Language Learning Forum: What is bilingual to you?

Print Page | Close Window

What is bilingual to you?

Printed From: How-to-learn-any-language.com
Forum Name: General discussion
Forum Discription: Discussion about language learning for people who study languages on their own.
URL: http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=37233
Printed Date: 18 August 2021 at 10:07am

Posted By: Solfrid Cristin
Subject: What is bilingual to you?
Date Posted: 04 November 2013 at 7:49am

We have discussed both the definition of fluency and polyglottery many times, but one term we seldom
discuss is bilingual ( or trilingual etc). The first time I came across it was in Spain at the age of 11 when they
asked me if I spoke any other languages. "I speak some English", I said. And they answered "Oh, so you are
bilingual". I just stared in surprise, because to me the term bilingual entails that you are native, or native like
in the languages concerned. And that was not where I was in English at that point.

I heard it many times later in Spain used in the same way, by people who said that they were bilingual, when
what they meant was that they could speak their native Spanish, and a tiny bit English. Here when we say
bilingual we still mean "native or being able to use both languages equally well", for instance someone with a
French mother and a Norwegian father, or who has an English wife with whom he speaks English at home. I
consider that I now have a fairly high level in both English, Spanish and French, but I am nowhere near
being able to call myself bilingual with any of them. A couple of years more of immersion might do the trick,
but right now I am not there.

How is the term used in your languages? Do you qualify if you can communicate in more than one language,
do you need to have a very high level, or would you need to know both languages equally well?

Replies:

I once spoke with a man from Guatemala who called called us both "bilingue", although his English and my Spanish were nothing to brag about at the time. He wasn't just being nice either.
luke on 04 November 2013

I think the people who have two native languages or a "mother tongue" and the language of the country are bilingual. Like finlandssvenskar, who might speak Swedish with friends but write their shopping list in Finnish and so on.
Henkkles on 04 November 2013

Solfrid Cristin wrote:

How is the term used in your languages? Do you qualify if you can communicate in more than one language,
do you need to have a very high level, or would you need to know both languages equally well?

I have never described myself as bilingual. I agree 100% with your definition of the term. But I can see where the Spanish were coming from in your case. Back then, the vast majority of Spanish citizens probably only spoke Spanish, so anyone with a decent knowledge of another language would have been a novelty to them. A couple of times, people in the UK have referred to me as bilingual, precisely because we have no culture of foreign-language learning and someone who can babble into a phone for 5 minutes is often classed as "fluent"

Within education circles in the UK, the term "bilingual" refers to a child who - for whatever reason - has had extensive immersive experiences in two languages.

beano on 04 November 2013

The word "bilingual" (in English) holds no connotation of advanced fluency in my opinion. It seems to imply some basic conversational skills and creating sentences of your own instead of parroting something back from a phrase book, but there's nothing native or near native about it. That's the way the word has always been used when I've encountered it, not the way I necessarily think it should be used.

EDIT: As beano pointed out, "bilingual education" means something different though. As does "bilingual diploma", "bilingual household", etc.

"Tvåspråkig" (Swedish) on the other hand implies to me a level of fluency that is more or less native. It's someone who speaks one language at home and at school/work. It's a community where a large part of the population is native in one language, and another part of the population is native in another.

Since the question was about the word "bilingual" though, I'll go with the first definition.
eyðimörk on 04 November 2013

This may be a romance thing, but in France we would definitely call someone who speaks 2 languages (one natively, one not) "bilingue", and same for "trilingue". And though we have the word "polyglotte", nobody ever uses things like "diglotte" or "triglotte".

So in French (and I suppose Spanish, from your description), X-lingual is just the way to refer to what HTLAL calls X-glot.
vermillon on 04 November 2013

I would reserve the term bilingual (and trilingual etc.) for native speakers, and native speakers have learnt their languages as children - preferably before the age of 5 (based on some brain research which I have referred to earlier). However you can probably sneak under the cloak of native skills if you learn a language well before the onset of puberty, though I mostly say that out of deference for the normal definition.

NB: the presence of a language in your surroundings doesn't guarantee that you learn it - and even less learn it well. Children in families speaking a minority language will probably also have to learn the majority language, whereas it is less certain that 'majority children' learn the minority language or languages.

