FAQs

The Marnix Plan for a multilingual Brussels is a bottom-up collective effort to promote the learning of several languages across the Brussels population. It gives priority to French, Dutch and English, while encouraging the transmission of all native languages.

The Marnix Plan runs a website, sends out newsletters and holds regular public events. We hope to make a difference by connecting, informing and encouraging. The Marnix Plan is about building hundreds of bridges across the many divides that divide and partition the Brussels population. It is about replacing ignorance, rivalry and distrust with mutual appreciation, emulation and support. It is about identifying the many valuable existing initiatives and weaving them into an exciting common project. It is about realizing that what works for some people in some contexts does not work for all people in all contexts and that therefore, that multilingualism does not have to be out of reach for many people, but that it can and should be pursued in an intelligent, context-sensitive way. It is about convincing all inhabitants of the capital of Europe that learning languages and helping others to learn languages should be a normal daily activity, economically valuable for each individual and absolutely crucial for the lasting dynamism of Brussels as a whole, and moreover enriching and gratifying in all sorts of ways.

The Marnix Plan rests on two convictions : firstly that the learning of languages, in particular the acquisition of an adequate knowledge of French, Dutch and English, is exceptionally important for Brussels residents. Secondly, the idea that if we mobilise the Brussels context in an intelligent way, we can makes the achievement of this sort of multilingualism more realistic than elsewhere.

Competence in French, Dutch and English is important for those who grow up in Brussels, both to help them find a job in and around the region and to give them the option of settling comfortably either in Flanders or in Wallonia, as Brussels fills up. It is also exceptionally important for the city’s economic dynamism and in its function as the de-facto capital of the European Union : the main collective asset of the home-grown population must be its ability to serve as an efficient link between the increasingly English-speaking international activity in Brussels-Capital and the two neighbouring regions on which this activity depends in all sorts of ways.

At the same time, the learning of these languages should be less difficult in Brussels than elsewhere, providing one manages to mobilize the linguistic wealth and the good will of many residents of the Brussels Region and its surroundings. This requires early learning and innovative teaching of more than one language in all Brussels schools, but also drawing on an effective collaboration between schools, the media, the social partners, voluntary associations and - above all - families.

French, English and Dutch are, in that order, the most widely known languages in Brussels. But they are not the most widespread mother tongues. Among Brusselers, there are far more native speakers of Arabic than native speakers of English and even, in the younger generation. Worldwide there are also far more native speakers of Chinese or Spanish than of French and Dutch. Yet, the status enjoyed by French and Dutch in Brussels itself and in the two neighbouring regions and the role played by English in and around the European institutions are such that these three languages are most important for every Brusseler to learn, for economic, administrative and political purposes. This priority must be consistent with showing respect and appreciation for the many other languages, big and small, spoken in the Region and with encouraging their transmission.

In 2005, Wallonia set up its ‘Marshall Plan’. What Brussels needs most of all right now is not an investment plan for its infrastructure, but a plan to develop the linguistic competencies of its inhabitants. And to name this plan, we don’t need an American general – a great Brussels intellectual does just the job. Philippe de Marnix de Sainte Aldegonde (1540-1598) was born and grew up in Brussels. As a close collaborator of William of Orange, the top Brussels nobleman now regarded as the founding father of the Netherlands, he became one of the chief figures of the Calvinist revolt against Spanish domination. He was a remarkable polyglot and published books in Latin, French and Dutch. On the front of a primary school in Brussels’ Marolles quarter , he is represented carrying his posthumously published treatise on the education of the young, Ratio instituendae juventutis. This book contains the first known plea for immersion schooling and the early learning of several languages.

Despite the similar name, the Marnix Plan has nothing to do with the Marnix Ring an ‘international service club’ (like a Rotary Club), which is mostly active in Flanders and was founded in 1968 to ‘serve the Flemish linguistic and cultural community.

The Marnix plan is a bottom-up initiative emanating from Brussels’ civil society. Its origin can be traced to a workshop organized in May 2010 by the association Aula Magna on what Brussels could learn from language acquisition in Barcelona and Luxembourg. Its main contours emerged from a brain storming that took place in June 2012, with participants from Brussels’ French-language, Dutch-language and European schools, from the Brussels Trade Unions and employers’ organizations, from the European institutions, from various relevant associations, from the Brussels media and from several universities. The inaugural event was held in the Zinneke Room of the Brussels Information Point on 23rd September 2013.

The Marnix Plan is coordinated by Alex HOUSEN (professor of applied linguistics and Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Philosophy at the University of Brussels (VUB), Philippe VAN PARIJS, professor at the UC Louvain, KU Leuven and the European University Institute, and Nell FOSTER, pedagogical advisor at the ULB and doctoral candidate in sociolinguistics at Ghent University, who replaced Anna SOLE MENA (European Commission). The project received a grant from the Fondation Roi Baudoin and the National Lottery. We depend entirely on the voluntary collaboration of people who are convinced of the need for the citizens of Brussels to become more multilingual and hope to contribute to making this happen.

The nineteen municipalities of Brussels Capital Region are officially bilingual, which means that both Dutch and French enjoy the status of official language. In these communes, all official documents, public announcements, street names and road signs must be provided in both Dutch and French. In its relations with individual citizens, the public administration must use French or Dutch, as the citizen prefers. And compulsory public education, both primary and secondary, must take either French or Dutch as the medium of instruction. By contrast, with a few exceptions, each commune in Flanders and Wallonia has only one official language, Dutch in Flanders and French in Wallonia. This is the language in which all official relations between the citizens and the public authorities must be administered and in which public education must be organised. The exceptions are 9 Walloon communes in which German is the official language, 2 more Walloon communes with “linguistic facilities” for German, 4 with “linguistic facilities” for Dutch, and 12 Flemish communes, including six adjacent to the Brussels region, with “linguistic facilities” for French. The linguistic facilities consist in some limited rights for a second language in administrative and educational matters.

Ever since the middle ages until the 19th century, the overwhelming majority of the people living in what is now the region of Brussels had as their native language some dialect of Dutch. French came in as the language of court of the Duke of Burgundy in the 15th century and remained mainly the language of the Brussels elites throughout the following centuries. The situation changed after 1830, when Brussels became the capital of an officially unilingual Francophone state and primary education became accessible to a growing proportion of the children. This triggered a gradual Frenchization of both the original population and Flemish immigrants. Even after the recognition of Dutch as Belgium’s second official language in in 1898, the process continued and led to a large majority of the population having French as its native language. In recent decennia, however, massive immigration from both European and non-European countries has triggered a dramatic increase in linguistic diversity.

