Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:51:03.658Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Being monolingual, bilingual or multilingual: pros and cons in patients with dementia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Farooq Khan
Farooq Khan*
Affiliation:
Centre for Ageing and Mental Health, Staffordshire University, UK, email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This article looks at the advantages and disadvantages of being monolingual or multilingual, with particular reference to dementia patients who belong to ethnic minorities. There has been some progress in understanding the field of cultural diversity and the variations between different ethnic groups in relation to their specific difficulties when suffering from dementia (Hendrie et al, 2001). However, research has largely been targeted towards cultural variations and dementia, while the language aspects have not been properly researched.

Type
Special Papers
Information
International Psychiatry , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , November 2011 , pp. 96 - 98
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits noncommercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists 2011

References

Ardila, A. & Ramos, E. (2010) Bilingualism and aging. Perspectives on Communication Disorders and Sciences in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations, 17, 74–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. & Freedman, M. (2006) Bilingualism as a protection against the onset of symptoms of dementia. Neuropsychologia, 42, 459–464.Google Scholar
D'Acierno, M. R. (1990) Three Types of Bilingualism. Educational Resources Information Centre (ERIC). At http://www.eric.ed.gov:80/PDFS/ED321574.pdf (accessed 3 June 2011).Google Scholar
Diaz, C. & Peraita, H. (2008) Neuropsychological evaluation and cognitive evolution of a bilingual Alzheimer patient. Revista de Psicopatología y Psicología Clínica, 13, 219–228.Google Scholar
Fabbro, F. (2002) The bilingual brain: cerebral representation of languages. Brain and Language, 79, 211–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendrie, H. C., Ogunniyi, A., Hall, K. S., et al (2001) Incidence of dementia and Alzheimer disease in 2 communities: Yoruba residing in Ibadan, Nigeria, and African Americans residing in Indianapolis, Indiana. JAMA, 285, 739–747.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howard, C. (2010) Multilingualism (but not always bilingualism) delays the onset of Alzheimer disease: evidence from a bilingual community. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 24, 118–125.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Obler, L. K. (1989) Bilingualism Across the Lifespan: Aspects of Acquisition, Maturity, and Loss. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendez, M. F., Perryman, K. M., Pontoon, M. O., et al (1999) Bilingualism and dementia. (Letter.) Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 11, 411–412.Google Scholar
Paradis, M. (1997) The Assessment of Bilingual Aphasia. Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Perani, D., Paulesu, E., Galles, S. B., et al (1998) The bilingual brain –proficiency and age of acquisition of second language. Brain, 121, 1841–1852.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wattendorf, E. & Festman, J. (2008) Images of the multilingual brain: the effect of age of second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 28, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.