Lost in transit

Well, you're not stupid. Bilingual brains are quite interesting. I have a BA in Linguistics and an MA in Sociolinguistics and Bilingualism so I've studied this a little bit. When you learn a second language as an adult it is stored differently and separately from your first language in your brain. Your first language is stored in a very compact area while your second language is more spread out all over your brain. So the words for specific things are not necessarily closely connected to each other in your brain. For your second language, words probably have stronger connections to related things in that language than to their English translations. Even for people who learn two or more languages as a child, translation is not always easy. It is easier to make connections in the same language than in another language. Translation is something that you have to work at.

'käka' = Have some grub/chow/nosh

Congratulations on attaining fluency, Francis. What Marina says about language storage is interesting, too. I find I inhabit two different worlds, depending on whether I'm speaking German or English, because rather than translate what I would say in English into German, I express myself differently in German, to the point that I end up talking about completely diffent things, and differently than I would in English. I have a whole different style in German. Although fluent, I think (I often dream in German) I still find it hard to make jokes in German, so I'm more serious in German than in English, for example. The differences in "worlds" has less, I think, to do with languages influencing our world view than simply with what and how I am able to express myself in the two languages. By this I mean differences in the ways I have acquired the two languages, differences in what I have acquired, etc.

Having learned English as a child, for example, maybe I am more prone to "play" with it than with my adult-acquired German. Or something.

On the other hand, there are entire areas where my German is superior to my English, to a certain degree, where I have learned something after moving to Austria. These would include house-building vocabulary (I can name more hardware and building supplies in German than in English) and cello-playing vocabulary, simply because I did not do these things until I moved here, so in English had no need for the vocabulary.

I also find my fluency, in either language, is much better when I'm talking to someone I like, than with someone I dislike.

I was born in Poland and my native language is, naturally, Polish. But at the age of 12, we left and I spent a year in Germany (where I learned to speak German, now forgotten mostly). Then we moved to Canada, when I learned to speak English. The thing is, though, that English is now my dominant language. I think mostly in English and most of my dreams are in English. I find translation into Polish from English very, very difficult. It's far easier for me to translate from Polish to English, the words just come easier.

According to Marina's explanation, it should be the other way around, shouldn't it? Why is my native language not as strong as my second language?

Is it because I was still a child when I left, so my Polish couldn't develop as it did in my friends who stayed there. Is this why I sound so childish when I speak Polish and find it difficult to have discussions in Polish?

Mig: Your comment about playing with language is interesting, people sometimes have trouble with puns in their second language.

Kinuk: Translation is usually easier from your less dominant language into your more dominant one, this usually means from your second language into your first language but not always, as in your case.

There are some aspects of language that you can learn throughout your life and others that are more difficult. For example, vocabulary is something that you continue to learn throughout your life while the ability to acquire a native-like accent is something you generally lose relatively young. The ability to integrate grammar into spoken language (I'm not talking about grammar rules you learn in school) falls somewhere in between, you learn it almost instinctively while you are young and have to work harder at it as you get older. (Young = around 5, older = after your teenage years, although these ages are not set in stone).

The fact that you think of English as your dominant language is most likely a reflection of your vocabulary in English, which probably grew considerably while you were a teenager. Your Polish would be childlike if you basically stopped learning new vocabulary as a 12-year-old. Because your English vocabulary is (I'm guessing) larger than your Polish vocabulary, you can express things more easily in English, and thus translate into English more easily. Expressing yourself in Polish would be more difficult because you just don't know enough words.

I'm wondering about your accent though. You say English is your more dominant language, but based on the age you learned it I would guess that you still have a slight Polish accent when speaking English. Am I right?

Thanks for explaining that! It sounds like a very intersting field.

My accent isn't Polish at all. In fact, I don't really have a typical accent. When I was learning English in Canada, it had a Canadian tint to it, but I decided that I didn't really like the way I sounded, so I tried so sound more "British" (though I didn't really...I just always pronouced my t's gently--as in butter, water...). Then, whilst in Japan I spent some time with Australians and my accent went through yet another metamorphosis. So now, some say I have a Canadian twinge, some say I sound South African, and when I'm in Canada, many say I sound British. But everybody does agree on the fact that I do not have a Polish accent. Even when I try to sound Polish-accented, I can't!

