Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View : Personality and Emotional Intelligence in Relation to Perception and Expression of Emotions in the L1 and L2 [1 ed.] 9781443867634, 9781443845328

Citation preview

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View: Personality and Emotional Intelligence in Relation to Perception and Expression of Emotions in the L1 and L2

By

Katarzyna OĪaĔska-Ponikwia

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View: Personality and Emotional Intelligence in Relation to Perception and Expression of Emotions in the L1 and L2, by Katarzyna OĪaĔska-Ponikwia This book first published 2013 Cambridge Scholars Publishing 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Copyright © 2013 by Katarzyna OĪaĔska-Ponikwia All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-4532-9, ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-4532-8

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Illustrations ................................................................................... viii List of Tables.............................................................................................. ix Preface and Acknowledgements................................................................. xi List of Abbreviations ................................................................................ xiv Chapter One................................................................................................. 1 Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions 1.1. Introduction 1.2. A personal reflection 1.3. Culture and emotions 1.4. Sociolinguistic and socio-cultural competence 1.5. Bilingualism and emotions 1.6. Personality and emotions 1.7. Researching emotions 1.8. Summary Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 21 Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature 2.1. Introduction 2.2. Language and thought 2.3. Cross-linguistic influences on language and cognition 2.4. Language, culture and emotions 2.5. Bilingualism, language and emotion 2.6. Personality, language and emotion 2.7. Summary 2.8. Hypotheses Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 60 Methodology 3.1. Introduction 3.2. Participants 3.3. “Bilingualism and Emotions” research instruments 3.4. Selection and recruitment

vi

Table of Contents

Chapter Four.............................................................................................. 74 Quantitative Data Analysis 4.1. Introduction 4.2. Immersion in an L2 and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 4.3. Self-perceived L2 proficiency and the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 4.4. Immersion in an L2 and self-perceived L2 proficiency 4.5. Personality traits and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 4.6. EI and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 4.7. LGS and L2 proficiency and EI and OCEAN personality traits 4.8. The effect of higher order and lower order personality traits on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 4.9. Difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2 4.10. Discussion of quantitative data analysis findings Chapter Five ............................................................................................ 128 Qualitative Data Analysis 5.1. Introduction 5.2. Difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2- Analysis of findings 5.3. Discussion of the qualitative data analysis findings Chapter Six ............................................................................................. 136 “Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View”: Discussion and Conclusion 6.1. Introduction 6.2. Summary of findings 6.3. Discussion of findings 6.4. Limitations of this study 6.5. Conclusions and suggestions for further work Appendix A ............................................................................................. 147 Questionnaire Measuring Perception and Expression of Emotions in the L1 and L2 Appendix B.............................................................................................. 149 “Low”, “Medium” and “High” Groups’ Stores on Personality Traits (ANOVA)

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

vii

References ............................................................................................... 150 Index........................................................................................................ 168

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 1. The effect of extraversion on self-perceived difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2 Figure 2. The effect of Agreeableness on feeling different when using the L2 Figure 3. The effect of Conscientiousness on feeling different when using L2 Figure 4. The effect of Openness on feeling different when using L2 Figure 5. The effect of Self-esteem on the perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2 Figure 6. The effect of Emotion expression on feeling different when using L2 Figure 7. The effect of Happiness on the L2 use Figure 8. The effect of Empathy on change of attitudes towards the L2 Figure 9. The effect of Emotion perception on change of attitudes towards the L2 Figure 10. The effect of Stress management on the perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2 Figure 11. The effect of Emotion management on feeling different when using L2 Figure 12. The effect of Optimism on feeling different when using L2 Figure 13. The effect of Adaptability on the L2 use and expression of emotions in the L2 Figure 14. The effect of Well-being on feeling different when using L2 Figure 15. The effect of Emotionality on L2 use and feeling different when using L2 Figure 16. The effect of Sociability on feeling different when using L2

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Cultural scripts for expressing emotions in Polish vs. English Table 2. The Five Factor Personality Model adapted from NEO Personality Inventory- Revised, (Costa & McCrae, 1992c: 120) Table 3. The sampling domain of trait EI adapted from the official TEIQue website (2001-2009) Table 4. Cronbach’s Į of all dimensions Table 5. Length of stay (LGS) and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 (Pearson’s r) Table 6. L2 proficiency and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 (Pearson’s r) Table 7. Personality traits and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 (Pearson’s r) Table 8. EI traits and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 (Pearson’s r) Table 9. LGS and L2 proficiency and EI and OCEAN personality traits (Pearson’s r) Table 10. The effects of Extraversion on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 11. The effects of Agreeableness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 12. The effects of Conscientiousness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 13. The effects of Neuroticism on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 14. The effect of Openness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 15. The effects of Self-esteem on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 16. The effect of Emotion expression on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 17. The effect of Self-motivation on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 18. The effect of Emotion regulation on the perception and expression of emotions in L2

x

List of Tables

Table 19. The effect of Happiness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 20. The effect of Empathy on the perception and expression of emotions in L2 Table 21. The effect of Social awareness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 22. The effect of Impulsivity on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 23. The effect of Emotion perception on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 24. The effect of Stress management on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 25. The effect of Emotion management on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 26. The effect of Optimism on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 27. The effect of Relationship skills on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 28. The effects of Adaptability on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 29. The effect of Assertiveness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 30. The effect of Well-being on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 31. The effect of Self-control on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 32. The effects of Emotionality on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 33. The effect of Sociability on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 34. The effect of Global trait EI perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 35. Summary of the effects of personality traits on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Table 36. Answers to “In what situations do you find any problems in expressing of emotions in English?”

PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This book reports an investigation into the relationship between immersion in a foreign language and perception and expression of emotions in a native and non-native language. The purposes of this study were (a) to examine informants who were immersed in an L2 language and culture and those who were not in order to investigate whether such exposure to a foreign language changes the perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2 and (b) to identify possible factors which might play a role in probable changes in the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2. A literature review considers this relationship from a range of perspectives, including that of monolingual speakers, bilingual speakers and L2 users and shows that immersion in a foreign language and culture together with affective socialization processes might influence one’s emotional repertoire and contribute to changes in the perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2, as well as result in cognitive changes in semantic and conceptual levels of emotional representation. An investigation was conducted to research possible changes in the emotional repertoire of Polish monolinguals, Polish L2 users of English and Polish-English bilinguals, operating in two typologically distant languages. An online questionnaire consisted of various testing instruments including self-report questionnaires, openended questionnaires and personality tests such as the Big-Five personality test and Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). Both quantitative and qualitative analysis found that immersion and socialization into L2 language and culture influenced the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2. The findings also revealed a relationship between personality traits and emotional intelligence, as well selfperceived L2 proficiency and perception and expression of emotions in the first and second language. It was suggested that the complex relationship between personality, emotional intelligence, immersion in a foreign language and culture and perception/expression of emotions should be further analysed. This book is composed of six chapters. Chapter One introduces the main themes and provides a general overview of the topic. Following a brief introduction of the research on emotions, the discussion is narrowed to some specific studies that investigated different aspects potentially

xii

Preface and Acknowledgements

influencing perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 including: sociobiographical data, personality traits, cultural differences. The notion of universal vs. culture-specific emotions or untranslatability of the emotions among various languages was also addressed, alongside evidence for a conceptual shift among bilinguals. Chapter Two presents a wide-ranging review of the literature relating to the themes of language, culture, emotion, and personality. The focus throughout is on how individuals perceive and express emotions in an L2 that is typologically distant from their L1, and how immersion in a foreign language and culture might influence or shape this perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 alike. The discussion begins by placing the current research in the context of theories of language and thought, and subsequently aims to describe a complex interplay of such concepts as language, culture, personality and emotions. The research studies reviewed are organized and grouped into three main research areas: culture and emotions, perception and expression of emotions in the L2, and personality and emotions. The first research area of language, culture and emotions discusses crosslinguistic influences in language and cognition, different ways of perceiving and expressing emotions in different cultures, the notion of the linguistic untranslatability of some emotions, cultural scripts of expressing emotions as well as both linguistic and cultural differences in the two languages under examination in this book, Polish and English. This section draws on both empirical and autobiographical data in order to describe the complexity of the topic and provide further support for the view that the core of emotions is largely influenced by the culture in which we live and the language we speak (Panayiotou, 2001: 70). The second section provides an overview of up-todate research on emotions, presenting at the same time different ways of approaching the vast subject of research on the perception and expression of emotions in an L2. The last section is devoted to personality and emotions, and examines the possible influence of some higher and lower order personality factors including “OCEAN” and trait emotional intelligence (EI) on the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2. Chapter Three describes the research procedures and tools used in the present book. Five testing instruments consisted of a: personal background questionnaire, questionnaire measuring the perception and expression of emotions in a foreign language, exposure to an L2 questionnaire, an OCEAN personality test, and a TEIQue (Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire). All these instruments are described in detail together with

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

xiii

various scales adapted for scoring purposes. This chapter also presents participants’ profiles, administration procedures. Chapter Four presents the statistical procedures and the empirical findings of the present research. A detailed statistical analysis of all the measured factors is provided, as well as a discussion of the findings. Chapter Five provides a detailed qualitative data analysis supported throughout by the analysis of respondents’ insights concerning the complex relationship between language, culture, and emotion perception and use that complements the quantitative data analysis presented in Chapter Four. The book concludes in Chapter Six with a more general discussion of the findings and of the possible role of immersion in a foreign language and culture in the process of the perception and expression of emotions in native and non-native language, as well as the conceptual shift that might occur due to such exposure. I would like to conclude the preface by acknowledging and thanking those people who have been most influential in writing of this book. The people to whom I am scholarly most indebted are Professor Aneta Pavlenko and Professor Jean-Marc Dewaele, whose ideas I develop in this book. I could not have completed this work without the help of my Ph.D. supervisor Professor Jean-Marc Dewaele. His patience, support and criticism helped me grow academically and professionally. I am also very grateful for the contributions of colleagues and friends, whose assistance cannot be underestimated. Particular thanks go to my second supervisor K.V. Petrides for support and advice on using Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue). Thanks go also to Aneta Pavlenko, Panos Athanasopoulos and Anna Ewert for their help in gathering the necessary bibliography. Finally, I wish to thank my family members, especially my husband Daniel and my daughter Julia for their unstinting support and for putting up with it all.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

L1 L2 SLA LGS ESC EI TEI OCEAN

TEIQue IPIP

First Language Second Language Second Language Acquisition Length of stay English-speaking country Emotional Intelligence Trait Emotional Intelligence Personality test measuring such factors as Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire International Personality Item Pool

CHAPTER ONE BILINGUALISM AND PERCEPTION AND EXPRESSION OF EMOTIONS

1.1. Introduction Emotions are perceived as very important to human life (Wierzbicka, 1992). They enable us to function in a given environment and are the threads that weave together the fabric of society (Smith, 1759). Many anthropologists now claim that differences between emotional experiences around the world are minor compared with the similarities (Evans, 2001: xiv). However, it is impossible not to acknowledge that every culture has its own emotional climate. Emotional climates depend on underlying emotional culture, and both influence, and are affected by, emotional atmosphere (de Rivera, 1992).Tagiuri (1968) notes that emotional climate is a molar concept (like personality) but that it is experienced as external to the person (as part of the environment), although the person may feel he or she contributes to its nature, and that it has a connotation of continuity, but is not as lasting as culture. Emotional climate is “the relatively enduring quality of the total environment that (a) is experienced by the occupants, (b) influences their behavior, and (c) can be described in terms of the values of a particular set of characteristics (or attributes) of the environment” (Tagiuri, 1968:25). Emotional climate specific emotional experiences in different cultures, as described by Wierzbicka: “Different languages are linked with different ways of thinking as well as different ways of feeling; they are linked with different attitudes, different ways of relating to people, different ways of expressing one’s feelings” (Wierzbicka, 2004: 98)

The main issue that is to be addressed in the present book is connected both with the universality and cultural differences of emotions. It aims to

2

Chapter One

examine whether exposure to a foreign language and culture changes the perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2 and the possible influence of the personality traits and emotional intelligence on this process. It secondarily addresses the notion of feeling different or being a different person when operating in a foreign language.

1.2. A personal reflection The idea of carrying out research on the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 among bilinguals and L2 users resulted from my own experiences. I spent four years in Ireland, where I was using English, my L2, on an everyday basis both for professional and personal purposes. It is important to mention that prior to my stay in Ireland I graduated in English Philology in Poland so I was used to reading, writing and conversing in English (my L2) as I had been doing so for the previous five years. Nevertheless, after being immersed in English language and culture and not having so many opportunities to communicate in Polish, I noticed that not only am I a different person when operating in my L2, but I also started to feel differently, as if I were the same person but with an enlarged emotional repertoire. In some instances I felt in Polish and in others in English; even if these emotions could be linguistically translated from one language into another they still felt different. This was quite a new observation for me. Even though I had been using English for professional purposes for a long time prior to this, I had never observed any changes in my behavior or perception of emotions imposed by L2 use. Following this path I started interviewing Polish native speakers with a high command of English who had been living in an English-speaking country (ESC) for two years or more. My inquiry concerned whether there had been any change in the perception and expression of emotions in these two languages after some period of exposure to L2 language and culture. This informal pilot study revealed that most of my respondents noted a change, either in behavior while using their L2 or in “feeling different” while operating in it. Some interviewees even claimed to feel different emotions than those learned and known in their L1, as if using a foreign language changed their emotional repertoire. The next step was interviewing friends from the Polish University who had studied English with me. Most of them had graduated with an MA degree in English Philology, so their command of English was very high. They only criterion for choosing these informants was no or a very limited stay in an ESC. They were asked the same question concerning any noticeable changes in behavior, perception or expression of emotions while operating in L2 and

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

3

most of them admitted that they felt more self-confident knowing that they had acquired a high command of a foreign language and were able to converse in it on any topic, but they rarely pointed to any behavioral or emotional changes imposed by operating in a second language. This pilot study was based on interviewing approximately 15 people in Ireland in person and about 18 in Poland either in person or by sending an e-mail. I found that the majority of informants who were living in an Ireland and were exposed to L2 culture and language pointed to some kind of undefined change in behavior and perception or expression of emotions, whereas the group of graduates who were highly proficient in L2, but had spent no (or very limited) time in an ESC, failed to report such changes, at least to such an extent as the group of Polish immigrants to Ireland. These findings resulted in my growing interest in the topic and an intention to research it in order to find out whether exposure to a foreign language and culture can change the perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2. I decided to research the influence of exposure to foreign language and culture on the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 because if any change occurs, it most likely influences our emotional repertoire as such, and not a specific L2 emotional perception. Based on personal experience, I felt this to be true but I needed to find out how to empirically research such an “emotional” topic, which led me to a very fascinating field of culture and emotions.

1.3. Culture and emotions “What is an emotion?” That question was asked in precisely that form by James over 100 years ago (James, 1884). But philosophers have been concerned about the nature of emotion since Socrates as emotions have always been important, often perceived as threat to reason and danger to philosophy (Solomon, 2004). Emotion is the complex psychophysiological experience of an individual’s state of mind as interacting with biochemical (internal) and environmental (external) influences. In humans, emotion fundamentally involves “physiological arousal, expressive behaviors, and conscious experience” and is associated with mood, temperament, personality and disposition, and motivation (Myers, 2004). The cultural theory of emotions claims that emotions are learned behaviors, transmitted culturally, much like languages (Evans, 2001). According to this view, people living in different cultures should experience different emotions. But is it really the case? Pavlenko (2008) rightly notes that people feel the same emotions but different languages might provide different means to access our feelings as well as shape the way we express our emotions.

4

Chapter One

As already mentioned by OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012), the relationship between culture and emotion is a very important one, as culture “shapes” the perception and expression of emotion through the social constructions of reality that presumably characterize important aspects of one’s culture (e.g., American culture is individualistic; East Asian cultures are collectivistic and group oriented; Mexican culture is family oriented, etc.) (Matsumoto, 2006: 422). As Matsumoto stated: “Because cultural worldviews can differ across cultures, they can help to construct different self-concepts in people of different cultures. Like the concept of the self (Markus, 1977), which is also a social construction, cultural worldviews are ideological belief systems that individuals use as guidelines to explain their and others’ behaviors. When reappraising events, therefore, it is likely that individuals will tap into these cultural and personal ideologies to retrieve guidelines for ways in which they should evaluate or appraise emotion-eliciting situations” (Matsumoto, 2006: 422)

OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012) writes that many researchers have suggested that any theory concerning emotion should include a linguistic and cultural element (Panayiotou, 2001; Rosaldo, 1980; Wierzbicka, 1994a, 1998). An argument supporting such a claim rests on the observation that some emotions that are key concepts in some cultures may be linguistically nonexistent in others (Panayiotou, 2001). It has been argued by many researchers that some concepts like “amae” (Doi, 1990), “fago” (Lutz, 1988), “perezhivat” (Pavlenko, 2002), “stenahoria” (Panayiotou, 2006), or “tĊsknota” (Wierzbicka, 1992) may not be translated into other languages when taking their cultural manifestation into account (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012). Nevertheless, Pavlenko noted that: “To say that emotion concepts vary does not imply that speakers of different languages have distinct physiological experiences. Rather, it means that they may have somewhat different vantage points from which to evaluate and interpret their own and others’ emotional experiences” (Pavlenko, 2008: 150).

In support of Pavlenko’s (2008) statement, there is a body of research which claims that there are more similarities than differences in the perception of emotions in the typologically distant languages that are Japanese, Chinese and English than had been previously assumed (Moore, Romney, Hsia & Rush, 1999). Moore, Romney, Hsia & Rush (1999) demonstrated that culture had a shared cognitive structure among all languages and that there were important similarities in the perception of given emotion terms in dissimilar languages (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012).

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

5

Their suggestions might relate to the important question of universal vs. culture-specific aspect of emotions.

1.3.1.

Universal or culture-specific?

The debate concerning whether emotions are universal or culturespecific dates back to Darwin (1872), who described the universal nature of facial expressions. Ekman (1969) in the late 1960’s provided the first scientific evidence that the cultural theory of emotion, which stated that emotions are learned behaviors, might not be entirely accurate. By showing photographs portraying various emotions to people from remote cultures, Ekman discovered that they were able to recognize the given emotion and assign a situation that could elicit it. Although the cultural theory of emotion was very popular at that time, Ekman scientifically proved that some of the emotions are “hardwired into a human brain” (Evans, 2001) and present in all cultures. His research changed the approach to studying emotions and it is now widely accepted among emotion researchers that some emotions are not learned, but universal and innate (Evans, 2001: 6). Among such universal emotions Ekman enumerated: joy, distress, anger, fear, surprise, and disgust. This suggests two categories of emotions: universal emotions that are innate and common to all human beings on the one hand, and culture-specific emotions that can be developed only if you are exposed to them by your culture (Wierzbicka, 1999) on the other. “Our common emotional heritage binds humanity together in a way that transcends cultural difference. In all places and all times, human beings have shared the same basic emotional repertoire. Different cultures have elaborated on this repertoire, exalting different emotion downgrading others, and embellishing the common feelings of cultural nuances” (Evans 2001: 11).

The debate concerning whether emotions are universal or culturespecific implies a binary decision between universality and specificity. However, it had already been suggested that emotions could be both universal and recognizable in all cultures, as demonstrated by Ekman, and culture specific, like the emotion of “being a wild pig” felt by the Gururumba people of New Guinea that is apparently never experienced by people from other cultures. People who experience it behave just like wild pigs: they run wild, looting articles of small value and attacking bystanders (Evans, 2001). This could suggest that undoubtedly we are equipped with a set of universal emotions but at the same time the culture we happen to

6

Chapter One

live in provides us with means of expressing them or with another set of culture-specific and unique emotions. This point of view could explain why we are able to recognize basic emotions among various nations but at the same time experience and learn new emotions like English “frustration” (Panayiotou, 2004), Russian “perezhivat” (Pavlenko, 2002; Pavlenko & Driagina, 2007), Polish “tĊsknota” (Wierzbicka, 1992), Greek “stenahoria” (Panayiotou, 2004), Italian “fare festa a qualcuno” (Parks, 1996) and many more by means of immersing in a foreign language and culture (that is living in a foreign country and using its language on everyday basis). Lantolf (1999), notes that immersion in the second culture seems to play an important role in the learners’ ability to construct conceptual organizations and lexical paradigms similar to those of native speakers. Panayiotou’s (2004) studies with Greek-English bilinguals show a number of language-specific terms that are perceived as untranslatable. One such term is the English word “frustration” used in a code-switched utterance by Greek-English bilinguals during a conversation in Greek in order to describe a specific feeling. A similar situation arises with respect to a Greek emotion of “stenahoria”: a socioculturally determined pattern of experience and expression which is acquired and subsequently felt in the body, featuring in specific social situations, which could be loosely translated into English as sadness, discomfort, or suffocation (Panayiotou, 2004). What is of great importance here is the fact that Greek-English bilinguals would never use this term in English as they claim that one cannot feel “stenahoria” in English; this is not because of the lack of an equivalent term in English but rather because of the lack of an appropriate situation which could evoke it in English (Panayiotou, 2004: 133). Pavlenko and Driagina (2007) used a narrative elicitation of two short films in order to investigate the non-equivalent emotion words “frustration” and “perezhivat”, which could be translated as to suffer, to worry, or to experience things keenly. They found that monolingual Russian speakers systematically used the term “perezhivat” to describe the feelings of the main characters in the film, whereas American L2 learners of Russian and Russian-English bilinguals residing in the USA did not use the term at all. Nevertheless some of them borrowed the word “frustration” into Russian to describe the main character (Pavlenko, 2009: 139). This suggests that there is a possibility of acquiring new ways of expressing emotions by means of affective socialization and immersion in a L2 culture and language. Similarly, Dewaele (2008b: 249) suggested, with respect to the Italian concept “fare festa” that this could be learned only through a process of socialization and that second language learners of Italian might be able to learn to recognize such concepts only through

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

7

exposure to Italian culture. Consequently, if exposure to a foreign language facilitates or enables a learner to acquire new emotion concepts it would be plausible to ask how this new “emotional” knowledge influences the perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2 as well as what is the role of sociolinguistic and socio-cultural competence in that process.

