. 125–132 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Tits, D., Le mécanisme de l’acquisition d’une langue se substituant à la langue maternelle chez une enfant espagnole âgée de six ans (Bruxelles: Veldeman, 1948), p. 36 Google Scholar.

19 Penfield, W. and Roberts, L., Speech and Brain-Mechanisms (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959)Google ScholarPubMed.

20 West, M., “Bilingualism,” English Language Teaching 12 (1958), pp. 94–97 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Darcy, N. T., “A Review of the Literature on the Effects of Bilingualism upon the Measurement of Intelligence,” Journal of Genetic Psychology 82 (1953), pp. 21–57 Google ScholarPubMed.

22 Taylor, D. W., “Learning Telegraphic Code,” Psychological Bulletin 40 (1943), pp. 461–487 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Lambert, W. E. et al., “Evaluation Reactions to Spoken Languages,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 60 (1958), pp. 44–51 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Smith, M. E., “A Study of the Speech of Eight Bilingual Children of the Same Family,” Child Development 6 (1935), pp. 19–25 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 Haugen, E., Bilingualism in the Americas: a bibliography and research guide (University of Alabama: American Dialect Society 1956), p. 40 Google Scholar. (See review by Mackey, W. F. in JCLA 4, pp. 94–99.Google Scholar)

26 I wish to thank M. A. K. Halliday and J. C. Catford for introducing me to this term and to the important variable it represents in language description.

27 The terms “model” and “replica” were established by Haugen to distinguish the feature introduced from the other language (the model) from its rendition into the language being used (the replica). See Haugen, Bilingualism …, p. 39.

28 Here again I am following Haugen’s terminology. See also his “Analysis of Linguistic Borrowing,” Lang. 26 (1950), p. 212 Google Scholar.

29 Gage, W. W., Contrastive Studies in Linguistics: a bibliographical checklist (Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1961)Google Scholar.

30 Vinay, J-P. and Darbelnet, J., Stylistique comparée du français et de l’anglais (Paris: Didier; Montréal: Beauchemin, 1958), p. 261 Google Scholar.

31 Darbelnet, J., “La couleur en français et en anglais,” Journal des Traducteurs 2 (1957), pp. 157–161 Google Scholar.

32 Mackey, W. F., “Bilingualism and Linguistic Structure,” Culture 14 (1953), pp. 143–149 Google Scholar.

33 Menarini, A., “L’italo-americano degli Stati Uniti,” Lingua Nostra 1 (1939), pp. 154–156 Google Scholar.

34 Frei, H., “Monosyllabisme et polysyllabisme dans les emprunts linguistiques,” Bulletin de la Maison franco-japonaise 8 (1936), p. 79 Google Scholar.

35 Weinreich, U., Languages in Contact: Findings and problems (New York: Linguistic Circle of New York, 1953), p. 7 Google Scholar.

36 I am grateful to Georges Straka for giving me evidence of mutual French-Czech interference which could be resolved only by the use of instrumental techniques. During his term as visiting professor in the experimental phonetics laboratory of Laval, he demonstrated techniques of analysis which will permit the realization of our plans for an instrumental study of phonetic interference.

37 Herdan, G., Type-Token Mathematics: a textbook of mathematical linguistics (The Hague: Mouton, 1960)Google Scholar.

38 Jones, I., Bilingualism: A bibliography with special reference to Wales (Aberystwyth: University College, 1960)Google Scholar.