Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-c75p9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-08T04:52:28.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bilingualism as a Resource in the United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2008

Björn H. Jernudd  and
Sung-Hwan Jo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper specifies characteristics of language as a resource and demonstrates that it is possible from the perspective of economics to make a case for government involvement in foreign language learning and maintenance of skills in the U.S.A. Market solutions based on private incentives to learn and maintain language skills alone fail to provide nationally optimal solutions to international communication needs. What is required is an alternative system which combines market with non-market incentives to foreign language learning and use.

Information

Type
Introductory Essays
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 6 , March 1985 , pp. 10 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

UNANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baldauf, R. B. Jr., and Jernudd, B. H.. 1983a. Language use patterns in the fisheries periodical literature. Scientometrics. 5. 4.245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldauf, R. B. Jr and Jernudd, B. H.. 1983b. Language of publications as as variable in scientific communication. Australian review of applied linguistics. 6. 1. 97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berryman, S. E. et al. 1979. Foreign language and international studies specialists: The marketplace and national policy. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. [R-2501-NEH.]Google Scholar
Carpenter-Huffman, P. 1980. Findings of a seminar on the cost of bilingual education. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. [N-1504-ED.]Google Scholar
Chamot, A. Uhl. 1985. ESL literature (ESLIT) study. Forum. 8. 3. 2–3. [National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.]Google Scholar
Fishman, J. A. 1985. Macrosociolinguistics and the sociology of language in the early eighties. Annual review of sociology. 11. 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gendron, J. D. 1972. Report of the Commission of Inquiry on the position of the French language and on language rights in Québec. Québec: Editeur officiel du Québec.Google Scholar
Gold, K. 1985. Three articles reporting on the Nuffield Modern Language Inquiry. The Times higher education supplement. London: The London Times. June 28. 660.11.Google Scholar
Grabe, W. and Kaplan, R. B.. 1985. Science, technology, language, and information: Implications for language and language-in-education planning. Social science information studies. 5. 99–120. Also in B. H. Jernudd (ed.) In press. Chinese language planning. [Special issue of the International Journal of the Sociology of Language No. 59.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hočevar, T. 1983. Les aspects économiques de la dynamique fonctionnelle des langues. Language problems and language planning. 7. 2. 135–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jernudd, B. H. 1968. Is self-instructional language teaching profitable? IRAL: International review of applied linguistics in language teaching. 6. 4. 349–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jernudd, B. H. 1971. Notes on economic analysis for solving language problems. In Rubin, J. and Jernudd, B. H. (eds.) Can language be planned? Honolulu: East-West Center. 263–276.Google Scholar
Jernudd, B. H. 1981. Planning language treatment: Linguistics for the third world. Language in society. 10. 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jernudd, B. H. and Archibald, S.. 1982. Foreign languages and international business: An annotated, selective bibliography. Honolulu: East-West Culture Learning Institute. [Document No. 100094.]Google Scholar
Kaplan, R. B. 1983. Language and science policies of new nations. Science. 221. 4614. [Editorial.]CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
PLANLangPOL Committee. 1983. A national language policy for Australia. Sydney: PLANLangPOL Committee.Google Scholar
Pool, J. 1980. The economics of artificial languages: An exploration in cost minimization. Paper prepared for delivery at Fachtagung Angewandte Soziolinguistik. Paderborn, West Germany: Universitat Paderborn. 06 19–20.Google Scholar
President's Commission on Foreign Language and International Studies. 1979. Strength through wisdom: A critique of U.S. capability. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Senate Standing Committee on Education and the Arts. 1984. A national language policy for Australia. Canberra: Australian Government Printing Service.Google Scholar
Simon, P. 1980. The tongue-tied American: Confronting the foreign language crisis. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Swales, J. 1985. English as the international language of research. RELC journal. 16. 1. 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. T. 1978. Long-range planning and the future of language study in the United States. In Gerli, E. M., Alatis, J. E., and Brod, R. I. (eds.) Language in American life. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 114–124. [Proceedings of the Georgetown University Modern Language Association Conference, October 6–8, 1977.]Google Scholar
Vaillancourt, F. 1983. The economics of language and language planning. Language problems and language planning. 7. 2. 162–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiermair, K. 1976. The economic effects of language training to immigrants: A case study. International migration review. 10. 2. 205–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar