Relating input factors and dual language proficiency in French–English bilingual children

Abstract

The input factors that may cause variation in bilingual proficiency were investigated in 38 French–English bilinguals aged six to eight, of middle-to-high socio-economic status, attending an international state school in France. Data on children's current and cumulative language exposure and family background were collected through questionnaires given to parents and children. Language proficiency was measured using the standardised French and English versions of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and the Student Oral Language Observation Matrix, a rating scale of oral competence, completed by children's French and English teachers.

The results indicated significant correlations between the language proficiency measures and current amount of overall exposure to each language, as well as current input and output quantity. Cumulative length of exposure was also a significant predictor for all the language proficiency measures. Furthermore, the child's dominant language was a reliable indicator of variables related to language use, including the child's preferred language for speaking and reading and the language used with peers in the school playground. The implications of these findings are discussed, highlighting particularly the need to find ways of promoting the child's weaker language.

Keywords:

• childhood bilingualism
• bilingual acquisition
• language proficiency
• input factors
• French
• English

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Charlotte Hoffmann my Ph.D. supervisor for her support throughout my research, the San José Unified School District for authorising me to use the link for the SOLOM, and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable feedback on earlier drafts of this article.

Notes

1. Although the psychometrics of the two Peabody tests are unlikely to be exactly equivalent, because comparisons of children's scores were used only as an approximate measure, any differences probably made little difference.

2. We enquired if families employed an au pair. If they did, these individuals would also have extended contact with children. However, results revealed that just two families had an English-speaking au pair, while none employed a French-speaking au pair.

3. While it is commonly observed that bilinguals sometimes use, and are exposed to, code-switched or mixed utterances, we considered that it would not be feasible to obtain data on children's estimates of such utterances, in view of their age.

4. Interestingly, there is a strong association between Peabody scores for each language and the SOLOM vocabulary section for English (r = .46, N = 38, p < .01), and French (r = .73, N = 38, p < .01).

5. The information provided here, on particular trends for the different family types within the school, was given to the researcher during informal discussions with IS teachers and parents.