1.4. Sociolinguistic and socio-cultural competence Language and culture are closely tied to one another and have a profound influence on both verbal and non-verbal communication. Snow (1999) suggests that apart from the cognitive aspects of L2 learning (i.e. problems faced by L2 learners and users while acquiring a complex system that has overlap with the complex systems already acquired) the societal context of bilingualism also has to be acquired, as “language use is tied closely to personal identity, to cultural identification, to national or ethnic pride, to specific communicative tasks or situation, and to a set of attitudes and beliefs that influence the course of SLA” (Snow, 1999: 468).In this respect, sociolinguistic competence comes into play, described by Ranney (1992: 25) as “the ability to perform various speech acts, the ability to manage conversational turns and topics, sensitivity to variation in register and politeness, and an understanding of how these aspects of language vary across the social roles and settings”. Some components of communication are culturally-dependent, including the degree of formality in one’s speech or body language (Cohen & Olshtain, 1981), and the significance of the length of a pause or of a change in tone (Chun, 1998). Acquisition of sociolinguistic and socio-cultural factors could not only broaden knowledge of cultural and social norms present in every society (and as a result facilitate communication processes) but also enlarge the emotional repertoire by means of which acquisition of new concepts takes place. It was suggested that only by a process of secondary affective socialization might foreign language learners internalize concepts that are non-existent in their L1 (Pavlenko, 2008). Only by immersion in the L2 language and culture can all components of socio-cultural competence be fully acquired, including social contextual factors, stylistic appropriateness factors, cultural factors, and non-verbal communicative factors (CelceMurcia, Dorneyi & Thurred, 1995). It is believed that some L2 concepts connected with sociolinguistic and socio-cultural competence could be acquired only by socialization in the L2 culture (Arabski, 2006; Dewaele, 2008b; Pavlenko, 2008; Wierzbicka, 2004). In this respect, Wierzbicka (2004: 97) notes that Polish and English concepts are linked with different

8

Chapter One

cultural models and different emotional scripts. Apart from evoking possible linguistic misunderstandings, there is a cultural and emotional mismatch which could be overcome by contact with L2 culture (Wierzbicka, 2004). Similarly, Arabski (2006: 15) comments that “it is the culture which is transformed, language structures being a part of it”. Meanwhile, Regan, Howard & Lemée (2009:3) state that: “In our globalized multicultural/multilingual world, communities are constantly shifting and individuals move in and out of them. People need to adapt to that constant shift in communities and find their own place in the speech community which they currently inhabit. Knowledge of grammatical and structural elements of the L2 is only a part of the skills and competencies which are necessary for this process of adaptation; sociolinguistic and sociocultural competences are equally important. These competences condition the L2 speaker’s view of themselves in the L2 speech community, their view of their own community as well as the way they are perceived by the L2 community in turn, and this consequently affects the place they occupy in that community or communities and their progress through it”.

1.5. Bilingualism and emotions OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012), notes that according to Matsumoto (1994) in the case of bi-cultural bilinguals, each language may access a different set of cultural values. He also hypothesized that the behavior of bilingual individuals would depend on the language that is in current use. At the same time, Wierzbicka (1999) claimed that the way people interpret their own emotions depends on the vocabulary provided by their native language. Following this line of argument it could be stated that in the case of bilinguals or L2 users who are operating in two typologically distant languages this interpretation of emotions might change due to exposure to a foreign language (Pavlenko, 2005). It has been empirically demonstrated that emotion concepts vary across languages and cultures (Pavlenko, 2008). By emotion concepts we understand: “Prototypical scripts that are formed as a result of repeated experiences and involve causal antecedents, appraisals, physiological reactions, consequences, and means of regulation and display.” (Pavlenko, 2008: 150).

OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012) writes after Russell (1991a) that these concepts are embedded within larger systems of beliefs of psychological and social processes, often viewed as cognitive models, folk theories of

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

9

mind, or ethno-psychologies. Pavlenko (2008: 151) enumerates three possible relationships between concepts encoded in two different languages in her analysis of concept comparability: similar or identical concepts across the two languages; a concept from one language which has no counterpart in the other language; and two or more concepts from the two different languages which are in partial overlap. In the first case complete overlap of concepts in L1 and L2 may facilitate positive transfer in the L2 learning process. In the second case learners find no translation equivalent in their L1 conceptual and linguistic repertoires and in order to internalize such concepts, L2 learners have to undergo the process of secondary affective socialization and develop prototypical scripts for these emotions. In the last case one concept may represent a subpart of another or refer to a lexically and conceptually different term in other language. In the case of bilinguals or second language users living in a foreign country, interpretation of emotions might change due to exposure to a foreign language (Pavlenko, 2005) and a conceptual shift may occur. This conceptual shift can be hypothesized to take place in the lexicon of the L2 user residing in an L2 context, where representations of partially overlapping concepts have shifted in the direction of L2-based concepts. Such a conceptual shift was observed in the performance of RussianEnglish bilinguals when producing Russian (L1) narratives; they used a combination of change-of-state verbs and adjectives to describe emotions as states, rather than as processes, as is common in Russian (L1), thus displaying an influence of L2 on L1 performance (Pavlenko, 2002; Stepanova Sachs & Coley, 2006). On the basis of the research detailed above, it can be concluded that bilinguals indeed appear to express emotions differently to monolinguals, and that immersion in a foreign language and culture might change the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2. Nevertheless, a key outstanding question concerns the influence of personality on this process. None of the studies presented above considered both personality traits and emotional intelligence as contributing factors. This insufficiency could be partly attributable to the fact that research carried out from a linguistic point of view traditionally concentrates on linguistic variables and avoids incorporating psychological variables. In this respect, Dewaele & van Oudenhoven (2009: 4) noted: “Experts on multilingualism do focus on the linguistic aspects of immigration and acculturation, but typically pay less attention to psychological aspects”. However, inclusion of individual differences seems to be justified in an investigation of crosslinguistic differences and similarities. It is important to consider a “real person” behind the data, a reality which cannot be reduced to one or

10

Chapter One

two linguistic variables (most frequently linguistic history and linguistic performance). Rather, the situation is much more complex and needs to be addressed from the psychological point of view as well as from the linguistic one. It has already been demonstrated that some crosslinguistic differences could be entirely accounted for by individual differences and not crosslinguistic differences (Matsumoto, 2006). Therefore, inclusion of psychological variables such as personality traits and emotional intelligence is of vital importance in any crosslinguistic research as it yields a much richer picture than that gained by examination of linguistic variables alone.

1.6. Personality and emotions Child (1986: 239) has defined personality as: “the more or less stable and enduring organization of a person’s character, temperament, intellect and physique which determines his unique adjustment to the environment”. Major approach to the study of human personality is “trait theory” and trait theorists are primarily interested in the measurement of “traits”, which can be defined as habitual patterns of behavior, thought, and emotion (Kassin, 2003). As noted by OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012) Allport& Odbert (1936), pioneers in the study of traits, divided traits into “central” and “secondary” traits. In their approach, “secondary traits” are those that could be recognized within a given culture and “central traits” are those by which an individual may be recognized or characterized (Allport & Odbert, 1936). There is an unlimited number of potential traits that could be used to describe personality, however many psychologists currently believe that five factors are sufficient (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Among these five factors, later called “higher-order personality traits” or “The Big Five”, are: Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Neuroticism. Nevertheless, it is very important to remember that the evidence suggests that personality traits are hierarchically organized with more specific or lower-order traits (like EI) combining to form more generalized higherorder traits (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012). At the same time there are good reasons to consider that both higher-and lower-order levels of the hierarchy are important for understanding personality (Livesley et al.1998) that shapes various aspects of our life including SLA or affective socialization processes (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012). According to Stern (1983: 379), there are certain personality characteristics that “are helpful or detrimental to successful language learning”. Extraversion, for example, is seen as the factor influencing speech production both in L1 and L2. Its effect on communicative speech production in situations of varying formality makes this variable

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

11

particularly interesting from the point of view of expression of emotions in the first and second language. Extravert people are said not to have any problems with communication as they are more spontaneous and while interacting with a speaker of the target language they do not place as much emphasis on form, grammatical rules or linguistic structures (Klein, 1995). Generally, an extravert can be characterized an impulsive individual, who always has a ready answer, and generally likes change; (s)he is carefree, easy-going, optimistic, and does not keep feelings under tight control. On the other hand, the typical introvert is a quiet, retiring, introspective, fond of books rather than people and reserved and distant except to intimate friends. An introvert keeps feelings under close control, seldom behaves in an aggressive manner, and does not lose his/her temper easily (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1964: 8). Given this description of a single trait (Extraversion), it could be suggested that some personality traits might influence emotional expression in both L1 and L2. Consequently, personality traits should be incorporated as mediating variables in studies on bilingual emotion perception and expression as well as in studies on SLA as they might shed some light on the complex process of acquiring a foreign language. The acquisition of a foreign language is a complex process, characterized by Ellis (1985: 4-6) as: “The product of many factors pertaining to many interrelated factors. Acquisition refers to picking up a second language through exposure to the subconscious or conscious process by which a language is learnt in a natural or tutored setting. It covers the development of phonology, lexis, grammar and pragmatic knowledge.”

Learning a foreign language abroad, among native-speakers, favours the acquisition of vocabulary, pronunciation and the subconscious use of grammatical structures. The motivation for communication is likely to be stronger in this environment and therefore, the achievement of success in SLA might seem to be more certain. However, learning in a tutored setting, based on a more regular system can be conducive to the gradual assimilation of knowledge which is potentially more suitable for some personality types. Dewaele (2008b) and Pavlenko (2008) commented that immersion in a foreign language and culture is necessary for the affective socialization process under consideration in the present study. The current study hypothesized that some personality traits such as Extraversion may facilitate such a socialization process, since extraverts, who can be characterized as “talkative” and “sociable”, do not have any problems with interpersonal relationships; they are very responsive, and this is

12

Chapter One

significantly related to measures of language development. Introverted people, on the other hand, avoid interpersonal contact, are not willing participants in class activities and concentrate on form more than content. Introverts prefer to remain silent rather than to produce an utterance which violates form or grammatical rules. This hinders their interaction with speakers of the target language and prevents them from practicing the target language effectively. At the same time it was hypothesized that apart from higher-order personality traits also lower-order trait of emotional intelligence might influence the affective socialization process. The lower-order trait of emotional intelligence (EI) (Petrides, 2001) is a fairly new concept in SLA research. Dewaele, Petrides & Furnham (2008) researched the effects of emotional intelligence (EI) and sociobiographical variables on communicative anxiety in the first language and on foreign language anxiety in the second, third, and fourth languages of adult multilinguals. They found that higher scores on trait EI corresponded to significantly lower communicative anxiety and foreign language anxiety. Nevertheless, it appears that none of studies that researched perception or expression of emotions in the L2 have ever incorporated EI, with the exception of Dewaele (2008). Since emotional intelligence (EI) involves the ability to carry out accurate reasoning about emotions and the ability to use emotions and emotional knowledge to enhance thought (Mayer, Salovey & Caruso, 2008), incorporation of the EI as the mediating variable in a study of perception and expression of emotions seems appropriate. The current study hypothesized that the more emotionally intelligent a given person was, the more easily he/she would notice changes in behavior or perception of emotions caused by operating in a foreign language. It was important to find out whether emotionally intelligent informants would report such changes more frequently than respondents with a lower level of EI. Based on the review of the literature reported above, the present research seeks to address not only immersion in a foreign language and culture, but also the role of individual differences in the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2. Some individual differences, such as higher- (OCEAN personality test) and lower-order personality traits (Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire) were therefore included in the current study as it was hypothesized that they might influence perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2. It is crucial to note here that even if personality is more or less stable throughout one’s lifespan, it can still be shaped by environmental factors (Furnham & Heaven, 1999; Jang et al., 1996; McCrae et al., 2000). Dewaele & van Oudenhoven (2009: 12) showed that certain personality

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

13

dimensions of young teenagers were linked to their multilingualism and multiculturalism. They found that there was a relation between the number of languages mastered and multicultural personality dimensions: multilinguals scored significantly higher on the dimensions of Cultural Empathy and Openmindedness, and scored significantly lower on the dimension of Emotional Stability compared to mere incipient bilinguals, i.e. classroom learners of a second language. Another important finding was that language dominance had a significant effect on the five personality dimensions. On closer examination, it appeared that multidominance corresponded with significantly higher scores on the dimensions of Openmindedness, marginally higher scores on Cultural Empathy and significantly lower scores on Emotional Stability compared with participants who were dominant in a single language (Dewaele & van Oudenhoven, 2009: 12). Similarly, Hull (1987, 1990) showed that bilinguals might score differently on the same personality test depending on the language in which it was presented. This review of the literature might suggest that we might indeed display different personalities depending on the language that we are using and that the number of known and used languages might be related to personality dimensions. Therefore incorporating such psychological variables that take into account individual differences and emotional intelligence might shed more light on the very complex relationship between language, culture, and personality.

1.7. Researching emotions While considering the various studies researching emotions, the variety of methodologies and approaches employed was striking. Some research concentrated on perception, while others focussed on expression. Some studied emotions in the context of the first language and some in the context of the second language, or cross-linguistically. Since the present research focuses on the perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2, and concentrates on two languages governed by different emotional scripts, the aim of this section is to provide a brief overview of research conducted in the related fields of the perception and expression of emotions. It also addresses cultural aspects of emotion perception and expression as well as the notion of “feeling different” while operating in a foreign language. A brief overview of the research on the perception and expression of emotions in a foreign language follows below.

Chapter One

14

1.7.1.

Perception and expression of emotions in a foreign language

A number of studies have considered the perception of emotions in a foreign language. Among them was research carried out by Rintell (1984). She asked Arabic, Chinese and Spanish informants to listen to a taped conversation in their L2 (English) and then to identify the emotion expressed and rate its intensity. She discovered that L2 proficiency and native language had a strong effect on the perception of emotions in the L2. Another similar study conducted by Graham, Hamblin and Feldstein (2001) required informants to listen to a conversation and to select an appropriate emotion. This resulted in the similar finding that native language is an important factor, and in particular when it is typologically similar to L2 it facilitates perception of emotions in a foreign language. A number of recent studies demonstrate that bilinguals with languages that differ in their grammatical and lexical categories may shift their cognitive representation of those categories towards that of monolingual speakers of their second language (Imai and Mazuka, 2003; Levinson, 1996; Levinson, Kita, Haun and Rasch, 2002; Lucy and Gaskins, 2001, 2003; Majid, Bowerman, Kita, Haunand, Levinson, 2004; Roberson, 2005). Athanasopoulos (2008) suggested that the acquisition of an L2 with different concepts from the L1 can serve to reorganize the cognition of bilingual speakers, and that the degree of that reorganization is linked to the acquisition of specific grammatical categories which are present and obligatory in the L2 but absent, or optional, in the L1. Athanasopoulos (2009) examined the cognitive representation of color categories in bilinguals with languages that differ in the way they code the color space. Results showed a shift in focus placement with the level of bilingualism, but minimal differences in the extension of color terms on color space. This demonstrates that concepts in the human mind are not stable and fixed, but flexible and changing, susceptible to both linguistic and cultural influences. Czechowska & Evert (2010) claim that there is a possibility that change in bilingual perceptions takes place even if no differences are to be found in the linguistic domain. Their study consisted of two experiments whose aim was to investigate the influence of linguistic structures encoding motion on the perception of two aspects of motion: manner and path among Polish and English monolinguals and PolishEnglish bilinguals. According to Talmy (1985, 2000), languages can be divided into two groups on the basis of how they encode two aspects of motion-manner and path. The group of “satellite-framed” languages, e.g. the Germanic group, conveys primarily manner of motion, which is

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

15

encoded in a main verb in a sentence, while path of motion is expressed by a preposition or a particle, i.e. a satellite. The group of “verb-framed” languages, e.g. the Romance group, conveys primarily path of motion, which is encoded in a main verb in a sentence, while manner of motion is expressed only additionally in an adverbial phrase or other verbs. Slobin (2003) suggested that these lexicalization strategies have cognitive consequences for speakers of a given language group: speakers of “satellite-framed” languages pay more attention to manner of motion, while speakers of “verb-framed” languages pay more attention to path of motion. In other words, the way in which a particular language encodes motion might influence how one conceptualizes actions, attracting the speaker’s attention to the feature that is encoded more saliently in language, i.e. either manner or path (Czechowska & Ewert, 2010). Polish and English belong to the same group of satellite-framed languages that encode manner of motion more saliently than its path. Nevertheless, despite many similarities in motion lexicalization, there are some crucial differences between these two languages and it was hypothesized that mentioned differences in motion lexicalization between Polish and English will have cognitive consequences in that speakers of English will pay additional attention to path of motion in comparison to speakers of Polish (Czechowska & Ewert, 2010). Czechowska & Ewert’s (2010) experiments made use of nonlinguistic materials in order to avoid examining the influence of language on language, i.e. linguistic transfer (Lucy, 1992). They have found that the conceptualization of motion by English monolinguals appears to be influenced by the linguistic structures of their language. The same holds true for Polish monolinguals; in comparison to speakers of English they do not pay as much attention to path, as this aspect of motion seems not to be encoded as saliently in Polish as it is in English. These findings support the hypothesis that differences in motion lexicalization between Polish and English have cognitive consequences for speakers of these languages. Their research on bilinguals showed the conceptual shift towards the L2 even in the least proficient bilinguals and a restructuring of the conceptual domain in the two most proficient groups. This might suggest that with acquisition of a foreign language we undergo a conceptual shift that takes place in L2 users’ and bilinguals’ perceptions even if it does not show in the linguistic domain. Some other studies have looked at perception of emotions in a foreign language by using a Stroop test that measures interference in a color naming task (Stroop, 1935). This methodology is based on the finding that it takes participants longer to identify the ink color of incongruent color words (e.g. the word BLUE printed in red ink) than of congruent color

16

Chapter One

(e.g. the word BLUE printed in blue ink) or control stimuli (e.g. XXX printed in blue ink). Among studies employing this methodology, Altarriba and Mathis (1997) taught Spanish color words to English monolinguals with no prior knowledge of Spanish and found that monolingual English participants produced a significant Stroop interference effect for Spanish color words, after a single learning session. Similar patterns of the classic Stroop effect have been observed in monolingual and bilingual populations, and for fluent bilinguals the Stroop effect seems to be equivalent in size between L1 and L2 (i.e., Rosselli et al., 2002; cf. Eilola et al, 2007: 9). Another version of the Stroop task is an Emotional Stroop task, adapted to examine emotional stimuli. In the emotional Stroop task, participants are presented with emotion words (e.g., anger, fear, jealousy) and neutral words (e.g., boat, car, train) instead of color congruent (RED in red ink) and color incongruent (RED in blue ink) words. It was intended that this would yield information regarding the automatic capture of attention of the emotional components of word stimuli (see e.g., Sutton & Altarriba, 2008; Sutton, Altarriba, Gianico, & Basnight-Brown, 2007). The data indicated that negative emotion words lead to slower reaction times for color naming than positive or neutral words (Altarriba & Basnight-Brown, 2007). Santiago-Rivera & Altarriba (2002) suggest that emotional words are more deeply encoded in L1 than in L2 as they are experienced in a greater variety of contexts and therefore able to develop multiple memory traces, strengthening their semantic representation at the same time. Many researchers have also examined the expression of emotions in a foreign language (e.g. Dewaele, 2004; Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002; Panayiotou 2004, 2006; Pavlenko, 2005, 2006, 2008); a consistent finding has been that L2 users experience more difficulties in expressing emotions in their L2 (Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002; Pavlenko, 2004, 2005, 2006). Dewaele and Pavlenko (2002) also examined how emotion vocabulary is incorporated and used in interlanguage. In the case of Flemish students, recorded while conversing about everyday topics, Extraversion, gender and L2 proficiency were significant predictors of use of emotion vocabulary in the interlanguage. In the case of Russian L2 learners of English and Russian- English bilinguals who were asked to retell a short film showing violations of privacy: a roommate reading someone else’s letter without his or her permission. Informants of the study were to describe what they just saw in the film. In both studies gender and cultural differences in the perception of the notion of privacy were found to be significant factors. Another important finding was a conceptual shift that

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

17

was observed in the performance of Russian-English bilinguals as they used a combination of change-of-state verbs and adjectives (typically used in English L2) to describe emotions as states rather than as processes in their Russian (L1) narratives (Pavlenko 2002, Stepanova Sachs and Coley 2006). In another study, Dewaele (2004a) found that multilinguals swear mostly in their dominant language and that the perceived force of swearwords is highest in the L1 and gradually lower in languages learned subsequently. He also found that participants who learned their languages in naturalistic or partly naturalistic settings gave higher ratings for the emotional force of swearwords in that language than learners who acquired the language in instructed settings.

1.7.2.

Cultural differences and expression and perception of emotions

As it was shown in the previous section, the expression of emotions in a foreign language might cause some difficulties. Two distant languages could differ not only from a linguistic point of view, but also as far as the cultural norms and manifestations of a given emotion is concerned. Altarriba (2003) found that several emotion terms in Greek and English cannot be directly translated. Even such emotion terms as “love” or “anger” may be untranslatable when one takes the cultural manifestation of a given word into account. In Pavlenko’s (2006) research based on a web questionnaire (Dewaele & Pavlenko 2001-2003), 47% percent of respondents positively identified with “feeling different” while operating in a foreign language. Wilson (2008) took up the notion of feeling different while operating in a foreign language and researched this notion in the light of personal differences and sociobiographical data. She found a negative relationship between Extraversion and feeling different when operating in a foreign language for participants who rated their foreign language proficiency at intermediate level or above. She also found a significant effect for educational level, with individuals with schoolleaving qualifications or below more likely to feel different. Finally, age of acquisition (AoA) was shown to be a significant factor: participants who had learned their L2 at a younger age were more likely to feel differently (Wilson, 2008: 157). It was suggested by Pavlenko (2006) that languages may create different worlds for their speakers, who feel that their selves change with the shift to a different language. The empirical findings are confirmed by the autobiographical insights of such writers as BaraĔczak (1990), Besemeres (2002, 2004), Hoffman (1989), Parks (1996), or Wierzbicka

18

Chapter One

(1997, 1999). The common point of reference in all these cases is differences in languages both at the lexical and mental levels of representation. Hoffman (1989) writes about differences in the expression of emotional experiences in Polish and English. BaraĔczak (1990) describes cultural as well as linguistic differences between English and Polish and the untranslatability of such common English concepts as “happy”. Wierzbicka (1992, 1999) consequently demonstrates that the meanings of cognates from different languages do not directly correspond with each other and that they reflect and convey ways of living and ways of thinking characteristic of a given society, as priceless clues to the understanding of culture. A key question, not previously investigated in any of the studies described above, is to what extent the differences in the expression and perception of emotions in bilingual and monolingual speakers are the result of L2 knowledge and immersion in an L2 culture and language, compared with dependence on personality? In other words, to what extent is personality responsible for changes in the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2? None of the studies presented above (Panayiotou, 2004; Pavlenko, 2002; Pavlenko & Driagina, 2007; Wierzbicka, 1992) have considered personality and individual differences as a potential variable influencing changes in the perception and expression of emotions/emotion terms. The authors report qualitative and quantitative differences in the perception and expression of emotions by bilingual and monolingual speakers, but the variables are limited to the linguistic history of a given informant versus her/his linguistic performance, without paying attention to personality traits. Even more significantly, none of the studies dealing with emotions included emotional intelligence as a potential factor that might be crucial in the process of expressing and perceiving of emotions in both L1 and L2. The sole exception is Dewaele’s (2008: 1764) research, which examined in which language the self-perceived emotionality of the term “I love you” is the highest. He distinguished three options: (1) L1 dominance when the dominant language coincided with the L1; (2) L1 + LX if more than one language including the L1 was said to be dominant; (3) LX dominance if a language other than the L1 was presented as the dominant language. He found that only language-specific variables were strongly linked to the perception of emotional weight. Self-reported language dominance also exerted a strong influence but not gender, trait Emotional Intelligence or education level (Dewaele, 2008: 1775). Although no differences according to emotional intelligence proved significant, it must be remembered that the sample in that study consisted of highly educated, mostly female

Bilingualism and Perception and Expression of Emotions

19

polyglots and was not representative of the general population. While this does not hinder the analysis, it may be important in terms of assessing the generalizability of the results (Dewaele, 2008: 1780). The main aim of this book is to investigate whether immersion in a foreign language and culture changes the perception of emotions not only in the L2 but also in the L1. At the same time, it serves to underscore the importance of incorporating additional variables, especially personality traits and emotional intelligence, in order to create a broader picture of the whole process, and to stress the importance of analyzing such topics from a number of possible angles.

