Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching

Ed. by Jordens, Peter / Roberts, Leah

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 1.242

CiteScore 2017: 1.47

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.892
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.915

Online
ISSN
1613-4141
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 55, Issue 1

Issues

Becoming multilingual: The macro and the micro time perspective

Björn Hammarberg
Published Online: 2017-04-06 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0010

Abstract

Potential multilingualism is a characteristic property of human language. This paper adopts a usage-based, complex-systems approach in discussing two different but interrelated perspectives on how multilingualism takes shape in individuals: the development of a linguistic repertoire over time (macro time perspective) and the processes of language use and acquisition in specific situations (micro time perspective). The concept of L3 has a role at the micro time level, in the situations of language use. A variable model of the situation of language use and acquisition in micro time is proposed. It adopts a factor approach which is inspired by Hufeisen’s Factor Model, but extends that model so as to be applicable to more variable stages and forms of linguistic repertoires. The connection between dynamic processes in micro and macro time is illustrated by data from a longitudinal test of phonological production which exposes both specific usage events and an evolving pattern.

Keywords: multilingual development; multilingual repertoire; L3 term definition; Factor Model extension; usage events and longer-time development

References

  • Aronin, Larissa & David Singleton. 2008. Multilingualism as a new linguistic dispensation. International Journal of Multilingualism 5(1). 1–16.Google Scholar

  • Aronin, Larissa & David Singleton. 2012. Multilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Bardel, Camilla & Ylva Falk. 2012. The L2 status factor and the declarative/procedural distinction. In Jennifer Cabrelli Amaro, Suzanne Flynn & Jason Rothman (eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood, 61–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Beckner, Clay, Richard Blythe, Joan Bybee, Morten H. Christiansen, William Croft, Nick C. Ellis, John Holland, Jinyun Ke, Diane Larsen-Freeman & Tom Schoenemann (The “Five Graces Group”). 2009. Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. In Nick C. Ellis & Diane Larsen-Freeman (eds.), Language as a complex adaptive system. (Language Learning 59, Supplement 1. 1–26). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Blommaert, Jan & Ad Backus. 2013. Superdiverse repertoires and the individual. In Ingrid de Saint-Georges & Jean-Jacques Weber (eds.), Multilingualism and multimodality: Current challenges for educational studies, 11–32. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar

  • Bybee, Joan. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Cenoz, Jasone. 2000. Research on multilingual acquisition. In Jasone Cenoz & Ulrike Jessner (eds.), English in Europe: The acquisition of a third language, 39–53. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

  • Cenoz, Jasone. 2003. The additive effect of bilingualism on third language acquisition: A review. International Journal of Bilingualism 7(1). 71–87.Google Scholar

  • Croft, William & D. Alan Cruse. 2004. Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • de Bot, Kees. 2004. The multilingual lexicon: Modelling selection and control, International Journal of Multilingualism 1(1). 17–32.Google Scholar

  • de Bot, Kees. 2012. Time scales in second language development. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 1(1). 143–149.Google Scholar

  • de Bot, Kees. 2015. Rates of change: Timescales in second language development. In Zoltan Dörnyei, Peter D. MacIntyre & Alastair Henry (eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning, 29–37. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

  • Ellis, Nick C. & Diane Larsen-Freeman (eds.). 2009. Language as a complex adaptive system. (Language Learning 59, Supplement.)Google Scholar

  • Falk, Ylva & Camilla Bardel. 2010. The study of the role of the background languages in third language acquisition. The state of the art. IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 48(2–3). 185–220.Google Scholar

  • Green, David W. 1986. Control, activation and resource: A framework and a model for the control of speech in bilinguals. Brain and Language 27(2). 210–223.Google Scholar

  • Green, David. 1998. Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1(2). 67–81.Google Scholar

  • Grosjean, François. 2001. The bilingual’s language modes. In Janet L. Nicol (ed.) One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Gumperz, John J. 1972. Introduction. In John J. Gumperz & Dell Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication, 1–25. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar

  • Hammarberg, Björn. 1988. Studien zur Phonologie des Zweitsprachenerwerbs. (Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis, Stockholmer germanistische Forschungen 38.) Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.Google Scholar

  • Hammarberg, Björn. 2010. The languages of the multilingual: Some conceptual and terminological issues. IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 48(2–3). 91–104.Google Scholar