My first memories concerning the English language date back to the early sixties, where people around me got TV with Fred Flintstone (my first English word was probably "Yabadabadooo") - i.e. within the time bracket where you should be able to acquire a native language no. 2. And I had English in school from around age 10 or 11. But I don't feel that English is a native language for me because I didn't walk around speaking it. A Danish child nowadays is however exposed to so much English (right from it is born) that you might argue that it is hard for those kids not to become bilingual with English as their second native language. Hey, those kids even have to endure Disney Channel in English, and all the pop music that bellows out of their phones is in English!
Iversen on 04 November 2013

Iversen wrote:

A Danish child nowadays is however exposed to so much English (right from it is born) that you might argue that it is hard for those kids not to become bilingual with English as their second native language. Hey, those kids even have to endure Disney Channel in English, and all the pop music that bellows out of their phones is in English!

I know what you mean. There are times when I have to translate English terms that my kids are perfectly familiar with, and use in their Norwegian, and explain to them that we already have a term for that in Norwegian. My youngest daughter says she hates reading Norwegian and is more comfortable in English. Sigh. I am getting worried for the future of the smaller languages.
Solfrid Cristin on 04 November 2013

Might just be her exaggerating - I probably would've done the same at her age. Fact
remains I don't distinguish between whether something is in English or Dutch and I never
will anymore, to me anything using either is 100% guaranteed to be understood. Anything
else - your mileage may vary.
tarvos on 04 November 2013

So if the Spanish, Latin Americans, and French are using "bilingual" to indiate any level
of competence, how do they describe people with native capability in more than one
language?
schoenewaelder on 04 November 2013

For me, bilingual means equally strong skills in two languages. They don't have to both be native. But you do have
to be able to function fully (and equally) in both.
Stelle on 04 November 2013

At least in my part of the US, somebody might be called "bilingual" if they speak their native language and sufficiently good English that it's never an issue. I mean, if they've spoken English every day for over a decade, in all sorts of circumstances, whether they have an accent or they have the "correct" responses under an MRI is a bit of a moot point. I mean, they're standing in front of you and they speak English perfectly well.

But in Montreal, at least as far as I can tell, "bilingue" means something more like, "I talked to them for 5 minutes in both languages, and I still can't tell which is their 'native' language." This makes perfect sense, because so many people there are so good at their second languages, but they still need a word for people who genuinely don't care which language they use.
emk on 04 November 2013

As flattering as @emk's description of bilingualism in Montreal, I would like to nuance it a bit. While many people,
especially the youhg generation of native English-speakers may be able to switch easily from one language to the
other, not everybody can sustain complex conversations in both languages. And the real problem is writing. That is
where real bilingualism is still quite rare.

In French we often use the description "parfaitement bilingue" to speak of someone who is equally at home in both
languages.
s_allard on 04 November 2013

I stick to the standards of this forum and consider someone bilingual if they have two native languages. Native fluency is a different concept, and so is thinking in the language of the country you live in (to me it doesn't mean that your native language "changed" unless you actually forgot it). Although in general I believe the speaker knows best what counts as a native language and what doesn't.
Serpent on 04 November 2013

The Oxford English Dictionary says for bilingual: As n., one who can speak two
languages.

There's no hint that either of those languages need to be of "native" or "near native"
level (although it would be most odd if at least one of them were not!).

It's going to be very difficult to find someone who speaks two languages to the same
level even if they are "native" in both. I read and speak Italian with no trouble at
all but I do so only a fraction of the time that I do the same in English. My Italian
must be quite a bit weaker. That doesn't stop me understanding Rai Uno with as little
effort as I understand BBC 1. So I don't feel any sort of twinge of shame when I tick
the bilingual box anywhere.

Eventually I'll get around to dusting off my French. Once I get to the point that I
feel I can communicate reasonably well in (say) an office environment, then I'll be
trilingual (without a twinge).

dampingwire on 04 November 2013

Is someone still a native speaker if they spoke the language since birth with their family, but only with a very limited vocab? They can speak fluently with family, but couldn't understand movies or tv series from any country in which the language is spoken, not literate, & have problems communicating with others?
sillygoose1 on 04 November 2013

I would go with the "speaking two languages" definition... in the US, there are plenty of people who speak English quite well, but aren't native speakers of the language, because they came over to the US in their teens, twenties, thirties, or whatever. You can have conversations with them and they don't have to ask you what words mean (unless you use something uncommon, but sometimes native speakers might also have that trouble). They can do their jobs in English without help translating. I would consider them to be bilingual, even if they speak Spanish better than English.