1.8. Summary In summary, a brief overview of the field of language acquisition, cultural differences, emotional expression, perception, and individual differences showed that there indeed appear to be some cultural differences in the perception and expression of emotions. At the same time, it was suggested that the L2 socialization process may facilitate the acquisition of some culture-specific notions and that cognitive processes could be modified by linguistic and cultural influences. The present contribution examines complex socio-cultural differences between Polish and English that may influence and shape the expression and perception of emotions. As mentioned above, Polish and English differ greatly in many aspects including social scripts for expressing emotions or even grammatical categories of words denoting emotions (Polish-verbs, English-adjectives). The main question posed by this book is whether immersion in an L2 culture and language that is distant from the L1 changes the perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2. If so, which of the factors under examination (length and intensity of socialization, sociobiographical data, personal differences or emotional intelligence) contribute to such a change? The present study will consider the following research questions: x Can the perception of culture-specific and universal emotions gradually change as a consequence of socialization into a foreign language and culture? x Is the accurate perception and expression of emotions in the L2 linked to exposure to and proficiency in the L2? x Is the perception and expression of emotion linked to personality traits, including emotional intelligence?

20

Chapter One

Bearing in mind that the majority of the world’s population is bilingual/multilingual (Li Wei, 2007), answering these questions will shed new light on the acquisition of sociopragmatic and socio-cultural competence in the L2 by adult learners. By considering the perception and expression of emotions in a first and a second language that differ radically in emotion scripts, we should be able to determine to what extent multilingualism and multiculturalism is a dynamic process, with mutual influences between both languages, as well as the role of lower and higher order personality traits in this process.

CHAPTER TWO EMOTIONS, LANGUAGE AND CULTURE: AN OVERVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

2.1. Introduction Emotions are widely perceived as important in life as they enable us to exist in a given culture. We think, we feel, we perceive and at the same time we want to express our thoughts, feelings and perceptions, mainly because we want to share them with other people (Wierzbicka, 1992). Many researchers agree that emotions are not purely biological events, but are influenced and shaped by culture (Frijda, 1986; Lutz 1988; Matsumoto, 1994; Rosaldo 1984; Wierzbicka, 1999). Emotions are “selfconcerning, partly physical responses that are at the same time aspects of a moral and ideological attitude; emotions are feelings and cognitive constructions, linking person, action, and sociological milieu” (Rosaldo 1984: 304). This approach to emotions shows that they are not isolated notions but an essential part of language and culture. Such a view concerning emotions was adopted by a number of researchers who sought to demonstrate that not only might emotion concepts and emotion scripts differ across cultures and languages, but also that some of these concepts are untranslatable (Anthanasiadou & Tabakowska, 1998; Rosaldo, 1980; Wierzbicka, 1999). On the other hand, some studies have shown that there is some commonly shared emotional knowledge among typologically distant languages (Moore, Romney, Hsia & Rush 1999; Romney, Moore & Rush, 1997). They suggest that culture has a shared cognitive structure among all languages and there are important similarities in the perception of given emotion terms in dissimilar languages. The present contribution to the debate is concerned with the perception and expression of L1 and L2 emotions by bilinguals, monolinguals and L2 users. It seeks to investigate whether exposure to a L2 influences the perception and expression of L1 emotions, and whether personality traits

22

Chapter Two

and emotional intelligence influence the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2.

2.2. Language and thought Discussing the possible relation between language and thought is crucial to an investigation of the possible influence of language on the way emotions are perceived and expressed. This book considers the influence of linguistic classifications on speech and thought, and any possible changes in the perception and expression of emotions that might occur with the acquisition of a foreign language and immersion in its culture. With that in mind, a discussion of the possible influence of language on thought seems to be justified. This section presents some literature that addresses this issue and forms the theoretical framework of the current research. The complex relationship between language and thought was widely discussed by a number of philosophers, psychologists and linguists including Carruthers (1996); Chomsky (1957); Fodor (1987); Searle (1983); Whorf (1956) and Wittgenstein (1921), to name just a few. The main question is: What is the role of language in the thinking process? Does language transfer the thought in a “transparent” way without influencing the thinking process itself, or conversely, does it determine it and shape the thought and thinking process? A further question of great importance concerns the place of a foreign language in human thought and cognition (Pavlenko, 1999). The cognitive conception of language is described below and its weaker “Neo-Whorfian” version is presented as the version adopted for the present book.

2.2.1. The cognitive conception of language: A proposal for a theoretical framework The cognitive conception of language has been endorsed by such philosophers as Wittgenstein (1953); Leibniz (1704); Dennett (1991) and Carruthers (1996) and suggests that people are unique in the range and sophistication of their thoughts as well as in possessing natural language. This natural language makes distinctively human thought possible. However, the most radical and best known argument for the cognitive conception of language came from a linguist, Benjamin Lee Whorf (1956). According to Whorf’s linguistic relativity hypothesis, human concepts and ways of thinking, and indeed much of the very structure of the brain itself, are acquired by young children from adults when they learn a native

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

23

language and become immersed in the culture (Carruthers & Boucher, 1998). Whorf claimed that linguistic classifications might influence not only the way we talk, but also the way we think. In other words one might perceive a word differently depending upon the language spoken, what was showed by Lucy (1992). He demonstrated that language has an influence on the way humans think about the world around them in a comparative study of English and Yucatec Mayan, a language that lacks count-mass syntax. Lucy (1992) used a similarity judgment task in which subjects compared one entity to two others, one similar on a shape dimension and the other on a material dimension (e.g. a cardboard box followed by a piece of cardboard and a plastic box). He found that Yucatec Mayan subjects demonstrated a strong preference for the material choice, while English subjects consistently favored the shape choice. He proposed that this difference rested on lexical semantics. In English, since nouns are pre-specified as count or mass, quantificational information is encoded directly in the noun. As most nouns are classified on the basis of shape, shape may become the default, resulting in a shape-bias that shifts the classification patterns of English speakers. Yucatec Mayan nouns lack this “built-in” quantificational information. Quantification in Yucatec Mayan, like that in all classifier languages, depends on the modification of the head noun by a “classifier”, an individuating term analogous to English term like “piece of”. Since the same noun, when modified by a different classifier, may indicate a different quantification type and sometimes even a different referent, Lucy argued that the noun itself comes to favor the material dimension as more fundamental for classification (Lucy 1992). Language appeared, at least in the presented example, to have an impact on the way that the adult perceived the world in a nonlinguistic task. Lucy’s (1992) work suggested that language could influence thought, even a non-linguistic one. Other researchers also found that language, and especially early exposure to it, has an immediate and far-reaching impact on the aspects of a situation that children would include in their speech as well as on the formal means they use to convey those aspects (Berman & Slobin, 1994). They also found that as soon as children begin to speak, they behave like native speakers of a given language rather than like universal speakers, even at an early stage of language acquisition. One more argument in line with the previously mentioned ones could be the one proposed by Carruthers & Boucher, who write that: “We find wide variations in behaviors and social structures between different cultures, and equally wide variations amongst languages; yet these variations are not genetic- children born of one culture but brought

Chapter Two

24

up in another will of course develop the behaviors and practices of a native language; so the natural explanation is that the mind is initially a more or less blank slate (…), and that all the structure imposed upon it comes from the particular language the person acquires, and from the particular culture they find themselves immersed in” (Carruthers & Boucher, 1998: 6).

Cognitive conception theories claim that language is involved in, and partly constitutive of all kinds of thinking (Carruthers, 1996). At the same time, it suggests that animals and pre-linguistic infants are not capable of any thinking processes. However, the weak version of the cognitive conception of language allows that some thoughts, particularly visuospatial thoughts, and the thoughts available to infants and animals are independent of language. On the other hand, it can be safely stated that other thoughts implicate language. In other words, this version of the theory allows for special reasoning conducted independently of language, while many other types of reasoning are crucially conduced in language. The second aspect in which the cognitive conception could be weakened is that language is but one component of some of our reasoning systems and does not necessarily have to be implicated in all thoughts and thinking processes (Carruthers & Boucher, 1998). This tendency is postulated by an increasing number of scholars, termed “neo-Whorfians” by Pavlenko (2005: 434). The next section presents a more detailed account of this new approach to cognitive conception of language.

2.2.2.

“Neo-Whorfian” account of relationship between thought and language

Pavlenko (2005), claims that the current trend for investigations in linguistic relativity was derived from groundbreaking work by Lakoff (1987), Lucy (1996) and Levinson (2003). Although she refers to these scholars as “neo-Whorfians” she highlights the importance of differentiation among the researchers concerning their view of linguistic relativity or the relationship between language and thought. The label “neo-Whorfians” should not be taken to imply that all these scholars share an identical point of view, but rather that they share a common interest in the complex relationship between the ways in which different aspects of language may influence distinct modes of thought. Very important and characteristic for this weaker version of cognitive conception of language is that “neoWhorfians” acknowledge that some cognitive processes and modes of thought may not be affected by language at all (cf. Pavlenko, 2005). What is crucial for the present book is that:

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

25

“Unlike the traditional view of linguistic relativity, the functional approach is sensitive to alternative discursive constructions of reality that may be found within speech communities, influenced by age, gender, ethnicity, or socioeducational background of speakers. In this view, two different languages are no longer alternative ways of describing the “same reality’: They not only differ from each other, but also consist of multiple discourses associated with various contexts” (Pavlenko, 2005: 434).

It is of great importance that scholars have acknowledged the possibility of influence of particular languages on the speaker’s construction and perception of the world. This influence might be by means of structural patterns of languages, but the very fact of noticing that it may change due to participation in alternative discourses, such as foreign language learning is crucial. This suggests that L2 learning and socialization into new discourses may result in the assimilation of new perspectives. From the point of view of the present research, which examines the influence of exposure to an L2 on the perception of universal and culture-specific emotions in L1, this claim is crucial, as it allows the hypothesis that with acquisition of the foreign language, thinking patterns and perception of the world change. At this point, it is necessary to explore what is understood by the influence of language on thought. According to Lucy (1997), both verbal and nonverbal behaviors should be taken into consideration. “Nonverbal behaviors refer to those elicited through classification, categorization, sorting, matching, memory, and role-playing tasks; verbal behaviors include elicitation, inferencing, and picture description, as well as interviews, storytelling, and other conversational activities. In this view, the influence of language on thought will be seen as the case where the particular language interpretation guides or supports cognitive activity and hence the beliefs and behaviors dependent on it” (Lucy, 1997 cited in Pavlenko, 2005: 435).

“Neo-Whorfians” acknowledge that different linguistic levels may affect distinct cognitive processes and activities to different degrees or not at all. Contemporary linguistics aims to combine experimental research with the study of thought in an everyday context, that is, in daily activities and practices, at the intersection of linguistic psychology and anthropology, in order to uncover the subtle relationship between crosslinguistic differences and thought processes (Edwards, 1997; Lucy 1997; cf. Pavlenko, 2005: 436). The aim of the present contribution is also to combine experimental research on the perception and expression of emotions in L1 by bilinguals, L2 users, and monolinguals by investigating language use in an everyday context. It aims to discover whether exposure

26

Chapter Two

to an L2 may change the way the informants of the study express themselves and perceive the world.

2.3. Cross-linguistic influences on language and cognition Cross-linguistic influence could be described as the influence of a person’s knowledge of one language on that person’s knowledge or use of another language (Jarvis and Pavlenko, 2008: 1). So far, this question has been widely addressed in many areas including syntax, semantics, phonology, discourse and morphology. Nevertheless, from the point of view of this book, the most important development of the research on language transfer has been the concentration on conceptual representation. Two types of language-independent and language-mediated conceptual representation have been differentiated. Language independent concepts develop experientially and have no predetermined means of linguistic expression, whereas language-mediated concepts develop in the process of language socialization (Jarvis and Pavlenko, 2008: 113).Jarvis & Pavlenko explained: “Languages differ with respect to the aspects of reality that they give prominence to. These differences have implications for how speakers of different languages perform both verbal and nonverbal tasks in either their native or later-learned language, and they also have implications for how learning another language can lead to changes in a person’s conceptual knowledge”(Jarvis & Pavlenko, 2008: xii).

Pavlenko & Jarvis (2002) have also pointed to the notion of “bidirectional” transfer, suggesting that not only does L1 influence L2 but that this relationship could be reversed, with L2 exerting an influence on use of L1.The main focus of this book is such “bidirectional” transfer (Pavlenko and Jarvis, 2002) that influences an individual’s use of both L1 and L2. It was suggested by Jarvis & Pavlenko (2008: 166) that there is an observable shift of concepts in various conceptual domains; however, this appears to occur most frequently with immigrants or expatriates who have spent a significant amount of time in the target language community. The possible changes in conceptual knowledge of an L2 user or L2 learner have already formed the object of many investigations. Some examples are described below. Andrews (1994) concentrated on differences in the English and Russian terms for “blue”. In English, there is one basic term for blue, whereas in Russian there are two: “sinij” and “goluboj”. Andrews found that monolingual speakers of Russian and recent adult immigrants

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

27

differentiated between these two types of blue. In contrast, the performance of younger Russian immigrants resembled that of monolingual speakers of English who perceive blue as unified conceptual category. Meanwhile, a more recent study conducted by Athanasopoulos (2009) investigated the domain of color in Greek-English bilinguals with different levels of bilingualism and English monolinguals. Greek differentiates the blue region of color space into a darker shade called “ble”and a lighter shade called “ghalazio”. He found a semantic shift of category prototypes with the level of bilingualism and acculturation; the way bilinguals judged the perceptual similarity between within- and crosscategory stimulus pairs depended strongly on the availability of the relevant color terms in semantic memory, and the amount of time spent in the L2-speaking country (Athanasopoulos, 2009: 83). Athanasopoulos (2006) also showed further evidence of shift, in research comparing monolingual English and Japanese speakers with Japanese speakers of English as a second language. Japanese is a non-plural-marking language and therefore it was suggested that contrary to the English informants, this group of respondents would not judge differences in the number of countable objects as more significant than differences in the number or amount of non-countable objects. Results showed that intermediate L2 speakers behaved similarly to the Japanese monolinguals while advanced L2 speakers behaved similarly to the English monolinguals. The results provide support for the claim that grammatical representation may influence cognition in specific ways (Athanasopoulos, 2006: 86). Meanwhile, in the domain of emotions, Pavlenko (2002b) showed evidence for conceptual shift in a group of Russian L2 users of English who shifted from describing emotions as processes and actions, to the expression of emotions as states, since in English emotions are expressed by means of adjectives and in Russian by means of verbs. In a follow-up study. Pavlenko and Driagina (2007) found similar transfer in American learners of Russian, visible in linguistic framing as well as the adjectival pattern that appeared not only in English but also in Russian narratives. These findings suggest that it is possible for language to affect cognition, and that the extent of that effect is closely linked to the acquisition of specific grammatical features and to linguistic proficiency. Some of the studies presented above also showed that nonlinguistic variables such as acculturation play an additional role in bilingual cognitive shift. Further, Athanasopoulos (2008) suggests that learning an L2 earlier in life may facilitate the redirection of attention to new conceptual categories, but it is ultimately specific linguistic competence that is most tightly linked with the bilingual cognitive shift. Overall, these results suggest that cognition is

28

Chapter Two

tightly linked to semantic memory for specific linguistic categories, and to cultural immersion in the L2-speaking country. Nevertheless, none of the studies presented above incorporated lower or higher order personality traits as a possible variable influencing such cognitive shift. Researchers have not investigated the possibility that personality or emotional intelligence might partly influence cognitive shift. Nevertheless, it was mentioned by Athanasopoulos (2009) and Jarvis & Pavlenko (2008) that some nonlinguistic variables as acculturation also play a role in the bilingual cognitive shift. Certain higher order personality traits like Extraversion or Openness might have an influence on the frequency of L2 use (Klein, 1995) and the amount of contact with the language and its culture might result in a greater or lesser acculturation or affective socialization, which on the other hand is needed for this bilingual cognitive shift (Jarvis and Pavlenko, 2008).

2.4. Language, culture and emotions While discussing the relationship between language culture, and emotions, it is very important to note that these are all closely related concepts. As stated by previous researchers, different cultures provide us with different cultural norms and cultural scripts for expressing emotions (Pavlenko, 2008; Wierzbicka, 1999). At the same time, emotions can be expressed through the language being used, which again provides us with certain vocabulary or concepts that might be culture-specific and that we need to acquire through the affective socialization process (Jarvis and Pavlenko,2008). Pavlenko (2008:151) enumerates three possible relationships between such concepts encoded in two different languages. In the first case, the complete overlap of concepts in L1 and L2 may facilitate positive transfer and L2 learning process. In the second case, learners who find no translation equivalent in their L1 conceptual and linguistic repertoires undergo the process of secondary affective socialization and develop prototypical scripts for these emotions in the L2. In the last case, one concept may represent a subpart of another or refer to a lexically and conceptually different term in other language. Emotions or emotion concepts are at least partly dependent on sociocultural context, in that they are learned and determined by patterns of experience and expression. Bilinguals adopt certain emotions as they learn the sociocultural significance that they carry in a specific system (Panayiotou, 2004). Since the bilingual cognitive shift under investigation is dependent on the acquisition of specific grammatical features and the level of proficiency reached in the specific language (Jarvis & Pavlenko, 2008) or

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

29

on nonlinguisitic variables including acculturation (Athanasopoulos, 2009), the important notion of sociolinguistic competence needs to be introduced. Sociolinguistic competence is crucial to operating in a foreign language. As it was outlined in section 1.4. , some components of communication such as the degree of formality in one’s speech or one’s body language (Cohen & Olshtain, 1981), as well as the significance of the length of a pause or a change in tone are culture-dependent (Chun, 1998) and need to be acquired together with the acquisition of a language, as they form cultural norms that are as important as the linguistic knowledge itself. Regan, Howard and Lemée (2009: 6) note that since the late 1970’s, there has been a small but consistent interest in sociocultural aspects of SLA which has developed in parallel with, and in a complementary way to, purely language-internal approaches. The importance of the social context in L2 acquisition in such domains as pragmatics, classroom second and foreign language learning, literacy and multilingualism has been widely acknowledged and explored by sociolinguistic research in SLA in the areas of language variation and face-to-face communication (Young, 1999). Among many aspects that formed the object of research are: how patterns of conversation differ from one culture to another, why L2 speakers speak differently in different situations and with different people, the causes of miscommunication, and whether bilingual speakers transfer patterns from L1 to their L2. Young (1999) pointed to four main areas of SLA and use: interlanguage variation, cross-cultural communication, conversational phenomena and social identity, where social context plays a major role (cf. Regan, Howard and Lemée, 2009: 6). Sociocultural competence broadens the knowledge of cultural and social norms present in every society and as a result facilitates the communication process, but also enlarges the emotional repertoire by means of which the acquisition of new concepts takes place, a crucial factor when we take the expression of emotions in a foreign language into account. Below the complex relationship of emotion, language and culture, as well as some key differences in the perception and expression of emotions in Polish and English will be presented.

2.4.1.

Emotions

The nature of emotion has become a vibrant subject in a number of disciplines. In its broadest sense, an emotion brings together cognitions, evaluations, neurophysiological processes, somatic changes, subjective feelings, facial expressions, and behaviors (Johnson-Laird & Oatley, 2004:

30

Chapter Two

459). For the purpose of this book it was decided to adopt Panayiotou’s (2001, 2004) understanding of emotion as “a subcategory of feelings’ (Levy, 1984) which helps to “organize thoughts, behavior and meaning systems” (Lutz, 1987). In line with Panayiotou (2001: 70), it is believed that emotions are “biologically generated elements, which must be enriched by meanings before becoming emotional experiences” (Parrott and Harré, 1996). It is crucial to stress the importance of the cultural aspect here, as arguably any biologically generated experience must be filtered through a cultural meaning-making system (Parrott and Harré, 1996) before it is defined as “emotion”. This also entails that the core of emotions is largely influenced by the culture in which we live (Panayiotou, 2001: 70). In the present study, some fundamental aspects of what defines an emotion were adopted from Panayiotou (2004). According to her, an emotion: “is a biologically manifested element, bounded by a bodily experience, understood as a cognitive appraisal of a situation, created and learned with particular cultural meaning-making system, constructed in context and located within cultural categorization system”(Panayiotou, 2004: 125).

In this respect, hunger is not an emotion as it violates some of these premises; however, “tĊsknota”, which could be translated into English as a mixture of nostalgia, longing and heart’s hankering, does fulfil the criteria of being a socioculturally determined pattern of experience and expression, which is featured in specific social situations. It is also important to note that a new emotion expression can be acquired in a new language and culture (Panayiotou, 2001, 2004). In such situations, language provides a means through which one can access emotions. However, it is important to mention that acquisition of new emotions may only be possible via the affective socialization process that may take place only when a given person is immersed in a foreign language and culture (Pavlenko, 2008). The possibility of acquisition of the new emotion concepts in a foreign language is complex as it might sometimes imply that people feel different emotions in different languages whereas, as it was rightly stated: “emotional expressions are not like words, which differ from culture to culture; they are closer to breathing, which is just part of human nature” (Evans, 2001: 7). At the same time it is important to mention that Ekman (1992), as briefly explained in 1.3.1. , proposed a theory of “basic emotions”, claiming that these are universal and innate, of rapid onset, lasting a few seconds and include joy, distress, anger, fear, surprise, and disgust. He also claimed that there is no culture in which these emotions are absent,

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

31

and that they are hardwired into the human brain. Since that time, a number of studies have addressed the question of whether people who speak different languages interpret facial expressions of emotion in similar ways (Ekman, 1994, 1998; Izard, 1977; Russell, 1994). Across cultures, people appear to judge facial expressions of emotion with very high levels of accuracy, approximately 60%-80% (Ekman & Keltner, 2000). However, some studies have found that accuracy in judging facial expressions changes when individuals are allowed to interpret the expressions in their own words (Haidt &Keltner, 1999). Ekman stated that: “The universality of facial expressions, it is important to note, by no means implies universality in other components of emotion. Facial expressions of emotion may be the most universal of the different facets of emotion because of their central role in meeting different social problems that have been observed in different cultures, such as forming attachments, negotiating status or apologizing. Other facets of emotion, such as the descriptions people give to the private feelings of emotion, may demonstrate more cultural variation” (Ekman & Keltner, 2000: 242).

There is also evidence for cultural variation in the expression of emotions. For example, in many cultures laughter is pervasive at funerals (Keltner & Bonanno, 1997), some tribes never express anger facially (Briggs, 1960), others prohibit the physical expression of emotion by means of hugs or kisses (Ye, 2003), whereas in others not only physical “shows of affection” but also extended use of diminutives is crucial (Parks, 1996). Every culture has its own rules that define the socially acceptable forms of the expression of emotions. In Europe these “display rules” encourage vivid facial expressions of emotions, whereas the Japanese must make an effort to attenuate their emotional expressions (Evans, 2001). In an interesting experiment, Ekman (1973) videotaped Japanese and U.S. students while watching a stress-inducing film; participants were not aware that they were being recorded. It was observed that Japanese and U.S. students displayed remarkably similar negative facial expressions in response to the viewing material. However, when watching the same film with the interviewer present, Japanese students smiled more and expressed their emotions in a very controlled manner. This suggests the need to: “Acknowledge the neurobiological and physiological bases of emotional experiences, while assuming that in the process of language socialization, speakers learn to discriminate, elaborate, and suppress bodily feelings in accordance with the local conventions of how one should feel in a particular socially defined situation (Harré, 1986). Each emotion term then

Chapter Two

32

evokes a culture-specific conceptual representation” (Jarvis and Pavlenko, 2008: 125).