The most reliable recent data available are based on a representative sample of 2500 officially registered adult Brusselers surveyed in 2017 for the fourth Taalbarometer of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel . They can be compared to similar data collected in 2001, 2006 and 2011, as well as to data collected in 2018 in the ‘Vlaamse Rand’, the 19 Flemish communes which surround Brussels (including the 6 ‘communes à facilité’) and totalling around 400,000 inhabitants. The following table gives the proportions of respondents who mention the various languages when asked which languages they spoke at home when they were children, whether exclusively or in combination.

| Mother Tongue | 2001 | 2006 | 2011 | 2017 | Rand 2018 |
| FRANCAIS | 71 | 76.4 | 63.2 | 73 | 37.4 |
| NEERLANDAIS | 19.3 | 15.6 | 19.6 | 16.3 | 55.9 |
| ANGLAIS | 2.9 | 2.3 | 2.5 | 2.6 | {{
}} |
| ARABE | 9.7 | 6.9 | 21.1 | 8.9 | {{
}} |
| ESPAGNOL | 2.5 | 2.9 | 3 | 3 | {{
}} |
| ALLEMAND | 1.6 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 2.2 | {{
}} |
| ITALIEN | 2.5 | 3.2 | 2.5 | 2.2 | {{
}} |
| TURC | 3.3 | 1.4 | 4.5 | 1.3 | {{
}} |

Sources: Rudi Janssens, Meertaligheid als opdracht. Een analyse van de Brusselse taalsituatie op basis van taalbarometer 4, VUB Press, 2018, table 21; Rudi Janssens, De Rand vertaald. Een analyse van de taalsituatie op basis van taalbarometer 2 van de Vlaamse Rand, VUB Press, 2019, tableau 23; and Rudi Janssens, personal communication for the languages others than Dutch and French.

Almost 30% of Brussels inhabitants (and even more amongst the younger end of the population) says they spoke several languages at home during their childhood, for example Dutch, Arabic or Turkish combined with French¹. 52.2 % of respondents said that French was the only language spoken at home when they were a child, and 5.6% only had Dutch. . In the ‘Vlaamse Rand’ (2018), these figures are 20.4% and 45% for French and Dutch respectively ².

¹ R. Janssens, Meertaligheid als opdracht, VUB 2018, tables 22 and 23.
² R. Janssens, De Rand vertaald, VUB Press, 2019, table 23.

It is impossible to know how many languages are known by Brussels citizens, but there must be hundreds. In their survey of around 2500 people, the Taalbarometers identify more than one hundred. However, given that there are people from over 180 countries in Brussels and that many countries are multilingual, this number is doubtless considerably higher.

The following table gives the proportion of the adult population of Brussels who claim to speak Brussels’ main languages well or very well. It shows data from the four Taalbarometers and the Taalbarometer 2018 for the Vlaamse Rand.

| {Good or very good knowledge } |
|   | {2001 } | {2006 } | {2011 } | {2017 } | {{Rand 2018 |
| FRENCH (FR) | 95.5 | 95.6 | 88.5 | 87.1 | 79.6 |
| DUTCH (NL) | 33.3 | 28.3 | 23.1 | 16.3 | 68.5 |
| ENGLISH (EN) | 33.3 | 35.4 | 29.7 | 34.4 | 50.0 |
| ARABIC | 10.1 | 6.6 | 17.9 | 9.1 | 4.6 |
| SPANISH | 6.9 | 7.4 | 8.9 | 4.9 | 11.7 |
| GERMAN | 7.1 | 5.6 | 7.0 | 3.2 | 19.1 |
| ITALIAN | 4.7 | 5.7 | 5.2 | 3.5 | 6.6 |
| TURKISH | 3.3 | 1.5 | 4.5 | 1.4 | 1.8 |
| FR+NL | 32.8 | 27.0 | 20.8 | 13.6 | 51.7 |
| FR+NL+EN | 16.4 | 15.1 | 11.6 | 6.2 | 33.2 |

In terms of the different levels of proficiency in the three main languages, the Taalbarometers for Brussels -Capital Region (2017) and (in brackets) for the Vlaamse Rand (2018)¹ give the following figures :

|   | {FRENCH } | {DUTCH } | {ENGLISH } |
| {Very good level } | 67.8 (55.1) | 9.2 (56.5) | 12.0 (19.7) |
| {Good level } | 19.3 (24.5) | 7.1 (12.0) | 22.4 (30.3) |
| {Gets by } | 12.0 (15.0) | 20.3 (15.4) | 26.0 (24.6) |
| {Knows a few words } | 0.7 (4.1) | 43.0 (10.9) | 18.7 (12.4) |
| {No knowledge } | 0.1 (1.3) | 20.5 (5.1) | 20.8 (13.1) |

Looking at this data we can say that if there is a place in Belgium which is bilingual French-Dutch it is the Vlaamse Rand (51.7%) and not Brussels-Capital (13.6%). The rapid decline of knowledge of both official languages in Brussels since 2000 is only partially balanced by a slight rise in the knowledge of English, often used as a lingua franca. In 2017, 7.6% of the population could speak neither French, nor Dutch, nor English, compared to 3% in 2000. This diversity can be explained by the diversity and the increasing fluid mobility of the population of Brussels. Between 2000 and 2017, the population grew from 950,000 to around 1, 200 000 inhabitants. In the same period of time, around 1, 200 000 people moved to the city, most of whom (800 000) came from abroad and around 1, 100 000 left the city, most of them (600 000) moving to another location in Belgium. The decline in the number of Brusselers speaking French and/or Dutch does not exclude the fact that during their stay in Brussels, they doubtless improved their knowledge of French and Dutch.

¹ R. Janssens, Meertaligheid als opdracht, VUB Press,, 2018, table 4 ; De Rand Vertaald, VUB Press, 2019, table 8.

The publicly funded schools of the Brussels Region consist of six years at primary level and another six years at secondary level. For about 76% of Brussels’s pupils, they are run either by the French Community (the Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, , also in charge of Wallonia’s education system) or for 18% of the pupils, by the Flemish Community (Vlaamse Gemeenschap, , also in charge of Flanders’ education system). The remaining 6% attend either European Schools or private international schools. By virtue of a national law dating back to 1963, some teaching of the second national language is compulsory at both primary and secondary level in all schools of both Communities located in the Brussels Region or in bordering communes with “linguistic facilities”.

