1. IntroductionDifferent from the past when the competence of one language was accepted as thenorm, being able to use a single language is insufficient and the acquisition of one or morelanguages is encouraged in today’s world. This can be supported with numbers which indicatethat there are more bilinguals and multilinguals than monolinguals. Even though bilingualismand its impact on variables, such as metalinguistic awareness (Bialystock, 1991), cognitiveflexibility and processing mechanism (McLaughlin & Nayak, 1989; Nayak, Hansen, Krueger& MacLaughlin, 1990), has been studied since the 1960’s there has been no agreement on asingle definition of bilingualism and the difference between bilingual and multilingualindividuals.1.1 Definition of BilingualismMany researchers have defined bilinguals as those individuals who have theknowledge and ability to use and function in two languages (Butler and Hakuta, 2004;Mohanty and Perregaux, 1997; Valdés and Figueroa, 1994); however, one of the firstdefinitions made by Bloomfield (1933) indicate that bilinguals need to have a “native-likecontrol of two languages” (p. 56). The reason for the variety of definitions is the high numberof unanswered questions concerning the characteristics of a bilingual individual as someresearchers such as Bhatia (2004) suggests that the study of bilingualism is a complex fieldand that it includes “the study of nature of the individual bilingual's knowledge and use of two(or more) languages as well as the broader social and cultural consequences of the widespreaduse of more than one language in a given society” (p. 3). On the other hand, Hamers andBlanc (2000) proposed that bilingualism is the concept which refers to the state of a linguisticcommunity where two languages are in contact and which results in two codes that can beused in the same interaction process.In order to avoid misunderstanding it should be highlighted that in the present study‘bilinguals’ are classified as those individuals who identified themselves as having acquired alanguage and are in the process of gaining competence in the second one.58
1.2. Definition of MultilingualismSimilar debates take place about the similarities and differences of bilingualism andmultilingualism as these concepts are very interrelated. Multilingualism is defined as theacquisition of three and more languages without having equal control of all domains in alltheir languages (Kemp, 2007). However, it needs to be clear that it does not involve a simpleaddition of new grammar and vocabulary, but a complex system connected to identity, statusand usage. In other words, multilingualism involves the knowledge of how to use thelanguages and not only the knowledge of the languages (Herdina & Jessner, 2002). Therefore,the assumption that “most of the findings obtained in bilingualism research can be generalizedto cover 2+n languages” (Herdina & Jessner, 2002, p.52) is inadmissible. Therefore, bilingualand multilingual individuals should not be considered as one and the same.Different from the bilinguals, in this study ‘multilinguals’ are accepted as individualswho have acquired at least 2 languages and consider themselves in the process of theacquisition of at least one additional language.A good number of studies can be found on the differences of cultural background orlanguage learning strategies of the individuals considered monolinguals and bilinguals;however, the differences of bilinguals and multilinguals have not been sufficiently examinedeven though multilinguals are thought to be different from bilinguals (Cenoz & Genesee,1998; Herdina & Jessner, 2002). One of the differences is the effect of having learned alanguage; in other words, the amount of language learning experience. Joaristi et al. (2009)stated that aside from the common aspects in acquiring a second or third language “ [...]learners of the third language have greater experience than learners of a second language[and] access to two different linguistic systems [...]” (p. 108). Additionally, multilinguals arethought to have a different knowledge of their first, second and additional languages, adifferent kind of language awareness and language processing (Herdina & Jessner, 2002)which leads to the assumption that the language acquisition of multilinguals differs in someway from first and second language acquisition (Cenoz & Genesee, 1998; Kemp, 2007).In the article of Cenoz and Gorter (2011) an illustration has been given on the relationbetween the three language acquisitions of a learner. It shows that learners who have acquiredtwo languages are limited to these two languages and their linguistic systems, whereaslearners with three languages have the chance to use all three languages and their systemswhich leads to a wider concept of the languages and consequently the world. Thus, it is59
- Page 1 and 2:
ISSN: 2146-7676UFUK ÜNİVERSİTES
- Page 3 and 4:
UFUK ÜNİVERSİTESİSOSYAL BİLİM
- Page 5 and 6:
SUNUŞDergimizin 2014 yılı ilk sa
- Page 7 and 8: A NEED-BASED EVALUATIONOF A PREPARA
- Page 9 and 10: In the literature on language teach
- Page 11 and 12: focus teaching on this. Accordingly
- Page 13: International Relations) were 20 (7
- Page 16 and 17: questionnaire in their English-medi
- Page 18 and 19: REFERENCESAlagözlü, N. K. (1984).