This point of view adopted also in the present book, explains why we are able to recognize basic emotions in the faces of people from different parts of the world, but at the same time also acknowledges vast crosscultural differences in the conceptualization and categorization of emotions (Anthanasiadou & Tabakowska, 1998; Harkins & Wierzbicka, 2001; Panayiotou, 2001, 2006; Pavlenko, 2002, 2005b). It could also explain why we are able to learn new emotions by means of immersion in a foreign language and culture.

2.4.2.

Language and emotions

The vocabulary of emotions undoubtedly varies between languages. Pavlenko (2008) states that: “Cross-linguistic studies of emotion lexicons show that emotion concepts may vary across languages in terms of function, encoding, and salience. Some languages do not require their speakers to differentiate between thoughts and feelings, some privilege the view of emotions as processual and relational, and others view emotions as individual phenomena and as inner states rather than processes.” (Pavlenko, 2008: 150).

This suggests that the concepts by means of which the speakers of a given language make sense of their own and other people’s feelings is specific to particular languages (Wierzbicka, 2004:94). There are some major cross-linguistic differences in the encoding of emotion by means of either verbs or adjectives. Some languages including Polish, Russian, and Hindustani favour “emotion verbs that function as relationship markers and encode emotions as personal and interpersonal processes” (Pavlenko, 2008: 150). Other languages, such as English and Dutch, “favour adjectives and nouns that function as self-markers and encode emotions as inner states” (Pavlenko, 2008: 150). The present study focuses on Polish and English emotion concepts that have no direct equivalents. Speakers of Polish thus have a different set of conceptual categories for classifying and interpreting feelings from those of English speakers. Wierzbicka (2004: 95) makes these vocal “Since the way we think about what happens to us is an integral part of the experience, the emotions associated with these different interpretations may also be different”. This could suggest that the emotional life of speakers of different languages, in this case of Polish and English, is likely to be different to some extent (Wierzbicka, 2004: 95).

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

33

Both languages researched in the present study, L1 (Polish) and L2 (English), are claimed to be typologically distant languages (Wierzbicka, 1992, 2003, 2004). This means that they differ greatly in many aspects including their social scripts for expressing emotions or even grammatical categories of words denoting emotions. In the section below, the main differences between these languages are briefly summarised. 2.4.2.1.

Polish and English cultural scripts for expressing emotions

Anglo-American “cultural scripts” that form society’s shared frame of reference are different from Polish ones, for the hierarchy of values governing interpersonal relations is different (Wierzbicka, 1999). English “cultural scripts” encourage people to be “careful”, “considerate”, “thoughtful”, and to avoid “hurting other people’s feelings”. Generally speaking they focus on the feelings of the “other person”. By contrast, Polish “cultural scripts” focus not on the feelings of the addressee but on those of the speaker. What is of great importance are the speaker’s spontaneous displays of “warm” and good feelings towards the addressee. Instead of seeking to know “what I feel” and “why I feel like this” one wants others to know “what I feel” or rather “how I feel”. “In Polish culture there is no need for me to know what I feel or think about what I feel. Rather there is a need to express my feelings and to express them now, without thinking about them and without trying to analyze, shape or suppress them” (Wierzbicka, 1999: 78). The most common Polish terms used concerning one’s own current negative state appear to be “zdenerwowany”, “záy”, “wĞciekáy”, “zmartwiony”, “przykro mi”, all of which imply a lack of control over one’s emotional state. On the other hand, according to Anglo-American “cultural scripts”, whatever the emotion is, it should not be allowed to express itself in uncontrolled physical behavior (Hoffman, 1998). The categorization of emotions in Polish is also different from that reflected in the English lexicon. The way people interpret their own emotions depends, to some extent, on the lexical grid provided by their native language (Harkins & Wierzbicka, 2001). Because of the fact that Polish allows for spontaneous expression of emotions, the emotional vocabulary, which it provides, differs greatly in comparison to that of English. In Polish experiences comparable to “joy”, “sadness”, or “anger” are often conceptualized as inner activities in which one engages rather than as states which one passively undergoes. Expressing emotions by means of verbs refers to processes such as “to worry”, and most often, there are no adjectival counterparts available (Pavlenko, 2002a; Wierzbicka, 1992, 2004). As a result, these emotions

34

Chapter Two

are often designated by verbs rather than adjectives, for example: “radowaü siĊ” (to rejoice), “tĊskniü” (to be melancholic; to long), “smuciü siĊ” (worry), “záoĞciü siĊ” (to be angry). Another important difference between Polish and English is the use of diminutives and endearments (Besemeres, 2004; Wierzbicka, 1999). Diminutives and endearments reveal a cultural gap between English and Polish approaches to expressing emotions and demonstrate how deeply embedded feelings may be in the forms of speech of a particular language (Besemeres, 2004: 148). The difficulty of translating such words reveals the extent to which they shape an individual’s feelings. “Since the meaning encoded in diminutives cannot be directly translated into English, the feeling it expresses is peculiarly dependent on, or bound up with, the word itself” (Besemeres, 2004: 148). The differences in cultural scripts for expressing emotions Polish and English are presented in Table 1 below. Table 1. Cultural scripts for expressing emotions in Polish vs. English Cultural Scripts for expressing emotions

Polish

English

Emotion words

verbs

adjectives

Focus on feelings of the addressee

-

+

Focus on feelings of the speaker

+

-

Controlling and suppressing emotions

-

+

Analysing emotions

-

+

Spontaneous expression of emotions

+

-

Use of diminutives

+

-

As can be seen in this table, Polish and Anglo-American cultural scripts for expressing emotions differ along all these dimensions. However, Pavlenko (2008: 151) suggests that in situations where one language possesses a concept that has no counterpart in the other language,

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

35

the internalization of such concepts by L2 learners is still possible by undergoing a process of secondary affective socialization and developing prototypical scripts for these emotions. She also states that: “In this process, they learn what events and phenomena commonly elicit such emotions, in what context and how these emotions are commonly displayed, and what consequences they may lead to” (Pavlenko, 2008: 151).

The present research investigates differences in the perception and expression of emotions in two typologically distant languages by means of analyzing the data gathered from informants who were exposed to L2 language and culture and those who were not. As a response to Dewaele (2005, 2008) and Pavlenko’s (2008) suggestions to combine emic and etic perspectives and to obtain a more detailed analysis, the self-reports of bilinguals and L2 users were also taken into account, as it was considered crucial to draw on individuals’ insights concerning the interplay between their emotions and language choices in context, which is not directly externally observable. Research methods in applied linguistics can benefit from both emic and etic perspectives, and it is arguably the combination of the two that proves very fruitful when incorporated into data collection and analysis (Dewaele, 2005, 2008; Pavlenko, 2008). Dewaele (2007), postulates that instead of the exclusively etic perspective employed in research designs that often considered the specific communicative actions of L2 users as reflections of their pragmatic competence, an emic perspective should be added, as it allows assessment of “pragmatic competence in the L2 using L2 users” views on their ability to communicate appropriately in L2” (Dewaele 2007: 244). As he later argues: “L2 users may intentionally violate sociolinguistic, sociocultural and sociopragmatic rules, just as L1 users do. In other words it is very difficult for SLA researchers working on L2 production data to guess what the communicative intention of the L2 user was and hence to describe whether a deviation from target language (TL) norm is attributed to gaps in knowledge, to a conscious choice to stick to the L1 norm, and whether deviations from the norm in the TL were intentional or not”. (Dewaele, 2008: 244)

As Pavlenko (2008) notes, bi- and multilingual self-reports complement experimental data, and serve to highlight individuals’ insights about the interplay of their emotions and language choices in context that is very difficult to observe. The vocabulary of emotions differ from language to

36

Chapter Two

language and similarly the set of concepts by means of which the speakers of any given language make sense of their own and other people’s feelings is specific to particular languages (Wierzbicka, 2004: 94). Since Polish and English emotion concepts are non-equivalent, speakers of Polish have a different set of conceptual categories for classifying and interpreting emotions from speakers of English. This suggests that their emotional lives are likely to be different to some extent (Wierzbicka, 2004: 95). It is very difficult to establish whether differences in the meaning of words matter in people’s lives and from this point of view, internalizing the perspective of bilinguals is crucial as it can complement an objective semantic analysis with insights derived from subjective experience (Wierzbicka, 2004).

2.5. Bilingualism, language and emotion This section provides a brief definition of bilingualism and presents a number of studies, which investigated the complex relationship between language and thought in bilingual speakers. First, the term bilingualism needs to be explained, as there are many different definitions of this notion connected with the speaker’s language competency. Bilingualism is understood as “the alternative use of two or more languages by the same individual” (Mackey, 2000: 27) with the emphasis on equal competency in either language. At the same time, another term “L2 user” is incorporated into the present research. This was introduced by Cook (2002: 4), and refers to an individual who uses a second language at any level, with no reference to language competence. Thus “L2 user” (SLU) has a slightly different meaning to “bilingual” as in the first instance the level of language competence is not important, whereas in the second it is crucial. For the purpose of this book, bilingualism is understood as a combination of the definitions presented above, in that it is considered that language competency does not have to be equal in all areas of use. From this point of view, a person who uses L2 for professional purposes on an everyday basis but L1 at home would be considered a bilingual, provided the country of residence is an L2speaking country. In the debate on language and emotions, bilingualism provides a new perspective and sheds new light on old debates (Wierzbicka, 2004). Bilinguals, as people who cross physical, linguistic, and cultural boundaries, offer an optimal cross-cultural comparison of emotion terms because they subjectively experience two languages and two cultures (Panayiotou, 2004). At the same time, in a world in which more people are bilingual

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

37

than monolingual, research into the interface of emotions and bilingualism provides new insights on issues of the relationship between languages, culture, and self. Due to the fact that more and more scholars acknowledge that different languages may affect cognitive processes, there is a growing field of research linking psychology, anthropology, and linguistics in order to understand “language, cognition, emotion, self, and the human condition in general” (Wierzbicka, 2005: 24). Whorf (1956) believed that learning another language transforms and enhances the speaker’s world-view. From that perspective behavior of the bilingual individual would probably depend on the language that is currently used. Matsumoto (1994) claims that when we learn a language we learn it in the context of two cultures. Learners thus access a different set of cultural values through each language. In this regard, many bilinguals report that they think or feel differently depending on their current linguistic context. This may be considered as having a different sense of self, depending on which language is being used. Study by Marian and Kaushanskaya (2003) asked Russian-English bilinguals to describe, in English and in Russian, events from their life elicited by particular prompts. The researchers found that in addition to grammatical differences in terms of pronoun use, independent judges rated the English narratives as more self-oriented than those in Russian and, conversely, the Russian narratives as more other-oriented. This reflects the emphasis placed in English on the individual, in contrast with the emphasis on the group in Russian, but the authors suggest that such cultural differences not only shape the language but may also influence views of the self. In another study (Marian & Kaushanskaya, 2004), Russian-English bilinguals were prompted by cue words to recall and record incidents from their past and to note their age and language use at the time of each incident. The incidents were independently coded for emotional intensity; results showed that the accounts were more emotionally intense when the incident was recalled in the same language in which it had originally occurred. Todorov (1994) states that some bicultural bilinguals face difficulties while translating from one language to another. As a result, their view of translation is one of an approximation at best. Similarly, Panayiotou (2004) notes that several notions including frustration, resentment, and the need for privacy, cannot be translated from Greek to English. She writes that even some common emotion terms such as “love” and “agape” are not equivalent and may be untranslatable when one takes the cultural manifestation of the terms into account (Panayiotou, 2001). This point of view is seen mainly among late bilinguals, who acquired their second

Chapter Two

38

language late in life. The majority of such individuals describe this experience in terms of living in two different worlds; others view L2 socialization as a process of intense personal transformation (Hoffman, 1989; Pavlenko, 1998; cf. Pavlenko, 2005; Wierzbicka, 1985).

2.5.1.

Bilingualism and the expression of emotions

The notion of expressing emotions in a foreign language has been addressed by a number of researchers and writers (Hoffman, 1989; Dewaele 2006, 2009, 2010; Pavlenko, 2004; Wierzbicka, 1999, 2004, 2009; Wilson, 2008). The L1 was suggested to be bi- and multilinguals’ language of emotions whereas the L2 was considered the language of distance and detachment (Dewaele, 2004, 2006). At the same time, research carried out by Pavlenko concerning parental language choice in bi- and multilingual families shows that L2 socialization in the private space of the family may cause other languages to seem equal in emotional intensity to the L1 (2004: 200). It was also suggested that difficulties in expressing emotions in the L2 may lie in differences in emotional scripts and vocabulary of the given languages (Panayiotou, 2004; Pavlenko, 2008; Wierzbicka, 2004, 2009). Wierzbicka writes: “It is important to bear in mind that two languages of a bilingual person differ not only in their lexical and grammatical repertoires for expressing and describing emotions but also in the sets of ‘emotional scripts’ regulating emotion talk. (…) The testimony of many bilingual people who have reflected on their own experience shows that for bilingual people, living with two languages can indeed mean living in two different emotional words and also travelling back and forth between those two worlds. It can also mean living suspended between two words” (2004: 101102). “I never describe myself in English in a way similar to Polish (…) as the interpretation put on our experience shapes that experience, the experience itself is different. In a sense, then, I do not only project a different persona but am in fact a different person in my Anglophone and Polophone relationships” (2004: 99)

Although human emotional endowment is no doubt largely innate and universal, individuals’ emotional lives are shaped to a considerable extent by their culture. Every culture offers not only a linguistically embodied grid for the conceptualization of emotions, but also a set of “scripts” suggesting how people should feel, express their emotions, and think about their own and other people’s feelings (Wierzbicka, 1999: 240). On

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

39

the other hand, Panayiotou (2004) claims that what seems to be universal is the ability to learn emotions, acknowledge their importance in a specific cultural context and to adapt their use or even manifestation. In agreement with Panayiotou (2004), Pavlenko suggests that factors such as age and context of language acquisition, together with language dominance, mediate language emotionality, so that L2 users who undergo secondary affective socialization may perceive an increase in the emotionality of the L2 (2008: 157).

2.5.2.

Bilingualism and the perception of emotions

Wierzbicka (1999: 26) claims that whether two feelings are interpreted as two different instances of essentially the same emotion, or rather as two different emotions, depends largely on the language through which these feelings are interpreted. She consequently notes that this depends on culture. Wierzbicka’s (2004: 99) testimony of not only projecting a different personality while operating in a foreign language but also becoming a different person might suggest that people may act and perceive themselves differently while using foreign languages. Some research has been conducted on the subject and it was indeed discovered that informants either perceive changes in behavior and personality while using L2 (Hull, 1990; Pavlenko, 2006; Ramirez-Esparza et al, 2006; Ross et al., 2002; Wilson, 2008;) or react differently to the same stimuli depending on the language in which they are operating (Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002; Panayiotou, 2004, 2006; Stepanova & Coley, 2006). Some of these studies used short stories in order to elicit data from participants operating in both L1 and L2. Panayiotou (2004) elicited Greek-English and English-Greek bilinguals’ reactions to the same story presented in English and Greek a few weeks apart. She found that participants reacted differently to the same story depending on the language of presentation. The two versions elicited not only different reactions, but also different cultural scripts, suggesting that the two languages were linked to distinct linguistic and cultural repertoires. Meanwhile, Stepanova & Coley (2006) presented monolingual Russian and English as well as Russian-English bilingual informants with five stories describing envy- or jealousy- arousing situations and found that bilinguals tested in English scored differently to all other groups, in the direction of English monolinguals. It was therefore suggested that the overlapping conceptual representation of the two emotions in English affected bilinguals by making jealousy and envy seem more similar to each other than would normally be the case for native Russian speakers.

40

Chapter Two

Wierzbicka (1999) claims that culture and language shapes what we feel and how we perceive the world. In the case of bilinguals and L2 users exposed to and socialized into an L2 culture and language this interpretation of emotion might change due to immersion in a foreign language and culture (Panayiotou, 2004; Pavlenko, 2006) what is to be discussed below.

2.5.3.

Research on the perception and expression of emotions in a foreign language

A number of studies have investigated perception of emotions in a foreign language. However, the first and arguably most important study was conducted by Rintell (1984), who sought to investigate whether second language learners perceive the intensity of the emotions presented in speech differently to native speakers. Her findings, as well as those of Graham, Hamblin & Feldstein (2001), could support the statement that recognition of emotions and their intensity in a foreign language is dependent on L2 proficiency as well as on native language, as the later shapes the way in which emotions are expressed and perceived. Further, if the two languages are typologically close, this could facilitate the recognition of emotions. On the other hand, Moore, Romney & Hsia (1999: 529) investigated the extent to which the semantic structure of emotion terms is shared among three unrelated languages and found that Chinese-, English-, and Japanese-speaking subjects assigned similar meanings to 15 common emotion terms. Another important finding in their study was that the bilingual semantic structures were between that of the original language, Chinese or Japanese, and the acquired language, English. The bilingual groups, when responding in English, were close to the English monolinguals in their overall responses. It was apparent that bilingual subjects had learned many, but not all, of the nuances of the configuration of English emotion terms in their acquisition of a second language (Moore, Romney & Hsia 1999: 538). Meanwhile, a number of studies suggested that bilinguals with languages that differ in grammatical and lexical categories may shift their cognitive representation of those categories towards that of monolingual speakers of their second language (Imai and Mazuka, 2003; Levinson, 1996; Levinson, Kita, Haun and Rasch, 2002; Lucy and Gaskins, 2001, 2003; Majid, Bowerman, Kita, Haunand Levinson, 2004; Roberson, 2005). Pavlenko (2005) and Pavlenko and Jarvis (2002) suggest that in the case of bilinguals or second language users living in a foreign country, the interpretation of emotions might change due to exposure to a foreign language.

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

41

2.6. Personality, language and emotion Language plays an important role in the personalities of multilingual people (Matsumoto, 1994). There is also evidence from the autobiographical writers that in the case of bilinguals or multilinguals a given language or a shift to another language might influence who we are, thus arguably influencing our personality (Hoffman, 1989; Wierzbicka, 1985). Nevertheless, the majority of multilingualism experts focuses on the linguistic aspects of immigration and acculturation, but typically pays less attention to psychological aspects (Dewaele & van Oudenhoven, 2009). It appears that the only study concerning the relationship between multilingualism, acculturation and higher order personality traits was that conducted by Dewaele & van Oudenhoven (2009), who investigated these variables in a group of 79 young London teenagers, half of whom were born abroad and had settled in London during their childhood. The other half of informants was British born. The results showed that language dominance had a significant effect on participants’ personality profile, with the multidominant group scoring significantly higher on Openmindedness, marginally higher on Cultural Empathy and significantly lower on Emotional Stability than participants dominant in one language only. Thus, it was shown that multiple language knowledge, or actual use of other languages outside school, might have an effect on higher-order personality traits. Harrison & Voeker (2008) investigated the cross-cultural adjustment of study abroad students and the associated impact of emotional intelligence and entrepreneurial attitude orientation. The results showed that individuals with higher self-emotional appraisal, higher others’ emotional appraisal and higher use of emotion exhibited stronger general adjustment than those who scored lower on these dimensions. Similarly, those who were higher on regulation of emotion tended to have stronger general adjustment. It seems that dimensions of EI play an important role in the general adjustment of study abroad students (Harrison & Voeker, 2008:79). Another interesting study by Smith et al. (2011) examined the role of social capital in language acquisition during study abroad. Using data collected from 204 participants in Japanese study abroad programs, it showed that students who leverage social capital through bridging relationships feel they achieve higher levels of language improvement (Smith et al.2011:2030).

42

Chapter Two

Kim (2001) states that “the most important personality traits are Openness, Strength and Positivity” (Kim, 2001: 85). Dewaele & van Oudenhoven also point out that: “Openness ‘enables strangers to minimise their resistance and to maximise their willingness to attend to new and changed circumstances (…) and to perceive and interpret various events and situations without making ethnocentric judgments’ (p. 84). Personality strength is the ‘internal capacity to absorb shocks from the environment and to bounce back being seriously damaged by them’ (p. 85). Personality strength is also linked to positivity, which is an optimistic outlook on life and the ‘capacity to defy negative prediction’ (p. 85)” (Dewaele & van Oudenhoven, 2009: 448).

A further study concerning personality and cultural differences (Allik & McCrae, 2004) showed that according to NEO-PI-R facet scales, European cultures differ systematically from Asian and African cultures, chiefly with respect to Extraversion and Openness to Experience scores, on which Europeans score higher. They also found that Southern European cultures tend to score higher on Neuroticism than Northern European cultures. This suggests that not only language but also culture might influence personality. Detailed description of lower- and higher-order personality traits is provided below. Additionally, the relationships between personality, language, culture and perception and expression of emotions are also explored in detail. The aim is to demonstrate the interconnections between these variables, suggesting that they cannot be examined separately.

2.6.1.

Personality

Personality is the organized system of behaviors, attitudes, and values that characterize a given individual and account for his particular manner of functioning in the environment (Strelau, 2000). Human personality has been defined by Child (1986: 239) as: “the more or less stable and enduring organization of a person’s character, temperament, intellect and physique which determines his unique adjustment to the environment”. All psychologists discuss personality in terms of an individual’s traits. A trait is a particular and persistent feature of an individual’s personality, a characteristic that can be measured and observed. Every individual has personality traits but some of them are more strongly developed than others, which has a direct influence on the way a given individual behaves in everyday life (Strelau, 2000). Trait theorists argue that personality has both a biological and environmental basis but is also influenced by culture, in the sense that behaviors are expressed according to local norms

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

43

(Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985). There also appears to be a consensus that traits are hierarchically organized with larger number of lower-order traits combining to form fewer higher-order traits of Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Neuroticism (Livesley, 1998). Below, a brief description is provided of both higher-order personality traits like “The Big Five”, and the lower-order personality trait Emotional Intelligence. 2.6.1.1.