In terms of education in the French-speaking network, it is important to make a distinction between the present situation and the changes that will gradually be put into place following the adoption of the Pacte d’Excellence in April 2019. These will begin from 2021 for primary education and from 2026 for secondary education. In Brussels’ French-language primary schools, Dutch is supposed to be taught for 3 hours a week in years 3 and 4 and for five hours a week in years 5 and 6. In francophone schools in Wallonia, the second language can be Dutch, English or German and is currently taught for 2 hours a week to pupils in years 5 and 6. The Pacte d’Excellence will have no impact on the current regime in Brussels, but will introduce the second language in years 3 and 4 in Wallonia (taught for 2 hours a week). However, in a foreign language is not taken into account in the test for the primary school certificate (Certificat d’études de base or C.E.B.).

In the first two years of Brussels’ French-language secondary schools, all pupils currently have 4 hours of Dutch per week and but in Walloon schools, pupils can choose between four hours of English or Dutch. From the third year onwards, there is a big difference between the different education tracks (general, technical or professional). Under the Pacte d’Excellence, the common programme has been extended from 2 to 3 years. In the first year of secondary, there will be 4 hours per week of the second language, similar to primary ; this language is by definition Dutch for pupils in Brussels. In the second year, the second language is studied for 3 hours a week, and a third modern language is added (in Brussels, this is English), also taught for 3 hours per week. For the last three years of secondary, pupils either follow ‘transition education’ (i.e. preparation for higher education) or ‘qualification education’ (known previously as ‘professional’ education). In some schools and some transition programmes, it is also possible to add other languages for example, German, Italian, Spanish or Russian. In the ‘qualification’ track, the new programme aims to ensure that pupils will be able to follow language lessons that are adapted to the specific needs of different professional domains and to put an end to the current situation whereby a significant number of pupils in these tracks leave school without having had any language lessons at all in their four final years.

According to the 2017 Taalbarometer figures, 8% of Brussels residents under the age of 30 who have studied in the francophone education system claim to speak Dutch ‘well’ or ‘very well’ ¹. In 2000, this figure was 20%. Although it claims to aim put a high priority on the learning of languages, the Pacte d’Excellence stands little chance of improving this figure. The number of hours per week of Dutch lessons has been doubled in Wallonia but remains unchanged in Brussels and the second language doesn’t count towards the CEB qualification. Furthermore, the difficulty of recruiting suitably qualified teachers in Brussels will be accentuated by the increase in teaching hours in Wallonia. Added to this, given that latin will be obligatory for all pupils in the first three years of secondary education, the number of hours available for Dutch will be reduced in the second year from 4 to 3 hours per week. The Communauté Française has shown little enthusiasm for developing and valorising the learning of Dutch in Brussels and is sometimes overly motivated by their concern that pupils arriving in Brussels from Wallonia should not be at an educational disadvantage. Regrettably, doubling the number of hours of second language instruction in Wallonia will not have a significant impact, particularly given that schools can choose between Dutch or English, and the majority opt for English.

¹  R. Janssens, Meertaligheid als opdracht, VUB 2018, table 46

In the Dutch-language schools located in Brussels, French as a second language is compulsory from 3rd grade primary onwards (it only starts in grade 5 in Flanders), but many Brussels schools already start teaching French in the first year of primary school. The target level in French at the end of primary education is the A1 level of the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference).

At secondary level, all pupils in Brussels’ Dutch-language schools are required to learn at least two languages. Depending on the school track they are in, pupils in first and second grade secondary have two, four or five hours of French per week. They also have two or three hours of English per week (from first year onwards in the ‘official’ school system, but from second grade in the ‘free’ school system). From third grade onwards, and again depending on the school track in question, pupils study French and English for at least two hours per week, but in most cases it is more like three or four hours. A fourth language (i.e. not Dutch, French or English) can be studied in fifth and sixth grades, depending on the school track or specialisation (e.g. modern languages or tourism). This fourth language (taught for one hour per week, sometimes more) is invariably German or Spanish.

In secondary education in the Dutch-speaking system, about 20% of the timetable is dedicated to the teaching of languages. The goal is for students to reach B1 on the CEFR scale in both French and English at the end of their studies.

According to the Taalbarometer 2017 ¹, 69% of Brussels residents who are below the age of 30 and have been educated in the Dutch-speaking system state that they speak Dutch either well or very well, with 72% reporting the same levels in English. These figures indicate a perceptible decrease since 2000 (94% and 78% respectively) but they remain much higher than the corresponding figures for the French-speaking system (8% for Dutch and 41% for English). The goal of generalised trilingualism is clearly a more realistic goal for the Dutch-speaking system than the French-speaking system in Brussels, that is, unless the teaching of Dutch is radically reformed in the near future.

¹ R. Janssens, Meertaligheid als opdracht, VUB 2018, table 46.

There are currently four permanent European Schools in Brussels, at Uccle (Brussels I), Woluwé (Brussels II), Ixelles (Brussels III) and Laeken (Brussels IV), and one annex at Forest (Berkendael). One of the objectives of the European Schools is to provide a multinational, multicultural and multilingual environment to a linguistically and culturally diverse population. Consequently, the teaching of languages plays a prominent role in the European School curriculum. All European School pupils learn at least two languages in addition to their mother tongue.

After a two-year nursery cycle (ages 4 to 6), education in the European School system consists of a five-year primary cycle (ages 7 to 11) and a seven-year secondary cycle (ages 12 to 18). All 24 of the official languages of the European Union are taught as a first language (L1).

|| Language sections of the European Schools in Brussels - 2018/2019 | ||
| School | BU | CZ | DE | DK | EN | EL | ES | ET | FI | FR | HU | IT | LT | LV | NL | PL | PT | RO | SK | SV | Total |
| Bxl I |   |   | x | x | x |   | x |   |   | x | x | x |   |   |   | x |   |   |   |   | 8 |
| Bxl Berkendael |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | x |   |   |   | x |   |   |   |   | x |   |   |
| Bxl II |   |   | x |   | x |   |   |   | x | x |   | x | x |   | x |   | x |   |   | x | 9 |
| Bxl III |   | x | x |   | x | x | x |   |   | x |   |   |   |   | x |   |   |   |   |   | 7 |
| Bxl IV | x |   | x |   | x |   |   | x |   | x |   | x |   |   | x |   |   | x |   |   | 7 |
| Total | 1 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 35 |

There are 20 different language sections in the Brussels Schools. All four European Schools in Brussels have English, French and German sections and the other language sections are divied out amongst the schools, as can be seen from the table. Pupils with a dominant language that is an official language of the European Union but do not yet have a separate language section (e.g. Croatian, Estonian, Latvian, Slovenian) can be enrolled in one of the vehicular language sections (DE, EN and FR). Students Without A Language Section (SWALS) are provided with L1 tuition in dedicated language classes. In addition, Maltese and Irish pupils have the possibility of studying Maltese or Irish as Other National Language (ONL), starting from the nursery cycle.

