Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h85IeM727326; Fri, 5 Sep 2003 14:40:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 14:40:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3F58D794.5000405@csulb.edu> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Kevin Rocap <krocap@csulb.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-ESL:9423] RE: Illiteracy X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Status: O Content-Length: 3244 Lines: 65 Dear Kate, Actually that is a piece of received wisdom that may need to be reassessed (not ignored or rejected as I think it makes good sense from a sociocultural point of view). Recent learning and brain research suggest, for instance, that kids can learn two language simultaneously and keep them straight (maintain code integrity, if you will); basically the different languages (with a small "l") are treated I suspect as Language (with a capital "L") resources by the child and there is no evidence, to my knowledge, that one is needed before the other can be introduced. Of course with regard to second language learners of English in the U.S. we have other sociocultural issues to take into account. Such as if we want the parents to be a strong positive influence on the child's life it is likely important to help maintain the strongest "mother tongue" linkages between parents and child (even as English is acquired as well). Also, we have the issue of dominant and subordinate languages (the fact that kids may be surrounded by English in the media, in society, etc., but based on their own first language likely have fewer opportunities to use and maintain that - language loss). Since, of course, we do have the benefit of research that demonstrates greater cognitive flexibility for children who know two or more languages it is important to design programs that promote additive rather than subtractive bilingualism (adding English, not losing L1). Also, it is likely that with regard to a child's *identity* formation (e.g., self-esteem, self-efficacy, etc.) I imagine that it is detrimental to not get early and high-quality validation of their home language use in the school environment. How is the child to make sense, for instance, of all "official" practices denying the value of their own parents' language? Also, I'd venture to say that your point may still hold for some issues like learning to read. While it seems from research to be true that a child can acquire two or more languages simultaneously there may be something to be said for developing strength in reading in one language and then transferring the skill. Though we do know that it is helpful, even if a child is learning to read in English in school for parents to read to/with a child regardless of the language to learn certain reading strategies. So I'm afraid I don't know the current best answer in this regard. What I believe is true, Kate, is that IF a child has a rich first language that many of the skills of that language use are indeed transferable in the process of acquiring/developing another language. And I would venture to say that your statement holds true for *adults* who would benefit from having a rich first language, since they may not have the benefit of as malleable and formative a brain in later years in order to create all of the extra neural pathways for acquiring the new one. (but I don't know of specific brain research in this vein) In Peace, K. kate.diggins wrote: >On the other hand, childen need a rich first language. Without that, there >would be a lack of cognitive "hooks", metaphorically speaking, on which >to "hang" second language. > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:16:24 EST