I ran into the same thing when I lived and worked in Italy. I spoke English with the Italians all day long, unless I was actually trying to practice my Italian language skills on them. On occasion, they might have to think about how to say a word in English, but they could work with English speakers without a problem. I would consider them to be bilingual, even if they learned English at a later age, watched TV at home in Italian, read Italian books, etc.

People not as into languages as we are might not be as picky though...
Lorren on 04 November 2013

dampingwire wrote:

It's going to be very difficult to find someone who speaks two languages to the same
level even if they are "native" in both.

I would say people who grow up as native Welsh or Gaelic speakers in the UK (and use it as their first
language among family and the local community) will effectively end up completely fluent in 2 languages.
beano on 04 November 2013

In a neighbouring thread, we got into a raucous debate over what is a polyglot. I'll spare all the gory details,
but at the end what seemed to be the majority opinion was four languages at a minimum B1 level. My
suggestion for bilingual then would be simply two languages starting at B1.
s_allard on 04 November 2013

I found this definition when I looked it up:

bi·lin·gual (b-lnggwl)
adj.
1.
a. Using or able to use two languages, especially with equal or nearly equal fluency.
b. Using two languages in some proportion in order to facilitate learning by students who have a native
proficiency in one language and are acquiring proficiency in the other: bilingual training; bilingual education.
2. Of, relating to, or expressed in two languages: a bilingual dictionary.
n.
A person who uses or is able to use two languages, especially with equal fluency.

And since in French and Spanish it looks like it is commonly used in a loser way, I looked up the French
definition:

Le bilinguisme peut se rapporter à des phénomènes concernant :

- un individu qui connaît deux langues ;
- une communauté où deux langues sont employées.

Il consiste théoriquement dans le fait de pouvoir s'exprimer et penser sans difficulté dans deux langues à un
degré de précision identique dans chacune d'elles. Les individus authentiquement bilingues sont également
imprégnés des deux cultures indifféremment et dans tous les domaines.

Solfrid Cristin on 04 November 2013

You looked up "bilinguisme" while the topic was "bilingue". Anybody using bilinguisme would indeed refer to a narrower concept closer to what people on HTLAL think of when they say bilingual. But in French, looking up "bilingue" (not bilinguisme... hopefully you wouldn't research what "social" means looking up "socialism" :D) in a dictionary would give you something as loose as:
-qui sait deux langues.
Looking "bilingual" in English (in a dictionary, not in an Encyclopedia) seems to return as the first definition "Having the ability to speak two languages" with no more precision.

I'm of course not arguing with what people here mean by "bilingual". It is good that people of a community agree to use a word in a certain way, but as in about any domain, the layman may have a very different usage of the word.
vermillon on 05 November 2013

I wonder if this debate isn't fundamentally the same as that of speaking multiple languages, something we all know
about here. One could think, rather naively, that to speak various languages means to speak them equally well. We
all know that this is not the case. Similarly, being biiingual does not really imply equal proficiency in two languages.
s_allard on 05 November 2013

s_allard wrote:

There seems to be different views on that, which often would coincide with the meaning in different languages.

That is why I asked how the term was interpreted in the different languages. In my language, I have never heard it used by experts or laymen as anything but knowing two languages equally well. If I say I am "tospråklig" in Norwegian, my English doesn't cut it, regardless of how well Norwegians in general speak English or other languages.

In Spanish it is mostly interpreted differently. I am not so sure we can find a rule that is correct for everyone on this one. We may have to note that the usage is different in different languages, or that it differs between laymen and experts in some languages.
Solfrid Cristin on 05 November 2013

Solfrid Cristin wrote:

That is why I asked how the term was interpreted in the different languages. In my language, I have never heard it used by experts or laymen as anything but knowing two languages equally well. If I say I am "tospråklig" in Norwegian, my English doesn't cut it, regardless of how well Norwegians in general speak English or other languages.

Are you implying that the meaning of the word in different languages could correlate with how common it is in that country to have native bilinguals? I would imagine that in multilingual countries, nobody would call himself "bilingual" if he knew only his second language to a B1 level. On the other hand, in France (and from CVs I've seen, Spanish people in London) people don't hesitate to brand themselves as fluent (and/or bilingual) when their English is still clearly poor: they're usually the person that speaks the best English in their family, and in the eyes of their entirely monoglot parents, they're bilingual. Would that make sense?
vermillon on 05 November 2013

Nowadays it is common for people to relocate but still retain fluency of their native language. To be bilingual you
need certain fluency in a language but not necessarily residing in places where the language is spoken. I know
people from Africa who speak Swahili as a mother-tongue but ended up in Canada where English is the official
language. They can speak both fluently although their English tend to have a distinct accent.