The study of a second language or L2 (English, French or German) is compulsory throughout the school, from the first year of primary education. From primary year 3 onwards, L2 is also used as a medium of instruction in European Hours and sometimes also as a language of tuition for Art, Music and Physical Education lessons. From secondary year 3 onwards, History and Geography are studied in L2, as is Economics and several other optional courses which may be taken as an option from secondary year 4. In the final two years of secondary school, depending on the options they have chosen, some pupils may have up to 50% of their teaching time in L2.

All pupils must study a third language (L3) starting from secondary year 1. They may choose to study Latin as an option from secondary year 3 onwards and a fourth language (L4) from secondary year 4 and even a fifth. In principal, the L3 and L4 can be chosen from any of the 24 official languages, taking into account the local language situation. The L5 can be any language (for example Chinese), as long as there is sufficient demand. The L3 and L4 languages can also be used for certain optional courses at the end of the secondary cycle.

Language classes which are not given in the L1 are composed of mixed nationalities and are taught mainly by native speakers. Everyday interaction in the playground, the corridors and common spaces enhances the acquisition of other languages and the realisation that using them is not only vital but natural.

In 2019, the Conseil Supérieur des Ecoles Européennes approved in principle a wide ranging programme of reform to the language curriculum in the schools. For example, it will ensure that the teaching of L3 will begin earlier (in fourth grade primary, rather than first grade secondary). It also aims to offer a wider selection of L2s, beyond the current possibilities of German, English and French to encompass the language of the host city (if it is not one of these three languages). If the reforms are adopted, they will be put into place in 2020-21.

Genuine bilingual schools. The European Schools are officially multilingual. Surely it would seem logical that in an officially bilingual city, all of the schools in the city would be bilingual? This is the case for example in Barcelona with Catalan and Spanish, or in Singapore with English and (depending on the situation) Chinese, Tamil and Malay. In Luxembourg, German and French are used as languages of instruction to varying degrees depending on the stage of the curriculum, in addition to Luxembourgish in the kindergarten. The demand for schools of this kind clearly exists, as suggested by the growing number of non Dutch-speaking parents who send their children to Dutch-language schools and by opinion surveys that consistently show that a considerable majority of the Brussels population would like to have bilingual schools (90% according to the Taalbarometer 2017). In May 2013, Brussels’ Minister-President Rudi Vervoort declared that he was determined to “fight for bilingual schools”. In September 2017, Minster Guy Vanhengel facilitated the creation of a bilingual teacher-training course, run through a collaboration between the Haute Ecole Franciso Ferrer and the Erasmushoogeschool. This programme aims to address the shortage of primary school teachers with strong competence in both languages. In April 2019 the rectors of the Université libre de Bruxelles and the Vrije Universiteit Brussel published their plans to create multilingual secondary schools in which French, Dutch and English would be used as languages of instruction. The project was warmly welcomed by some but was not added to the Brussels-Capital legislative programme for 2019 – 2024.

Nonetheless, the debate generated by the rectors’ project has meant that certain institutional and legal conditions associated with the creation of bilingual schools have been clarified. The Flemish and French Communities currently exercise a monopoly in publicly funded education in Brussels, with each using, respectively Dutch and French as the sole language of instruction. The 1963 legislation regarding languages does not, however, completely exclude the possibility of schools functioning in French and Dutch as languages of instruction, and several Communes have expressed an interest in setting themselves up as the governing authorities for such schools. The main difficulties lie in constructing establishing bodies that would have the capacity to regulate such schools, as well as to finance them. The federal government has the right to do so, but is not currently set up to take this on, nor is it keen to delegate this competence to the Brussels Region authorities. Regardless of these challenges, they would also face the challenge of recruiting and retaining enough teachers with the requisite qualifications to teach subjects in Dutch.

Immersion in French-language schools. “Immersion” schools can be regarded as a modest variant of bilingual schools. Since 1998, however, the French Community has allowed some of its schools to become immersion schools. In order to conform to legislation about language, this means they offer the teaching of some subjects in a language other than French (i.e. in the language of immersion) as a way of teaching that language rather than as the use of a second medium of instruction. In 2019-20, there were 185 immersion primary schools (of which 20 in Brussels) offering the main curriculum in French but with up to 70% taught in Dutch or English (see list) . In 2017-18, there were 128 immersion secondary schools (of which 23 in Brussels) (see list). In Brussels, immersion is always in Dutch at primary school and in the first two years of secondary school. It can in principle also be English in later years, but the offer, so far, has been very scarce. Teaching in the second language varies from 8 to 18 hours per week. Despite the publicity surrounding it, immersion remains a marginal phenomenon in the schools of the French Community, particularly in Brussels.

Immersion in Dutch-language schools. The official position of the Flemish Community has generally been less favourable towards immersion schools, especially in and around Brussels; currently there are no immersion nursery or primary schools. The reason given is that a large proportion of the pupils in the Dutch-language schools of the Brussels area do not have Dutch as their home language. For them, attending school in Dutch is already a form of submersion (see below). In particular, using French as an additional medium of instruction when a significant proportion of the pupils has French as its native (or street) language risks impairing the learning of Dutch to such an extent that pupils will never achieve the level of Dutch required for success in secondary and higher education. Research shows that this is not necessarily the case. Despite these reservations and the cautious position adopted by the authorities, immersion education in Italian, Spanish and Arabic was offered in a few Brussels schools until 2011 at the initiative of the Molenbeek-based association Foyer. It aimed to enable pupils who used one of these languages at home to learn it in school and as such wasn’t open to those from other language backgrounds. Experimentation has continued in a handful of schools as part of the Stimob project (Stimulating Multilingual Education in Brussels) whereby the schools provide certain extra lessons in French (e.g. maths revision sessions).

