The construct of language proficiency in the study of bilingualism from a cognitive perspective*

By J. Hulstijn. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2012

130 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Describing bilinguals: A systematic review of labels and descriptions used in the literature between 2005–2015 (2017, background): “Yet, studies differ in how individual attributes such as first (L1) or second language (L2) proficiency (Hulstijn, 2012), language acquisition history or language dominance (Birdsong, 2016; Birdsong & Vanhove, 2016), and contextual factors such as opportunities to use one’s languages and the local s”
ASSESSING SECOND-LANGUAGE ORAL PROFICIENCY FOR RESEARCH (2016, unknown): “Given that the SOPI involves production beyond the sentence level and the Spanish EIT correlates extremely highly with it, this suggests that the EIT may tap not only oracy—limited to the sentence level—but also more global aural/oral profi ciency, or BLC as defi ned by Hulstijn ( 2011 , 2012 ).”
When a seven is not a seven: Self-ratings of bilingual language proficiency differ between and within language populations (2018, background): “Hulstijn (2012) reports that 55% of 140 empirical studies published in Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, did not measure language proficiency objectively.”