Out in the West there are a lot of people in the Chinese community who are fluent in spoken Chinese but have
trouble with the characters besides writing their names. We would consider them native as well as long as their
fluency in spoken Chinese is sufficient to carry on a conversation.
shk00design on 05 November 2013

vermillon wrote:

Solfrid Cristin wrote:

That is why I asked how the term was interpreted in the
different languages. In my language, I have never heard it used by experts or laymen as anything but
knowing two languages equally well. If I say I am "tospråklig" in Norwegian, my English doesn't cut it,
regardless of how well Norwegians in general speak English or other languages.

Are you implying that the meaning of the word in different languages could correlate with how common it is in
that country to have native bilinguals? I would imagine that in multilingual countries, nobody would call
himself "bilingual" if he knew only his second language to a B1 level. On the other hand, in France (and from
CVs I've seen, Spanish people in London) people don't hesitate to brand themselves as fluent (and/or
bilingual) when their English is still clearly poor: they're usually the person that speaks the best English in
their family, and in the eyes of their entirely monoglot parents, they're bilingual. Would that make sense?

That was not what I meant when I wrote it, but that does actually make perfect sense.
Solfrid Cristin on 05 November 2013

s_allard wrote:

I wonder if this debate isn't fundamentally the same as that of speaking multiple languages, something we all know about here. One could think, rather naively, that to speak various languages means to speak them equally well. We all know that this is not the case. Similarly, being biiingual does not really imply equal proficiency in two languages.

Hm, for me it's more about the "way of learning" than the level. AFAIU in Canada bilingual often implies "both English and French"? It surely makes sense that if you can use both of the official languages, it doesn't matter if they are both your native languages or only one of them. (if it's neither, you'd be called trilingual, right?)

But for example on this forum it's important for us not to lump together people with two native languages and those who grew up speaking one language and then learned one more. (interestingly, the combination "bilingual diglot" is very rare here. an overwhelming majority of the people with two native languages speak at least one more language fluently, regardless of whether English is one of their native languages or not)
Serpent on 06 November 2013

In the US if you say that you're a diglot or a triglot, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people wouldn't know what
you're talking about. I really don't think that people here use bilingual as native fluency in both languages. I do
think, however, that they're talking about a pretty competent level in each. Someone who has taken a few years of
Spanish in high school is never going to call themselves bilingual. Someone who lived in Argentina for a couple
years would probably be described as bilingual. That's my experience here in the states anyway.
LeadZeppelin on 06 November 2013

I suppose it depends upon the foreign-language proficiency of the individual nation. An American who can speak sufficient Spanish to communicate with Mexican clients will be a prized asset and most likely regarded as bilingual, even if the grammar is on the ropey side.

If, on the other hand, a Norwegian claims bilingual status with Norwegian and only lower-intermediate English, he or she would be, in the words of Solfrid Christin, "laughed out of the country"
beano on 06 November 2013

It seems that the majority of those who have answered in this thread expect a certain level in both languages (though not necessarily a very high level or two equally high levels), but they don't make a distinction between native languages and later additions. And the dictionaries in English and French may support that.

But here in Denmark it is a simple fact that the word "tosproget" (= bilingual) almost exclusively is used about persons who grew up in immigrant families who spoke their original language at home and then their kids simultaneously learnt Danish outside their front door. In the few cases where this situation isn't relevant the family situation will almost certainly be one where a family has parents speaking two different native languages or families who have moved a lot around in the world during the childhood of their kids. It would be almost unheard of to characterize as bilingual just because he/she had Danish as native language and English as a 'good' second language. Like Solfrid Cristin's daughter, who even prefers reading stuff in English. And as I wrote earlier, I'm in my own eyes not a native speaker of English so by inference I'm just a mere monolingual - even though most of my TV watching, reading and writing is in English (if you include computer programs), and even though I think in English as readily as in Danish.