Higher order personality traits

Despite various approaches to psychological traits, one dominant model seems to have evolved. “The Big Five Factor Model” primarily uses a lexical analysis of trait adjectives in natural languages and classifies all the major sources of individual differences in personality (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1988, 1992a, b; Digman, 1989, 1990). The “Five-Factor Personality Model” developed from Allport and Odbert’s (1936) attempts to compile trait-related terms. Investigators focused on situational-based approaches that offered greater flexibility in explaining a specific personenvironment. Goldberg (1981) proposed five main personality factors to examine in more depth, naming his findings “The Big Five”. His starting point was the Lexical Hypothesis according to which: “the most important individual differences in human transactions will come to be encoded as single terms in some or all of the world’s languages” (Goldberg, 1990: 1216). Within Goldberg’s taxonomy, terms were grouped and organized according to their culturally-shared meaning, as determined by the meaning-similarity ratings of native speakers, dictionary definitions, cooccurrence of adjectives and self-rating (Peabody & Goldberg, 1989). “The Big Five” model that was measured by the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI) was created by Costa and McCrae and originally measured only Neuroticism, Extraversion and Openness to Experience, the other factors being measured in later developments of the NEO-PI-R. It was not until 1989 that the NEO model (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience) was enlarged to the NEO-PI-R model by adding two more factors: “Agreeableness” and “Conscientiousness”. The “OCEAN” personality test that had been used in the present study is not an original NEO-PI-R (available only to psychologists) test but it also measured five higher-order personality traits in question

Chapter Two

44

The OCEAN factors are: I - Extraversion vs. Introversion II - Agreeableness vs. Antagonism III - Conscientiousness vs. Undirectedness IV - Neuroticism vs. Emotional Stability V - Openness to Experience vs. Not Open to Experience Each of “The Big Five” personality traits has its counterpart presented on a linear scale. The reason for pairing these factors is that a high score for one of the pair, e.g. Extraversion, entails a low score for its counterpart, in this case Introversion. Between the extremes, there is place for the so-called “ambi” scores that characterize scores that are of neither extreme. Table 2 below provides an overview of “The Big Five” factors. It describes the general characteristics of the traits as well as the characteristics of its high and low scorers. It presents particular factors with a detailed description of the behavior of its scorers. On the basis of these characteristics, the framework for measuring the “The Big Five” was constructed.

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

45

Table 2. The Five Factor Personality Model adapted from NEO Personality Inventory- Revised, (Costa & McCrae, 1992c: 120) HIGH SCORER

Worrying, nervous, emotional, insecure, inadequate, hypochondriacal

Sociable, active, talkative, personoriented, optimistic, funloving, affectionate

Curious, broad interests, creative, original, imaginative, untraditional

Soft-hearted, goodnatured, trusting, helpful, forgiving, gullible, straightforward

Organized, reliable, hardworking, self-disciplined, punctual, scrupulous, neat, ambitious, persevering

GLOBAL DOMAINS Neuroticism (N) Assesses adjustment versus emotional instability. Identifies individuals prone to psychological distress, unrealistic ideas, excessive cravings or urges, and maladaptive coping responses. Extraversion (E) Assesses quantity and intensity of interpersonal interaction; activity level; need for stimulation; and capacity for joy. Openness (O) Assesses proactive seeking and appreciation of experience for its own sake, toleration for and exploration of the unfamiliar. Agreeableness (A) Assesses the quality of one’s interpersonal orientation along a continuum from compassion to antagonism in thoughts, feelings, and actions. Conscientiousness (C) Assesses the individual’s degree of organization, persistence, and motivation in goaldirected behavior. Contrasts dependable, fastidious people with those who are lackadaisical and sloppy.

LOW SCORER

Calm, relaxed, unemotional, hardy, secure, self-satisfied

Reserved, sober, aloof unexuberant, taskoriented, retiring, quiet

Conventional, down-toearth, narrow interests, inartistic, unanalytical

Cynical, rude, suspicious, uncooperative, vengeful, ruthless, irritable, manipulative

Aimless, unreliable, lazy, careless, lax, negligent, weak-willed, hedonistic

Chapter Two

46

2.6.1.2.

Lower order personality traits

Trait Emotional Intelligence (TEI) is said to be closely related to personality traits and therefore this is termed a lower-order personality trait (Petrides, Furnham & Mavroveli, 2007). The construct of emotional intelligence (EI) posits the existence of actual or perceived differences in the extent to which people attend to, process and utilize affect-laden information (cf. Davey, 2005: 306). Emotional intelligence (EI) has received much attention in the psychological literature and beyond, generating intense demand for application in educational, organizational and clinical settings. Petrides, Pita & Kokkinaki (2007: 273) explain that many researchers (e.g. Austin, 2004; Austin, Saklofske, & Egan, 2005; Petrides & Furnham, 2000, 2003; Spence, Oades, & Caputi, 2004; Tett, Fox, &Wang, 2005) distinguish between two EI constructs, depending on whether the operationalization process is based on self-report (as in personality questionnaires) or on maximum performance (as in IQ tests). Trait EI (or trait emotional self-efficacy) concerns emotion-related dispositions and self-perceptions measured via self-report, whereas ability EI concerns emotion-related cognitive abilities measured via performancebased tests. The conceptual differences between the two constructs are directly reflected in the empirical findings, which reveal very low correlations between measures of trait and ability EI (e.g. O’Connor & Little, 2003; Warwick & Nettelbeck, 2004) (cf. Petrides, Pita & Kokkinaki, 2007: 273). It is further claimed that: “The operationalization of ability EI is problematic because the subjectivity of emotional experience undermines the development of maximumperformance (IQ-like) tests (Brody, 2004; Matthews, Roberts, & Zeidner, 2004; Robinson & Clore, 2002). In contrast, the operationalization of trait EI is straightforward because the construct encompasses self-perceptions and dispositions, which accord with the subjective nature of emotions. Petrides and Furnham (2001) content-analyzed salient models of EI and cognate constructs in the literature and derived the first sampling domain of trait EI” (Petrides, Pita & Kokkinaki, 2007: 273-274).

This domain comprises personality facets that are specifically related to affect. Petrides, Pita and Kokkinaki (2007: 274) pose an interesting question concerning the place and location of trait EI among established personality hierarchies such as “Eysenckian’ or “Big Five’ factor space, which are higher-order personality traits. It was suggested that:

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

47

“the factor location analyzes demonstrates that trait EI is a distinct (because it can be isolated in personality space), compound (because it is partially determined by several personality dimensions) construct that lies at the lower levels of personality hierarchies (because the trait EI factor is oblique, rather than orthogonal to The Giant Three and The Big Five). This conclusion enables us to connect our trait emotional self-efficacy conceptualization of EI to the established differential psychology literature. This is a major conceptual advantage of trait EI theory because it integrates the construct with the mainstream models of personality. Moreover, this conceptualization appears to be consistent, not only with hierarchical, but also with circumplex models of personality. Thus, De Raad (2005) located trait EI within the Abridged Big Five circumplex and found that it comprises scattered aspects of The Big Five domain and correlates with at least four of the five basic traits, conclusions that are fully in line with trait EI theory” (Petrides, Pita & Kokkinaki, 2007: 283).

Given the arguments outlined above, it seems plausible to combine the TEIQue testing instrument together with “The Big Five” personality questionnaire in research that deals not only with the perception and expression of emotions in two distant typologically languages but also with personality traits that might contribute expressing and perceiving emotions in both L1 and L2. Since EI has been conceptualized as a lowerorder personality trait and correlates with several higher-order personality traits from “The Big Five” domain (Petrides, Pita & Kokkinaki, 2007), inclusion of both personality questionnaires might shed some light on the interaction of both high and low order personality traits and the perception and expression of emotions by bilinguals, monolinguals and L2 users. Trait EI (or emotional self-efficacy) concerns a constellation of emotion-related self-perceptions and dispositions (Davey, 2005: 306). The construct itself posits the existence of actual or perceived differences in the extent to which people attend to, process and utilize affect-laden information (Davey, 2005: 306). As mentioned above, TEIQue measures Global trait EI by incorporating four factors of broader relevance and fifteen facets measured through fifteen subscales. Below are listed short descriptions of all factors and facets, obtained from the TEIQue official website (Petrides, 2001-2009). The four factors of broader relevance (Well-being, Self-control, Emotionality and Sociability) are described in turn below: High scorers on the Well-being factor reflect a generalized sense of Well-being, extending from past achievements to future expectations. Overall, individuals with high scores on Well-being feel positive, happy, and fulfilled. Meanwhile, high scorers on the Self-control factor have a healthy degree of control over their urges and desires. In addition to fending off impulses, they are good at regulating pressures and

48

Chapter Two

stress. Individuals with high scores on Emotionality factors have a wide range of emotion-related skills. They can perceive and express emotions and use these abilities to develop and sustain close relationships with important others. Finally, the Sociability factor differs from the emotionality factor in that it emphasizes social relationships and social influence. The focus is on the individual as an agent in different social contexts rather than on personal relationships. Individuals with high scores on Sociability factor are better at social interaction. They have good listening skills and can communicate clearly and confidently with people from very diverse backgrounds. Apart from these four factors of broader relevance, TEIQue measures fifteen specific facets that are described in Table 3 below where descriptions of the high scorers of each facet are presented (Petrides, 2001; Petrides & Furnham, 2001, 2003). Nevertheless, both high and low scores of all factors and facets were analysed statistically and are discussed in the chapter on quantitative data analysis.

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

49

Table 3. The sampling domain of trait EI adapted from the official TEIQue website (2001-2009) Facets Adaptability Assertiveness Emotion perception Emotion expression Emotion management (others) Emotion regulation Impulsiveness (low) Relationships Self-esteem

High scorers perceive themselves as… flexible and willing to adapt to new conditions forthright, frank and willing to stand up for their rights clear about their own and other people’s feelings capable of communicating their feelings to others

capable of influencing other people’s feelings capable of controlling their emotions reflective and less likely to give in to their urges capable of having fulfilling personal relationships successful and self-confident

Self-motivation

driven and unlikely to give up in the face of adversity

Social awareness

accomplished networkers with excellent social skills

Stress management

capable of withstanding pressure and regulating stress

Trait empathy Trait happiness Trait optimism

capable of taking someone else’s perspective cheerful and satisfied with their lives confident and likely to “look on the bright side” of life

Chapter Two

50

2.6.2.

Personality and culture

The personality profiles of cultures can be operationalized as the mean trait levels of members of particular cultures. This was done in a study conducted by McCare et al. (2005), in which college students from 51 cultures rated an individual from their country whom they knew well. McCare et al. (2005: 416) showed that aggregate personality factor scores were related to a number of culture-level variables that characterize societies’ beliefs and values. For example. Neuroticism was seen to be related to uncertainty and avoidance, a dimension associated with anxiety (Hofstede, 2001). Cultures whose members were high in Extraversion were also seen to demonstrate democratic values. Extraversion was also related to individualism, an emphasis on self-expression rather than survival, a disbelief in the role of fate, and high subjective well-being. These are generally Western beliefs and values, consistent with research showing that Extraversion is highest in Europe and the Americas (McCrae, 2004). Cultures whose members were high in Openness were also characterized by low power distance (i.e. people of lower ranks enjoy more equality in terms of rights and opinions as their superiors) and high individualism. In addition, open cultures valued affective and intellectual autonomy and egalitarian commitment but rejected conservatism; they had a secular-rational approach to life. Open cultures thus appeared to be independent and unconventional. Agreeableness, another dimension associated with values at the individual level (Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, & Knafo, 2002), had a similar set of correlates. Conscientiousness was unrelated to values and beliefs when zero-order correlations were examined (McCare et al., 2005: 416).These findings support the scalar equivalence of NEO-PI-R factors and facets across cultures and suggest that aggregate personality profiles provide insight into cultural differences. At the same time this suggests that, in studies of cross-cultural differences/similarities, personality traits should be taken into consideration. This is particularly the case when the research focuses on the complex interplay of language, culture, and perception and expression of emotions.

2.6.3.

Personality and emotions

As already mentioned by OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012), when discussing emotions and personality it is important to note that emotions almost always have an “outward” aspect observable by means of expression or changes in behavior (Solomon, 2003). However, the importance of behavior in such analysis is unclear. Another important question concerns

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

51

the influence of personality on the perception and expression of emotions across cultures and languages. In particular, is it ever possible to analyze expression or perception of emotions without the analysis of personality traits (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012)? Matsumoto (2006) demonstrates in his study documenting US-Japan differences in emotion regulation that those differences are entirely accounted for by individual differences in personality. At the same time, he claims that: “These findings raise questions about studies that merely document crossnational differences in a psychological variable yet attribute the source of the observed differences to cultural variables without empirical justification to do so. Such differences may be accounted for by aggregate differences in personality” (Matsumoto, 2006: 241).

As OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012) mentions, other researchers have also provided additional evidence concerning the influence of personality on the perception and expression of emotions. According to Matsumoto (1994: 93), bilinguals have two clearly distinct cultural affiliations, accessible through the language in which much of this cultural knowledge was learned or is associated. Hull (1987) researched Chinese-English and Korean-English bilinguals who were given the California Psychological Inventory (CPI). Bilinguals completed the CPI twice, once in their native language and once in English. The bilinguals scored differently on personality traits depending on whether they were responding in English (L2) or in their native language. In his other research on Spanish-English bilinguals the results showed that bilinguals’ scores in the Good Impression factor were higher in Spanish than in English (Hull, 1996). Hull (1996) conjectured that bilinguals showed this tendency because in the Spanish-speaking culture, like in other collectivist cultures, there is greater concern about interpersonal harmony and pleasing others, and also because group affiliation is valued more strongly. In addition, bilinguals showed more Intellectual Efficiency when responding in English rather than in Spanish. Hull (1996) argues that this finding results from the widespread belief that the American-English culture, at the pinnacle of individualistic culture, emphasizes more achievement aspirations than does Spanish-speaking culture (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012). RamírezEsparza et al. (2006) tested (by means of “The Big Five” personality test) whether bilinguals show different personalities in English and in Spanish and whether these differences are consistent with differences between English and Spanish-speaking cultures. They found that bilinguals were more extraverted, agreeable, and conscientious in English than in Spanish and these differences were consistent with the personality displayed in

Chapter Two

52

each culture. The cross-language personality differences for Neuroticism were relatively small and the differences for Openness were not consistent with the cross-cultural differences identified (Ramírez-Esparza et al., 2006: 115). Another example of influence of language on the thinking process is mentioned by OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012) research of Matsumoto & Assar (1992) who asked bilingual observers in India to view a set of forty different facial expressions of emotion. The participants were asked to judge which emotion was being portrayed in the faces and the intensity of this emotion. Judgments were elicited twice, a week apart, the first time in English and the second time in Hindi. The results showed that emotions were more accurately identified in English, but perceived more intensely when considerate in Hindi. The above results would suggest that our perception of self and others is dependent on the language we speak when making judgments. Therefore, in any cross-linguistic research on the perception and expression of emotions it is important to incorporate personality traits, as this might shed some new light on the outcomes.

2.6.4.

Personality and language

Researchers claim that personality plays an important role not only in second language acquisition (SLA) but also in various skills such as communication, pronunciation, listening comprehension, etc. (Dewaele & Furnham, 1999; Hassan, 2001; Lee, 2001; OĪaĔska, 2004). Recent research also shows that SLA may have an influence on personality and that there is a significant change in self-perception as well as in the perception of the world because of language switching (Hull, 1990; Koven 1998; Ramirez-Esparza et al., 2006). As has been correctly pointed out by Guiora et al (1975), “to speak a second language authentically is to take on a new identity as with empathy, it is to step into a new and perhaps unfamiliar pair of shoes” (Guiora et al., 1975: 48). Guiora’s cross-cultural studies on bilingual behavior investigate both how language affects personality development and how personality development affects the way language is used (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012). In addition, Medved Krajnoviü & Juraga (2008) investigate the perception of the influence of foreign language learning on personality. Their study was based on the responses of 186 proficient learners of English as a foreign language and analysed the link between language learning and the development of personality in the foreign language learning context. They found that the predominant opinion among proficient learners of English as a foreign language, who had learned English in institutional settings, was that

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

53

foreign language learning could not influence personality in such a way that the speaker developed different personalities, or personality traits, for the different languages (s) he spoke. On the other hand, a quarter of their respondents reported a strong feeling of change in personality when using different languages. However, it is important to note that the questionnaire in this study included only one general question on the link between language and personality and did not include any psychological questionnaires measuring personality traits. Reporting findings that are solely based on respondents’ beliefs and insights is very important, but it is essential to keep in mind that these were not complemented by empirical research using the psychological variables that it aimed to research ( OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012). Meanwhile, Dewaele & van Oudenhoven (2009) investigated the link between multilingualism-multiculturalism, acculturation and the personality profile. They found that the number of languages known by participants was significantly linked to their personality profile. These findings suggested that personality could be shaped by social and biographical factors. Similarly, Panayiotou (2004) showed in her study that bilingual/bicultural professionals changed their social code with the change in linguistic code. These findings raise the interesting question of the nature of the relationship between language, emotions, and the formation of the bilingual self (Panayiotou, 2004: 124). As noted by OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012), Dewaele and Pavlenko (20012003) posed the important question: “Do you feel like a different person sometimes when you use your different languages?” to which almost half of the 1,414 informants responded in the affirmative. This could suggest that there is indeed a change in personality accompanying use of a foreign language. This issue was further explored by Wilson (2008), who investigated the feelings expressed by individuals operating in a foreign language with reference to specific personality traits. She found that a number of independent variables, including personality traits, perceived proficiency and when and how the language was acquired, influenced individuals’ feelings about foreign language use (Wilson, 2008). She also reported a negative correlation between Extraversion and feeling different when operating in a foreign language, which could be explained by the fact that individuals who are more “reserved”, “quiet” and “shy” are more likely to affirm that operating in a foreign language not only creates objective differences in their voice and manner but also liberates them in some way from their inhibitions (Wilson, 2008: 153-154). Wilson (2008) was the first to research the notion of feeling different or being a different person while operating in a foreign language with relation to personality traits. Nevertheless, she did not incorporate emotional intelligence as one

54

Chapter Two

of the variables that might potentially influence the results (OĪaĔskaPonikwia, 2012). The current book suggests that lower-order personality traits, such as emotional intelligence (EI) might have an influence on the perception of changes in behavior or personality that might occur with switching language, as only people with sufficient self-awareness might be sensitive to subtle changes in personality. Arguably, if an individual is not emotionally skilled he/she will not be able to notice any changes that occur while operating in a foreign language. Autobiographical literature also presents a similar perspective on the issue of “feeling different” (e.g. Besemeres, 2004; Harbsmeier, 2004; Hoffman, 1989; Parks, 1996; Pavlenko, 2001; Ye, 2003). Narratives suggest that expressive forms and emotion concepts alike give a certain distinctive shape to a speaker’s feeling (Besemeres, 2004: 156). It is striking that in all of these autobiographies, the authors speak of the themes of multiple identities while operating in a foreign language. For example, Hoffman (1989) writes about being immersed in a foreign language and culture at the age of 13 and gradually becoming “English”, as was noticed by her mother who commented on her being cold and less demonstrative. Hoffman’s ability to reflect on feeling different when operating in English and the effect of language and culture, not only on her changing view of herself but also of how others see her, provides a great example of developing a multiple identity when being immersed in a foreign language and culture (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012). Similarly, Parks (1996:165) notices “becoming a little bit more Italian” when he portrays himself as changing under the influence of the language and the culture he lives in. Ye (2003) writes that in some situations she remains fundamentally Chinese, whereas in some other aspects of public interaction, including polite structures, she has gradually changed under the pressure of foreign language practice. Harbsmeier (2004) writes that a shift of language brings a change of role and behavior and that he learned Danish because his Danish wife-to-be, didn’t like his Anglophone personality (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012). OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012), notes that all the above-mentioned authors point not only to feeling different when operating in a foreign language but also to a gradual change in their behavior and personality caused by immersion in a foreign language and culture. These examples suggest that there is a possibility of a language influencing personality and causing self-perceived changes. However all the possible changes take place only in a language and culture contact situation (Pavlenko, 2005).

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

55

2.7. Summary Key conclusions from the overview of the field presented above are: x Concepts in the human mind are flexible and changing, susceptible to both linguistic and cultural influences (Athanasopoulos, 2009) x L2 can influence L1 (Pavlenko 2002, Stepanova Sachs and Coley 2006) x Words that label emotions are represented at deeper level of conceptual understanding in a native or dominant language (Altarriba, 2003, 2006; Dewaele, 2004) x Use of emotion vocabulary in L2 is the result of a complex interaction of such variables as language proficiency, age of onset, and context interaction (Dewaele, 2004; Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002; Wilson, 2008) x Some emotion terms are untranslatable between languages (Altarriba, 2003; BaraĔczak, 1990; Besemeres, 2002, 2004; Hoffman, 1989; Panayiotou, 2001,2004; Parks, 1996; Pavlenko, 2002; Wierzbicka, 1992, 1999) x Some systematic cultural differences of comprehension of emotions are linked to L1 emotion scripts and socio-cultural competence (Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002; Graham, Hamblin & Feldstein, 2001; Rintell, 1984) x Emotions are dependent on socio-cultural context and learned and determined by patterns of experience and expression, and bilinguals adopt and learn certain emotions as they learn the socio-cultural significance that they carry in a specific system (Dewaele, 2008b; Panayiotou, 2001, 2004; Pavlenko, 2008) x Personality traits may influence the degree of socialization process achieved and the acquisition of socio-cultural competence (Klein, 1995) x Multilinguals scores on personality traits are different than those of monolinguals (Dewaele & van Oudenhoven, 2009) and might depend on the language that the psychological test was administrated in (Hull, 1987, 1996) This chapter has explained the complex relationships between emotion, language, culture, and personality, as enriched by a review of the existing literature. It was shown that the expression and perception of emotions in both L1 and L2 could be modified by the linguistic and cultural influence of affective socialization processes. It was also shown that none of the

56

Chapter Two

previous research incorporated both higher-and lower-order personality traits while studying possible changes in personality observable while operating in a foreign language. In addition, it was noted that none of the research on the perception and expression of emotions incorporated emotional intelligence, with the exception of Dewaele (2008). It is interesting that such prominent researchers as Pavlenko, Panayiotou, or Wierzbicka never considered personality as one of the factors influencing the bilingual cognitive shift, or examined changes in personality while operating in a foreign language. At the same time, there is clear evidence that the language we speak might affect our personality. Previous research on personality traits shows that both knowledge of other languages, the use of the later outside the classroom, and the acculturation process might influence personality (Dewaele & van Oudenhoven, 2009; Kim, 2001). It was also reported that the same bilinguals score differently on a personality questionnaire depending on the language it was presented in, suggesting that different personalities might be elicited when operating in different languages (Hull, 1990). Further, some of the claimed cultural differences could potentially be better explained by differences in the personalities of the informants (Matsumoto, 2006). There is also evidence that personality traits differ between cultures (Allik & McCrae, 2004) and that personality dimensions are also shaped by environmental factors (Furnham & Heaven, 1999; Jang et al., 1996; McCrae et al., 2000). Considering all these findings, it appears that any study dealing with different cultures, acculturation processes and/or bilingualism needs to consider the inclusion of personality traits (preferably lower and higher order) as an important variable that might influence and be influenced by the aforementioned factors. It is important to remember that personality influences that way we function in the world, be it our culture and language or the host culture and language, but that at the same time one’s personality might be influenced by the very process of acculturation or socialization into new culture and language. Research in applied linguistics frequently focuses on one or two variables common in this discipline, such as the linguistic history of an informant and his/her linguistic performance (see Altarriba & Heredia, 2008). The current book claims that reality is much more complex and cannot be reduced to one or two variables. At the same time, the inclusion of individual differences and personality traits in any research on bilingualism and emotions, changes in linguistic behavior/conceptual shift or changes in personality is justified and necessary in order to create a broader picture and to understand this complex relationship. It can be argued that an understanding of how a conceptual change occurs in

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

57

bilinguals requires incorporation of both linguistic and psychological variables, as well as treating the relationship between personality and foreign language use as reciprocal. The literature review showed that perception, expression and use of emotions and emotion words in a foreign language has been examined by various researchers (e.g. Altarriba, 2003; Dewaele, 2004a, b, 2010; Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002; Panayiotou 2004; Pavlenko, 2005), with the common finding that L2 users experience difficulties in expressing emotions in L2 (Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002; Pavlenko, 2004; Rintell, 1990). The ability to use language appropriately, according to context, has been linked to age of onset of acquisition, L2 proficiency, and type and intensity of exposure to L2 (Altarriba & Canary, 2004; Dewaele, 2005; Harris, 2004). Acquisition of fluency through an “immersion” experience was frequently highlighted (Kasper, 1997; Regan, Howard & Lemée, 2009; Spielman & Radnofsky, 2001). The emotional aspect of foreign language has also been shown to be important (Pavlenko, 2001) as well as empathy and the ability to understand the feelings of others linked with authentic second language use (Guiora et al., 1979). It was also noted by Wierzbicka (1999) that the way individuals interpret their own emotions depends on their native language and this interpretation might change due to exposure to a foreign language (Pavlenko, 2005). Thus, bilinguals and second language users having social interactions with people from different cultural backgrounds might become more skilled in recognizing other people’s facial expressions of emotions. The review of the literature also suggests that higher and lower-order personality traits should also be taken into account as these might be connected with the perception and expression of emotions in a foreign language. As the result, the present contribution aims to examine the complex interaction of such factors as personality traits, emotional intelligence, and the expression and perception of emotions in L1 and L2. Due to the lack of research on the effect that emotional intelligence might exert on the expression and perception of L2 emotions this contribution is the first to incorporate emotional intelligence (EI) as one of the variables potentially influencing not only the expression and perception of emotions in a foreign language, but also self-perceived personality changes occurring while operating in L2. The main question of the present dissertation is whether an immersion in a L2 culture and language that is typologically distant from the L1 changes the perception and expression of emotions in both L1 and L2. If this is the case, which of the factors under examination (length and

58

Chapter Two

intensity of socialization, sociobiographical data, personal differences or emotional intelligence) contribute to such a change?

