We keep reading media reports of studies which conclude that people who speak more than one language are capable of perceiving some aspects of the world differently and may even develop another personality as a result of being bilingual. This assumption goes back as far as the Middle Ages when Charlemagne supposedly said: ‘To have another language is to possess a second soul’.
Much later, this assumption came to comprise the gist of the idea of ‘linguistic relativity’ aka Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, a theory which claims that language and its grammatical structure shapes and constructs our thoughts and the mental frame in which we view the world around us. Consequently, people who speak more than one language are likely to experience reality differently, depending on the language they are speaking. Since then, a large number of studies have been attempting to prove this, and more or less informed debate of the matter is, unsurprisingly, all over the Internet.
Even so, the statement that bilinguals have more than one soul is not as simple as we are made to believe it is. As a linguist and an active bilingual, I neither think that bilinguals – even the most bicultural of us (those who have immersed themselves, to a great extent, in more than one culture) – have more than one soul nor do I believe that the number of languages a person speaks multiplies their souls (or personalities).
Studies that make such claims not only portray bilinguals as exotic individuals who are categorically different from monolinguals, but phrases such as ‘having a second soul’ or a ‘different personality’ also suggest that bilinguals may be confused individuals with a split personality: bilingualism comes to be represented as akin to a personality disorder in such reports.
I think the problem with the idea that bilinguals have ‘two souls’ and the messages they send is two-fold. The first one is that they do not really do justice to the complexity of being a bilingual; instead, they reduce bilinguals to individuals who have a dual identity, a misconception that linguists such as Aneta Pavlenko have consistently challenged. For instance, a difference in the linguistic terms used for time units in different languages might make bilinguals experience time slightly differently, but that does not mean that such a change in perception can be generalised and be used as evidence that bilinguals experience reality differently, depending on the language they speak.
Furthermore, reports about bilinguals’ perception often entail some element of exaggeration. To focus on the ‘perks’ of being a bilingual and encourage second language learning, they make it sound as if an automatic outcome was guaranteed: All you have to do is learn a second language and you will perceive time differently’.
A change in language as a change of worldview?
The second problem with this assumption is its neglect of the crucial role of culture and the extent of immersion a language learner needs to have to reach a certain level of bilingualism and thus, if at all, have another ‘view’ on life. Without considering the role of culture and socialisation of learners into a new culture an important pre-requisite of accessing and adopting a certain worldview is ignored.
Linguist John McWhorter (2014: xiv; 6-8) contends that what these studies do is mainly pointing out the ‘subtle and, overall, minor’ cognitive differences between speakers of different languages; differences that do not suffice to be considered a ‘worldview’. Instead, he argues that this so-called change of perspective is a result of ‘get[ting] yourself into a culture […] learn[ing] a different way of looking at life, not from the way the grammar works’. Many recent studies (e.g., Pavlenko, 2008) indeed show that learners’ immersion into a new culture can help them acquire certain cultural aspects and modes of expressions (e.g. perceiving and expressing emotions).
What is it then? A worldview or a change in stance?
Taking the role of culture and socialisation into account, I argue that what seems to be a change in the worldview can be explained as a change in bilingual speakers’ stances or attitudes when switching to the other language. ‘Having a second soul’ might be really about identity performance and having multi-faceted identities that tend to be activated and highlighted through switching between languages. My PhD project shows that the temporary aspects of bilingual speakers’ identities that are projected and performed through switching between languages can be attributed to a change in the stances they take up. These stances are found to be related to the different functions for which bilinguals use each language, such as expressing different emotions and making attitudinal shifts when switching between languages. These shifts can also be linked to the values or social and cultural meanings they associate with each language or language group, often an inevitable result of prolonged contact with that group.
Language Lovers Blogging Competition 2017
If you liked this post, don’t forget to vote for Language on the Move in the 2017 Language Lovers blogging competition over at the ba.bla voting page! Voting closes on June 06.
- Hanan Ben Nafa, Do bilinguals express different emotions in different languages?
- Shiva Motaghi-Tabari, Lost in bilingual parenting
- Ingrid Piller, Growing up between cultures
- Ingrid Piller, Beyond the mother tongue
- Lisa Fairbrother, Does multilingualism cause temper tantrums?
- Hanna Torsh, Is bilingualism impolite?
McWhorter, John A. 2014. The Language Hoax: Why the World Looks the Same in Any Language. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pavlenko, A. (2008). Emotion and emotion-laden words in the bilingual lexicon Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11 (02) DOI: 10.1017/S1366728908003283