Skip to main content
Social Sci LibreTexts

3.8.1: Cognitive Development in Early Childhood – Monolingualism vs. Bilingualism

  • Page ID
    205604
  • \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    ( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

    \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

    \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

    \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

    \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

    \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

    \(\newcommand{\avec}{\mathbf a}\) \(\newcommand{\bvec}{\mathbf b}\) \(\newcommand{\cvec}{\mathbf c}\) \(\newcommand{\dvec}{\mathbf d}\) \(\newcommand{\dtil}{\widetilde{\mathbf d}}\) \(\newcommand{\evec}{\mathbf e}\) \(\newcommand{\fvec}{\mathbf f}\) \(\newcommand{\nvec}{\mathbf n}\) \(\newcommand{\pvec}{\mathbf p}\) \(\newcommand{\qvec}{\mathbf q}\) \(\newcommand{\svec}{\mathbf s}\) \(\newcommand{\tvec}{\mathbf t}\) \(\newcommand{\uvec}{\mathbf u}\) \(\newcommand{\vvec}{\mathbf v}\) \(\newcommand{\wvec}{\mathbf w}\) \(\newcommand{\xvec}{\mathbf x}\) \(\newcommand{\yvec}{\mathbf y}\) \(\newcommand{\zvec}{\mathbf z}\) \(\newcommand{\rvec}{\mathbf r}\) \(\newcommand{\mvec}{\mathbf m}\) \(\newcommand{\zerovec}{\mathbf 0}\) \(\newcommand{\onevec}{\mathbf 1}\) \(\newcommand{\real}{\mathbb R}\) \(\newcommand{\twovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\ctwovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\threevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cthreevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\mattwo}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{rr}#1 \amp #2 \\ #3 \amp #4 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\laspan}[1]{\text{Span}\{#1\}}\) \(\newcommand{\bcal}{\cal B}\) \(\newcommand{\ccal}{\cal C}\) \(\newcommand{\scal}{\cal S}\) \(\newcommand{\wcal}{\cal W}\) \(\newcommand{\ecal}{\cal E}\) \(\newcommand{\coords}[2]{\left\{#1\right\}_{#2}}\) \(\newcommand{\gray}[1]{\color{gray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\lgray}[1]{\color{lightgray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\rank}{\operatorname{rank}}\) \(\newcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\col}{\text{Col}}\) \(\renewcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\nul}{\text{Nul}}\) \(\newcommand{\var}{\text{Var}}\) \(\newcommand{\corr}{\text{corr}}\) \(\newcommand{\len}[1]{\left|#1\right|}\) \(\newcommand{\bbar}{\overline{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bhat}{\widehat{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bperp}{\bvec^\perp}\) \(\newcommand{\xhat}{\widehat{\xvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\vhat}{\widehat{\vvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\uhat}{\widehat{\uvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\what}{\widehat{\wvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\Sighat}{\widehat{\Sigma}}\) \(\newcommand{\lt}{<}\) \(\newcommand{\gt}{>}\) \(\newcommand{\amp}{&}\) \(\definecolor{fillinmathshade}{gray}{0.9}\)

    Monolingualism and Bilingualism: A Comparison 

    The main difference between a monolingual brain and a bilingual brain is the way in which the two languages are processed. In a monolingual brain, a single language is processed in specialized language regions of the brain. In a bilingual brain, both languages are processed in overlapping regions of the brain, and the brain is able to switch between the two languages more easily. Studies have also shown that being bilingual can have cognitive benefits, such as improved attention and problem-solving abilities. The results of several research studies highlight an important parallel between the language development of children from bilingual and monolingual learning environments, showing the critical role of verbal engagement between caregivers and children in shaping children's early language outcomes. 

    The finding of links between variation in quantity of caregiver talk and processing speed reinforces the view that early engagement with caregivers not only provides young children with information that supports the development of language knowledge, but also tunes up information‐processing skills fundamental for later language and cognitive growth (Hurtado et al., [ 22] ; Weisleder & Fernald, [ 42] ). Those children who are experiencing less supportive learning environments early in development are less likely to gain strength in those critical language learning skills and thus may be at increased risk for poorer language and cognitive outcomes than children from more supportive early learning environments. (Marchman, 2017)

    Research studies compared monolingual and bilingual babies’ brain responses to language sounds. The most obvious difference the researchers saw was in two brain regions associated with executive function—the prefrontal cortex and frontal cortex. In these regions, babies who were bilingual in Spanish and English had stronger brain responses to speech sounds than did babies monolingual in English. (McElroy, 2016)

    The findings align with brain studies in bilingual and monolingual adults, according to Ramírez (2021). The boost bilingualism gives to executive function areas in the brain could arise from the need for bilingual speakers to switch back and forth between languages, which allows them to routinely practice and improve executive function skills.

