Obviously learning a couple of words in another language doesn’t really make you bilingual, or being able to say a few phrases. But there’s also clearly some point before full fluency where you can be considered bilingual, but how is it determined (formally or informally)? Is it purely vibes based, you’ll know when you see it kind of thing?

I’m vaguely familiar with the CEFR levels measuring how much of a language you speak, but if there’s a cutoff point for counting as bilingual in there somewhere I don’t know where.

  • Slotos@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    28 days ago

    Bilingualism is a bit overloaded nowadays, which I find kinda annoying given that word “polyglot” exists.

    Anyways, if you can freely use another language in an informal exchange with a few people of different sobriety levels while failing to remember key words and recovering from that - you’re a fluent polyglot. Ability to exchange information is a key part of what language is, and that’s how you measures your proficiency.

    Bilingual can also mean “natively proficient in two languages”. And if you’re older than three years old and are not native speakers of multiple languages already, the chances of you becoming one are slim.

    Native proficiency is a result of a language acquisition ability that is not well understood and disappears early into child development. It results in a level of effortless mastery that seems to be impossible to achieve as an adult, i.e. a dedicated or merely attentive native speaker will be able to recognize that you are not one.

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      I’ve legitimately never heard polyglot used to mean “speaks two languages”, I thought it meant “speaks three or more languages.” I can understand it being useful to have a specific term for people raised with two languages from birth/very early childhood though.

    • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      [Caveat lector: I’m not from language acquisition, my main area of knowledge within Linguistics is Historical Linguistics.]

      Native proficiency is a result of a language acquisition ability that is not well understood and disappears early into child development.

      That’s the critical period hypothesis. It’s more complicated than it looks like, and academically divisive; some say that it’s simply the result of people having higher exposure and incentive to learn a language before they’re 12yo, while some claim that it’s due to changes in cerebral structures over time.

      And then there’s people like Chomsky who claim that the so-called “window of opportunity” is to learn Language as a human faculty, not to learn a specific language like Mandarin, Spanish, English etc.