The Dutch City of Utrecht as a European Hotspot and Laboratory for Multilingualism

48 Pages·2011·1.43 MB·English

The Dutch City of Utrecht as a European
Hotspot and Laboratory for Multilingualism
Dr. Borja Martinovic
nl
t.
h Utrecht University 2011
c
e
r
t
u
w.
w
w
Acknowledgements
This research was conducted at the Department of Sociology of Utrecht University, under the supervision of Professor
Tanja van der Lippe and Professor Frank van Tubergen. The author is grateful to the supervisors for their comments on
the earlier versions of this report.
The Dutch City of Utrecht as a European Hotspot and Laboratory for Multilingualism
Contents
Preface - The City of Utrecht - Multilingual Hotspot in Europe 4
1 The Dutch City of Utrecht as a European Hotspot and Laboratory for Multilingualism 6
1. Introduction 6
1.1. Ambitions of the city of Utrecht 6
1.2. A novel approach to studying multilingualism 7
1.2.1. Theoretical innovativeness 7
1.2.2. Methodological innovativeness 7
1.3. The structure of the report 7
2 Multilingualism and its dimensions 9
2.1. Societal versus individual multilingualism 10
2.2. Bilingualism versus multilingualism 10
2.3. Basic knowledge versus fluency 10
2.4. Types of language skills 11
2.5. Language proficiency versus language use 12
2.6. The form of multilingualism to be studied in Utrecht 12
3 Utrecht as a European hotspot for multilingualism 13
3.1. Tertiary education 14
3.2. Secondary education 15
3.3. Primary education 15
3.4. Dutch courses for foreigners 15
3.5. Language institutes 15
3.6. Companies 15
3.7. Leisure activities 15
3.8. The next step 16
4 Theoretical framework for multilingualism 17
4.1. Previous research: Two dominant streams 18
4.1.1. Literature on foreign-language acquisition 18
4.1.2. Literature on immigrants’ destination-language proficiency 19
4.2. Present research: A unified framework 20
4.2.1. Causes of multilingualism: the role of exposure, efficiency and incentives 21
4.2.2. Consequences of multilingualism: accumulation of human, social and cultural capital 23
5 Utrecht as a European laboratory for multilingualism 25
5.1. Results from the three completed studies 26
5.1.1. A survey of the inhabitants of Utrecht 26
5.1.2. A survey of language course participants 31
5.1.3. The survey of companies 36
5.2. Directions for future research and policy 38
5.2.1. A longitudinal study on multilingualism in Utrecht 38
5.2.2. A cross-national study on multilingualism in Europe 39
5.2.3. Policies for stimulating multilingualism 39
6 Conclusions 40
6.1. Utrecht is a multilingual hotspot in Europe 41
6.2. Theoretical guidelines for turning Utrecht into a European laboratory for multilingualism 41
6.3. Results from the three studies on multilingualism conducted in Utrecht 41
7. References 42
3
The City of Utrecht - Multilingual Hotspot in Europe
Preface
Utrecht is an international city with international ambi- The main reason for this high level of multilingualism
tions. The city has the largest and best university in the in Utrecht is the presence of numerous well-educated
Netherlands, is intricately linked to an extensive Euro- young people and adults. In addition, many people with
pean network and hopes to become the European Cul- a foreign background live in the city. Research shows
tural Capital in 2018. And Utrecht is a multilingual city; that people with a foreign background do not speak, on
increasing numbers of students follow courses in various average, more languages than those without a foreign
languages. The city attracts international companies background; however, this diversity of the population
and in its streets, libraries, restaurants and cinemas, the in Utrecht brings more languages to the city, making
international character of the city is expressed daily in Utrecht a multilingual hotspot in Europe. Next to being
multilingualism. such a flourishing hotspot, Utrecht hopes to further uti-
lize its rich linguistic potential.
