1. 3. Sociolinguistic aspects of TLA
1.1. Global perspective: Multilingualism is the rule, not the exception. European perspective: Persistence of monolingual norms applied to multilingual contexts.
1.1.1. Multilingualism in European countries: horizontal or vertical.
1.1.1.1. Horizontal multilingualism: Multilingualism is present at higher levels of society, but not all citizens are multilingual.
1.1.1.2. Vertical multilingualism: People are in daily contact with other languages
1.1.1.3. English is learned as an L3 in many European countries
1.1.1.3.1. Hoffmann (2000): Multilingualism with English can be seen both as a societal and individual phenomenon.
1.2. Language prestige influences language choice in regard to its maintenance and the attitudes towards learning additional languages
1.2.1. Nowadays researches observe increasing favorable attitudes towards minority languages.
2. 4. Psycholinguistic aspects of TLA
2.1. Areas of investigation on research on individual multilingualism
2.1.1. Acquisition of multilingualism: developmental patterns of TLA, maintenance, attrition and loss.
2.1.2. Multilingual use: multilingual production
2.1.3. Multilingual processing: underlying cognitive mechanisms.
2.2. Focused on early early trilingualism, the effects of bilingualism on additional language learning and crosslinguistic influence.
2.2.1. Effects of bilingualism on additional language learning: Studies show that bilingual children outperform monolinguals in the acquisition of English and also when learning French.
2.2.1.1. Metalinguistic awareness, language strategies and communicative ability (in particular with typologically close languages)
2.2.1.1.1. The application of a bilingual norm is necessary for successful further language learning
2.2.1.1.2. Metalinguistic and metacognitive awareness of multilinguals fosters the development of language learning strategies > Multilingual learners use different strategies to monolingual students learning their first foreign language.
2.2.1.1.3. Experience in the use of multiple languages may be also an important factor to develop automaticity in processing several languages as demanded by the linguistic environment.
2.2.2. Crosslinguistic influence: L3 learners or users do not rely on their L1 but on their L2 > L2 exposure influence learners' ability to use their knowledge of L2 to overcome their lexical deficits in L3, and L2 proficiency causes a more frequent intrusion of L2 during L3 production (Tremblay, 2006)
2.2.2.1. Cenoz (2003) and Jessner (2006) detected different roles of the supporter languages activated in L3 performance
2.2.2.2. Learning and using additional languages is dependent on both social and psychological factors.
3. 5. Educational aspects of TLA
3.1. Gulutsan (1976) observed an intellectual enrichment resulting from multilingual learning.
3.2. Definition of multilingual education (Cenoz & Genesee 1998): Educational programs that use languages other than the L1 as a media of instruction and aim for communicative proficiency in more than two languages.
3.3. Examples of multilingual schooling
3.3.1. Concerning minority languages: The Basque Country (North of Spain) Ladin Valleys (North of Italy)
3.3.2. European schools
3.3.2.1. The study of a first foreign language (English, Frend or German) is compulsory (L II)
3.3.2.2. All pupils must study a second foreign language (L III)
3.3.2.3. Pupils can choose a third foreign language (L IV)
3.3.2.4. History and Geography are taught in the pupil's first foreign language at Secondary School, and also Economics (elective subject)
3.3.3. International schools: Vienna International School
3.3.3.1. Students represent over a hundred nationalities and speak over seventy mother tongues.
3.3.3.2. English is exclusively the language of instruction
3.3.3.3. Students with good command of English must study German as first foreign language. Students with low competence in English study English as L2.
3.3.3.4. French and Spanish are offered as foreign language
3.3.3.5. Latin is also available (optional, privately-paid course).
3.3.3.6. Mother tongue lessons are encouraged (out of regular timetable and paid for separately)
3.4. Multilingual teaching projects in Europe
3.4.1. EuroCom: It aimes to provide European citizens with solid linguistic basis for understanding each other (at least withing their own language family) > Several inferencing techniques in typollogically-related languages have been developed for Roman languages, Germanic languages (EuroComGerm) and Slavonic languages (EuroComSlav)
3.4.1.1. EuroCom makes learners aware of their prior language knowledge > that gives them greater self confidence in learning a language.