This suggests that there indeed is a fundamental difference between the use of the notion "bilingual" in 'big' and 'small' languages, and it may actually reflect a difference in the expectations concerning the level of the 'second' language.
Iversen on 06 November 2013

Tweetalig in Dutch also implies native level in both languages, yes. "Tweetalig
onderwijs" (bilingual education) refers to education taught in two languages with the
idea of having the students obtaining a level of English that is native-like in addition
to Dutch (except in the cases where the language in case is not English but German -
there are a few of those schools near the border - Frisia also has trilingual schools
with Dutch/English/Frisian).
tarvos on 06 November 2013

Iversen wrote:

But here in Denmark it is a simple fact that the word "tosproget" (=
bilingual) almost exclusively is used about persons who grew up in immigrant families who
spoke their original language at home and then their kids simultaneously learnt Danish
outside their front door.

Is it the level of the languages that determines this of how they were learnt? Could I
become "tosproget" by starting Danish now and keeping going until I become (in practice)
indistinguishable from a native?

dampingwire on 06 November 2013

dampingwire wrote:

Is it the level of the languages that determines this of how they were learnt? Could I become "tosproget" by starting Danish now and keeping going until I become (in practice) indistinguishable from a native?

I can't speak for Danish, but I've had this discussion with Swedes (about the cognate "tvåspråkig") and it's definitely a matter of how the language has been learned, not how well.

During my teen years, I often made errors in Swedish that appalled my parents simply because they were the errors of an anglophone. I got perfect scores on my Swedish tests at school, but I often created new words out of English, put English-like suffixes on Swedish words, and I had a tendency to get prepositions wrong. English was, in effect, my strongest language. Few people would have called me "tvåspråkig". Some relatives have, when bragging about me, said in those days that I was practically "tvåspråkig", but that is how far it went. Now, my ex, on the other hand, who had horrible Swedish for someone who'd spent his entire life speaking the language, and apparently much worse Arabic (including being entirely illiterate, not that reading and writing is what matters here),would have been someone people wouldn't hesitate to call "tvåspråkig" because he had two "native" languages.
eyðimörk on 06 November 2013

I think we all agree that a child who is heavily exposed to two language environments and can switch effortlessly between them can be classed as bilingual. But it's also possible to reach this position in adulthood.

My wife grew up speaking only German and didn't learn any English (beyond the absolute basics) until she moved to Ireland at the age of 20. After many years residence in English-speaking countries, using the language professionally, academically and socially (including local dialect), she can speak and write at a native level in my opinion. I have heard people class her as bilingual and I wouldn't contradict this.

Leaving aside heritage speakers, people who grew up in bilingual communities and those who a spent a large chunk of their childhood abroad, few British citizens actually reach the stage of being entirely comfortable in an additional language. The situation is more common in Germany, but hardly the norm. Yet once you look at countries like Norway and the Netherlands, you start to find huge numbers of people who speak English to an incredibly high level, many of whom have never lived in an English-speaking society. I don't know how they do it, people say it's down to pop music and TV. Can it really be that simple? Maybe it is. Anyway, it's not unusual at all for a Scandanavian or Dutch person to be "bilingual" going by definitions from larger countries. But I guess that in Norway it's nothing really to brag about, being fluent in English. People would say...tell me something new.
beano on 06 November 2013

It's down to exposure, cultural standards and use. Many Dutch people don't write as
well as they speak either. I wouldn't class the level of English most Dutch people have
as bilingual - more as competency in English, but I've seen the workings of actually
teaching teenagers in English firsthand - the more exposure they get and the more they
are forced to use that language in the classroom and home environment, the better they
do with it. Almost invariably, those people who speak better English have more exposure
to the language and practice it. Practicing English here doesn't mean you have to
travel abroad (although many of us have and those that have spent extensive time in
English-speaking countries will speak better English as a rule). But those who for even
two or three years had the bigger part of school education in English and who had come
in with a modicum of English already would speak fluently by ANYONE's standards and the
only way to tell that they are foreign are by tracing their accent (which is generally
weaker), as well as the odd word choice here and there. It's really down to the fact
that in the Netherlands often the exposure to English is huge and this exposure has the
corollary that some active practice will mean that this English can activate quickly -
and English is more popular now than 30 years ago. Teenagers now speak much better
English than the generation of babyboomers (who would still need conversational English
classes if they went abroad, though they would understand the grammar).

