Evidence for Multicompetence

Abstract

The term multicompetence describes “the compound state of a mind with two grammars” (Cook, 1991a, p. 112). This paper reviews evidence addressing two questions: 1. Do people who know two languages differ from people who know only one in other respects than simply knowledge of an L2? L2 users differ from monolinguals in L1 knowledge; advanced L2 users differ from monolinguals in L2 knowledge; L2 usershave a different metalinguistic awareness from monolinguals; L2 users have different cognitive processes. These subtle differences consistently suggest that people with multicompetence are not simply equivalent to two monolinguals but are a unique combination. 2. Do people who know two languages have a merged language system rather than two separate systems? The L1 and L2 share the same mentallexicon; L2 users codeswitch readily; L2 processing cannot be cut off from LI; both languages are stored in the same areas of the brain; L2 proficiency relates to L1 proficiency. This evidence suggests merged systems at some level in some areas, even if some of it is open to other interpretations. A final section discusses more general issues. Much SLA research is biased by adopting the monolingual as a norm rather than the multicompetent speaker. Multicompetence distinguishes diachronic transfer during the learner's acquisition from synchronic transfer between the two languages at a single moment of time. Multicompetence starts when there is systematic knowledge of an L2 that is not assimilated to the L1. Holistic multicompetence is seen as an offshoot of polylectal grammar theory applied to monolinguals. Language teaching should try to produce multicompetent individuals not ersatz native speakers.

The Effect of L2 Writing Ability on L1 Writing Ability

“…The findings of this study not only imply conscious L2 learning in classroom but also strengthen the multicompetence view (Cook, 1992), which postulates that "there seems to be strong links between L1 ability and L2 classroom success, even if the results do not generalize for L2 learning outside the classroom" (p. 574). The results of this study might also indicate that if L2 learning is accompanied by intensive formal instruction and adequate motivation, it can have positive effects on the writing ability and syntactic complexity of the L1 of the L2 learners.…”

“…The theory contends that because the crucial abstract principles of UG are available to children innately, they are able to acquire L1 effortlessly (McLaughlin, 1987). Whereas, Cook (1992) argues that there is an obvious difference between a person who knows an L2 and a person who knows only one language. In other words, people who know two languages may think differently from those who only know one language.…”

“…The bidirectional influence forms a unique competence which shows both similarities to and differences from the native monolingual competence (Beare, 2000;Kecskes, 1998). Cook (1992) claims that learning an L2 might have some effects on L1 knowledge. In the field of phonology, for instance, it has been maintained that the phonological systems of people who know an L2 differs from those of the monolinguals.…”

“…It could further be added that a syllabus that lacks particular attention to the specific nature of L2 users seems inadequate. Cook (1992) believes that a) bilinguals have a different metalinguistic awareness from people who only know an L1, b) L2 users have different cognitive processes from monolinguals, c) the level of L2 proficiency in academic circumstances is related to the level of L1 proficiency, d) L2 processing cannot be cut off from L1, e) L1 and L2 share the same mental lexicon, f) both L1 and L2 are stored in the same areas of the mind, and finally, g) L2 users differ from monolinguals in the knowledge of L1. The abovementioned evidence is in line with the claim that there seems to be a positive relationship between the knowledge of both L1 and L2, and therefore, the more proficient the L2 learner is in L2 writing ability, the more developed his or her L1 writing ability should be.…”

An Analysis of Phonetic, Morphological and Syntactic Errors in English: A Case Study of Saudi BA Students at King Khalid University

“…Selinker (1992) clarified that transfer of L1 structure to L2 performance is negative and errors are inevitable when L1 and L2 structures differ but positive when the structures are similar. A particular challenge identified by Cook (1992) is that regardless of the teacher's efforts, L1 knowledge remains present in the minds of L2 learners, who connect it with L2 knowledge. He therefore warned not to treat the L2 in isolation from the L1.…”