Is that unusual?

Kinuk: My accent in my second language is also quite flexible. I speak French (my second language) with a Quebec accent, but when I am around European French speakers I unconsciously start using a more European-sounding accent. I don't really notice it until I start talking to Canadian French speakers again and hear the difference. This is the total opposite of English, my first language, which I always speak with an English-Canadian accent, no matter who I'm with. I think it has to do with your second language being less anchored in your brain (more spread out), so it is more flexible. To change your accent in your first language you really have to consciously make an effort.

I don't really know how this applies to you. You say you consciously tried to take on a British accent when you were in Canada, but you don't mention if the Australian influence on your accent was conscious or if you just picked it up from being around Australians.

Language is a very interesting subject, with still many mysteries about how the brain processes it all.

Also, two languages often don't have exact equivalents for any given word or idea: translation isn't just a question of matching up a thing in one language with its opposite number in another; sometimes you need a sentence or more to indicate what's meant by a word. Sometimes there's an approximate word, but the feeling of it is quite different - here in Canada where labels on food products, etc. must be bilingual, you can see amusing examples of this: "creamy peanut butter" is translated "beurre d'arachides onctueuse"; and I contend that "Flocons Givrés" actually means "Frost-bitten Flakes" or "Hoar-frosted Flakes." :-)

Exactly, Sarah.

"Käka" is just one of those words that for me doesn't translate so well into English. One of my favorites is the concept of "ovän" - someone who is a kind of "un" friend, not necessarily an enemy and not necessarily a former friend since someone can be an ovän as soon as you meet them. It is simply someone you've met or know who is not now and would never be your friend.

My other favorite is "kissnödig." It means in the need of taking a piss.

Anyway, it's interesting all the research on this, Marina. Your comments about accents was interesting. I was part of a radio interview a couple of months ago and I just listened for the first time to a recording of the program and I didn't recognize myself at all at first. My accent was so good for the most part, and I sounded so at ease and comfortable with the language, I was amazed. But oh, the grammatical errors I made - yikes!

I try fairly hard to get the accent down as well as possible, which takes quite a bit of effort for me - there are a few very strange consonants and the important difference between a long vowel and a short vowel is hard for my American ears and tongue to master. The accent is the hard part, since the grammar and sentence structure is actually pretty close to English.

One of my biggest problems is getting too hung up on getting the grammar correct instead of just forging on ahead, though. I keep correcting myself (and probably half of the time correcting myself incorrectly!) as I speak, in particular if I'm in a situation where I'm not comfortable.

coming late to the conversation (as always), but the comments have been so interesting, I can't help but chime in. Having moved to France as a teenager, I manage to disguise my accent for the most part... except with young people. Those fortyish and older always assume I'm native, while younger folks hear an accent, even though they can't necessarily tell where I'm from. On the other hand, I'm just as likely to be asked where I'm from when speaking English (my first language) when meeting someone for the first time. I'm blaming my Polish husband for that one.

Marina,

Thanks for the explanation on my wondering accent in English. As for the Aussie pick up, no, it wasn't intentional. It was purely passive, sort of by osmosis, I guess.

Thanks for providing some good scientific explanation to this very interesting discussion. You're right: language is a very interesting subject. I wish I knew more about it.

If you're interested, any intro to linguistics textbook would give you more information on the subject. One short and easy-to-read book is Richard Hudson's Invitation to Linguistics. It's a paperback and less than 200 pages. It's not new, but it covers a lot of the different areas of linguistics and the writing style is not too textbook-ish. It is a bit pricy, but you might be able to find it at a university library or a second hand bookshop that sells university textbooks (Amazon has a few second-hand copies).

Marina,

Many thanks for that tip! I'll definitely look for this book; it sounds like a good introduction to the topic.