2.8. Hypotheses Based on the findings of previous research as reviewed in this chapter, it was hypothesized that: 1) Immersion in an L2 language and culture will have an influence on the perception of emotions in the L2 as well as on choice of language for the expression of emotions, with participants who spend a longer time in an ESC being more likely to choose the L2 for expressing emotions, and to choose the L2 as a dominant language. 2) Self-perceived L2 proficiency will have an influence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 as well as on the language choice for the expression of emotions, with informants who spend a longer amount of time in an ESC more likely to choose the L2 for expressing emotions, and to perceive the L2 as a dominant language. 3) Immersion in an L2 language and culture will have an influence on self-perceived L2 proficiency, with participants who spend a long time in an ESC more likely to score higher on the self-perceived L2 proficiency scale. 4) Extraversion will have an effect on L2 use as well as on feeling different while using the L2, with participants with higher scores on the Extraversion trait using the L2 to a greater extent and being more likely to feel different while operating in L2. 5) Openness will have an influence on the use of L2 as well as on feeling different while using L2, with participants who are more open to new experiences being more likely to use the L2 more frequently or to report feeling different while operating in the L2. 6) Neuroticism will have an influence on the use of L2 and the expression of emotions in the L2, with participants who gained higher scores on the Neuroticism scale being more likely to report limited L2 use and to find it difficult to express emotions in the L2. 7) Specific EI traits will affect the extent to which individuals perceive difficulties in expression of emotions in L2, L2 use, feeling different while using L2, and the choice of language for expressing emotions, with informants who are more socially skilled being more likely to notice possible changes in behavior, body

Emotions, Language and Culture: An Overview of the Literature

59

language, or expression of emotions while operating in a foreign language. 8) Length of stay in an ESC as well as self-perceived L2 proficiency will have an effect on personality traits and EI, with participants who have been in an ESC for a long time and self-reported higher scores on L2 proficiency scale being more likely to score higher on Empathy, Extraversion, and Global EI scales.

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY

3.1. Introduction The aim of the present book is to examine the possible relationship between immersion in L2 language and culture, measured by means of the length of stay in an ESC as well as self-perceived L2 proficiency, and the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 and L1. This dissertation also aims to investigate the perception and expression of emotions in a foreign language with reference to specific personality traits and emotional intelligence. In order to provide an overview of this complex phenomenon of understanding and expressing emotions while operating in a foreign language, an online questionnaire comprising of several sub-questionnaires was developed. The idea of an online questionnaire measuring perception and expression of emotions in the L2 was inspired by an online survey created by Dewaele and Pavlenko (2001-2003). The development and piloting of this online questionnaire as well as the participants of the study will be described in detail in the following sections.

3.2. Participants 137 anonymous volunteers answered the online questionnaire. In this group there were 97 females and 40 males (Mean = 1.29, SD = .46). Their ages ranged from 17 to 58 (Mean = 28.9, SD = 7.6); however the majority of informants (66%) were in the 22-29 age group. Educational level varied from Primary to MA with nearly half of the sample at BA level. The age of L2 onset varied from 2 to 32 years (Mean = 13.7, SD = 5.8); however, 48.1% of the sample began L2 acquisition before the age of 12. Selfperceived L2 speaking proficiency, measured on a 5-point Likert scale, varied from beginner to fully fluent (Mean = 3.8, SD = 1.2) with a third of participants rating themselves as fully fluent, nearly a third as upperintermediate, a fifth as intermediate, 10 % as pre-intermediate and 5% as beginners. As can be clearly seen, the vast majority of informants (84%)

Methodology

61

rated their command of English as intermediate or above. For the purpose of this book, only participants with L1 Polish and L2 English were taken into consideration. Half of these participants began L2 acquisition in Poland; the remainder acquired English in an English-speaking country. Length of stay in an English-speaking country (ESC) varied from 0 to 324 months (Mean = 18.8, SD = 1.1) with a quarter of informants having never been abroad, a quarter having spent 1 to 4 months in an English-speaking country, nearly a third of the participants living in an ESC from 6 to 24 months and 17.5% living abroad between 25 and 324 months. Participants were divided into two groups. The first group was the “control” group, consisting of participants that had never been to an ESC; the second was the “immersion” group that had lived in an ESC for some period of time. A detailed description of these two groups is provided below.

3.2.1.

The “control” group

There were 35 informants in the control group, consisting of participants who had never been to an ESC and never used English on everyday basis. This group consisted of 70% females and 30% males (n = 35, Mean = .3, SD = .46). Their age varied from 20 to 57 with two thirds of the sample being in their twenties, 25% being in their thirties, and the remaining 5 % being either in their forties or fifties (n = 35, Mean = 28, SD = 7). In terms of educational level, one third of the sample had received vocational level education, one third had an MA diploma, 25% had a BA and the remaining 5% had received only primary education (n = 35, Mean = 2.9, SD = .9). Their L2 proficiency also varied from not knowing English at all (8%) to fluency (5%) with 17% rating themselves as beginners, one quarter as pre-intermediate, one third as intermediate and the remaining 15% as upper-intermediate (n = 35, Mean = 2.4, SD = 1.3).

3.2.2.

The “immersion” group

There were 102 informants in the “multilingual” group. Two thirds were females and one third were males (n = 97, Mean = 1.3, SD = .45). Their age varied from 17 to 58 years with two thirds of the sample being in their twenties, 23% being in their thirties, and the remaining 10% being in their forties of fifties (n = 97, Mean = 29, SD = 7.9). More than half of the informants held a BA, 8% had an MA, 8% had received secondary education, and more than one quarter reported receiving vocational education (n = 97, Mean = 3.4, SD = 1). Concerning L2 proficiency, 1%

62

Chapter Three

reported beginner level, 3% rated themselves as pre-intermediate, 15% as intermediate, one third as upper-intermediate, and nearly half as fluent (n = 95, Mean = 4.2, SD = .89). Half of the participants had lived in an ESC for up to 12 months, one quarter reported living in an ESC from 12 to 24 months, and the remaining 23% had lived in an ESC between 24 and 324 months (n = 97, Mean = 25.7, SD = 47).

3.3. “Bilingualism and Emotions” research instruments The questionnaire used in the empirical phase of this study was constructed by drawing on responses to four pilot test questionnaires administrated among Polish monolinguals, Polish-English bilinguals and Polish L2 users of English. A web-based survey of bilingualism and emotions was inspired by Dewaele and Pavlenko’s web survey hosted on the website at Birkbeck, University of London (Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2001-2003). Their survey invited respondents to supply socio-biographical details together with information about their knowledge of different languages and respond to a series of questions about aspects of their use of these languages. The investigation described in this dissertation draws on data from pilot tests that used various techniques of measuring the perception of emotions, including emotion elicitation as well as interviews with Polish-English bilinguals. The online questionnaire on bilingualism and emotions consisted of six sub-questionnaires: 1) Personal background questionnaire, measuring such variables as age, gender, self-perceived L2 proficiency, age of L2 onset, length of stay in an English-speaking country, educational level, and length of L2 instruction. 2) Questionnaire measuring the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2. All questionnaire items were divided into the following sub-groups, measuring: changes of attitudes towards the L2, difficulties in expression and perception of emotions in the L2, feeling different when using the L2, L2 use, expression of emotions in the L1, expression of emotions in the L2, L1 language dominance, and L2 language dominance. All questionnaire items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale. 3) Questionnaire on exposure to English 4) IPIP questionnaire which is a short version of the OCEAN personality test measuring such traits as Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional stability and Intellect

Methodology

63

5) TEIQue (Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire) providing scores on four factors of broad relevance: Well-being, Self-control, Emotionality, and Sociability. In addition, it incorporates 15 specific factors and measures global trait emotional intelligence. All questionnaires were used in a Polish version (informants’ L1) to avoid comprehension difficulties in the L2. In situations where informants were to answer in the L2 there was an option to indicate insufficient English proficiency rather than “I don’t know” which would influence the data analysis. The use of both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods was justified by new trends in Applied Linguistics research, which show that the combination of emic and etic perspectives overcomes the limitations of narrowing frameworks and enriches the research by allowing for greater diversity in the type of data gathered (Dewaele, 2008a). Detailed descriptions of the six sub-questionnaires as well as of the procedures leading to the final version of the questionnaire are presented in detail below.

3.3.1.

Personal background questionnaire

The personal background questionnaire comprised ten questions measuring age, gender, self-perceived L2 proficiency, age of L2 onset, length of stay in an English-speaking country (LGS), educational level, and length of L2 instruction. In addition to the variables described above, it also elicited data concerning participants’ self-perceived command of other foreign languages. It also measured how participants felt at the moment of taking the test, asking them to choose from five options rating from 1- Really bad to 5-Fantastic. An additional short test was introduced to ensure that informants were Polish native speakers. It comprised eight Polish emotions and their definitions. Informants were asked to match an emotion and its definition. Only those who have scored 75 % or above (six out of eight) were invited to complete the remainder of the questionnaire. As the present research focuses on data elicited from Polish monolinguals, Polish-English bilinguals and Polish L2 users of English, and that data was gathered by means of an online questionnaire, it was crucial to ensure that respondents were Polish native speakers. A further analysis of participants’ responses to both questionnaire items and open-ended questions demonstrated that all respondents were Polish native speakers.

Chapter Three

64

3.3.2.

Questionnaire measuring perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2

The original version of this questionnaire comprised 44 questions/ statements grouped according to 17 sections: attitude towards L2, perception of difficulties in expressing emotions, feeling different when using L2, L2 use, L1 use, type of L2 instruction environment, expression of emotions in English, expression of emotions in Polish, L2 dominance, L1 dominance, contact with L2, difficulties and changes linked to L2 use, L1 choice, L2 choice, L2 environment, and language dominance. Nevertheless, the original analysis showed that some of the dimensions enumerated (L1 use, type of L2 instruction environment, contact with L2, difficulties and changes linked to L2 use, L1 choice, L2 choice, L2 environment) above had a low Cronbach’s Į and therefore had to be excluded. The most common measure of scale reliability is Cronbach’s Į that calculates a variance-covariance matrix of all items (Field, 2005). Kline (1999) notes that although the generally accepted value of .8 is appropriate for cognitive tests, such as intelligence tests, for ability tests a cut-off point of .7 or slightly below is more suitable. He also claims that as far as psychological constructs are concerned, values below .7 can be expected because of the diversity of constructs being measured. The Cronbach’s Į for the whole questionnaire measuring perception and expression of emotions in the L2 comprising 35 items was .822. Nevertheless the whole test was divided into 8 dimensions measuring specific phenomena such as change of attitudes towards the L2, difficulties in expression and perception of emotions in L2, feeling different when using L2, L2 use, expression of emotions in L1, expression of emotions in L2, L1 dominance, and L2 dominance. Consequently, another reliability analysis was needed for separate dimensions. Summary of the reliability analysis is presented in Table 4.

Methodology

65

Table 4. Cronbach’s Į of all dimensions No. Dimension 1 Change of attitudes towards the L2 Difficulties in the perception 2 and expression of emotions in L2 3 Feeling different when using L2 4 L2 use 5 Expression of emotions in L2 6 Expression of emotions in L1 7 L2 dominance 8 L1 dominance

No. of items Cronbach’s per dimension Į 2 .729 2 3 9 5 5 5 5

.727 .681 .762 .837 .768 .768 .726

The final version of the questionnaire on the website consisted of 35 questions/statements grouped according to eight dimensions: change of attitude towards L2, perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2, feeling different when using L2, L2 use, L1 use, expression of emotions in L2, expression of emotions in L2, L1 dominance, L2 dominance. All the questionnaire items were scored on 5-point Likert scales. Informants were asked to answer with one of five options for dis/agreement with statements: 1- Strongly disagree, 2- Disagree, 3Neutral, 4- Agree, 5- Strongly Agree; and one of five following options for questions dealing with frequency: 1- Not at all, 2- Seldom, 3- Sometimes, 4- Often, 5-Very often, depending on the question type. The following sections provide a detailed description of the final group of variables and of scales chosen for the analysis, as well as a thorough discussion of all questionnaire items. The questionnaire measuring perception and expression of emotions in L1 and L2 is presented in Appendix One. 3.3.2.1.

Change of attitudes towards the L2

This questionnaire scale consisted of two statements to which respondents were required to respond by choosing from five options on the scale from 1-strongly disagree to 5-strongly agree. The statements were: “My stay in an English-speaking country changed my attitude towards the English language” and “My stay in an English-speaking country changed my attitude towards the English culture”. These questions were incorporated into the questionnaire as it clearly emerged from pilot tests and from interviews with Polish-English bilinguals that there is a noticeable change in attitude toward L2 language and culture resulting

66

Chapter Three

from stay in an ESC. The relationship between such individual changes and personality traits and emotional intelligence was of great interest for the current research. 3.3.2.2. the L2

Difficulties in the perception and expression of emotions in

The difficulties experienced in perceiving and expressing emotions in the L2 scale was based on the feedback to two statements: “I find it difficult to express emotions in English” and “I find it difficult to understand emotions in English”. Informants were to choose an answer from five options 1- Strongly disagree, 2- Disagree, 3- Neutral, 4- Agree, 5- Strongly Agree. The statements were chosen on the basis of the literature review which demonstrated that some emotions are culturespecific and untranslatable between languages (Wierzbicka, 1999) as well as the fact that differences in cultural scripts for expressing emotions in English (L2) and Polish (L1) might have an influence on self-measured difficulties in the expression and perception of emotions in L2 by PolishEnglish bilinguals and L2 users (Panayiotou, 2004; Pavlenko, 2004). 3.3.2.3.

Feeling different when using L2

The Feeling different when using L2 scale reflected Likert scale scores in answer to three statements: “I feel I’m someone else when speaking English”; “When I speak English my mimic and body language changes” and “Friends say that I’m a different person when I speak English”. Informants were to choose from five options rating from 1-Strongly disagree to 5-Strongly agree. All three statements were adopted from the study conducted by Dewaele and Pavlenko (2001-2003) and presented in Wilson (2008). The first statement was adopted and reconstructed from question 33 in Dewaele and Pavlenko’s (2001-2003) online research: “Do you feel like a different person sometimes when you use different languages?” The present questionnaire item is formed as a statement rather than a question: “I feel like I’m someone else while speaking English”. Such a change from question to statement was adopted as the majority of the present questionnaire items were in the form of statements. The next two statements “When I speak English my mimic and body language changes” and “Friends say that I’m a different person when I speak English” were also inspired by Dewaele and Pavlenko’s (2001-2003) online questionnaire. They were used in a similar form by Wilson (2008) whose questionnaire was also formulated on the basis of Dewaele and

Methodology

67

Pavlenko’s (2001-2003) informants’ responses to questionnaire item of “Do you feel like a different person sometimes when you use different languages?” Wilson (2008) measured self-perceived changes while operating in a foreign language. In her questionnaire, item 1 (“When I speak a foreign language my body language and facial expressions are different”) is similar to the present research item (“When I speak English my mimic and body language changes”). The next statement (“Friends say that I’m a different person when I speak English”) was presented in Wilson’s (2008) questionnaire in items 6 and 10. Item 6 was “People say that I sound like a different person when I speak a foreign language” and item 10 was “People say I look different when I speak a foreign language”. It is necessary to acknowledge that all items in the present questionnaire were based on either Dewaele and Pavlenko’s (2001-2003) online study or Polish-English bilinguals’ insights gathered by pilot testing of the present research items. 3.3.2.4.

L2 use

The L2 use scale was devised in order to measure the frequency of L2 use by bilinguals and L2 users in different, everyday situations. It consisted of nine statements requiring participants to choose between the following responses: 1- Strongly disagree, 2- Disagree, 3- Neutral, 4Agree, 5- Strongly Agree. The items were: “I use English at work”; “I use English at home”; “I use English at school”; “I use English when I talk to my friends”; “I use English in everyday situations”; “I use English for praising”; “I use English to maintain discipline”; “I use English when I talk to my partner”; “I use English when I talk to my children”. The scale was incorporated into the current research in order to determine the degree of socialization into L2 language and culture, as Pavlenko (2004) stated that together with affective socialization, the emotional intensity of L2 might increase. Few of the statements consider the degree of L2 use while addressing children, praising or maintaining discipline as it was shown by Pavlenko (2004) that L1 is not always the language of emotions for bilingual/multilingual parents. Nevertheless, she points to the “underlying discourse of emotional primacy of the first language whereby the use of the L1 is seen as “natural’ and the preference for the LX may appear as “strange” and requires justification” (Pavlenko, 2004: 201). From the point of view of the present contribution, it is interesting to investigate how socialization into the L2 culture and language influences the expression and perception of emotions in various contexts in a language that is distant

68

Chapter Three

from L1 in terms of the cultural scripts necessary for expressing emotions (Wierzbicka, 1999). 3.3.2.5.

Expression of emotions in the L2

The scale of expression of emotions in the L2 comprised five items. The scale items were: “I use English for showing emotions”; “If I happened to hit myself with a hammer my first words would be in English”; “How much do you express emotions in English?”; “How much do you argue in English?”, and “How much do you swear in English?”. For the first two items, respondents were to choose between 1- Strongly disagree, 2- Disagree, 3- Neutral, 4- Agree and 5- Strongly Agree. For the remaining three questions, informants were to choose from the following five options: 1- Not at all, 2- Seldom, 3- Sometimes, 4- Often, 5-Very often. The presence of the two similar items “I use English for showing emotions” and “How much do you express emotions in English?” is justified as the first considers the use of L2 for expressing emotions while the second addresses the frequency of such use. The item “If I happened to hit myself with a hammer my first words would be in English” was adapted from Dewaele’s (2004b) article on “Emotional Force of Swearwords and Taboo Words in the Speech of Multilinguals” where he notes that the perception of emotional force of swearwords in multilinguals’ different languages is determined by several independent variables, largely those related to the individual’s linguistic history of how and when the language was learned, the general level of activation of the language and its frequency of past or present use (Dewaele, 2004b: 219). Dewaele also claims that swearwords and taboo (S-T) words from languages acquired later in life have less emotional force as “participants report some detachment when performing in these languages, including a perception of lower emotional force of S-T words, which can, again, either favour or hinder their use. Most users of S-T words also admit that their perception of the emotional force might not be accurate, hence the danger of undesirable perlocutionary effects” (Dewaele, 2004b: 220). On the other hand, Pavlenko (2004) argues that L2 affective socialization might influence L2 choice for expressing emotions. 3.3.2.6.

Expression of emotions in the L1

The expression of emotions in the L1 scale comprised the same questions as the expression of emotions in the L2 scale, but with the other language. Inclusion of this scale measuring the expression of emotion in

Methodology

69

L1 was justified by research findings that suggest that the L1 is the language of stronger emotional force (Dewaele, 2004a, 2004b) and that words labelling emotion are represented at a deeper level of conceptual understanding in a native or dominant language as compared to a second language (Altarriba, 2003). In this respect, Dewaele claims that “the stronger the emotion, the more likely for it to be expressed in the L1 (especially if it is the dominant language). It doesn’t seem to matter in that case whether the interlocutor understands the language. The swearwords in the L1 allow the speaker to vent his/her anger efficiently, and the communicative intention and emotional force can probably be interpreted through nonverbal cues” (2004a: 220). The expression of emotions in the L1 scale consisted of five items: “I use Polish for showing emotions”; “If I happened to hit myself with a hammer my first words would be in Polish”; “How much do you express emotions in Polish?”; “How much do you argue in Polish?”, and “How much do you swear in Polish?”. As described above. for the first two questions respondents were to choose between 1- Strongly disagree, 2Disagree, 3- Neutral, 4- Agree, and 5- Strongly Agree. For the remaining three questions, informants were to choose between the following five options: 1- Not at all, 2- Seldom, 3- Sometimes, 4- Often, 5-Very often. 3.3.2.7.

L2 and L1 dominance

A language dominance scale was employed as it was suggested that the choice of language for expressing emotions, be it positive or negative, depends on language dominance (Dewaele, 2004a, b; Pavlenko, 2004). In the case of Polish-English bilinguals and L2 users whose socialization with L2 culture and language led to a perception of English as the dominant language, this choice of emotional expression might differ in comparison to those bilinguals and L2 users whose dominant language is still Polish. Therefore, scales measuring both L1 and L2 dominance were used. The L2 and L1 dominance scale comprised five questions each: “I dream in English”; “I dream in Polish”; “I count in English”; “I count in Polish”; “I talk to myself in English”; “I talk to myself in Polish”; “English is my dominant language”; “Polish is my dominant language”; “If I were to choose only one language to use throughout my life it would be…? Participants were to choose between 1- Strongly disagree, 2Disagree, 3- Neutral, 4- Agree and 5- Strongly Agree on first 8 statements. However, while giving the answer to the last question respondents were to

Chapter Three

70

choose from the 5-point Likert scale with: 1- Definitely Polish and 5Definitely English.

3.3.3.