3.4.1.2. Focus on receptive skills > reading competence is trained by means of "optimised deduction' process: activation of ability to transfer previous experience and familiar meanings and structures into new contexts.
3.4.1.2.1. Text material is organized into the Seven Sieves
3.4.2. Projects funded by the European Centre of Modern Languages <objective> To encourage excellence and innovation in language teachinng and to help Europeans learn languages more effectively.
4. 7. Challenges for the future
4.1. Necessity of creating links among languages learned in the classroom to take advantage of synergies and previous knowledge
4.2. How to define the levels of language proficiency that multilingual students should reach
4.3. Language teachers: experts on mutiligualism
5. 1. Introduction
5.1. Rapid increase in interest in multilingualism > Commitment of EU to multilingualism in Europe
5.2. Multilingualism is misunderstood: multilinguals seen as multiple mololinguals in one <rooted in>Wester tradition of prejudice against bi- and multilingualism <which claimed>Negative effect on the cognitive development of bi- multilingual children
5.3. Recent research > bilingualism > cognitive advantages over monolinguals, contributing to better undestanding of multilingual processes
6. 2. Researching multilingualism
6.1. Definitions
6.1.1. Maximilian Braun (1937): active balanced proficiency in two or more languages
6.1.1.1. Distinction between learned and natural multilingualism
6.1.2. Vildomec (1963): Emphasis in distinction between bilingualism and multilingualism
6.1.2.1. Bilingualism: Mastery of two languages
6.1.2.2. Multilingualism: Familiarity with more than two languages
6.1.3. In European context: Plurilingualism = individual multilingualism. Multilingualism = societal use of a number languages
6.1.3.1. Multilingualism research focuses on more than two languages
6.2. Research
6.2.1. Schuchardt (1884): No language is unmixed
6.2.2. Vildomec: Advantages of multilingualism
6.2.2.1. Singh & Carroll (1979): Multilingualism as the step-child of language learning
6.2.2.2. Thomas (1988): Research showed advantages of bilingual over monolinguals in USA in learning L3
6.2.2.2.1. Ringbom (1987): Compared monolingual and bilingual (Finnish-Swedish) in Finland learning English as their L3
6.2.3. Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (1970's): The influence of L1 on other language(s) describes as negative transfer
6.2.4. Until recently, SLA and bilingualism were kept completely apart: Bilingualism tackled from a pedagogical viewpoint whereas SLA tackled from a sociolinguistic viewpoint
6.2.4.1. Researchers are aware of the connection between bilingualism and SLA
6.2.5. Chomskyan linguistics established the monolingual norms: a trilingual person = three monolinguals in one
6.2.5.1. Grosjean (2003, 2006): L2 user develops multicompetence which differs from monolingual competence
6.2.5.1.1. Bilinguals are better language learners than monolinguals
6.2.6. Language learning can take place naturally, by instruction or in a combination of both
6.2.7. Research study differences and similarities between SLA and TLA
6.2.7.1. Examples of L3 learners
6.2.7.1.1. Children growing up with three languages from birth
6.2.7.1.2. Bilingual children learning an L3 at an early age
6.2.7.1.3. Bilingual migrant children moving to a new linguistic environmet
6.2.7.2. Four routes of TLA
6.2.7.2.1. Simultaneous acquisition L1 / L2 / L3
6.2.7.2.2. Consecutive acquisition of L1, L2 and L3
6.2.7.2.3. Simultaneous acquisition of L2, L3 after learning L1
6.2.7.2.4. Simultaneous acquisition of L1, L2 before learning L3
6.2.7.3. Current models of TLA
6.2.7.3.1. Production models (De Bot 1992,2004; Clyne 2003), based on Levelt's (1989) speech processing model
6.2.7.3.2. Activation / Inhibition model (Green, 1986, 1998): Languages in bilinguals show different levels of activation and control
6.2.7.3.3. Language mode hypothesis (Grosjean, 1998, 2001) describes the state of activation of the bilingual's languages and language processing mechanisms at a certain point in time
6.2.7.3.4. The factor model (Hufeisen 1998; Hufeisen & Marx 2007). Factors that control influence on language learning process
6.2.7.3.5. Multilingual processing model (Meissner 2004) explains processes taking place when reading or listening to messages in an unknown language that belongs to a typollogically related family >Focus on the underlying processes that facilite to understand the new language
6.2.7.3.6. Dynamic systems theory (DST) model of multilingualism (DMM) (Herdina & Jessner 2002) > Interactions between subsystems of a complex system is described as non-additive ways of influencing language development > Multilingualism is a dynamic process > The development of a multilingual system changes over time and it is non-linear or reversible > possibility of language attrition or loss.