Multilingualism is the ability to actively use one or more
languages. Our research shows that 95% of residents in Our gratitude goes out to Utrecht University for being an
Utrecht have this ability. This can have various causes important partner in this research. Special thanks goes
one of which is immigration, but another is the fact out to Dr. Borja Martinovic, the author of this research
that in the Netherlands, primary and higher education project, who found a way to map and research the multi-
languages are part of the curriculum. Languages are also lingual potential of the City of Utrecht.
learned outside this formal education system. For profes-
sions and job opportunities it can be useful to speak
more than one language. These are just some of the rea-
sons why residents in Utrecht speak different languages. Hans Sakkers
Unfortunately, multilingualism is also often associated Head of the Department of International Affairs
with negative effects like language and learning prob- Municipality of Utrecht
lems and segregation. However, the research provided
here shows that multilingualism can also be viewed from
a positive perspective. The ability to use more languages
is an enormous potential in many aspects of life and pro-
vides opportunities for the city and its residents.
The European Commission set the standard for this
research. In 2006 the Eurobarometer entitled ‘Europeans
and their Languages’ issued by the European Commis-
sion demonstrated that the Netherlands was second
only to Luxembourg in residents who spoke two or more
languages besides their mother tongue, placing it near
the top of the list of multilingual hotspots in Europe.
With this research we zoomed in on Utrecht. Both from
a methodological as from a theoretical perspective, this
research is truly innovative. By focusing on the city as the
center of our research, we obtained a unique perspec-
tive on multilingualism. The results are extraordinary:
85% of the inhabitants speak at least 3 languages to
some extent, and 58% speak at least 3 languages well.
4
1
The Dutch City of Utrecht as a European Hotspot and
Laboratory for Multilingualism
From bricks and clay a city with a tower was built in the land of Sinear. The builders had envisioned a tow-
er so high that it would reach into the heavens. God convicted their vain plans and disrupted the construc-
tion. What used to be one people with one common language God turned into numerous peoples each
with their separate language, and spread them all over the world. Since that time the interaction between
the different peoples of the world has been hindered by the “Babylonian confusion of tongues”.
- The Bible
5 The Dutch City of Utrecht as a European Hotspot and Laboratory for Multilingualism
1. Introduction
Linguistic diversity is a phenomenon that reaches far The information about the multilingual practices of the
back into human history, and is a result of the initial geo- city have been collected by means of interviews with the
graphic isolation of early human settlements. The fact representatives of several institutions, such as the mu-
that this topic also appears in the Bible’s Old Testament nicipal government, the university, language institutes,
(in the form of a story about the Babylonian confusion of companies and NGOs that in some way promote multilin-
tongues) only strengthens the argument that language gualism.
diversity has characterized human society from an
early stage on. At the same time, people are by nature The second objective of this report is to provide theoreti-
endowed with the ability to master more than one lan- cal guidelines for turning Utrecht into “a European labo-
guage, which helps them overcome the communication ratory for multilingualism”. Given its linguistic diversity,
barriers posed by the “confusion of tongues”. Over the Utrecht represents a convenient setting for exploring the
centuries, as the contact between different civilizations possibilities for further stimulation of multiple language
gradually developed, people increasingly started learning acquisition and use. These possibilities can best be iden-
foreign languages. However, it was not until the last sev- tified by means of scientific research that attempts to
eral decades, which have been unprecedentedly marked unravel the causes and consequences of being multilin-
by the processes of migration and globalization, that the gual. The main research question posed is the following:
need for foreign language proficiency has skyrocketed. “What renders certain individuals more prone to acquir-
Languages are lately also receiving increasing attention ing (multiple) foreign languages, and what are the eco-
from governments and intergovernmental organizations. nomic, social and cultural advantages of speaking more
The United Nations proclaimed 2008 the “International than one language for these individuals?” Therefore, this
year of languages”, and in 2007 the European Union report will delve into the existing scientific literature on
appointed a Commissioner for Multilingualism, whose multilingualism, describe the type of research conducted
portfolio focused on promoting foreign language learn- on this topic and propose a comprehensive theoretical
ing. The goal that the European government ultimately model for identifying causes and consequences of multi-
wants to reach is for every citizen to speak at least two lingualism in Utrecht. This model could be systematically
languages in addition to his or her mother tongue. The tested in the years to come.
