The Fractional View of Bilingualism
The fractional view (aka monolingual view) of bilingualism suggests that the knowledge and linguistic competence of two languages are separate monolingual entities of that particular person. The followers of the fractional view look at a bilingual as two monolinguals within that person, and his language competency will be compared to that of the native monolinguals. For example, the proficiency of English language of a bilingual, who is from India, will be compared to the English proficiency of a native from the US or the UK. Such a comparison is extremely unfair because the natives of that particular language will always have more command in many contexts in that particular language as compared to a bilingual. And a bilingual person will use the two languages he knows in different contexts.
We see such unfair treatment of bilinguals when they migrate to the two major English speaking countries. In the US, emigrants are federally labeled as LEP (Limited English Proficient), and many EU countries also identify them as semilinguals (that in itself is a discriminatory term, which we will discuss later). These monolingua countries think of bilingualism as an oddity and suggest to use proficiency tests made for monolinguals. But regions such as India (with over 780 recognized languages) and Africa (1,000 to 2,000 languages) view bilinguals as normal, and knowing more languages is respected.
The Holistic View of Bilingualism
The holistic view of bilingualism was given by Grosjean in 1982. The holistic view paints a positive picture of a bilingual. He asserts that a bilingual creates something "more than two languages" through the collective knowledge of the two languages that "function independently of each other". Grosjean argues that a bilingual is NOT two complete or incomplete monolinguals within one person, but he has a unique linguistic profile. To prove his point, Grosjean gives an analogical example from athletics. He thinks of jumpers and sprinters as native monolinguals who are experts in one skill: jumping the highest and running the fastest. However, a hurdler (a bilingual) has to learn the skills of sprinting and a jumping to climb through the hurdels as fast as he can. Sure he is not able to jump the highest or run the fastest, but he is able to use both of his abilities to cross the hurdles. Similarly, a bilingual is not as capable in his second language as a native monolingual but he is most certainly capable of using the two languages to fulfill his daily demands in many contexts in two languages.
Then this raises a question, should bilinguals or ESL learners be compared against other ESL learners? We can see an example from Welsh-speaking children who are also ESL learners, but whose English competency is compared to that of the natives, giving the native monolinguals an edge in the English-speaking job market. So, the fractional view still prevails there.
Grosjean suggests that language proficiency tests should move away from traditional testing of correctness of form to that of the communicative usage of that language in all possible domains or contexts. Yet still, English dominant countries compare the English competency of a bilingual to that of a native monolingual from their countries. Though they could test the ‘monolingual’ competency of the two languages a bilingual knows, if he fails in the assessment of the majority language (English in this case), he might be denigrated (as a semilingual).
Semilingualism and Its Criticism
Semilingualism is defined as the deficiency in two or more languages in certain competences, such as grammar, unconscious processing of that language, vocabulary, etc. Semilinguals can be identified by the following:
His vocabulary will be limited, and his (written) sentences will lack grammatical correctness.
He will consistently search for the right word when attempting to speak that particular language.
His expression of emotions will be bland and uncreative.
Criticism
The Term Itself: Semilingualism as a term may serve as a discriminatory label for the people who are not as proficient as the natives as we saw how the emigrants in the US were labeled as LEPs.
The Deficit Might Not Be Within Bilingualism: The individual might not be provided with ample resources and guidance at an age when his ability to acquire the second language was at its peak due to social or economic problems.
Competence Varies over Contexts: It’s difficult, if not impossible, to be competent in all the contexts in the two languages. Each person uses languages for certain contexts only. For example, a school-going student will be proficient in speaking that language in an academic context only but not in purchasing something from a shop in a street.
Limited Language Tests: Most language tests only test candidates against a limited set of contexts. He might be proficient in the language he is being tested for in other contexts, which the test has not taken into account.
Vagueness: The term double semilingualism is vague, as people will not agree on a cut-off point to assess “semilinguals.”.
Unjust: The term favours an unjust comparison of a bilingual to a native monolingual, who most certainly will outway the bilingual in a wide range of contexts, without thinking about the different geographical, social, and economic conditions of the bilingual.
Sources and Suggested Readings
Lecture and Discussion with Sir Nasir Mehmood