6.2.7.3.7. The model of multilinguality (Aronin & Laoire 2004): Difference between multilinguality and individual multilingualism
6.2.7.4. L2 learners are complete beginners in the learning process of a second or first foreign language <however> L3 learners already know about the foreign language learning process > they have built strategies > L3 learners have specific competencies that L2 learner do not.
7. 6. Emerging trends in teaching third languages
7.1. The language awareness movement (UK) to counteract illiteracy in English
7.2. Hawkins (1999): one of the pioneers of applying language awareness to L2 learning based on: learning to learn a language and cross-language comparisons with special emphasis on L1 in SLA > His ideas provide an ideal basis for education with multilingual goals > Metalinguistic awareness and metacognitive skills are developed as part of multilingual development.
7.3. Focus on the multilingual learner
7.3.1. New developments in multilingualism research and teaching propose cooperation between languages in the learner
7.3.1.1. The roles of L1 and L2 in L3 need redefinition by raising awareness of the potential for competencies in other languages
7.3.1.2. Linked to Cummins's idea of a common underlying proficiency (interdependence hypothesis) > formation of a repertoire of cognitive skills.
7.3.1.3. Jessner (2006) suggested exploiting the etymology of English when teaching English in the multilingual classroom
7.3.1.4. Language learning strategies is crucial for multilingual development. These strategies increase with linguistic experience and language proficiency.
7.3.1.5. Jessner (1999): The silent processes in multilinguals from natural language learning should be made explicit in instructed language learning.
7.3.1.6. Strategies identified in experiment on learning Italian by Spanish immigrant workers in Switzerland (Schmid 1993, 1995)
7.3.1.6.1. Congruence: Identification of interlingual correspondences
7.3.1.6.2. Correspondence: development of processes to relate similar forms in L2 and L3
7.3.1.6.3. Difference: Identification of contrasts
7.4. Focus on the multilingual teacher
7.4.1. The ideal language teacher should have language learning experience and pass that knowledge in the classroom.
7.4.1.1. That language learning experience should be complemented by the study of language acquisition research.
7.5. Focus on multilingual didactics
7.5.1. Special role of English
7.5.1.1. English, as the world's lingua franca, must be included in the curriculum of schools in a non-English speaking environment (well regarded by students and parents)
7.5.1.2. English could contribute to the development of linguistic awareness in multilingual learners.
7.5.1.2.1. This should be complemented by an etymological approach to English language teaching.
7.5.2. Common curriculum and multilingual didactics
7.5.2.1. It requires the integration of all language subjects, including them in other subjects.
7.5.2.2. A common curriculum should be governed by a multilingual concept by which more languages are learned > Language approach would change: less yet more intensive training (Content-based approach, regular exchange and trainee programs abroad)
7.5.2.3. Suggestion of joint courses in multilingualism research, didactics and pedagogy with intercultural education comprising heritage /minority / migrant languages (Hufeisen 2005)
7.5.2.4. Students at Innsbruck University (Austria) are taught integrated foreign language didactics.
7.5.2.5. Moore (2006) proposes links between languages and cultures
7.5.2.6. Wandruzska (1986, 1990) pleaded for a basic course in Latin and Greek for language students to increase crosslinguistic links between the modern European languages