justification for this goal is that multilingualism brings
along many advantages for individuals and for the Third, relying on new quantitative data that have been
society as a whole. According to the former European collected in 2009 from among the inhabitants of Utrecht,
Commissioner, Mr. Leonard Orban, some of the principal as well as the participants in language schools and the
benefits of raising multilingual European citizens are employees in small and medium companies, we will
increased competitiveness of the European economy present a detailed overview of how multilingual the
and an effective intercultural dialogue within as well as citizens of Utrecht are: how many languages are being
outside Europe (Orban, 2007). spoken per person, what the most commonly spoken
languages are, how proficient Utrechters are in the for-
eign languages they speak, and in what contexts (work,
1.1. Ambitions of the city of Utrecht
family, friends, etc.) and how often these languages are
being used. Also, a first step will be made towards identi-
Stimulated by the EU’s fresh discourse on multilingual- fying some of the characteristics of people that facilitate
ism, the linguistically diverse city of Utrecht in the or hinder the acquisition of multiple languages, as well
Netherlands has decided to more actively promote its as the characteristics that might be a result of being mul-
multilingual features, among others, in support of its tilingual. In this way preliminary answers will be provided
candidature for the European Capital of Culture in 2018. to the abovementioned research question.
This report is a starting point, and its aim is threefold.
First, we would like to present Utrecht as an example of a By experimenting with its linguistic richness, Utrecht
flourishing multilingual environment within the EU: “a Eu- wants to set a precedent for Europe. The ambitions, how-
ropean hotspot for languages”. We will sketch a linguistic ever, do not stop here. The ultimate goal is to establish
portrait of Utrecht by making an inventory of multilingual contact with other multilingual cities of Europe, such as
arenas and practices in the city, focusing on both the Valletta, Luxembourg, Brussels and Strasbourg, to name
diversity of languages spoken by the inhabitants as well a few, and to see if there are any possibilities of conduct-
as the language-related events, courses and facilities ing comparative research on multilingualism in these
provided by the city. European cities.
6
Therefore, we will conclude this report by proposing that As to the consequences of multilingualism, these are
our conceptual model of multilingualism be validated also often studied but have not yet been unified under
in multiple locations in Europe in the future. The added a common theoretical umbrella. In this report it will be
value of replicating this research on multilingualism in argued that the consequences of multilingualism can all
other cities is not only that one can check where multi- be grouped under the terms of human, social or cultural
lingualism thrives more and whether the individual-level capital, and that language proficiency provides an ad-
causes and consequences identified in Utrecht also hold ditional opportunity for people to accumulate all three
true for other locations, but also that the characteristics forms of valuable capital.
of the larger context could be taken into account when
explaining the differences in the degree of multilingual-
1.2.2. Methodological innovativeness
ism among European cities. For example, national poli-
cies on language, such as the subtitling versus dubbing
of foreign films, can also be informative of the popula- Many studies draw conclusions about causes and con-
tion’s foreign-language skills. sequences of multilingualism, but very rarely are these
conclusions validated by longitudinal data, in which the
same group of respondents is interviewed repeatedly
1.2. A novel approach to studying
over a certain period of time, and that therefore provide
multilingualism
a better indication of the direction of the relationships;
for example, does travelling abroad increase foreign-
Apart from shedding some light on what categories of language proficiency or do people who speak foreign
people in Utrecht speak several languages and how they languages more likely decide to go on such trips? Ideally,
profit from these skills, the present research is also inter- a longitudinal survey should be conducted among a
esting from a scientific point of view, both theoretically broader Utrecht population and over a longer period
and methodologically. of time, in order to be able to pinpoint the causes and
the long-term benefits of foreign language proficiency.