Exposure to L2

A questionnaire measuring exposure to L2 was adapted from Eilola, Havelka, & Sharma’s paper on “Emotional Activation in the First and Second language” (2007) and comprised questions on the following L2 activities: read books in English, read newspapers in English, read magazines in English, read comics in English, browse English websites, listen to English music, watch films in English, watch English TV programs, discuss in English, give presentations/speeches in English, write letters/e-mails in English, and write essays/articles in English. Informants were required to choose an answer from a 5-point Likert scale of 1- never, 2- yearly, 3- monthly, 4- weekly, and 5- daily. Cronbach’s Į for the 12 statements in the exposure to English scale equalled .872. Incorporating a previously tested measure of L2 contact was particularly important as it limited the problems inherent in creating an instrument that has not been validated and used before, and at the same time allowed for detailed scanning of the amount of exposure to a foreign language and its possible influence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. This is particularly important in the case of Polish immigrants as the length of stay in an ESC itself cannot be the only variable to determine the amount of exposure to L2 language and culture, as many Polish immigrants tend to socialize mainly with fellow immigrants, avoiding contact with English native speakers. As some researchers have pointed out, there is a growing range of ethnic and religious institutions that serve the Polish community. For example in Ireland: “The ethnic institutions in question include the following: the Polish Information and Culture Centre, the Polish Social and Cultural Association, the Polish House and the Polish-Irish Society. Apart from the dissemination of information about Polish culture in Ireland, Polish ethnic institutions provide free English tuition (e.g. the Polish House), offer a free information service for newcomers in their native language (e.g. the Polish Information and Culture Centre in Dublin), and run libraries where Polish books are available (e.g. the Polish Social and Cultural Association), as well as organizing various cultural events, concerts, lectures, art exhibitions and theatre performances. Polish migrants who have language problems quite often turn to the Polish Social and Cultural Association and the Polish-Irish Society, as the National Economic and Social Council of Ireland reports (NESC, 2006:235). It is worth noting that the former also offers Polish language and culture courses for bilingual children of Polish

Methodology

71

migrants. With regard to religion, the Polish Chaplaincy in Ireland offers religious worship in the Polish language and runs a Polish weekend primary school for bilingual children, where Polish, Polish History, Geography, Mathematics are Religion are taught.” (Singleton, Skrzypek, Kopeckova, Bidzinska, 2007: 2)

In the light of this description, it was considered particularly important to incorporate other measures of exposure to L2.

3.3.4.

Question concerning difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2

The item contained one question measuring the expression of emotions in a foreign language. It was designed to provide a detailed insight into the process of expressing emotions in the L2. The question was: “In what situations do you find any problems in expressing emotions in English?” Informants were asked to explain whether they face any difficulties in expressing emotions in a foreign language and to describe the situations that cause such difficulties.

3.3.5.

OCEAN Personality test

Costa and McCrae (1992a) used questionnaire statements to construct the NEO Personality Inventory based on the Big-Five framework, with over 180 items designed to assess how respondents typically think, act and feel. Goldberg subsequently developed a shorter, 50-item version personality inventory, which is available free of charge online from the International Personality Item Pool (2001), a public domain personality resource (available at http://ipip.ori.org/New_IPIP-50-item-scale.htm). The OCEAN questionnaire used in this investigation uses the 50 items listed in the International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) and was obtained and distributed in Polish. The Polish version was translated and adapted by Maria Pachalska. The introduction to the questionnaire also drew on the instructions suggested by the IPIP, and required participants to use the rating scale from “very inaccurate” to “very accurate” with a mid-point of “neither inaccurate nor accurate” in order to describe honestly how they see themselves at the moment of testing. They were also informed that the test was anonymous and that their responses would be confidential. The OCEAN questionnaire can be found in Appendix Three.

72

3.3.6.

Chapter Three

Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue)

Petrides and Furnham’s (2003) TEIQue used in the present study comprised 153 items rated on seven-point Likert scale. It was used in the Polish adaptation created by Agata Wytykowska. In the introduction to the questionnaire, respondents were asked to complete the questionnaire on their own and in quiet conditions. They were instructed to answer each statement by putting a circle around the number that best reflects their degree of agreement or disagreement with a given statement. They were also asked to answer as accurately as possible, to work quickly, and not to think too long about the exact meaning of the statement. Emphasis was put on the fact that there are no right or wrong answers. TEIQue requires participants to use the rating scale from “completely disagree” to “completely agree” with a mid-point of “neither agree nor disagree”. Participants were also informed that the test was anonymous and that their responses would be confidential. The TEIQue questionnaire can be found in Appendix Two.

3.4. Selection and recruitment The sample chosen for the present study drew on a cross-section of the general population. Wilson (2008: 115) states that in a study of foreign language use, participants clearly need to be drawn from groups who are known to use the foreign language rather than a random sample of the population. However, the aim of the present study was to find heterogeneous groups of informants that would fulfil the following requirements. In the case of the control group, the requirement was not having travelled to or stayed in an English-speaking country (ESC). In the case of the experimental group the requirements was having stayed in the ESC for longer than six months and have used L2 on an everyday basis. The command of the L2 is very important but it was impossible to find monolinguals as a majority of informants had contact with the L2, as it is a compulsory subject in the Polish educational system. Nevertheless, the main focus was on the exposure to foreign language and culture rather than on command of the L2, even if they are closely related. Another aim when approaching particular groups to ask for their participation was to attempt to capture the responses of a broader group than only “young adults enrolled in the universities where the researchers work” (Dewaele, 2005a: 370), who are likely to represent a narrower range of ages, ability and linguistic background (Wilson, 2008: 115). Taking a broad overview of the literature on adult language learners,

Methodology

73

participants in such studies seem to fall into three main categories (Wilson, 2008: 115-116). The first category of participants mentioned in many of the published studies (e.g. Altarriba & Canary, 2004;Callahan, 2005; Koven, 2004, 2006; Marian & Kaushanskaya, 2003; Ramirez-Esparza et al,2006; Panayiotou, 2004), are bilinguals who are able to operate at a native-speaker level of competence in both languages. These participants have grown up speaking two languages, the home language and the ambient language. They may well exercise choice, either consciously or unconsciously, as to when and to whom they use each language, but they are able to operate equally competently in both (Wilson 2008: 115). Immigrants who need to learn or master their L2 in order to be able to live and work in a given community (Kanno & Norton, 2003; Norton, 2001) represent the second category of informants. Students taking part in an extended stay in the foreign country form the third category of respondents. These studies would typically report on the linguistic and cultural changes that are noted or reported during and after the period abroad (see for example Byram, 1996; Coleman, 1996; de Courcy, 2003; Freed, 1995; Hokanson, 2000; Kinginger & Farrell, 2004; Kinginger, Farrell & Whitworth, 2005; Schmidt-Rinehart & Knight 2004) (cf. Wilson 2008: 116). Reflecting on the three main categories of participants presented above, it was decided to seek informants from among L1 Polish and L2 English adults representing all three categories. For this reason, volunteers were recruited in different ways. Bilingual and immigrant groups were approached through Polish societies in Ireland and England. During the period of the survey, the researcher was living and working in Ireland, having access to the immigrant society both there and in England. Additionally the questionnaire was advertised among students taking part in exchange programs both at Polish and English universities. Firstly, it was also advertised at various conferences and on the Linguist List. The next two chapters present quantitative and qualitative results of the data analysis.

CHAPTER FOUR QUANTITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS

4.1. Introduction This chapter concerning the quantitative data analysis provides an overview of all statistical procedures and steps taken as well as detailed analysis of the eleven hypotheses listed in section 2.8. A series of independent statistical tests were performed on the values of the “immersion” group on all subscales of Questionnaire measuring the perception and expression of emotions in the L2, as well as the “OCEAN” personality test and the TEIQue. A detailed analysis of statistical results followed by a graphical presentation of significant differences is provided below.

4.2. Immersion in an L2 and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 The first hypothesis concerned immersion in an L2 language and culture, and its potential influence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. It was hypothesized that participants who had spent longer time in an ESC would be more likely to choose the L2 to express emotions and to perceive it as a dominant language. Results of the questionnaire measuring the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 were calculated. They comprised 35 items later divided into eight dimensions. Pearson’s correlation analyzes were performed; the results are presented in Table 5.

Quantitative Data Analysis

75

Table 5. Length of stay (LGS) and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 (Pearson’s r)

Change of attitude toward L2 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use Expression of emotions in English Expression of emotions in Polish L1 dominance L2 dominance

Length of stay in ESC .249* .047 -.043 .222* .189 -.238* -.385°°° .408°°°

The results presented in Table 5 show that the length of stay in an ESC is correlated with change of attitudes towards the L2 (r = .25, p < .05). The informants who noticed changes in their attitude toward L2 language and culture stayed in an ESC longer than those who didn’t notice any changes. The item does not state the direction of the change, whether it is positive or negative, but measures whether it occurs and is noticeable for the informants. Another statistically significant correlation emerges between LGS and L2 use (r = .22, p < .05) which suggests that the longer one stays in an ESC the more frequently and intensely the L2 is used. It is interesting to note that the LGS does not influence the expression of emotions in the L2 but has a negative effect on expression of emotions in the L1 (r = -.24, p < .05). It could be hypothesized that if one stays abroad for a long period of time, the use of the L1 for the expression of emotions might be limited. What is interesting here is that at the same time this does not necessarily entail using L2 as a substitute of L1 for expressing emotions. The explanation for this might be that Polish bilinguals and second language users might find it difficult to adapt to different social scripts for expressing emotions in the L2 and may either use a mixture of L1 and L2 for expressing emotions or use L1 only but to a lesser extent. It is important to note that the expression of emotions in the L2 is connected with high L2 proficiency and that those who cannot express themselves fully in L2 will not use it for such purposes but will report not using L1 to such a degree as they would when living in a native country. LGS was also correlated negatively with L1 dominance dimension (r = -.39, p < .001), and positively with L2 dominance (r = .41, p < .001). It might be concluded that the stay in an ESC influences the extent to

76

Chapter Four

which one would use L2, as informants reported using it when they talk to themselves, dream or count. Participants also selected L2 more often than L1 as their dominant language and the language that they would use exclusively for the rest of their lives. This suggests that, together with a longer stay in an ESC, there is an important change in attitudes toward the L2 and preference for the L2 use.

4.3. Self-perceived L2 proficiency and the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 The second hypothesis suggested that self-perceived L2 proficiency will have an influence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2, as well as on the language selected for the expression of emotions. It was speculated that informants who spent longer time in an ESC would be more likely to choose the L2 for expressing emotions, as well as selecting L2 as the dominant language. Self-perceived L2 proficiency was measured by means of the five-point Likert scale. Participants ranged from beginner to fully fluent (Mean = 4.1, SD = .9) with nearly half the participants rating themselves as fully fluent, a third as upper- intermediate, 17% as intermediate, 4% as pre-intermediate and one as a beginner. The results of the Pearson’s correlation are presented in Table 6 and described in detail below. Table 6. L2 proficiency and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 (Pearson’s r)

Change of attitude toward L2 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use Expression of emotions in English Expression of emotions in Polish L1 dominance L2dominance

Measure of speaking proficiency .232* -.118 .038 .408°°° .266** -.033 -.158 .296**

Quantitative Data Analysis

77

These correlation results show that self-perceived L2 proficiency is linked to change of attitudes towards the L2 (r = .23, p < .05), which might suggest that the better one knows a foreign language, the more it changes one’s attitude toward it and its culture. This could be related to the fact that high foreign language proficiency enables people to understand more, and they therefore feel more secure and self-confident while operating in L2. High foreign language proficiency was strongly correlated with L2 use (r = .41, p < .001.), suggesting that the higher the command of the L2 the more readily and frequently it is used. Self-measured L2 proficiency was also related to expression of emotions in L2 (r = .27, p < .01) and L2 dominance (r = .30, p < .01). It could be stated that only high command of a foreign language enables expression of various positive and negative emotions in the L2 as well as the use of L2 for such purposes as talking to oneself, dreaming, counting or the choice of L2 as a dominant language. It is also important to differentiate between the length of stay in an ESC and L2 proficiency, as living in a foreign country does not always mean taking an active part in L2 social interactions. More social interactions and a stronger immersion in L2 culture leads to higher sociolinguistic competence (Kasper, 1997), which enables second language users to use language appropriately, according to context and in various situations including expressing emotions. This suggestion is supported by Dewaele and Pavlenko’s (2002) report that the high proficiency group in their study used more emotion words than the low proficiency group.

4.4. Immersion in an L2 and self-perceived L2 proficiency It was hypothesized that immersion in the L2 language and culture would have an influence on self-perceived L2 proficiency, with participants who spent a long time in an ESC more likely to score higher on the self-perceived L2 proficiency scale. Immersion in L2 culture and language was measured by means of the length of stay in an ESC (LGS) variable. Participants having spent from 1 to 324 months in an ESC (n = 102, Mean = 25, SD = 46) with a third of participants having spent from 1 to 3 months in an ESC, a third having lived abroad from 4 to 24 months, and the remaining 33% having lived abroad from 25 to 324 months. The level of self-perceived L2 proficiency varied from beginner to fully fluent (n = 10, Mean = 4.1, SD = .9) with nearly half of all participants rating themselves as fully fluent, 30% as upper- intermediate, 17% as intermediate, 4% as pre-intermediate and one as a beginner. The Pearson’s r correlation between LGS and L2 speaking proficiency showed

78

Chapter Four

a statistically significant correlation at (r = .23, p < .05). The results suggest that the length of stay in an L2 country might facilitate L2 acquisition, resulting in a higher L2 proficiency level.

4.5. Personality traits and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 It was hypothesized that the personality traits of Extraversion, Openness and Neuroticism would have an effect on L2 use as well as on feeling different while using L2. Therefore, scores on the five dependent variables of Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness and Neuroticism (OCEAN) were correlated with eight dimensions of the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 questionnaire. The results are presented and discussed below.

Change of attitude toward L2 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use Expression of emotions in L2 Expression of emotions in L1 L1dominance L2 dominance

Agreeableness -.087 -.111 .292** .200 .142 .117 .111 .130

Extraversion .102 -.161 .320** .212* .150 .039 .131 .046

-.267** -.119 .002 -.106 -.285** .003 -.072

.128 .119 .047 .138 .070 .056

Neuroticism -.025

-.066

Conscientiousness -.033

Table 7. Personality traits and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 (Pearson’s r)

Quantitative Data Analysis

.285** .273** .179 .102 -.038 .182

.094

Openness -.098

79

Chapter Four

80

4.5.1.

Extraversion and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2

Extraversion was hypothesized to have an effect on the L2 use as well as on feeling different while using L2, with the participants who gained higher scores on the Extraversion trait using L2 to a greater extent and being more likely to feel different while operating in L2. The statistical analysis showed that Extraversion scores were linked to feeling different when using L2 (r = .32, p < .01) and L2 use (r = .21, p < .05). Participants who were high scores on Extraversion trait reported frequent L2 use. This might be linked to the fact that extraverts tend to participate actively in social interactions in both L1 and L2, and living in an ESC provides them with more opportunities to engage in the L2 interactions. Extraverted participants also reported feeling different when using the L2, which could suggest greater sociolinguistic competence acquired through the considerable amount of interactions in the L2. Consequently, it could be speculated that the Extraversion personality trait leads to greater social awareness and a self-perceived personality change while operating in the L2.

4.5.2.

Agreeableness and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2

The Pearson’s r correlation showed a link between the personality trait of Agreeableness and feeling different when using L2 (r = .29. p < .01). High scorers on the Agreeableness personality trait also gained high scores on the feeling different when using L2 dimension, indicating that they noticed changes in facial expression and body language as well as selfperceived personality changes while speaking in the L2. It might be hypothesized that being friendly and cooperative in social interactions facilitates greater intensity in communication and results in greater selfand social awareness.

4.5.3.

Neuroticism and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2

The personality trait of Neuroticism was hypothesized to exert an influence on the L2 use and on the expression of emotions in the L2, with participants who gained higher scores on the Neuroticism scale being more likely to have limited L2 use and to find it difficult to express emotions in the L2. The statistical analysis showed that the personality trait of Neuroticism was negatively correlated with perception of difficulties in

Quantitative Data Analysis

81

expressing emotions in L2 (r = –.27, p < .01) and expressing emotions in L1(r = –.28, p < .01). The informants who gained high scores on the Neuroticism trait reported finding no self-perceived difficulties in expressing emotions in L2 and at the same time gained low scores on expression of emotions in L1. It could be speculated that high scores on Neuroticism (which implies an enduring tendency to experience negative emotional states as well as responding poorly to environmental stress) might influence low scores on the expression of emotions in L1. At the same time, perceiving no difficulties in expressing emotions in L2 might be connected with the lack of such activity.

4.5.4.

Openness and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2

The Pearson’s r correlation showed that Openness is linked to the L2 use (r = .27, p < .01) and feeling different when using L2 (r = .28, p < .01). This result might be explained by the fact that “open-mindedness” and seeking opportunities for new cultural and educational experiences results in more frequent use of the L2. At the same time frequent L2 use and being open to new situations and experiences results in a greater amount of social interactions and self and social awareness and in feeling different when using L2.

4.6. EI and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 Specific EI traits were speculated to influence the extent to which individuals perceive difficulties in expression of emotions in the L1 and the L2, as well as feeling different while using a foreign language, or their language choice for expressing emotions. Therefore, the scores on TEIQue were correlated with eight dimensions of the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and the L2 questionnaire. The results are presented in Table 8.

Chapter Four

Perception of difficulties Change of in expression attitude of toward L2 emotions in L2 -.095 -.238* Self esteem -.062 -.092 Emotion expression -.091 -.046 Self-motivation -.032 -.181 Emotion regulation .138 -.007 Happiness -.178 -.075 Empathy -.096 -.104 Social awareness .042 -.131 Impulsivity (low) -.199 -.065 Emotion perception .029 -.229* Stress management -.138 .024 Emotion management .061 -.089 Optimism -.201 -.024 Relationships .098 -.207* Adaptability .078 .022 Assertiveness .057 -.109 Well-being .176 .244* .075 -.159 .160 .266** .267** -.130 .268** -.002 .327** .114 .094 .122 .136 .165 .261* .196 .095 .200 .205 .203 .111 .051 .138 .220* .045 .172 .071 .224* .095 .235*

.032 .157 -.049 -.018 .094 .117 .037 -.067 .058 .041 .072 .082 .005 .220* .070 .084

.053 .103 -.003 -.143 -.095 .124 .075 .053 .106 -.134 .025 -.161 .014 -.150 -.071 -.093

.001 .001 -.016 -.077 .039 .011 .048 -.094 -.002 -.094 .028 -.037 .030 -.142 -.056 .001

.000 .111 .000 .056 .057 .144 .074 .051 .108 .138 .077 .098 .066 .235* .078 .066

Feeling different Expression of Expression of L1 L2 L2 use when using L2 emotions in L2 emotions in L1 dominance dominance

Table 8. EI traits and perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 (Pearson’s r)

82

-.218* -.082

-.027 -.144

.017 -.209

-.065 -.061

Self -control Emotionality

Sociability Global trait EI

.287** .199

-.121 .271**

-.020 .111

.099 .069 .234* .095

.187 .191

Quantitative Data Analysis

.017 -.025

-.087 .109

.011 -.034

-.109 .012

.090 .135

.099 .135

83

Chapter Four

84

4.6.1.

EI traits and difficulties in the perception and expression of emotions in the L2

The perception of difficulties in expressing emotions in the L2 (one of eight factors of the questionnaire measuring perception and expression of emotions in L1 and L2) correlated negatively with Stress management (r = –.23, p < .05), Adaptability (r = –.21, p < .05), Self esteem (r = –.24, p < .05), and Self-control (r = –.22, p < .05). These results suggest that perception of difficulties in expressing emotions in a foreign language might be related to such factors as inability to control stress or to cope in stressful situations, as well as lack of flexibility or low self-esteem. Expression of emotions, especially negative ones, is undoubtedly a stressful situation. For some people, speaking in a foreign language is also very stressful. When simultaneously combining those two factors of expressing emotions and operating in the L2, the level of stress might be too high for informants who are not able to control it and are not willing to adapt to a new situation. As a result, they might feel very uncomfortable and avoid this type of social interaction.

4.6.2.

EI traits and feeling different when using L2

Feeling different while using L2 correlated positively with seven EI traits: Emotion expression (r = .24, p < .05), Empathy (r = .27, p < .01), Social awareness (r = .27, p < .01), Emotion perception (r = .27, p < .01), Emotion management (r = .33, p < .01), Emotionality (r = .27, p < .01), and Sociability (r = .29, p < .01). Participants who gained high scores on the factor measuring self-perceived changes in facial expressions, body language, behavior and personality while operating in a foreign language also gained high scores on Emotion expression (high scorers are characterized as fluent in communicating their emotions and expressing their feelings accurately and unambiguously); Empathy (high scorers tend to be skilful in conversations as they can see the world from someone else’s point of view); Social awareness (high scorers have excellent social skills, being socially sensitive, adaptable and perceptive); Emotion perception (high scorers are clear about what they feel and able to decode other people’s emotional expressions); Emotion management (high scorers can influence other people’s feelings); Emotionality (high scores on that scale implement a wide range of emotion-related skills including perception and expression of emotions in self and others) and Sociability (high scorers are great at social interactions, have good listening skills and can communicate clearly and confidently with people from very diverse

Quantitative Data Analysis

85

backgrounds). A very interesting picture of emotionally and socially aware bilinguals and second language users emerges from the correlation of EI factors with the scores for feeling different/ being a different person while using foreign language. This description of EI factors characterises participants as socially competent, fluent in communicating their emotions and expressing their feelings, adaptable, perceptive and able to decode emotions in various situations. They are also presented as individuals who have good listening and communicative skills. Only people that are socially and emotionally skilled can notice subtle changes in personality and behavior while using L2. These results could explain why some people report changes in personality while switching languages and some do not. The existence of such phenomena of self-reported personality changes could be assigned more to high emotional intelligence that enables noticing such subtle changes as well as higher self-awareness rather than stemming from a difference in the existence of such changes in these participants. It could be speculated that there are some personality changes that occur with operating in a foreign language but that they are noticeable only to those with high emotional intelligence. If a given person is not emotionally and socially competent, (s) he would not be able to notice or recognize any changes occurring while operating in a foreign language.

4.6.3.

EI traits and L2 use

The foreign language use factor, measuring the frequency of L2 use in various social situations like talking to partner or children, using L2 for praising, maintaining discipline, or operating in L2 at work, home, school correlated positively with the five EI traits of Self esteem (r = .26, p < .05), Stress management (r = .22, p < .05), Adaptability (r = .22, p < .05), Wellbeing (r = .24, p < .05), and Global EI (r = .23, p < .05). High scorers on the Self-esteem trait measuring one’s overall evaluation of oneself have a positive view of themselves and their achievements. High scorers on Stress management can handle pressure calmly and effectively because they have developed successful coping mechanisms. They are good at regulating their emotions, which helps them tackle stress. Those gaining high scores on the adaptability factor are characterized by flexibility in their approach to work and life, with high levels of willingness to adapt to new environments and conditions. People who score highly on Adaptability may even enjoy novelty and regular change. Trait Well-being could be characterized as a sense of well-being, extending from past achievements to future expectations. Overall, individuals with high scores

Chapter Four

86

feel positive, happy, and fulfilled (Petrides, 2001). High scorers on Global trait EI could be described as having a high overall level of emotional intelligence, measured by means of the four factors of broad relevance: Well-being, Self-control, Emotionality, and Sociability (Petrides, 2001). It could be concluded that the extent to which one uses the L2 is related to several factors including general positive attitudes toward oneself (Self esteem, Well-being), ability to cope in stressful situations, (Stress management), flexibility and willingness to adapt in new situations and environments, (Adaptability), as well as emotional intelligence (Global EI) that might facilitate L2 use especially when L1 and L2 differ greatly in social scripts for expressing emotions.