Even children who do not necessarily grow up speaking English at home may learn it
passively - my brother didn't read English when we returned home but at age 10 or so
(when he started English I think) he had amassed a serious passive ability already and
could recognise many things, even though he was shy to speak it. The reason is that
around our house many things are and have been in English and thus he had the exposure
to it.

In this case, it's really sink or swim - Dutch children cannot get around using English
anymore and thus the expectation culturally has become that some modicum of English
must be present - and it should preferably be quite good.

The other strange story I heard recently is of people arriving as au pairs here to
learn English (???). I talked to a friend recently who did that and I said "what? why?"
and she said it's only old ladies and children who don't speak English.

Which is only half true in my opinion, but it conserves the point - that no English is
a rarity, but that native English among Dutch speakers also is. Most people hover
somewhere in between and tend to have functional commands, which foreigners will take
for fluency because the Dutch tend to have clear, understandable accents with mistakes
that can easily be traced or accounted for.

Which is why Dutch people reserve bilingual (because it usually refers to English) for
someone who speaks this natively because of home environment reasons, or due to growing
up abroad, or whatever. For example, I would be considered bilingual (grew up abroad
and have attended bilingual education) but someone who had just learned English at
school (many of my friends) would not be, even if they are equally as capable of
conversing in English as I am (albeit with a slightly worse accent).
tarvos on 06 November 2013

tarvos wrote:

The other strange story I heard recently is of people arriving as au pairs here to
learn English (???). I talked to a friend recently who did that and I said "what? why?"
and she said it's only old ladies and children who don't speak English.

Strange but definitely plausible. When I was studying in Utrecht in 2011, I knew an exchange student from China
who barely spoke English (let alone Dutch). She had chosen to study in the Netherlands because she had heard it
would be a great place to improve her English.

I always felt a bit bad for her because all our classes turned out to be in Dutch, which must have been really
frustrating. But the teachers and most of the students could speak English, so there was this system set up
where she would sit through the Dutch-language classes and then get kind of filled in on what had happened three
hours later at the end of the lesson.
Hekje on 06 November 2013

It's not unheard of, I agree... but I just find it so counter-intuitive.
tarvos on 06 November 2013

I wonder how that would go down in France or Italy? Hi, I'm the new au-pair.....we speak in English, yes?
beano on 06 November 2013

Actually it makes perfect sense, and I know people who have done that here too. It would be almost like
going to Barcelona to learn Spanish. Yes, Catalan is the main language, but everybody speaks Spanish as
well. In principle the difference should be that here absolutely everyone would have Norwegian as their
mother tongue, whereas in Barcelona a lot of people do not speak Catalan, but given the amount of
foreigners who speak only very basic Norwegian, the difference is smaller than you would think.

And as many have commented on, Scandinavians and the Dutch tend to switch to English the moment they
hear that you are a foreigner anyway.
Solfrid Cristin on 06 November 2013

tarvos wrote:

It's not unheard of, I agree... but I just find it so counter-intuitive.

I can see how it would feel that way, but you guys just have a crazy good reputation for speaking English.
Hekje on 06 November 2013

Solfrid Cristin wrote:

And as many have commented on, Scandinavians and the Dutch tend to switch to English the
moment they hear that you are a foreigner anyway.

If their Dutch is very good that would just be patronizing... only if they feel they'll
be better off if I do
tarvos on 06 November 2013

To me, bilingual = you grow up speaking two languages because they're your native
languages.

Maralol on 06 November 2013

eyðimörk wrote:

I can't speak for Danish, but I've had this discussion with Swedes
(about the cognate "tvåspråkig") and it's definitely a matter of how the
language has been learned, not how well.

Reading through the other posts, there are obviously places where this is the case.

So you can describe yourself as bilingual, because you know your own history. But no-
one else can make that assessment (unless you volunteer the information) without
knowing something about your history.

Doesn't that devalue the word somewhat - especially since there are plenty of heritage
speakers who speak one of their native languages a little but (by their own admission)
not very well?

dampingwire on 07 November 2013

Hekje wrote:

tarvos wrote:

It's not unheard of, I agree... but I just find it so counter-intuitive.

I can see how it would feel that way, but you guys just have a crazy good reputation for speaking English.

But Dutch families don't speak English to each other. Why would they want an au-pair who had no real
intention of using the household language?
beano on 07 November 2013

beano wrote:

Hekje wrote:

tarvos wrote:

It's not unheard of, I agree... but I
just find it so counter-intuitive.

