I am not sure if I understood Your question correctly, but I guess I'l try it.

I remember reading a very interesting article about a reasearch conducted in the US to study whether personalities of bilinguals differ if they use a different language. And the study actually confirmed the hypothesis that whenever we switch into a different language, we simultaneously switch on and activate a different personality type. Not sure if that's exactly what You are intersted in, but anyway I wish You all the best in Your research!

I think that you will find relevant:

Louis-Jean Calvet. Pour une écologie des langues du monde, París, Plon, 1999.

Kirsten Süselbeck, Ulrike Mühlschlegel, Peter Masson. Lengua, nación e identidad: la regulación del plurilingüismo en España y América Latina, Madrid/Bern, Iberoamerivana-Vervuert, 2008.

You can find a huge bibliography about this topic studying Spain and America's multilinguism, so maybe you can apply their studies to yours.

Philadelphia, PA

Dear all, 

It strikes me that this question is relevant to the themes of a famous, and much loved book, The Little Prince. 

I've taken the following quotation from a brief, on-line account of the themes of the book:

Enlightenment through Exploration

As the critic James Higgins points out, each of the novel’s main characters hungers both for adventure (exploration of the outside world) and for introspection (exploration within himself). It is through his encounter with the lost prince in the lonely, isolated desert that the friendless narrator achieves a newfound understanding of the world. But in his story of the little prince’s travels, Saint-Exupéry shows that spiritual growth must also involve active exploration. The narrator and the prince may be stranded in the desert, but they are both explorers who make a point of traveling the world around them. Through a combination of exploring the world and exploring their own feelings, the narrator and the little prince come to understand more clearly their own natures and their places in the world.

---end quotation

The experience of learning a second or third language is much like that involved in the description here : enlightenment or self-growth through exploration of the wider human world.  Much more could be said, of course, but I'd say that the idea here is that of the spiritual growth of self through encounter with the foreign. 

H.G. Callaway

Philadelphia, PA

Dear Ugwuanyi. 

Thinking of multilingualism in one country, this may mean that the individuals of a country each speak several languages, or that the people of that country divide into groups as speakers of distinct languages. I would think of Nigeria as a country falling under each of these headings: there are many different language groups; and many people speak more than one language --at least a first language and then English as a "lingua franca." That, of course is a very complicated situation linguistically and socially. I wonder, though how many Nigerians speak a second Nigerian language other than their first or background language. Is this felt to be unnecessary in view of the common use of English?  I wonder about your impression of the willingness of people to learn 2nd or 3rd Nigerian languages. 

Access to English no doubt exists in many different degrees, and this would seem to be an educational route leading from a background society or sub-culture into the broader society of government, education and business. If so, proficiency in English I would expect to function as a class marker--as in European societies where facility in the literary language, as contrasted with local dialect, is often a marker of (or contributes to the impression of) a speaker's higher education, achievement and potentiality. 

Generally, I think that people who go to the trouble of learning other languages tend to be more open to difference and diversity--because they often feel they have personally benefited from the experience and encounter. One may obtain friends and acquaintances, evening learning and accomplishments across the linguistic lines. On the other hand, learning a foreign (or non-native) language might sometimes make the learners so different from their background group as to become unrecognizable from within it. Both of these possible developments may easily affect one's felt or perceived identity. 

Do any of these themes seem to be of interest for your purposes? 

H.G. Callaway

Multilingualism is in itself an identity! There are areas or countries where multilingualism represents a way of life, people speeak at least two languages, not rarely more. I have never been to Nigeria, but do know countries like Switzerland or regions like many in the Balkans or western Transylvania in Romania or Belgium or Finland etc. where bi- or multi-lingualism is the norm, and belong to the very identity of the people there.

Kingsley: One of the most engaging studies I’ve read on your topic is Michèle Koven’s book Selves in Two Languages. Bilinguals’ verbal enactments of identity in French and Portuguese. From the book abstract: “Bilinguals often report that they feel like a different person in their two languages.”

