Speaker
Description
Unlike many communities where first language (L1) speakers are often treated as a relatively homogeneous baseline, contact settings such as Singapore demonstrate that L1 status does not guarantee uniformity. Even among native speakers, substantial variation arises from differences in language experience, ethnic orientation, and multilingual exposure, resulting in considerable between speaker variation (e.g., Kalaivanan et al., 2020; Kwek & Low, 2021; Sim, 2019, 2024; Starr & Balasubramaniam, 2019), among children (e.g., Buschfeld, 2020; En et al., 2014; Sim, 2023; Sim & Post, 2021), and within adults in terms of their (ethno)linguistic repertoires (e.g., Sim, 2021). Yet, the language backgrounds of speakers in diverse contexts, and the complex interplay of experience, identity, and linguistic outcomes, remain poorly understood. Simple or inconsistent measures across studies often fail to capture this complexity, and tools designed to assess bilingualism frequently tap into different constructs (Dass et al., 2024).
In this paper, we report the development of a comprehensive tool designed to measure language experience and ethnic identity in contexts like Singapore. The questionnaire was constructed by synthesising key constructs from eight established bilingualism questionnaires and five ethnic orientation and identity measures. Seven bilingualism researchers in Singapore collaboratively refined these constructs into a concise yet comprehensive 101-item instrument spanning seven domains: (i) ethnic identity and orientation, (ii) language history and acquisition, (iii) language exposure, (iv) language use, (v) language identity, attitudes and perceptions, (vi) language proficiency, and (vii) language switching. The tool was originally designed for research on language variation and change, but it also has strong potential for applied contexts, for example in education, where it can inform classroom practice and language policy.
To evaluate its effectiveness in capturing variation in language background and identity, we administered the tool to 109 linguistics undergraduates (Mage = 21.5 years; 15 non-Singaporeans) at a local university. While the initial findings align with broader reports of increasing English dominance in Singapore, the instrument uncovers domain-specific patterns of multilingual maintenance and individual differences that would otherwise be obscured by aggregate trends. For instance, although many participants are highly English-dominant overall, Jaccard similarity coefficients computed from their reported language choices reveal systematic variation across interlocutor types, including generational differences (e.g., with parents versus siblings) and distinctions between interactions with family members and peers. The data further indicate that languages outside an individual’s dominant repertoire may be selectively mobilised for affective functions; for instance, Malay participants reporting the use of Mandarin to express negative emotions. Responses in the ethnic orientation section suggest tensions between specific ethnic affiliations and a broader sense of ‘Singaporean-ness,’ pointing to layered and negotiated identities in a multicultural society. Social network responses also indicate that while close friendships may become much less ethnically diverse over time, institutional settings such as schools and workplaces continue to promote cross-ethnic interaction.
We conclude by presenting user-testing feedback on the questionnaire’s strengths and limitations, and preliminary results from an ongoing paired speech production study examining whether measures derived from the instrument can predict variation in the use of ethnolinguistic features.