4.6.4.

EI traits and expression of emotions in the L2

Expression of emotions in the L2, measuring different ways of expressing emotions in a foreign language, correlated positively with one EI trait of Adaptability (r = .22, p < .05). High scorers on expression of emotions in the L2 gained high scores on Adaptability, which measures flexibility in approach to work and life. High scores on the Adaptability trait suggest willingness to adapt to new environments and conditions. It could be speculated that willingness to express emotions in L2 is related to flexibility and readiness to adapt to new situations.

4.6.5.

EI traits and L2 dominance

Participants who gained high scores on the L2 dominance factor were also high scorers on EI trait Adaptability (r = .24, p < .05), which characterizes willingness and readiness to adapt to new conditions and situations. It could be hypothesized that a flexible approach to life, seeking novelty and feeling comfortable in new situations influences acceptance of L2 as the dominant language.

4.7. LGS and L2 proficiency and EI and OCEAN personality traits It was hypothesized that there might be a link between the length of stay in an ESC, self-perceived proficiency level and higher order (OCEAN) and lower order (TEIQue) personality traits. It was speculated that some personality traits such as Extraversion, Empathy or Emotional intelligence might facilitate some aspects of L2 acquisition including socio-cultural competence and thus influence self-perceived L2 proficiency. Second

Quantitative Data Analysis

87

language acquisition, even in a naturalistic setting, would normally take place over some time; hence, another variable, length of stay in an ESC, was taken into consideration. All the scores for the various personality dimensions were correlated with length of stay in an ESC and self measured L2 proficiency. The results are presented in Table 9 below. The statistical analysis was performed in order to verify whether length of stay in an ESC and using L2 in a naturalistic setting and self-perceived L2 proficiency was linked to personality traits including trait Emotional intelligence. There was no effect for LGS and both OCEAN personality traits and EI traits. Self-perceived L2 proficiency correlated with two OCEAN personality traits of Agreeableness (r = 23, p < .05) and Openness (r = .24, p < .05) as well as with EI trait of Empathy (r = .22, p < .05). High scorers on self-perceived L2 proficiency could be characterized as trusting, friendly and cooperative (Agreeableness), tend to be imaginative, creative, and seek out cultural and educational experiences (Openness), as well as being skilful in conversations and having an ability to put themselves “in somebody else’s shoes” (Empathy). As mentioned above, it was important to differentiate between length of stay in a foreign country and L2 proficiency, as living in an ESC does not always imply high L2 proficiency and extended L2 use. It can be clearly seen that there is a relationship between some personality traits (including some of the EI traits) and the level of proficiency in a foreign language. What is suggested here is that this relationship could be reciprocal and instead of investigating either the effect of L2 use on personality or the effect of personality on behavior in L2, researchers should account for the mutual relationship of personality and L2 proficiency.

Chapter Four

88

Table 9. LGS and L2 proficiency and EI and OCEAN personality traits (Pearson’s r) .

Extraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness Neuroticism Openness Self esteem Emotion expression Self-motivation Emotion regulation Happiness Empathy Social awareness Impulsivity (low) Emotion perception Stress management Emotion management Optimism Relationships Adaptability Assertiveness Wellbeing Self control Emotionality Sociability Global trait EI

LGS -.107 .038 -.053 -.053 .023 -.096 -.010 -.047 .072 -.018 .028 -.053 .024 .056 .024 -.076 .019 -.048 .113 -.052 -.026 .049 .005 -.071 -.003

Measure of speaking proficiency .111 .225* .079 .092 .242* -.041 .09 .021 .071 .011 .222* .031 .054 .067 .123 .021 .029 .089 .121 -.033 .005 .125 .145 .009 .090

4.8. The effect of higher order and lower order personality traits on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Previous analyses showed that some OCEAN personality traits and EI traits are linked to perception and expression of emotions in the L2. This complex relationship might explain why some people report finding it difficult to express emotions in L2 or notice personality changes while

Quantitative Data Analysis

89

using L2, while some do not. Scores on personality traits were recoded in three groups: high, low or ambi scores. Depending on the category of scores, different characteristics could be assigned to a given person. For example, scoring low on Extraversion trait means that a given person is an introvert and shows different characteristics to an extravert (with a high score) or an ambivert (whose score lay around the mean). Therefore, the first group represented scorers on higher and lower personality traits that were classified as “low” and were placed around minus one standard deviation (-1SD). The next group of scorers, termed the “medium” group were placed around the mean. The last, “high”, group of scorers was placed at plus one standard deviation (+1SD). A detailed description of the “low” “medium” and “high” group for each of the higher and lower personality traits is presented in Appendix Four. An ANOVA was used in order to determine whether there is an effect of personality traits on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. The questionnaire in its original form comprised eight dimensions, the six mentioned above plus two additional measures: expression of emotions in L1 and L1 dominance. Nevertheless, both dimensions concerning L1 were not included in the analysis of variance, as its main aim was to investigate the relationship between personality and emotional intelligence traits and perception and expression of emotions in the L2, as well as selfperceived changes in personality while operating in a foreign language or changes of attitudes toward foreign language and culture. The means of the higher (OCEAN) and lower (TEIQue) order personality traits mentioned above were statistically tested to determine whether there was a significant relationship with the six dimensions of perception and expression of emotions in L2 questionnaire. A detailed description of analyses of variance for all personality and EI traits is presented below.

4.8.1. The effects of OCEAN personality traits on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Three of the testing hypotheses considered specific personality traits of Extraversion, Openness, or Neuroticism and their possible role in the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. The first hypothesis was: “The personality trait of Extraversion would have an effect on L2 use as well as on feeling different while using the L2, with participants who gained higher scores on the Extraversion trait, using the L2 to a greater extent and being more likely to feel different while operating in L2”. The second was: “The personality trait of Openness will have an influence on L2 use as well as on feeling different while using the L2, with participants

90

Chapter Four

who are more open to new experiences being more likely to use the L2 more frequently and to feel different while operating in the L2”. The third was: “The personality trait of Neuroticism will have an influence on L2 use and expression of emotions in the L2, with participants who gained higher scores on the Neuroticism scale being more likely to have a limited L2 use and find it difficult to express emotions in the L2”. In order to verify these hypotheses the ANOVA analyzes were performed. Detailed results are presented below. 4.8.1.1. The effect of Extraversion on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 As previously mentioned, it was speculated that personality trait of Extraversion would have an effect on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. Detailed results of the ANOVAs are presented in Table 10 below. Table 10. The effects of Extraversion on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Sum Dependent variable of Squaresdf Mean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 7.06 2 3.53 .79 .458 .019 Perception of difficulties in expression 36.09 2 18.04 3.97.022*.079 of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 4.90 2 2.45 2.38.098 .049 L2 use 55.42 2 27.71 .55 .579 .012 Expression of emotions in English 90.92 2 45.46 1.55.217 .031 L2dominance 15.42 2 7.71 .23 .791 .005

The ANOVAs performed on personality trait of Extraversion and six factors of perception and expression of emotions in the L2 questionnaire showed a statistically significant effect for self-perceived difficulties in the expression of emotions in a foreign language. The results are presented in Figure 1 below.

Quantitative Data Analysis

91

Figure 1. The effect of extraversion on self-perceived difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2

The graph above shows that low scorers on the Extraversion personality trait, later referred to as introverts, obtained the highest score on the self-perceived difficulties in expression and perception of emotions in L2 (F = 3.97, p < .05, R² = .079). The effect size is small. Nevertheless, this might suggest that introverts find it more difficult to understand and express emotions in L2, which could be explained by the fact that they are shy, avoiding meeting people, self-sufficient, and tend to prefer their own company (McCrae & Costa, 1995). This tendency to avoid social interaction might contribute to high scores on self-perceived difficulties in expressing and understanding emotions in the L2 as social interaction is necessary to the acquisition of this ability.

92

Chapter Four

4.8.1.2. The effect of Agreeableness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Agreeableness is one of the five higher order personality factors, and, as mentioned above, was speculated to have an influence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. An ANOVA analysis showed an effect of the Agreeableness personality factor on one of six dimensions measuring the perception and expression of emotions in L2. Detailed results of the analysis are presented below. Table 11. The effects of Agreeableness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 15.42 2 7.71 1.76.178 .041 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 7.44 2 3.72 .77 .467 .016 58.30 2 29.15 3.47.035*.069 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use 202.08 2 101.04 2.07.132 .045 Expression of emotions in English 43.76 2 21.88 .73 .483 .015 L2dominance 56.86 2 28.43 .88 .420 .018

Results of the analysis of variance show that Agreeableness has an effect on feeling different while operating in a foreign language (F = 3.47, p < .05, R² = .069). Nevertheless, the effect size was small. A graphical representation of the effect of Agreeableness personality trait on feeling different when using the L2 is presented below.

Quantitative Data Analysis

93

Figure 2. The effect of Agreeableness on feeling different when using the L2

The graph shows that high scorers on Agreeableness also gained high scores on the dimension of feeling different when using L2. Agreeableness is a tendency to be pleasant and accommodating in social situations. People who gain high scores on this dimension are on average more empathetic, considerate, friendly, generous, and helpful. People scoring low on Agreeableness place self-interest above getting along with others. They are generally less concerned with others' well-being and report less empathy (Graziano & Eisenberg, 1997). Those participants who gained low scores on the Agreeableness personality trait also gained low scores on the factor feeling different when using L2, and thus did not observe any changes in behavior or personality while operating in L2. By contrast, high scorers on the Agreeableness trait also gained high scores on the factor feeling different while using L2, and consequently reported changes in behavior, body language and personality. It could be stated that the more a given person is empathetic, friendly and cooperative the more likely (s) he is to observe and report changes in personality while operating in a foreign language.

94

Chapter Four

4.8.1.3. The effect of Conscientiousness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The conscientiousness personality trait was analysed in order to determine whether a significant relation exists between this personality trait and the perception and expression of emotions in L2. Detailed results are presented below. Table 12. The effects of Conscientiousness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 2.39 2 1.19 .26 .769 .006 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 7.08 2 3.54 .73 .486 .015 57.18 2 28.59 3,40.038*.068 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use 284.85 2 142.42 2,98.056 .063 Expression of emotions in English 57.96 2 28.98 .98 .380 .020 L2dominance 39.67 2 19.84 .61 .547 .012

The results suggest that Conscientiousness might influence the factor feeling different when using L2 (F= 3.40, p < .05, R² = .068). The effect size is small. However, informants who gained high scores on the Conscientiousness trait also gained high scores on the factor feeling different when using L2. It might suggest that these participants of the study that are well organized, persistent, highly motivated and goaldirected more frequently notice personality and behavioral changes occurring while operating in a foreign language. Results of the ANOVA are presented in the graph below.

Quantitative Data Analysis

95

Figure 3. The effect of Conscientiousness on feeling different when using L2

4.8.1.4. The effect of Neuroticism on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The analysis of variance showed no statistically significant relations between Neuroticism and any of the dimensions of perception and expression of emotions in L2 questionnaire. Results of the ANOVA are presented in Table 13.

96

Chapter Four

Table 13. The effects of Neuroticism on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 3.06 2 1.53 .34 .714.008 Perception of difficulties in expression 21.86 2 10.93 2.33.103.048 of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 19.48 2 9.74 1.10.336.023 L2 use 3.25 2 1.62 .03 .969.001 Expression of emotions in English 33.81 2 16.90 .57 .570.012 L2 dominance 96.00 2 48.00 1.50.229.030

4.8.1.5. The effect of Openness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Openness, as one of the higher order personality traits, was also hypothesized to have an effect on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. An ANOVA analysis suggests that there is a significant effect of Openness on feeling different when using L2 (F = 4.19, p < .05. R² = .083) nevertheless showing a small effect size. Detailed results are presented below. Table 14. The effect of Openness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 .61 2 .30 .07 .935 .002 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 4.24 2 2.12 .43 .649 .009 69.48 2 34.74 4.19.018*.083 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use 275.92 2 137.96 2.88.062 .061 Expression of emotions in English 110.57 2 55.29 1.90.155 .038 L2 dominance 85.27 2 42.63 1.33.270 .026

Quantitative Data Analysis

97

Figure 4. The effect of Openness on feeling different when using L2

The graph shows that high scorers on the Openness also gained high scores on the feeling different when using L2 dimension. It could be speculated that people who are open to new experiences and are intellectually curious tend to be more creative and more aware of their feelings. As a result, they gained high scores on feeling different when using L2, as they are more aware of their feelings and able to notice subtle changes occurring in their behavior while operating in a foreign language.

4.8.2.

The effects of Emotional Intelligence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2

All of the factors and facets of the EI were speculated to have an effect on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. Therefore, the analysis of variance was performed to determine whether a significant effect exists between mentioned above variables.

98

Chapter Four

4.8.2.1. The effect of Self-esteem on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Self-esteem, one of the factors of EI was speculated to have an influence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. The analysis of variance demonstrated that Self-esteem has an effect on the perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 (F = 5.61, p < .01, R² = .108). The effect size was small. Nevertheless, the results are presented in Table 15 and Figure 5 below. Table 15. The effects of Self-esteem on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 1.48 2 .74 .16 .850 .004 Perception of difficulties in expression 49.43 2 24.71 5.61.005**.108 of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 9.82 2 4.91 .55 .579 .012 L2 use 265.20 2 132.60 2.76.069 .059 Expression of emotions in English 54.16 2 27.08 .91 .405 .018 L2 dominance 4.48 2 2.24 .07 .934 .001

The graph shows that participants with low Self-esteem gained higher scores on the perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 than the remaining two groups. The perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2 factor consisted of two statements: “I find it difficult to express emotions in English” and “I find it difficult to understand emotions in English”. Expression of emotions, especially negative ones, is undoubtedly a stressful situation. For some people speaking in a foreign language is also very stressful. When simultaneously combining those two factors of expressing of emotions and operating in L2, the level of stress might be too high for informants with a lack of confidence and low selfevaluation. As a result, they might feel very uncomfortable and avoid this type of social interaction.

Quantitative Data Analysis

99

Figure 5. The effect of Self-esteem on the perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2

Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2

8

7

6 5.36 5 4.34 4 2.88

3

2

1

0

Low

Medium

High

Self-esteem

4.8.2.2. The effect of Emotion expression on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The analysis of variance showed that Emotion expression had an effect on one of the six dimensions of the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 questionnaire, showing a small effect size (F = 3.94, p < .05, R² = .078). Results of the ANOVA are presented below.

100

Chapter Four

Table 16. The effect of Emotion expression on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Suma of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 5.74 2 2.87 .64 .530 .015 Perception of difficulties in expression .20 2 .10 .02 .980 .000 of emotions in L2 65.62 2 32.81 3.94.023*.078 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use 147.13 2 73.56 1.49.231 .033 Expression of emotions in English 166.04 2 83.02 2.91.059 .057 L2 dominance 91.75 2 45.87 1.43.245 .028

Scores on the Emotion expression variable were recoded into three groups in order to determine the direction of the effect. Figure 6. The effect of Emotion expression on feeling different when using L2

14

Feeling different when using L2

12

10 8.44

8 6.43 6.00

6

4

2

0

Low

Medium

Emotion expression

High

Quantitative Data Analysis

101

The graph shows that high scorers on Emotion expression were also high scorers on the factor feeling different when using L2. It could be concluded that fluency in communicating emotions, characterized by the Emotion expression facet, results in higher awareness of differences that occur while operating in a foreign language. 4.8.2.3. The effect of Self-motivation on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The ANOVA showed that there is no effect of Self-motivation on the perception and expression of emotions in L2. Detailed results of the analysis are presented below. Table 17. The effect of Self-motivation on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 1.97 2 .99 .22.805.005 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 7.02 2 3.51 .72.488.015 Feeling different when using L2 12.36 2 6.18 .69.502.015 L2 use 64.99 2 32.50 .65.527.014 Expression of emotions in English 2.47 2 1.24 .04.960.001 L2 dominance 2.78 2 1.39 .04.959.001

4.8.2.4. The effect of Emotional regulation on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The ANOVA analysis did not reveal any statistically significant effect of Emotion regulation and perception and expression of emotions in L2. All these results are presented in Table 18.

102

Chapter Four

Table 18. The effect of Emotion regulation on the perception and expression of emotions in L2 Dependent variable Sum of Squaresdf Mean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 .29 2 .15 .03 .968.001 Perception of difficulties in expression 13.82 2 6.91 1.44.241.030 of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 32.35 2 16.17 1.86.161.039 L2 use 274.49 2 137.25 2.86.063.061 Expression of emotions in English 22.42 2 11.21 .37 .689.008 L2 dominance 42.14 2 21.07 .65 .526.013

4.8.2.5. The effect of Happiness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Happiness was found to have a small effect (F = 3.23, p < .05, R² = .068) on one of the six dimensions of perception and expression of emotions in the L2 questionnaire. Results of the ANOVA are presented below. Table 19. The effect of Happiness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 6.55 2 3.28 .73 .485 .018 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 1.46 2 .73 .15 .862 .003 Feeling different when using L2 23.86 2 11.93 1.36.262 .028 L2 use 307.09 2 153.55 3.23.044*.068 Expression of emotions in English 58.15 2 29.07 .98 .379 .020 L2 dominance 32.08 2 16.04 .49 .614 .010

Happiness has an effect on the L2 use factor measuring frequency of L2 use in various social situations such as talking to partner or children, using L2 for praising, maintaining discipline, or operating in L2 at work and at home.

Quantitative Data Analysis

103

Figure 7. The effect of Happiness on the L2 use

45 40 35

32.75 30.26

L2 usage

30

27.22

25 20 15 10 5 0

Low

Medium

High

Happiness

The graph shows that high scorers on Happiness also gained high scores on the L2 use factor. It could be speculated that people who feel good about themselves and are self-confident use the L2 more frequently. It could be also hypothesized that a positive attitude toward one’s skills and abilities, characterized by the Happiness facet, has an effect on the degree of the L2 use, as individuals may actively seek opportunities to use a foreign language. 4.8.2.6. The effect of Empathy on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The EI facet of Empathy was shown to have an effect on the change of attitudes towards the L2 factor (F = 4.85, p < .05, R² =.106). The effect size was small. Nevertheless, results of the ANOVA are presented below.

104

Chapter Four

Table 20. The effect of Empathy on the perception and expression of emotions in L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² 2 19.80 4.85.010*.106 Change of attitudes towards the L2 39.59 Perception of difficulties in expression 1.81 2 .90 .18 .832 .004 of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 50.32 2 25.16 2.96.057 .060 L2 use 48.12 2 24.06 .48 .623 .011 Expression of emotions in L2 1.87 2 .94 .03 .970 .001 L2 dominance 28.32 2 14.16 .43 .650 .009

The graph shows that “medium” and “low” scorers on the Empathy facet gained higher scores on the change of attitudes towards the L2 dimension than the high Empathy scorers. The Empathy scale measures the “perspective-taking” aspect of empathy (Petrides, 2001), thus, individuals with high scores on this scale tend to be skillful in conversations and negotiations because they take into account the viewpoints of those with whom they are dealing. In contrast, low scorers have difficulty in adopting other people’s perspectives. In the case of the informants of this study, low and medium Empathy scorers reported more frequently that the stay in an ESC had changed their attitude toward L2 language and culture. It could be speculated that the difficulties in seeing how things may seem to other people leads to more effort in adapting to the foreign culture and language, and therefore results in higher awareness of any changes linked with attitude toward L2. Detailed results of the Empathy effect on change of attitudes towards the L2 is presented in Figure 8.

Quantitative Data Analysis

105

Figure 8. The effect of Empathy on change of attitudes towards the L2 12

Change of attitudes towards L2

10

8

7.87

8.16

6.33 6

4

2

0

Low

Medium

High

Empathy

4.8.2.7. The effect of Social awareness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The social awareness EI facet showed no effect on any of the six dimensions of the perception and expression of emotions in L2 questionnaire. Detailed results of the analysis of variance are in Table 21 below. Table 21. The effect of Social awareness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 1.06 2 .53 .12 .890.003 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 6.48 2 3.24 .67 .516.014 Feeling different when using L2 36.31 2 18.16 2.10.128.043 L2 use 33.15 2 16.58 .33 .722.007 Expression of emotions in L2 .97 2 .48 .02 .984.000 L2 dominance 34.51 2 17.25 .53 .592.011

106

Chapter Four

It is very difficult to speculate about the lack of effect of Social awareness on the perception of emotions in L2, as high scorers have excellent social skills. Being socially sensitive, adaptable, and perceptive could be expected to influence perception and expression of emotions in L2. Nevertheless, high scorers tend to have control over their feelings and the manner in which they express them, and therefore might not pay attention to any changes in their emotional repertoire that occur with the foreign language use as they have mastered the art of controlling and expressing them equally well in the native and non-native language. 4.8.2.8. The effect of Impulsivity on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The analysis of variance showed that the EI facet of Impulsivity has no effect on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. It could be hypothesized that high scorers on that trait, which measures mainly dysfunctional rather than functional impulsivity, weigh all the information before they make up their mind and therefore might not pay attention to subtle changes in the perception and expression of emotions that take place while operating in a foreign language. Results of the ANOVA are presented in Table 22 below. Table 22. The effect of Impulsivity on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 6.88 2 3.44 .77 .467.018 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 11.23 2 5.62 1.17.316.024 Feeling different when using L2 25.01 2 12.51 1.43.245.030 L2 use 31.90 2 15.95 .31 .731.007 Expression of emotions in L2 26.08 2 13.04 .43 .649.009 L2 dominance 14.25 2 7.12 .22 .806.004

4.8.2.9. The effect of Emotion perception on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The ANOVA showed that Emotion perception has an effect (F = 3.29, p < .05, R² = .074) on one dimension of the perception and expression of emotions in L2 questionnaire. The effect size was small. Detailed results are presented in Table 23 and Figure 9 below.

Quantitative Data Analysis

107

Table 23. The effect of Emotion perception on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² 2 13.89 3.29.042*.074 Change of attitudes towards the L2 27.78 Perception of difficulties in expression 9.65 2 4.83 1.00.372 .021 of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 27.03 2 13.52 1.55.218 .032 L2 use 182.27 2 91.13 1.86.162 .041 Expression of emotions in L2 13.52 2 6.76 .22 .799 .005 L2 dominance 54.61 2 27.31 .84 .435 .017 Figure 9. The effect of Emotion perception on change of attitudes towards the L2 12

Change of attitude towards L2

10 8.15

8.05

8 6.65

6

4

2

0

Low

Medium

High

Emotion perception

Low and medium scorers on Emotion perception gained high scores on the change of attitudes towards the L2 factor. It could be speculated that informants who are often confused about how they feel and do not pay much attention to the emotional signals that others send out (Petrides,2001) reported more frequently that the stay in an ESC had changed their attitude toward L2 and L2 culture. The same situation occurs for Emotion perception and Empathy, where low and medium scorers report that immersion in L2 culture and language had changed their attitudes towards it. However, the direction of this change is not stated, so

108

Chapter Four

it could be speculated that individuals with low and medium Emotion perception and Empathy find it more difficult to adapt to new environments, and therefore report changes more frequently. 4.8.2.10. The effect of Stress management on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The stress management EI trait had an effect on the perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 factor (F = 6.15, p < .01, R² = .117). The effect size was small. