• The Conference
  • Home
  • Programme
  • Venue & directions
  • Organizing Committee
  • Scientific Committee
  • Exhibitors & sponsors
  • Satellite events
  • Conference Party
• Past & future
  • Previous symposia
  • Finland 2014
  • Spain 2016
• About FU Berlin
  • University homepage
  • Humanities at FU

Programme: accepted abstracts

Abstract ID: 1070

Part of General Paper Session (Other abstracts in this session)

Maybe intimate, but not identical: evaluating bilinguals’ language competences in a longitudinal study in a deeply bilingualised context

Authors: Vila i Moreno, Francesc Xavier; Illamola i Gómez, Cristina; Sendra i Rovira, Montserrat
Submitted by: Sendra i Rovira, Montserrat (Universitat de Barcelona, Spain)

One of the main challenges faced by research done in multilingual settings is that of defining the informants’ level of competence in each language. The difficulties encroached range from purely technical issues —are any tests available for the project? Are they coherent with the rest of the research in process?— to major epistemological questions —such as whether bilinguals should be analysed by means of tests designed for monolinguals (cf. Garcia 2009, Baker 2011). In such a context, a large percentage of both quantitative and qualitative sociolinguistic studies tend to rely on indirect indicators, including self-assessment, or indirect evidence to establish broad categories of L1 and L2 proficiency.

In this paper we will describe, classify and analyse the main difficulties encountered while trying to evaluate the level of oral competence in two closely related languages which are spoken side-by-side in the same society. The data come from a longitudinal project focussed on language practices, competence and ideologies among teenagers in Catalonia and deal with Catalan and Castilian [i.e., Spanish]).

Some of the difficulties encountered arise from the general frame of reference for language evaluation in each language. Both languages have their own regulatory bodies (Institut d’Estudis Catalans for Catalan, Real Academia Española for Castilian), but the sociolinguistic and broader ideological frames for language assessment differ: in general terms, Catalan is perceived by its regulatory bodies as endangered by excessive contact with Castilian and therefore language contact phenomena are widely present in standard evaluation procedures. On the contrary, Catalan language contact phenomena are hardly taken into consideration by Castilian normative institutions, and they are therefore rarely considered in general assessment materials. At the same time, the ideals of correction tend to be quite diverse: in Catalan, correction is deeply connected with genuinity, and (historical) geolectal diversity is regarded as positive. On the other hand, correction in Castilian is much more associated with social class and urbanity, and geolectal diversity which diverges from is penalised (cf. Moreno 2008).

Other difficulties come up from the longitudinal nature of the study. Some of them derive from the changing age of the subjects, which evolve from a preteenager status to the condition of youngsters. Other have to do with the very nature of the tasks, which include two kind of interaction contexts: from a closed formal one to a more informal and open context.

We will finally suggest some solutions to these challenges, taking into consideration not only the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)  but the particular sociolinguistic situation that surround those two languages and the project’s longitudinal nature.

References:

Baker, Colin. 2011. Foundations of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 5th edition.

García, Ofelia. 2009. Bilingual education in the 21st century. A global perspective. Malden, USA; Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Moreno Cabrera, Juan Carlos. 2008. El nacionalismo lingüístico. Una ideología destructiva. Península: Madrid.