Based on the theoretical approach that we will propose,
1.2.1. Theoretical innovativeness
in this report we will design such an ideal study, bearing
in mind that it might take a couple of years before such
Although foreign language proficiency has been the topic an extensive research project can be done. All in all, the
of numerous scientific studies, so far no comprehensive research on multilingualism in Utrecht is relevant not
theory has been developed that takes into account both only due to its practical implications for the city itself
the role of psychological characteristics of the people, and the EU, but also due to its theoretical and methodo-
their socio-economic background and the role of external logical innovativeness.
resources (e.g., the neighborhood in which people live or
the type of friends they have) in facilitating the acquisi-
1.3. The structure of the report
tion of foreign languages.
Sociological research on destination-language pro- After carefully defining the concept of multilingualism
ficiency of immigrants provides a sound theoretical and considering its various dimensions (Chapter 2), an
framework for explaining differences in foreign-language overview of existing multilingual practices in Utrecht will
proficiency. It posits that immigrants’ destination- be given (Chapter 3). By doing so, we want to highlight
language proficiency is determined by three mecha- the fact that Utrecht is one of the multilingual hotspots
nisms: the extent of exposure to the foreign language, of Europe. Next, upon having consulted the scientific
the efficiency with which an individual acquires foreign literature on foreign-language proficiency, a compre-
languages and the incentives he or she has for learning hensive theoretical framework for identifying causes
them (Chiswick & Miller, 2001). Yet, this type of research and consequences of multilingualism will be developed,
largely neglects the role of psychological characteristics. accompanied by a conceptual model that captures the
As we will propose below, the framework on exposure- hypothesized relationships (Chapter 4).1
efficiency-incentives could easily be extended to include
the psychological indicators, and it could also be applied The focus will then shift to Utrecht as a laboratory for
to the autochthonous population. multilingualism. With quantitative data that have been
collected in Utrecht we will be able to examine the
degree and forms of multilingualism among the city’s
population, and we will validate some of the theoretical
ideas about causes and consequences of multilingualism
(Chapter 5, section 5.1).
7 The Dutch City of Utrecht as a European Hotspot and Laboratory for Multilingualism
The report will end with a proposal for more elaborate
quantitative research that could be conducted in Utrecht
(but possibly also in other EU cities) in the course of the
coming few years (Chapter 5, section 5.2). Once the find-
ings of this more elaborate research are known, the city
of Utrecht and the EU could rely on them in their formula-
tion of future policies on multilingualism.
1 The literature presented in this report mostly encompasses
books and articles from peer-reviewed journals that were pub-
lished in English during the last 30 years, with the exception of a
couple of Dutch and German sources.
8
2
Multilingualism and its dimensions
In very basic terms, multilingualism can be defined as the ability to speak more than one language. A
similar but somewhat more elaborate definition adhered to by the EU equates multilingualism with “the
ability of societies, institutions, groups and individuals to engage, on a regular basis, with more than one
language in their day-to-day lives” (Commission of the European Communities, 2007). However, the concept
of multilingualism is too complex to be fully captured by a single definition. When examining the multi-
faceted character of multilingualism, scientific studies often highlight the difference between societal and
individual multilingualism, between bilingualism and multilingualism, between basic skills and fluency,
between the four types of language skills (speaking, listening, reading and writing), and between language
proficiency and language use. These differences are discussed below in order to specify what form of mul-
tilingualism will be considered in this report when presenting Utrecht as a hotspot and a laboratory.
