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 allows 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)