  • Hammarberg, Björn. 2014. Problems in defining the concepts of L1, L2 and L3. In Agnieszka Otwinowska & Gessica De Angelis (eds.), Teaching and learning in multilingual contexts: Sociolinguistic and educational perspectives, 3–18. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

  • Hufeisen, Britta. 1998. L3 – Stand der Forschung – Was bleibt zu tun? In Britta Hufeisen & Beate Lindemann (eds.) Tertiärsprachen: Theorien, Modelle, Methoden. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Hufeisen, Britta. 2003. L1, L2, L3, L4, Lx – alle gleich? Linguistische, lernerinterne und lernerexterne Faktoren in Modellen zum multiplen Spracherwerb. Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht 8(2–3). 1–13.Google Scholar

  • Hufeisen, Britta. 2005. Multilingualism: Linguistic models and related issues. In Britta Hufeisen & Robert J. Fouser (eds.), Introductory Readings in L3, 31–45. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Hufeisen, Britta. 2010. Theoretische Fundierung multiplen Sprachenlernens – Faktorenmodell 2.0. Jahrbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache 36. 200–207.Google Scholar

  • Hufeisen, Britta & Nicole Marx. 2007. How can DaFnE and EuroComGerm contribute to the concept of receptive multilingualism? In Jan D. ten Thije & Ludger Zeevaert (eds.), Receptive multilingualism: Linguistic analyses, language policies, and didactic concepts, 307–321. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Jessner, Ulrike. 2006. Linguistic awareness in multilinguals: English as a third language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar

  • Jessner, Ulrike. 2008. Teaching third languages: Findings, trends and challenges. Language Teaching 41(1). 15–56.Google Scholar

  • Kemmer, Suzanne & Michael Barlow. 1999. Introduction: A usage-based conception of language. In Michael Barlow & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Usage-based models of language, vii-xxviii. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

  • Klein, Wolfgang & Clive Perdue. 1997. The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research 13(4). 301–347.Google Scholar

  • Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Volume 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Langacker, Ronald W. 1988. A usage-based model. In Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (ed.), Topics in cognitive linguistics, 127–161. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Langacker, Ronald W. 1999. A dynamic usage-based model. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (eds.), Usage-based models of language, 1–63. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar

  • Larsen-Freeman, Diane & Lynne Cameron. 2008. Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Lemke, Jay L. 2000. Across the scales of time: Artifacts, activities, and meanings in ecosocial systems. Mind, Culture, and Activity 7(4). 273–290.Google Scholar

  • Levelt, Willem J.M. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Levelt, Willem J.M. 1993. The architecture of normal spoken language use. In G. Blanken, J. Dittmann, H. Grimm, J. C. Marschall and C.-W. Wallesch (eds.), Linguistic disorders and pathologies: An international handbook, 1–15. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Marx, Nicole & Britta Hufeisen. 2010. Mehrsprachigkeitskonzepte. In Hans-Jürgen Krumm, Christian Fandrych, Britta Hufeisen & Claudia Riemer (eds.), Deutsch als Fremd- und Zweitsprache: Ein internationales Handbuch, 826–832. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

  • Mißler, Bettina. 1999. Fremdsprachenlernerfahrungen und Lernstrategien. Eine empirische Untersuchung, 7–21. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Mißler, Bettina. 2000. Previous experience of foreign language learning and its contribution to the development of learning strategies. In Sigrid Dentler, Britta Hufeisen and Beate Lindemann (eds.) Tertiär- und Drittsprachen: Projekte und empirische Untersuchungen. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Paradis, Michel. 2004. A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Paradis, Michel. 2008. Language and communication disorders in multilinguals. In Brigitte Stemmer & Harry A. Whitaker (eds) Handbook of the neuroscience of language, 341–350. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar

  • Paradis, Michel. 2009. Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Verspoor, Marjolijn H., Kees de Bot & Wander Lowie. 2011. A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Williams, Sarah & Björn Hammarberg. 2009 [1998]. Language switches in L3 production: Implications for a polyglot speaking model. In Björn Hammarberg (ed.), Processes in third language acquisition, 28–73. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press (2009). Originally in Applied Linguistics, 19: 295–333 (1998).Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2017-04-06

Published in Print: 2017-03-01


Citation Information: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, Volume 55, Issue 1, Pages 3–22, ISSN (Online) 1613-4141, ISSN (Print) 0019-042X, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0010.

Export Citation

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in