- Page 20 and 21: APPENDIX A1 STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE
- Page 23 and 24: 24. Converting short notes into
- Page 27 and 28: The Role Of Gender On University St
- Page 29 and 30: (Johnson 2001; Türküm, 2005). Joh
- Page 31 and 32: Table 1 : Means and Standard Deviat
- Page 33 and 34: 2.3 ProcedureEthical permission to
- Page 35 and 36: age and attitude toward help seekin
- Page 37 and 38: Economics and Administrative Scienc
- Page 39 and 40: REFERENCESAddis, M. E., & Mahalik,
- Page 41 and 42: Koydemir-Özden, S. (2010). Self-as
- Page 43 and 44: LİSE ÖĞRENCİLERİNİN MESLEKİ
- Page 45 and 46: göre mesleki bakımdan daha önce
- Page 47 and 48: Araştırmanın amacıMesleki olgun
- Page 49 and 50: Tablo 1: Lise Öğrencilerinin Mesl
- Page 51 and 52: Lise öğrencilerinin karar verme s
- Page 53 and 54: KAYNAKÇA Acıbozlar, Ö. (2006). Y
- Page 55: Oğuz, Ö. (2008). Lise öğrencile
- Page 60 and 61: noteworthy to mention that multilin
- Page 62 and 63: The findings indicate that multilin
- Page 64 and 65: Table 1. Descriptives statistics fo
- Page 66 and 67: overall six factor structure which
- Page 68 and 69: wider variety of strategies with a
- Page 70 and 71: inclusion of instructors who are no
- Page 72 and 73: Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D.
- Page 74 and 75: AppendicesAppendix A- English Profi
- Page 77 and 78: ELT Student Teachers’ Evaluations
- Page 79 and 80: Reflective Teaching in TurkeyIn Tur
- Page 81 and 82: Table 1: Reliability Analysis o
- Page 83 and 84: Table 4: Mean and standard dev
- Page 85 and 86: Table 9: Mean and standard dev
- Page 87 and 88: ReferencesAkbari, R. (2007). Reflec
- Page 89: Pollard, A. & Triggs, P. (1997) Ref
- Page 92 and 93: 1. GİRİŞEğitim ve program geli
- Page 94 and 95: Genelgeçer tek bir bilimsel sürec
- Page 96 and 97: Program geliştirmedeki yenilikleri
- Page 98 and 99: -Elde ettiği sonuçlardan hareket
- Page 100 and 101: “İnternet Üzerinden Öğrenme
- Page 102 and 103: de sınıf içi dersler de öğrenm
- Page 104 and 105: teknik ve pedagojik uzmanlar gerekt
- Page 106 and 107: 3. Proje ekibinin kurulması4. Plan
- Page 108 and 109:
KAYNAKÇABigdoli, H. (2004). The In
- Page 110 and 111:
110
- Page 112 and 113:
Hiçbir öğrenci bir diğeriyle ay
- Page 114 and 115:
İçerik sınıfta nelerin öğreti
- Page 116 and 117:
(MEB, 2006; Tomlinson, 2005). Ek ol
- Page 118 and 119:
- Öğrencilerden gereksinim duyduk
- Page 120 and 121:
desteklerine gereksinim duydukları
- Page 122 and 123:
KAYNAKÇAAlberto P. A, ve Troutman
- Page 124 and 125:
124
- Page 126 and 127:
1.GİRİŞBuradaki araştırma OECD
- Page 128 and 129:
öğretilenleri almışlar mı diye
- Page 130 and 131:
edileceğini araştırmaz, ancak bu
- Page 132 and 133:
yaşarlar: Çok fazla sayıda koşu
- Page 134 and 135:
• Birincil Stratejiler ve Destek
- Page 136 and 137:
ir dönemdir. Özellikle artan yaş
- Page 138 and 139:
2. Hipotez: Öğretmenlerin coğraf
- Page 140 and 141:
Tablo 7 Öğretmenlerin Coğrafi
- Page 142 and 143:
stratejileri”ne yönelik bilişse
- Page 144 and 145:
sonuçları χ 2 (12, N =407) = 13,
- Page 146 and 147:
sebebiyet verir. Bunun önemli bir
- Page 148 and 149:
KAYNAKÇAArtelt, C., Stanat, P., Sc
- Page 150 and 151:
Lieteratur. 10. Sonderheft: Lesesoz
- Page 152 and 153:
YAYIM ALANI, YAZIM KURALLARI ve YAZ
- Page 154:
• Birebir alımlar “…” İş