Mixing Languages during Learning? Testing the One Subject-One Language Rule

PLoS One. 2015 Jun 24;10(6):e0130069. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130069. eCollection 2015.

Abstract

In bilingual communities, mixing languages is avoided in formal schooling: even if two languages are used on a daily basis for teaching, only one language is used to teach each given academic subject. This tenet known as the one subject-one language rule avoids mixing languages in formal schooling because it may hinder learning. The aim of this study was to test the scientific ground of this assumption by investigating the consequences of acquiring new concepts using a method in which two languages are mixed as compared to a purely monolingual method. Native balanced bilingual speakers of Basque and Spanish-adults (Experiment 1) and children (Experiment 2)-learnt new concepts by associating two different features to novel objects. Half of the participants completed the learning process in a multilingual context (one feature was described in Basque and the other one in Spanish); while the other half completed the learning phase in a purely monolingual context (both features were described in Spanish). Different measures of learning were taken, as well as direct and indirect indicators of concept consolidation. We found no evidence in favor of the non-mixing method when comparing the results of two groups in either experiment, and thus failed to give scientific support for the educational premise of the one subject-one language rule.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Child
  • Child Language
  • Concept Formation
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Language Development
  • Language*
  • Learning*
  • Male
  • Memory
  • Models, Theoretical
  • Multilingualism*
  • Reaction Time
  • Spain
  • Young Adult

Grants and funding

J.A.D. and E.A. were partially supported by grant PSI2012-32123 from the Spanish Government, and by grants ERC-AdG-295362 and FP7/SSH-2013-1 AThEME (613465) from the European Research Council. G.T. was partially supported by a Mid-Career Fellowship from the British Academy. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.