    In language processing, the argument that language development remains “fused” within the brain, as opposed to occurring through two “differentiated” linguistic systems, was proven by evidence that bilinguals have a differentiated neural pattern of activation for each language. A concern among educators is that early exposure to two languages might be a source of fundamental and persistent language confusion and lifelong fragmentary linguistic knowledge, the result of having experienced “language contamination” (or exposure to two languages too early in life; e.g., Crawford, 1999). However, there are studies that refute these claims with neural evidence from research studies suggesting that there may be a functional separation of two languages in a single bilingual brain based on the formal linguistic properties of each given language. This is an ongoing debate in the field of psychology to date.

    Differences in Development and Impact Between Bilingual and Monolingual Infants, Toddlers, Preschool and School-Age Children  

    The ability to speak more than one language has become increasingly important in our current globally connected world. Research suggests that being bilingual can have numerous cognitive, linguistic, and social advantages. However, the question of whether to raise a child monolingual or bilingual remains a matter of debate. In this chapter, we will explore the differences in development and impact between bilingual and monolingual infants, toddlers, preschool, and school-age children. 

    Proponents of bilingualism argue for its numerous cognitive, linguistic, and social benefits, whereas opponents argue that it may cause confusion and language delay. This chapter aims to compare the strengths and challenges of monolingual and bilingual language development during infancy, toddlerhood, and childhood. 

    Infancy. 

    Infancy is a crucial period for language development, and research has shown that bilingual infants are capable of differentiating between two languages as early as four months old (Byers-Heinlein et al., 2010). Furthermore, bilingual infants exhibit more cognitive flexibility and executive function than monolingual infants (Kovács & Mehler, 2009). However, the quality and quantity of exposure to both languages both play crucial roles in determining the benefits of bilingualism. 

    Toddlerhood. 

    In toddlerhood, children may experience a period of language mixing, where they use elements of both languages in their speech. This is a temporary stage that does not indicate language delay or confusion (Byers-Heinlein & Lew-Williams, 2013). In fact, bilingual toddlers have been shown to have better language processing abilities and stronger vocabulary skills than monolingual toddlers (Bialystok, 2017). 

    Preschool.

    Bilingualism in preschool children has been linked to increased metalinguistic awareness, or the ability to think about language as a system (Bialystok, 2017). Bilingual preschoolers have also been found to outperform monolingual children on tasks that require attention and cognitive control (Bialystok & Martin, 2004). Additionally, bilingual preschoolers have been shown to have better social skills and an increased awareness of cultural diversity (Bialystok, 2017). 

    Childhood. In childhood, bilingualism has been linked to increased metalinguistic awareness, or the ability to think about language as a system (Bialystok, 2017). Bilingual children have also been found to outperform monolingual children on tasks that require attention and cognitive control (Bialystok & Martin, 2004). However, bilingualism may also pose some challenges, such as the need for additional language support in school settings. 

    Conclusion 

    The benefits of bilingualism for children are numerous and well documented. However, the decision to raise a child as monolingual or bilingual is complex and depends on various factors, such as the quality and quantity of exposure to both languages, cultural and familial factors, and the child's individual needs. Therefore, parents and educators should consider the strengths and challenges of both monolingualism and bilingualism when making this decision. 

    Discussion Questions

    1. What are some of the differences in language development between monolingual children and bilingual children?

    2. Do you believe your level of language development was improved because of the stimuli in your childhood environment? Why or why not? 

    3. Why is it important to identify the most effective learning styles for children as language development occurs?

    4. Why would we want young children to learn a second language while they are focused on learning their primary one? Include a scholarly reference to support your stance.

    Additional information

    https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/47054/whats-going-on-inside-the-brain-of-a-bilingual-child 

     

    In language processing, the argument that language development remains “fused” within the brain, as opposed to occurring through two “differentiated” linguistic systems, was proven by evidence that bilinguals have a differentiated neural pattern of activation for each language. A concern among educators is that early exposure to two languages might be a source of fundamental and persistent language confusion and lifelong fragmentary linguistic knowledge, the result of having experienced “language contamination” (or exposure to two languages too early in life; e.g., Crawford, 1999). However, there are studies that refute these claims with neural evidence from research studies suggesting that there may be a functional separation of two languages in a single bilingual brain based on the formal linguistic properties of each given language. This is an ongoing debate in the field of psychology to date.


    • Was this article helpful?