9 The Dutch City of Utrecht as a European Hotspot and Laboratory for Multilingualism
2.1. Societal versus individual
gualism for individuals. The other stream of research
multilingualism
focuses exactly on these micro-questions that relate to
the causes and consequences of individual multilingual-
The most general distinction is the one between societal ism. Aside from finding out how many languages people
and individual multilingualism (Van Els, 2005). Societal can master, the following questions are often investi-
multilingualism refers to the number of languages that gated: “what are the characteristics of individuals who
are spoken in a given community (e.g., neighborhood, speak foreign languages?”, “who are the ones who obtain
city or country), while individual multilingualism de- a higher level of proficiency?”, “how does the learning
scribes for the number of languages that a single person environment enhance or hinder foreign language acquisi-
speaks. Both types of multilingualism have been exten- tion?” and “in what ways do multilinguals profit from
sively studied. their language skills?”.
On a national level, societal multilingualism is an omni- In this report both forms of multilingualism will be con-
present phenomenon. Although most of the countries sidered. When describing Utrecht as a European hotspot
present themselves as de jure monolingual (that is, they we will show how linguistically rich the city is and how
recognize one language as the official language), de fac- language diversity is stimulated and catered for by vari-
to all countries are multilingual. For a country to be pure- ous institutions. This portrait of multilingual Utrecht is a
ly monolingual all inhabitants should always speak only reflection of societal multilingualism. On the other hand,
one language, and that should be the same language when designing quantitative research to detect causes
for everyone (Mamadouh, 2002). This turns out to be and consequences of being multilingual, we will be oper-
impossible in the era of technological advances in com- ating in the sphere of individual multilingualism.
munication and travel, which have lead to the flourishing
of international trade, migration and tourism. Moreover,
2.2. Bilingualism versus multilingualism
many countries historically house one or more linguistic
minorities. Examples in Europe are abundant: Russians
in the Baltic states, Frisians in the Netherlands, Catalans While all people who speak more than one language
and Basques in Spain and Hungarians in Romania (Extra could, in principle, be labeled as multilingual, the field
& Gorter, 2008). African countries with their numerous of linguistics tends to distinguish between bilinguals and
tribal and colonial languages, as well as the traditional multilinguals. Linguists categorize an individual familiar
immigration destinations such as the US and Canada with two languages as bilingual, and multilingual as an
have an even richer palette of minority languages. individual familiar with three or more languages (Cenoz
& Genesee, 1998; Cenoz, Hufeisen & Jessner, 2001; De
However, societal multilingualism often does not trans- Angelis, 2007). Such research argues that the learning
late into a politically just treatment of all the languages of a third and additional languages differs substantially
spoken in a country. Most of the studies in Europe and from the learning of the second language (i.e., the first
abroad have therefore examined how well the minority foreign language). Given that we are not interested in de-
languages are represented in education (Balfour, 2007; tailed cognitive processes of language acquisition, in this
Christian, Howard & Loeb, 2000; Forray & Hegedus, 1995; report we will consider any person who speaks another
Langner & Imbach, 2000; Nehr, 2001), how they could language next to his or her mother tongue to be multi-
get a better place in the public domain (Desai, 2001; lingual. In quantitative research that we are planning to
Hornberger, 2002; Hult, 2004; Wong & Motha, 2007), or conduct we will analyze the differences between indi-
how the presence of English threatens the survival of viduals with respect to the overall number of languages
local languages (Hult, 2004; Özerk, 2001; Stotz, 2006). they speak.
Also the EU as a multilingual constellation has received
substantial attention. In this context it is often exam-
2.3. Basic knowledge versus fluency
ined how the EU, with its 23 official languages, can best
cater to the demand that documents be translated to all
these languages, thereby ensuring transparency without Another aspect that should be taken into account is the
compromising much of its efficiency (Gazzola, 2006; degree of language proficiency. What level of language
Mamadouh, 2002; Van Els, 2005). skills is needed to classify someone as having the knowl-
edge of that language? According to the Common Euro-
While societal multilingualism as a macro-approach pean Framework of Reference for Languages, 6 levels of
provides relevant insights into the richness of languages foreign-language proficiency can be distinguished, rang-
in a community and couples that with desirable linguistic ing from basic to proficient (Council of Europe, 2001).
policies, it is not very informative about the process of
language acquisition or about the benefits of multilin-
10