Book URL: https://benjamins.com/#catalog/books/sibil.34/main

There’s a very good review of the book at the Linguist, by Jean-Jacques Weber:

http://linguistlist.org/issues/19/19-1428.html

On identity as relating to nationhood and national language policies:

Taylor-Leech, K. (2008). Language and identity in East Timor. The discourses of nation building. Language Problems and Language Planning, 32(2), 153-180:

https://benjamins.com/#catalog/journals/lplp.32.2.04tay/details

On ethnic identity and language choice:

Bailey, B. (2000). Language and negotiation of ethnic/racial identity among Dominican Americans. Language in Society, 29(4), 555-582:

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=72807

All my best for your research

Madalena

Philadelphia, PA

Dear Paliga, 

You wrote:

Multilingualism is in itself an identity! There are areas or countries where multilingualism represents a way of life, people speeak at least two languages, not rarely more. I have never been to Nigeria, but do know countries like Switzerland or regions like many in the Balkans or western Transylvania in Romania or Belgium or Finland etc. where bi- or multi-lingualism is the norm, and belong to the very identity of the people there.

---end quotation

I suspect that Nigeria may be quite different from the European examples you mention, though I would not attempt to be definitive on the question. I understand that Nigeria has several hundred language and dialect groups.  I am not sure what Nigerians might say about their own identity in relation to this fact. But contrast your mention of Switzerland, where the four languages of the country include three broadly spoken international languages, German, French and Italian. I do not know the facts about the prevalence of chief Nigerian languages, say, Yoruba, Ibo and Hausa-Fulani, outside Nigeria, though I believe that Hausa-Fulani is spread across the West African Sahel area. I seem to recall that Yoruba is also present in contiguous areas to the West of Nigeria. 

Swiss national identity, though not totally lacking linguistic tensions, is deeply rooted in a long common history and in the peculiar mountain separation and neutrality of Switzerland in relation to the conflicts of the great powers of Europe over centuries.  At the same time, Switzerland is highly cantonized, so that there is a great deal of autonomy of distinctive areas of the country. All of this would seem to facilitate a common Swiss identity independent of, or encompassing, the language groups within the country. 

The language and ethnic groups of the Balkans (former Yugoslavia) have recently been separating themselves, with considerable conflict; and the linguistic conflicts of Belgium are well known. Finland has just the two languages of Finnish and Swedish, In consequence, I am not at all sure that European models of multi-lingualism as identity are very useful in application to Nigerian problems. 

In the end, of course, it is not for me to speak on Nigerian identity in any definitive way. I think they must do that themselves. I suspect, though that the larger the country may be (and Nigerian is one of the largest countries in Africa), the more problematic is common identity spanning multiple linguistic differences. 

H.G. Callaway

@H.G. Callaway. Of course Nigeria must be different, and of course Europe is different from anything else. Please note that EVERY ethnic group is unique, and what is valid in one country/region may not be valid in another, even if conditions are similar.

That is why I wrote that bi- or multi-lingualism is an identity too, because living in such a context leads to a certain behavior.

For sure, the linguistic and/or ethnic realitites in Nigeria are different from Europe, because ethnicity is unique. 

Philadelphia, PA

Dear Paliga, 

I'm much inclined to agree with you where you say:

Of course Nigeria must be different, and of course Europe is different from anything else. Please note that EVERY ethnic group is unique, and what is valid in one country/region may not be valid in another, even if conditions are similar.

---end quotation

Here we agree; and I agree, too, with your claim, as I take it,  that [every] "ethnicity is unique" --every natural language, too, I would think--in spite of wider similarlities. However, I wonder if you could say a bit more that might help with the present question. In particular it seems relevant to ask about the relations of languages and ethnic groups. 

It has long seemed to me one of the lessons of the E.U. and its many successes, is that it is sometimes desirable that particular groups or nations reduce their own distinctiveness, in relation to neighbors, where this has, in the past, significantly contributed to great tragic conflicts and war. Diversity is a fine thing, I believe, so long as their are effective means to deal with conflicts as they arise. The traditional notion or doctrine of cultural uniformity ("One people, one language, one religion," at the extreme) seems to have been predicated on the idea that this made more effective government possible. It was also an important aspect of European nationalism. While I agree with you when you say "what is valid in one country/ region may not be valid in another, even if conditions are similar," this may not be the whole story here. 