I can see how it would feel that way, but you guys just have a crazy good reputation
for speaking English.

But Dutch families don't speak English to each other. Why would they want an au-pair
who had no real intention of using the household language?

I can't really answer that, as that was a story Tarvos heard, not me. Your guess is
really as good as mine.

I suppose that if both parties can communicate, that's all that matters. Also,
sometimes families actually want their children to practice a foreign language with the
au pair.
Hekje on 07 November 2013

Hekje wrote:

beano wrote:

Hekje wrote:

tarvos wrote:

It's not unheard of, I agree... but I
just find it so counter-intuitive.

I can see how it would feel that way, but you guys just have a crazy good reputation
for speaking English.

But Dutch families don't speak English to each other. Why would they want an au-pair
who had no real intention of using the household language?

Yeah, I guess in some parts of America you have Spanish-speaking domestic staff. But it just seemed a bit unusual, travelling a long distance to practise English but not going to an English-speaking country. Like going to Cananda to learn French but not heading for Quebec.
beano on 07 November 2013

dampingwire wrote:

Doesn't that devalue the word somewhat - especially since there are plenty of heritage speakers who speak one of their native languages a little but (by their own admission) not very well?

In my opinion, yes, it does devalue the word. There are people with two half languages (or three or four, when we throw English and a third language in the mix) who are called "bilingual". Meanwhile, many of my classmates from secondary school would not qualify even though they had gone through 12 years of schooling in 100% English immersion schools, and lived in the UK ever since.

I'm not about to get prescriptive here and tell people how they should use the word "tvåspråkig", but yes, it's not necessarily a very useful word for describing language ability. In many situations, it's mostly descriptive of someone's past social environment.

Unless applied to certain situations, of course. Unlike myself, my husband did not do his secondary education entirely in English and did not take English that is equivalent to a UK native A-level. His was a "tvåspråkig utbildning" (bilingual education), that is to say: certain classes were taught in English (even if he teachers weren't always natives). The education can be "tvåspråkig", but no one would ever emerge from either of our educations "tvåspråkig".
eyðimörk on 07 November 2013

dampingwire wrote:

So you can describe yourself as bilingual, because you know your own history. But no-one else can make that assessment (unless you volunteer the information) without knowing something about your history.
Doesn't that devalue the word somewhat - especially since there are plenty of heritage speakers who speak one of their native languages a little but (by their own admission) not very well?

It doesn't devaluate the notion, but it removes the focus from the level achieved. In Denmark we have had suggestions that the socalled bilingual 2. or 3. generation immigrants really are semilingual, because thy can't even speak one language properly, but mix them. But the consensus here still is to call them bilingual.
Iversen on 07 November 2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-24 836837

I saw a report on the BBC that suggests bilingualism can delay the onset of dementia. I'm never sure whether to believe these findings but it's something to cling on to.
beano on 08 November 2013

Wow, I had no idea that "bilingual" meant something else to other people than what it means in North America.

emk wrote:

I agree with s_allard here, I can consider myself bilingual even if it's obvious it isn't my first language. I don't know what other word I could use.

vermillon wrote:

Larousse says:

1. Qui est en deux langues différentes : Inscription bilingue..
2. Qui use couramment de deux langues : Population bilingue[/].

So, same as what Solfrid Cristin had concluded.
Avid Learner on 10 November 2013

And why do you think you deserve a word? Become a polyglot and you'll have one :-)
(just kidding... maybe)
Serpent on 10 November 2013

"I saw a report on the BBC that suggests bilingualism can delay the onset of dementia.
I'm never sure whether to believe these findings but it's something to cling on to."

It's a well-known fact that multilingualism delays the onset of Alzheimer's.
Maralol on 10 November 2013

Quote:

It's a well-known fact that multilingualism delays the onset of Alzheimer's.

Source?
tarvos on 10 November 2013

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/738496
Maralol on 10 November 2013

I saw the reports of the study about dementia earlier this week and, especially after this discussion, I could only wonder whether there was a difference in between those who were native in two languages or had learned one later in life.