Immersion education was given a real boost by the Flemish Parliament’s decision on 10 July 2013 to allow for immersion (referred to as CLIL, Content and Language Integrated Learning) under certain conditions, both in Flanders and in Brussels. The language of immersion can be French, English or German and the maximum number of hours of teaching that can be delivered in the additional language (outside of language lessons) is set at 20%. In 2019-20, 123 schools began teaching through this immersion model, 4 of which were in Brussels and use either English or French (Meertalig Atheneum Woluwe, GO Atheneum Etterbeek, Comenius Campus Koekelberg and Atheneum GO for Business in Molenbeek).

Audiovisual. The local TV channels are the French-language BX1 (known as TéléBruxelles from 1985 to 2016) and the Dutch-language BRUZZ (known as TV-Brussel from 1993-2016). BRUZZ operates to some extent trilingually. Its programmes in Dutch are subtitled in French and English, and interviews in French or English are subtitled in the other two languages. There are various Brussels-based radio channels in French, Dutch and other languages. FMBrussel offers programmes in both Dutch and French. The radio station BXFM is aimed at “Eurobrusselers” and offers radio programmes in French, English, Italian and Spanish.

Print. La Capitale is a popular French-language daily newspaper which covers Brussels and the Brabant Wallon. The French-language national dailies have all pages dedicated to events and life in Brussels. The Dutch-language Brussels weekly Bruzz has a weekly cultural supplement (Agenda) and a quarterly cultural supplement for Brussels children (Kidsgazette) and is written in Dutch, French and English.

Online. In Brussels, as elsewhere, traditional printed and audiovisual media are being supplemented and partly replaced by websites and blogs, many of them operating in two, three or more languages. In English, the main websites are now The Bulletin (available as a print magazine until 2012) and The Brussels Times (printed bimonthly). Daardaar provides a selection of articles from the Flemish press, translated in French.

People can be called multilingual (or plurilingual) if they know two or more languages, whatever the level of competence. Some may know two or more languages so well that they may pass as monolingual native speakers of each of their respective languages in all situations and under all circumstances. Such cases are extremely rare. Most multilingual people master their various languages to different degrees. Moreover, what can be considered their stronger or weaker language may change from one context to another and in the course of their lives. Some multilingual people may be better in one language (for example, the French or Dutch they learned at school) for writing formal texts but better in another, even one they cannot write (for example, their Flemish or Moroccan dialect), for talking casually to relatives, expressing emotions or telling jokes. Thus, multilingualism comes in many shades. Ultimately, whether you are multilingual and how multilingual you are depends on how you perceive yourself and on whether you have the will to put into practice the competence you possess.

Some communities of people — countries, municipalities, schools, etc. — are officially monolingual, bilingual or multilingual, in the sense that formal communication is conducted in one, two or more languages. However, this official status need not reflect the number of native languages or of languages actually known or used by the members of the communities concerned. For example, the Region of Brussels Capital is officially bilingual French-Dutch, but based on the most recent data, one can conjecture that Brussels residents have hundreds of distinct native languages and keep speaking them regularly. This multiplicity of native languages or of languages known by the members of a community — whether a family, an organization, a firm, a school, a neighbourhood, a town, a region or a country — can be called linguistic diversity. Communities that are officially multilingual or in reality linguistically diverse may vary greatly in the extent to which their members are multilingual. At one extreme, the various language groups that make up the community are unable to communicate with one another. At the other extreme, they are all fluent in each other’s languages. A truly multilingual community is one whose members are themselves multilingual. Brussels will be truly multilingual when all its residents will be multilingual to a varying but significant degree.

The consensus today is that multilingualism is extremely common, both for individuals and for communities. Even seemingly monolingual individuals and communities often turn out to be multilingual on closer scrutiny. According to the most reliable guesses, over half of mankind uses at least one language other than their first language at some point in their lives and to varying degrees of proficiency. According to the best available estimates (see www.ethnologue.com), there are about 7000 languages currently spoken, or at least understood, in the world. With only about 200 sovereign countries, simple arithmetic tells us that even if each language was confined to a single country, many countries would need to host a high degree of linguistic diversity and hence also, if they are to function at all, to have many multilingual citizens.

Until not so long ago, many in Europe believed that trying to master more than one language, especially languages less “distinguished” than Latin, Greek, French or German, would confuse the mind, make people asocial and even lead to criminal behaviour and mental illness. As a result of considerable research in the last few decennia, this view is no longer held by anyone in the scientific community. Instead, multilingualism is now widely regarded as an asset, for two main reasons. The most obvious advantage of multilingualism for individuals is that it amplifies their communication potential. This is relevant in many contexts. Professionally, competence in more than one language often increases the probability of finding a job or of accessing better jobs. Culturally, being multilingual facilitates the discovery of different cultures, their literatures and traditions. Socially, it opens up the possibility of richer contacts both when travelling abroad and with fellow members of one’s own multilingual community and thereby tends to foster mutual understanding, tolerance and trust. In the case of families with foreign or mixed origins, it has the further advantage of enabling children to maintain an intimate bond with their extended families and a strong connection with their cultural roots, without this preventing them from integrating into the local community. In addition to this communicative advantage, a growing number of recent studies have documented a range of cognitive and even neurological advantages of early multilingualism if properly managed. According to these studies, multilingual children tend to score better in terms of mental flexibility, creativity and analysis, and they tend to keep these advantages later in life. Other recent studies have shown that, owing to their increased neuro-cognitive flexibility, multilinguals are significantly less prone to develop dementia related symptoms such as Alzheimer, or they develop them at a later age and suffer from them to a less severe extent than monolinguals do.

See also:
Why Bilinguals Are Smarter (2012) by Yudhihit Bhattacharjee, in New York Times, 18 March 2012,
Bilingualism: consequences for mind and brain (2012) by E. Bialystok, FI Craik, G. Luk, in Trends in Cognitive Science, 16(4), p. 240-50,
Bilingualism: the good, the bad and the indifferent (2009) by E. Bialystok, in Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, p. 3-11,
Study on the Contribution of Multilingualism to Creativity (2009)

A possible disadvantage of multilingualism is that multilinguals' mastery of each of their respective languages, when measured separately, tends to be lower than that of monolingual speakers of these languages. For instance, multilinguals may have a smaller active vocabulary in each of their languages than monolinguals. Also the influence of their other languages may seep through when multilinguals speak or write in one of their languages, and cause them to have an accent or make occasional grammatical errors. (This phenomenon is known as interference). Obviously, when taken together, the total linguistic knowledge and communicative abilities of multilinguals typically far outweigh those of monolinguals. The main disadvantage of multilingualism for individuals is the time and effort it takes to learn a new language, particularly when developed later in life.

In the 19th and much of the 20th century, many held the view that multilingualism was bad not only for individuals, but also for communities. In the ideal nation-state, so they believed, the citizens should share one language and eradicate all others, for linguistic diversity and the multilingualism it generates could corrupt the soul of the nation, undermine the dynamism of its cultural life, threaten civic peace and national unity, and hamper economic development. Today, the conjunction of globalization and migration has forced us to accept linguistic diversity as a central and irreversible fact of 21st century communities. In the worst case, linguistic diversity can generate a fragmentation of the community into sub-communities that are unable to communicate with each other or to share a common project. More generally, one must acknowledge running the economic, social and political life of a linguistically diverse community is often more difficult, more laborious, more conflict-ridden than that of a monolingual one. Yet, some countries, such as Singapore, Luxembourg and Switzerland, are proving that linguistic diversity is consistent with featuring among the five most prosperous countries in the world. Multilingualism — the widespread learning of several languages by the members of a community — is the glue, the network of bonds that can turn linguistic diversity from a handicap into an asset. In particular, providing there is sufficient competence in shared local languages, the lasting presence of people with a large number of different native tongues in a place like Brussels offers not only a wonderful opportunity for the local exploration and appreciation of a great variety of cultures, but also a wealth of economically valuable connections with countless places in the world. Hence the importance of promoting multilingualism through the learning of linking languages — in the Brussels case, French, Dutch and English — while at the same time cherishing and maintaining as many as possible of the other languages in the community.

In a globalized world, knowledge of other languages is essential for businesses that want to operate internationally. As a lingua franca in a large part of the world, English is an obvious choice as a common language of communication. However, being able to communicate in more languages gives a firm a competitive advantage over its rivals. Not only do certain countries use a lingua franca other than English (e.g. French, Spanish, Russian and Chinese). A company can also increase its success on foreign markets by using its customers’ native languages. Doing so expresses respect towards the customers’ culture and identity, fosters trust and goodwill, proves the enterprise’s long-term commitment, helps it gain a better insight into local legislation and customs, and enables it to make its market research and advertising campaigns more effective. Moreover, operating in several languages makes it possible to recruit from a larger pool of candidates and to make its workforce potentially more dynamic by making it more diverse. These various advantages accrue to enterprises operating globally. In the linguistically diverse Brussels context, however, they also accrue to companies that operate locally: a multilingual staff enables them to create a stronger bond with their customers and other stakeholders.

Respect for Europe’s linguistic diversity has been a major concern throughout the process of European integration and now features explicitly in Article 22 of the Lisbon Treaty (2007). For a linguistically diverse Union to work, it is obviously indispensable that enough of its citizens should learn other languages. It is therefore not surprising that European institutions keep emphasizing the importance of multilingualism for taking full advantage of the opportunities created by European integration. More specifically, the European Commission’s Action Plan of 2004 formulated the objective in terms of “mother tongue plus two”. In a 2008 report endorsed by the Commission, the idea was refined: each European citizen should acquire, in addition to English — the unnamed but irresistible lingua franca —, a “personal adoptive language” chosen among European languages because of some special affinity. Whereas bilingualism with English is spreading fast across the European continent , the more ambitious objective of trilingualism is far from reached and may be unreachable in many regions of the European Union. However, in Brussels, the EU’s unofficial capital, the proximity of Dutch-speaking Flanders and French-speaking Wallonia, combined with the presence of an international community that operates increasingly in English, should make the European ideal a more realistic goal than in most other places.

There are several ways in which individuals can become multilingual. Many people learn two or more languages by being exposed to them from an early age. This may happen in the home context, for example because the father and the mother each speak a different language with the child and sometimes a third language amongst themselves. This may also happen because the home language is different from the language used at school or with friends or neighbours. Many other people become multilingual later on in life, for example as a result of migration, or with the help of television or the internet, or through formal education, whether in the form of foreign language classes, or of immersion or submersion education. Some people learn a language faster than others, but there are no significant hurdles that prevent anyone from learning a second language. In many countries, bilingualism is the norm rather than the exception, regardless of differences in intelligence or language aptitude. The key factor, in language acquisition, is relevance to the learner’s everyday life. A language used in one’s environment will offer many opportunities for practicing the language in a real-world context. The aim, however, should not be overambitious, especially in the case of adults with little time to supplement practice with systematic study. It should not be to completely master a second or third language. Even monolinguals are often very far from knowing their own native language “perfectly”. The ability to engage in everyday conversation with native speakers from another language community should often prove ambitious enough — and highly rewarding.

No. Both children and adults are able to learn second languages, but there are differences in the way new languages are learned. In the case of young children, the language will be acquired through a spontaneous process at home, in the community or at school. One advantage of early learning is that children will master the pronunciation of a second language more easily than adults. Another is that they are spared much deliberate learning effort, even they too need to distinguish and decipher the different language codes and the distinct writing systems of the languages used around them. This dual or multiple learning task takes more time and effort than deciphering a single code, and may temporarily slow down the learning of one, or perhaps each of their languages, when compared to monolingual children. However, in the process, they develop greater cognitive skills. Moreover, when conditions are right, especially if they get enough exposure to all of their languages, multilingual children will often catch up with their monolingual peers by the end of primary school, if not sooner. If the various languages are not abundantly present in the children’s natural environment, parents, child minders and teachers who want them to become multilingual will need to make the effort of planning and carrying out an adequate linguistic strategy to ensure adequate exposure to each of the languages being learned. In the case of teenagers or adults, language learning is generally more formal and requires a more conscious effort. Adult learners are able to consciously analyze the new language and rely on different learning strategies that will help them speed up the language learning process. If there is enough motivation to learn and enough contact with the language to be learned, adults will often learn a language faster than young children, while generally keeping a “foreign accent” forever. However, adults who want to become multilingual will have to find the time and means to attend language classes and above all the opportunities to practice the languages they want to learn, preferably with native speakers. This should be less difficult in Brussels than in many other places, providing people do not remain confined within the boundaries of their own linguistic communities.

There are many different methods for learning a language, each with its advantages and disadvantages. Most important is that the method chosen should match the situation, character and purpose of the learner. Thus, informal learning through communicating with native speakers, for example by living abroad, may lead to excellent communicative skills, whereas formal classroom teaching may result in a more correct grammar and a more precise vocabulary. What is best for an adult need not be best for a child, nor does what is best for a highly sociable personality need to be best for someone more timid. And if you want to learn a language for purely professional purposes, it makes sense to focus on the jargon of your profession, whereas someone who wants to use a language on holidays will require a general vocabulary for everyday use. Whatever the method initially used, however, the learning of another language, just like mother tongue acquisition, is a process that will never be completed, and the best way to keep learning — and indeed to maintain what one has learned — is to keep practising the language, both passively and actively. Our main language teachers are people patient enough to listen and talk to us in a language we do not know that well but are bold enough to use. Nevertheless, formal teaching has a role to play, and all methods are not equally effective.

Traditional classroom methods , still used to some extent today, focus on the learning of rules of grammar and lists of vocabulary. They largely mimic the methods used to teach so called ‘dead’ languages such as Latin and Greek and involve only a limited amount of communicative practice. They may give adult learners a good grounding in the language but can seldom be successful in the absence of listening and speaking practice outside the classroom. Today, less formal methods are generally considered far more suitable, especially for young learners. Immersion education involves teaching some non-language subjects (mathematics or history, for example) in a language different from the home language of the pupils, in which the other subjects are taught. A carefully elaborated version of it is called Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), or Enseignement d’une matière par intégration d’une langue étrangère (EMILE). It is systematically used in a number of Belgian schools, most of them in Wallonia, and at secondary level in the network of European Schools, including the five located in Brussels. Obviously, this method of learning through being taught a subject in a language different from one’s native language is not restricted to primary and secondary education and is commonly used in higher and adult education. For example, all Belgian universities now offer courses in English accessible to foreign and local students alike. While there is now a wide consensus about the superiority of language learning through immersion over traditional methods, there doubts about whether it is appropriate in all contexts. How well it works will depend, for example, on how many children have the school’s second language as their home language and therefore tend to speak it among themselves (which would tend to be the case for many Dutch-language schools in Brussels and its periphery if they practised immersion teaching for French). It will also depend on how many children have neither of the school languages as their home language : for them, immersion would amount to double submersion.

TV broadcasts and films in another language are definitely good ways of improving an individual’s proficiency, especially in cases where exposure to the language in everyday life is limited. For children in particular, the combination of spoken words with visuals may increase interest in what is being said. For viewers who can read, subtitles either in their best language or in the language of the broadcast can greatly facilitate the learning of both structures and vocabulary. Unfortunately, TV channels in French and other widespread languages tend to use dubbing rather than subtitling. Any move in the direction of more subtitling on Belgium’s French-language channels would be welcome, including for example for interviews conducted in English or Dutch. Obviously, however, watching films and other broadcasts contributes mostly to the development of people’s passive competence and is no substitute for active practice. Over the past few decades, the internet has gradually become an easily accessible means for encountering and practicing languages other than one’s mother tongue. The possibility of communicating with people all around the globe has multiplied the opportunities not only to read but also to speak and write other languages. Social networks and online message boards, in particular, require the internet user to actively participate in online conversation. If there is a will to use these unprecedented opportunities to communicate in languages other than one’s mother tongue rather than choosing the least effort, the internet creates a formidable tool for language learning.

There is a great variety of opportunities for learning languages in Brussels, ranging from group lessons to individual tutoring, from daily to weekly courses. We have compiled a list of language course providers in Brussels that should help you find the formulas that best suit your needs. Updates and suggestions for additions are welcome at info@marnixplan.org.

If you already some knowledge of a language, conversation tables will help you practice it and thereby improve your proficiency. Other initiatives put you in contact with native speakers of various languages so that you can practise them in a natural environment. We have complied a list of conversation tables, language meet-ups and tandems. Updates and suggestions for additions are welcome at info@marnixplan.org.

Yes, as long as these languages are in the family or in the children’s environment and will therefore feel natural and useful to the child. A multilingual city, such as Brussels is therefore a favorable environment to bring up a multilingual child. How many languages can children learn ? As many as they need and are motivated to learn. There is no limit to the number of languages other than the amount of regular exposure/interaction that children can actually have in the different languages. Children will learn languages (as everything else in life) if they sense a need for learning them in their everyday life. If people around them (family, caretakers, school, friends, etc.) speak different languages to the children consistently and sufficiently, they will learn them.

Firstly, it is crucial that parents should express a positive attitude towards multilingualism, so that the children will feel that knowing more than one language is important and appreciated. Secondly, parents need to decide on a linguistic strategy well adapted to the family situation and its surroundings and to stick to it consistently. If the parents have different native languages and these languages are standardized written languages, there is little doubt that it is best for them to adopt the so-called OPOL strategy ( One parent one language ) : the parents each consistently use their own native language with the child, and they should do so as early as possible, ideally from birth. This has the advantage of creating a more intimate link with the child and with their cultural roots. It is also likely to give a good linguistic model because the parents speak the language they master best. If the parents do have the same native language, it is still possible to produce bilingualism at home through using the so-called artificial strategy  : one of the parents uses with the child a second language that is not his or her own mother tongue. This requires a very good mastery of the second language and a lot of determination, since this is not the most natural choice. In most families with a single native language, however, the children will become multilingual mainly thanks to attending a school that operates in a language distinct from the home language, either partially or entirely. In each of these basic strategies, the role of parents and school can often be usefully supplemented by other people in frequent contact with the child : grandparents or other relatives, neighbours, child minders, teachers, youth movements, etc. These people can help strengthen the linguistic competence children owe to their parents or their school, or teach a different language to the children and enable them to practice it on a regular basis. For instance a child born in a homogeneous French-speaking family could learn Dutch by having a Dutch speaking child minder and later joining a youth movement or sports club that operates in Dutch.

