1. Multicompetence
Cook, 1992; 2009

2. Multicompetence?
 the coexistence of more than one
language in the human brain
 the opposite of the idea of separate
language systems

3. Multicompetence
 the compound state of mind with two
grammars
VS.
 Monocompetence (the state of the
mind with only one grammar)

4. Cook 1992
MAIN QUESTIONS:
1. Is multicompetence a different state
of mind from monocompetence?
2. Is multicompetence simply adding an
L1 competence, albeit defective?

5. Cook 1992
IN OTHER WORDS …
 Are languages known by an individual
separate entities in the brain or are
they part of a supersystem?

6. Implications of
multicompetence
 a multicompetence perspective allow
for languages to be viewed as part of
a larger system rather than as
separate entities in a learner’s mind.

7. Implications of
multicompetence
 the introduction of the
multicompetence concept changed the
way in which crosslinguistic influence
was viewed: transfer became
multidirectional

8. Supersystem?
 since the first language or languages
are in the same mind, they must form
a language supersystem at some level
other than be completely isolated
systems (Cook, 2003)

9. Supersystem?
 reaction to Selinker’s (1972) notion of
Interlanguage that distinguishes a
system of stages in-between the first
and second language. (as per
Rothman et. al, 2011)

10. Further claims:
 languages in the multilingual mind are
connected in a larger supersystem
whereby changes in one language will
automatically have an impact on the
other existing languages.

11. That is:
 a language that has been acquired is
not viewed as a stable system in
which knowledge, once stored, is
invulnerable to change

12. Clyne 2003
 multicompetence implies that
languages are always subject to
change and this change is influenced
in great part, by sociolinguistic as well
as psycholinguistic factors.

13. Language Attrition
 clear evidence that languages (native
or non native) show signs of decline
when they are not used.

14. Furthermore
 since languages are assumed as
being in constant change, the idea of
‘end-state’ becomes irrelevant
(Rothman et. al, 2011)

15. And …
 the notion of multicompetence might
prove explanatory for researchers of
all paradigms, as its core tenets are
compatible with virtually any existing
theory of acquisition
◦ can account for individual variation and
unexpected development patterns
(Rothman et. al. 2011)