Serpent wrote:

And why do you think you deserve a word? Become a polyglot and you'll have one :-)
(just kidding... maybe)

Well, my comment wasn't about whether I wanted to be deserving of a word, but rather about understanding each other in the culture I live in. If, in a job interview here, somebody asked me if I was bilingual and I replied "No, but I am a diglot", I would be looked at as if I was from another planet. Even if I were to reply "No, but I am a polyglot" (assuming it was true, of course), I'm not sure it would come off that much better. Obviously, after reading this topic, if I had a job interview in some countries in Europe, my answer wouldn't be the same. :)

Not only that, but I have attempted to find out how to say "diglot" in French and I couldn't even find a word.
Avid Learner on 11 November 2013

"Not only that, but I have attempted to find out how to say "diglot" in French and I
couldn't even find a word. "

Diglotte?
Maralol on 11 November 2013

Avid Learner wrote:

Serpent wrote:

And why do you think you deserve a word? Become a polyglot and you'll have one :-)
(just kidding... maybe)

You can just say "no, but I'm fluent in English although it's not my native language" :) The whole point is that in Europe it's so normal that a word isn't required. Unlike Canada where there's a specific combination understood by bilingual (and it's often not important which of the two you speak natively), in Europe the most common question would be "do you speak English?"
Serpent on 11 November 2013

Serpent wrote:

I wouldn't say it's completely normal in Europe for people to be fluent in a foreign language. You have small nations like Switzerland and Luxembourgh where many people grow up effectively bilingual. In the Netherlands and Scandanavia most people have a good command of English. In the bigger nations and in eastern & southern Europe, you don't find that many people who are truly fluent in English or any other language.
beano on 11 November 2013

We don't need a word for diglot in Danish - if somebody speaks English then that's what we say (and we then assume that any Dane can speak Danish, and that our 'native' bilinguals can speak Danish and something else). This system will of course not give a term to use for an immigrant who only speaks Urdu and English (as a second language) - such a person is clearly not a bilingual in the sense the word is used in Denmark. "Diglot" would suffice, but we don't use the word - the only -glots here are the polyglots.
Iversen on 11 November 2013

beano wrote:

Serpent wrote:

It's normal in the sense that it's not unusual. In the countries you mentioned, it's more of a nice bonus/surprise, but there's still no need for words like bilingual.
Serpent on 11 November 2013

Iversen wrote:

We don't need a word for diglot in Danish - if somebody speaks English
then that's what we say (and we then assume that any Dane can speak Danish, and that our
'native' bilinguals can speak Danish and something else). This system will of course not
give a term to use for an immigrant who only speaks Urdu and English (as a second
language) - such a person is clearly not a bilingual in the sense the word is used in
Denmark. "Diglot" would suffice, but we don't use the word - the only -glots here are the
polyglots.

Same in the Netherlands.
tarvos on 11 November 2013

Serpent wrote:

You can just say "no, but I'm fluent in English although it's not my native language" :)

I could, but according to the dictionary as well as the common usage where I live, or even in North America if I go from what I've read here, I fit the description of "bilingual". Starting the answer with "no" would confuse the person who asked me the question.

Serpent wrote:

The whole point is that in Europe it's so normal that a word isn't required. Unlike Canada where there's a specific combination understood by bilingual (and it's often not important which of the two you speak natively), in Europe the most common question would be "do you speak English?"

I agree with you. I said above that my answer would be different in other countries in Europe (or on this forum), so I'm not sure why you thought I didn't understand. Now that I know it has a different meaning in many countries, I would reply exactly the way you suggested or, at the very least, clarify as to what "bilingual" means to the person before answering.

If you meant that my answer should always be identical, in other words that I should use the most restrictive definition from languages and countries which aren't relevant in the context I am in at a particular moment, then we'll have to agree to disagree.

Maralol wrote:

"Not only that, but I have attempted to find out how to say "diglot" in French and I
couldn't even find a word. "

Diglotte?

I looked for it, but couldn't find it in any online dictionary, including the Larousse. One thing for sure is that I have never heard it.
Avid Learner on 12 November 2013

Based on everyone else's responses, it looks like the definition of "bilingual" really depends on the cultural context! I grew up in an area with lots of immigration, so most people spoke English, and many people spoke one or more other languages natively. I'd say that a bilingual person is someone who can work/go to school in either language with minimal linguistic difficulties. So, for example, when I was in high school, my classmates who had immigrated to Canada late enough to still have a heavy accent but who were able to attend school in English would fit my definition of bilingual. Conversely, I'm working in Japan right now, but I have a lot of trouble with basic everyday tasks, so I'd say that I'm not bilingual yet.
FullofPears on 12 November 2013