Some define bilingualism as being of knowledge in culture, tradition and language; Contemporary definitions prefix it as being conversant in two languages.
Under the old pretext, the assumption is that without culture, tradition and local knowledge, suitable application is not encompassing. Case in hand, knowing English is different from being English.
So if one were fluent (say five languages) and truly bi- or tri-lingual under the old obscure unofficial definitions of the former:
What is the correct description of such persons ? What is your opinion why would you interpret it as such?
2006-10-30
20:52:48
·
10 answers
·
asked by
pax veritas
4
in
Society & Culture
➔ Languages
ABRIDGED
Vicky.. concurs with the older notion that the practicalities of speaking with equivocal proficiency requires understanding and experience of native culture and traditions. This is illustrated by Sunam..’s emphasis of nuances in English and Arabic. Each would take on different meanings and become undecipherable, should language be without cultural and other contextual references.(Such as religious text and in poetry.)
Sharing in likeness of Vick’s experiential understanding, the difference ends where blond..’s key to understanding languages of equal fluency, lies in understanding of context, grammar, idiosyncrasies and knowledge of the society. (A theoretical framework would suffice?)
Manifestations of bilingualism can be observed in sleep talking (kimbr..), much to Ronda..’s embarrassment.
2006-10-31
03:00:09 ·
update #1
In contention to the above, Mr. Z’s proposition is that “Bilingual” should be taken literally. Further to the contemporary definition, Fidget places a distinction between Multi-lingual (defined as language) as opposed to Multi-cultural, used to describe a society and its cultural values, above that of an individual, as epitomized in Britain.
A broader definition of spoken language is the ability to communicate in more than one way, which may include interpretive dance, miming, hand signals, visual universal symbols and symbolism. Hand signing is a prime example of communication, and therefore bilingualism.
2006-10-31
03:01:03 ·
update #2
For the sake of inclusion and only in passing, providing eye candy:
(On the side lines, bigotry alive and kicking(fukue..), with the green eyed monster lurking in contention. (loulo..))
2006-10-31
03:03:36 ·
update #3
While I could give a dictionary definition of what bilingual is, that isn't what really what you're asking for.
I think being bilingual means to be able to speak in more than one language, but I don't think it stops there. I think being able to communicate in more than one way is what should define bilingualism.
Speech should not be the only thing that determines it.
Here are some of the things that I think should classify as making a person bilingual.
- Able to speak in more than one language
- Interpretive dance
- Miming
- Hand signals
- Universal sign that people can read (eg Mens and womens bathroom signs, or the Red Cross)
Although I don't speak another language, my daughter is deaf, and therefore I speak to her with my hands. If being bilingual meant that it was only through speech, would this mean that I was not communicating to my daughter at all?
Bilingual should be being able to comminucate with someone in two or more different ways - not just through languages.
2006-10-30 21:17:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mr. Maul 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
Bilingualism is being able to speak two or more languages to the same proficiency.
Nowadays, I would say that in order to be truly bi - multi - lingual you should have some understanding of the culture and traditions as well as the language itself.
I studied French and German at University, before my year abroad, I was fluent, now I would say (because I spent a large amount of time in each country) I'm bilingual.
2006-10-30 20:58:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by Vicky A 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Once you know a different than mother-tongue language, you are familiar with its culture also, though never as much as like the British-culture despite knowing English perfectly well enough. Expressing in the other language is different than living in that language. I know more than one languages, yet I can never translate some words or expressions because in the other language there was no concept about that hence no words to translate. One example: For Muslims, only the Arabic Quran is holy, translation in any other language is not. Chances are that no other language can exactly convey meanings in about that many words as in Arabic. Long explanatory commentaries shall make the Holy Quran a very large volume, yet that may not convey all the Arabic meanings, adequately. Similar examples may be about reading Shakespeare in Persian, or reading 'Thousand and One Nights' in English.
2006-10-30 21:10:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Bi-two, lingua-language. Therefore the direct meaning is the ability to speak two languages. However the understanding is that these two languages are of equal and fluent ability. For true fluency, ie, understanding of context, grammar, idiosyncrasies, a knowledge of the society is also needed. Tri-lingualism-three languages, multi-lingualism-many languages.
2006-10-30 21:08:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
I would say bilingualism means you are fluent in two languages, tri-lingual, in 3 languages, anything after than I would say multi-lingual. I consider myself to be Try-lingual - I'll have a bash at any! Languages and communication fascinate me. I used to dream in Spanish when I lived there and have been known to sleep talk in Spanish as well, much to my embarrassment.
2006-10-30 21:38:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by rondavous 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Bi-lingual refers to language (from the Latin "lingua" = tongue) so would describe someone equally fluent in two languages. Multi-lingual is used to describe someone who is fluent in many languages.
Multi-cultural is used usually to describe a society rather than a person and refers to an environment that envelopes many different cultures. Britain is (rightly) a multi-cultural society.
2006-10-30 21:12:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by fidget 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
I don't think so. A lot of countries have two or more official languages or they have an official and de facto language. India, or example, has Hindi and English as official languages. However, within India there are hundreds of sublanguages and most people resort to speaking English anyways. Especially if you have an Indian from the North and one from the South, my friends Suraj and Sepna's parents are from opposite ends of India and resorted to speaking only English. I do not think two or more official languages compromise English, because it's such a universal language that most people resort to it.
2016-05-22 15:51:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bilingualism is speaking 2 languages fluently , or a Ability to speak 2 languages ...
2014-08-10 18:22:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
"Bilingual" simply means you can speak and understand, reasonably, two languages. Nothing more than that is implied.
2006-10-30 21:12:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by MrZ 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
my daughter is truly bilingual, she was brought up in Holland but
I'm British. When she's in Holland she dreams in Dutch, England, English (I know this because she talks in her sleep)
2006-10-30 21:05:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by kimbridge 4
·
1⤊
1⤋