The school language is likely to become the strongest language of the child, so this is an important consideration in school choice, along with others — such as the school’s distance from home or its “educational project” — and what type of school is best is highly dependent on the family’s specific situation. In the case of a bilingual family, for example, if a choice is possible between the two languages as regards the medium of instruction at school, it is better, other things equal, to choose the language less present in the home environment. If the possibility exists, the parents may also choose to send their children to a school that operates in a third language, so that their the children can grow up trilingual — even quadrilingual if the school offers immersion in a further language other than the home languages. For this to work best, however, it is important that one parent at least should know or acquire the school languages in order to follow the children’s school work, while sticking to the home languages for most other purposes, and make sure there is adequate exposure to each of the languages involved. In the case of monolingual families, the most obvious choice, if it exists is an immersion school with the home language as one of the languages of instruction. However, for most families in Brussels, this is not a real choice because their home language is not a medium of instruction in any Brussels school, or only in schools that charge fees they cannot afford, or only in European Schools to which they have no access. Even for families with French as the home language, this choice often does not exist. Access to French-language schools offering immersion teaching in Brussels is limited (10 primary schools and 18 secondary schools) and complicated. The main obstacle is the overall shortage of school places, coupled with a registration procedure that takes various criteria into account (such as socio-economic background or distance from the school). Moreover, educational continuity between primary and secondary school is not assured in immersion teaching. It would certainly be good if more schools adopted immersion schooling, or if genuinely bilingual or multilingual schools could be funded by the Belgian authorities. In the meanwhile, many parents send their children to a school operating in a language different from their own. Indeed, many have no other choice.

Submersion education refers to a situation in which pupils attend school in a language different from their native language without the latter being used to any extent as the medium of instruction. Submersion education, so defined, was common practice throughout Europe when the official language of the incipient nations was the only medium of instruction and differed often deeply from the pupils’ home dialects. It is common practice in today’s Africa, where the colonial language often serves as the only medium of instruction for children with African native languages. And most children from immigrant families in Brussels today have no other option. There is simply no school that offers teaching in their native language, and no hope whatever, for many of them, that this will ever happen : even if standard Arabic were adopted as a language of instruction in some schools, it would still be significantly different from the Moroccan dialect darija, and extremely different from the Berber dialects. Attending school in a language that one did not know at all before entering it can be a traumatic experience. As a result of educational submersion, children can suffer a lasting linguistic handicap that affects their learning of all subjects and sometimes leads to permanent cognitive and psychological damage. The frequency of these effects has given submersion education a bad name among experts, especially as it is often associated with the stigmatization of the children’s native languages. Nonetheless, it can succeed. Many pupils manage remarkably well and end up mastering the school language just as well as its average native speakers, while remaining proficient in their home language. Whether or not submersion education succeeds, depends crucially on many factors, such as the teachers having the attitude, the skills and the time to take account of the special needs of children with little or no prior knowledge of the school language, the linguistic composition of the class groups, the ability of parents and teachers to communicate with one another, the consistent use of languages at home and the extent of exposure to the school language in the media or in extra-curricular activities and at the pre-school stage. In the Brussels context, identifying and boosting these factors of successful submersion is of primary importance. It will be essential to learn as much as one can from the achievements and difficulties of the many Dutch- and French-language schools that have no option but to offer submersion education to many of their pupils — and to keep experimenting in order to address more effectively this crucial challenge. See the brochure published by the Onderwijscentrum Brussel for parents who want to send their children to a Dutch-language kindergarten or primary school.

Children are genetically equipped to learn several languages as they grow up. However, if young children are not to end up confused, consistency is important. Ideally, each of the parents and other adults in regular contact with a young child should endeavor to always address that child in the same language. They should avoid shifting from one language to another in the same sentence, the same conversation or from one day to the next. In particular, they should not try to speak with the young child the school or pre-school language when they themselves do not master it very well. This does not help the child learn the school or pre-school language. On the contrary, it makes it more difficult for children to work out the pronunciation and grammar rules that underlie the conversations they are exposed to. Sticking to their own native languages is far better. This ideal, however, is often unachievable, particularly when the native language of the parents is an unwritten dialect without an established code and perforated by borrowings from other languages. What the best strategy is in this case will depend on the specific circumstances. Above all, parents in that situation should not feel guilty nor let linguistic difficulties spoil their emotional relationship with their children. They should still take pride in their native languages and, when realistic, try to transmit them to their children, while early and regular attendance of a kindergarten in either French or Dutch must help their child secure the firm acquisition of one standard language before school starts. In any event, the concern for consistency can be relaxed when the children are in their teens and their various languages are firmly established and distinguished. Moreover, it does not prevent parents from speaking another language, including with each other, in the presence of the child. Nor does it prevent them from making exceptions to the basic rules, clearly demarcated in terms of activity, time and place. The child will understand that there is a temporary change of rules and will not be confused. This could be done for example when discussing schoolwork, reading a book or during an outing or holiday.

Some mixing of languages is a normal stage in the linguistic development of a bi- or multilingual child and therefore nothing to worry about. Many parents report such a stage. As the child grows, the involuntary mixing tends to decrease. However, some conscious forms of mixing can become permanent features of communication among multilingual children and adults. One such form is “code switching”, shifting from one language to another in the same conversation with speech partners competent in the same languages. Another is "borrowing", the use of words from another language in order to better express the meaning sought. This is no sign of confusion, but the mobilization of a broader repertoire in a multilingual environment. In order to minimize involuntary mixing and confusion, it is advisable that each of the parents should always use the same language to their young children in order to give them a clear model.

Not necessarily. When comparing with monolingual children, some delays in activating one or more of the child’s languages are often reported. These delays are difficult to estimate precisely since even monolingual children do not all take the same time in activating their language. See, for example, for recent evidence involving French and Dutch. Children need to "decipher" different codes at the same time and it is therefore normal that it may take them longer : they need to learn different words for each thing, different ways to combine them and when, with whom and how to use each of their language systems. This delay is generally not long but it may create some frustration for the children and also for their parents, eager to be reassured about the linguistic competence of their multilingual child. The different languages will generally blossom when the child is ready without creating any significant problem. On the contrary, changing the family languages after some months or years is generally not recommended. It is likely to confuse the child and may produce further delays on top of compromising the child’s bilingualism perhaps irreversibly.

Television and other media in languages other than the mother tongue are also an excellent support for bringing up multilingual children. The fact that the choices available on cable or satellite TV or on the internet are increasingly diverse is, in this respect, both a blessing and a curse for language learning. A blessing because of the variety of languages now accessible in this way. But also a curse because if the choice is left to the children the law of least effort will often lead them to select audiovisual consumption in the language in which they already feel most comfortable. Moreover, excessive TV watching with frequent zapping or highly fragmented children programmes can affect negatively children’s capacity for sustained attention. Hence, TV and the internet can be wonderful instruments in the service of multilingualism, but increasingly only if their use is sufficiently monitored by the parents. This is not easy in many family contexts. But it does not follow that there is no room for improvement. In particular, parents should encourage their children to watch broadcasts in the languages they need to learn with subtitles either in those languages or in their mother tongue. A significant positive impact can be expected both on their oral competence and on their ability to read.