I take it that the E.U. was awarded the Nobel peace prize recently, because it has effectively reduced the historical element of conflicting nationalism and its threat to the peace of Europe. Perhaps you understand the accomplishments of the E.U. differently. But do you think there is no wider lesson in this, from which the rest of the world might benefit? Surely, what it means for your own country to be a member of the E.U. is, in part, that its unique character is to be open to influences of the wider world and those of E.U.-European neighbors in particular. Isn't that right?

Romania, then, I take it, by joining the E.U. has opened itself not merely to local groups, and not only to the influence of other European groups whose languages derive directly from Latin, but to the wider European world as well. Doesn't this imply that language, ethnicity and identity are no longer strictly defined merely from within and apart from the wider relations?

H.G. Callaway

Europe has no other real choice than stay united. The most prosperous periods of the European history were those when the numerous ethnic groups were together, and the horrible periods were those when disruption, due to lack of vision, erupted, e.g. the horrible period after WW1, when enthusiasm was not sufficient to prevent a second, more horrible war. 

The so-called Eurosceptics are, in fact, Eurodestructives, the cheap slogans like ‘back to national identity’, ‘back to national currencies’ etc. are, in fact, steps towards conflicts and war. There is no doubt that, if successful, such ideologies will lead to war. The mere hypothesis that reverting to national currencies is a solution shows how stupid people may be.

But we already are far from the initial point, so I would rather stop.

It is an interesting question and a complex one to ponder.

We all have multiple identities, and being multilingual just adds another challenge and many great opportunities at the same time. Being truly (practicing it every day) multilingual helps us question who we are, and we realize that the “self” that underlies our being is not tied to a language we speak in a specific context/situation or when we code-switch in the same situation. In other words, there is the core personal level of "self" that does not change no matter what language we speak. What changes is our social identities, which is both relational (teacher - student, employer - employee, etc.) and communal (nationality, gender, ethnicity, etc.). So we all have our unchanging core identity at the personal level and the adaptive identities in social contexts. Both verbal and non-verbal communication in any given language we speak are affected by a situation we engage in and those we interact with.

You question also makes me think of the theories of Sapir and Whorf and the work of those who have applied their ideas. These theories seem to be under increasing scrutiny and a number of reservations have been expressed. One of those is thinking that our world is composed of discrete internally homogeneous language and culture areas. We see that Culture and language divisions are becoming more complex. Speakers of the same languages may find themselves separated by big cultural gaps.

If you are looking for research on this topic, it might be good to look for studies that focus on bilingualism and identity. Many scholars use this marker because it is a "more measurable one" when it comes to designing research studies, I think. I cannot recall any specific studies, but you can check Gumperz and his research on identity and language. Also, a local colleague, Aneta Pavlenko (Temple University, Philadelphia, USA) has written on this topic, too

Dear Kingsley

Do you know Ofelia Garcia's works (http://ofeliagarcia.org/publications/)? In many of them you can find theoretical support for the relationship between multilingualism and identity

Hi Kingsley,

It looks like Will Kymlicka may be interesting for you. Many other authors on nationalism have also touched upon this issue claiming that a shared language is necessary to create such an identity. For instance, Benedict Anderson's theory about an imagined community (the creation of a common space of nationhood) implies a common language. 

When it comes to linguistic and cultural diversity, let us not forget that there is a common core of humanity. We tend to overlook the common concepts behind the various expressive devices of different languages. Essentially, as I 've said elsewhere, all languages dance the same dance. All of them have evolved ways of stating, negating, asking for information etc., they have developed means of expressing ideas such as possession, location in place and time, amount, agent or doer, instrument, possibility, causality etc.  That's why languages, however remote from each other,  can be translated into each other.  If we probe deeply enough, we find there is unity in diversity.

Philadelphia, PA

Dear Senyshyn (& contributors), 

You wrote:

Your question also makes me think of the theories of Sapir and Whorf and the work of those who have applied their ideas. These theories seem to be under increasing scrutiny and a number of reservations have been expressed. One of those is thinking that our world is composed of discrete internally homogeneous language and culture areas. We see that Culture and language divisions are becoming more complex. Speakers of the same languages may find themselves separated by big cultural gaps.

--end quotation

This struck me as a very interesting comment in the present context --in particular regarding "how the issue of multilingualism connects to identity." I think, too, of European history and the strong historical tendency of language groups to separate into distinct, often warring nations. 

I've been looking back at Sapir and Whorf of late, and a certain emphasis seems to fall, not on the creative capabilities of language to extend and comprehend what is new or different, but instead on the more conservative tendency to simply reproduce what has been handed on by linguistic forefathers or precursors. There seems to be a presupposition at work to the effect, as you put it, that "our world is composed of discrete internally homogeneous language and culture areas." 

It is not, I expect that Sapir, say, or Whorf, would have been unaware of the fact that such an idealization sometimes fails, but this is a difficulty not unconnected with the very definition of "language" and "languages" as the object of study. Work on American Indian languages was very important at the time, and there was (and remains, unfortunately) a tendency to see the various indigenous American Indian societies and languages in terms of "discrete internally homogeneous" phenomena or objects of study. (Here might follow a criticism of the traditional reservation system, as inhibiting integration.)

It seems equally important, though, not to be caught up, excessively, in an opposite "universalist" conception of language and culture.  Ethnic conflict among or between peoples who see themselves as separate and distinct is a very real danger in the contemporary world. The lines are often drawn in linguistic terms. There has been much political-ideological emphasis on autonomy of separate groups in recent years, though the 1990's paradigm of "multiculturalism" has come under much criticism--and has been rejected within just about every European society. It has always seemed to me inappropriate in large, multi-ethnic, multiracial societies --including those based upon immigration and integration. In spite of that, it seems to have some continuing life in it. 

H.G. Callaway

Dear Kingsley,

I agree with Callaway, language does not give identity per se, although we should clarify what we are talking about when we talk about identity. As I see it, man, as a subject, has three types of identity: biological, shared with all living beings, psychic identity, not shared with anyone, and social identity, covering different aspects have to do with the national being, with a particular culture or ideology; ie, with a particular creecia.

The psychic identity is the only one that can be influenced by the language, but only for the mother tongue (which today celebrates its international day). Our mother tongue is the way we 'see' (interpret or we find sense) to the surrounding reality, something we inherited from our mother, and that helps us, finally, to identify with ourselves. But all the other languages we learn throughout our lives, for various reasons, have no influence over our own identity. It can only be changed social identity, which may change because change our beliefs.

Dante.

Philadelphia, PA

Dear Salatino, 

Thanks for the point of agreement. I suspect that the perspective from societies built upon immigration and integration is significantly different from those traditionally based on an ethnic-linguistic mono-culture. One needs to consider how a given society actually works and solves its own internal problems and conflicts.

I think, too, that there is a kind of "imprinting" involved with learning a first language as a child which goes more deeply than what is involved when we learn second or third languages. Still, I have often found that the people who do learn second and third languages are generally more open to the influence of the wider world. This openness is also an aspect of identity in many people.

H.G. Callaway 

You feel cool about yourself and can trick the monlinguals when the context presents itself.

Mr. Ugwuanyi

This may be also something worth taking a look at

Adegbija Efurosibina. (2004).Multilingualism: A Nigerian Case Study.Nigeria Africa World Press, Inc.

Let me thank everyone who has contributed a point or more to this discussion. I acknowledge, with deep appreciation, that my research has somewhat been shaped by your comments.

I am sorry it took me a long time to respond - I was engaged with some other academic activities.

Deserving special mention here is H.G. Callaway , who took the pains to respond to many other comments, shedding lights on issues and opening my eyes - and I am sure those of many others - to so many other linguistic issues deserving our attention. Thank you all!

Mr Ugwuanyi

 I strongly believe that multilingualism is a lingustic hybridised concept which has litle or nothing in connection with linguistic identity. Though, it is a conglomeration of linguistic identities. I am suggesting on a comparative linguistic identity in a multilingual nation.

I wrote some articles and a book about the connection between identity and multilingualism and provided a model how the multilingual profile of an individual might influence the construction of identity. However, this is not well described with "multilingual identity", "multiple identities" or "linguistic identity" as language does not necessarily influence a person's identity.

If ‘identity’ in your question refers to ‘ethnic identity’, it is difficult to answer, even if ethnicity is something we cannot escape: humans belong to an ethnic group, even if they migrate to another region/country, and even if they belong to bilingual (or tri-lingual) families.

There is much to study in this field, much depends on your stance on the problem.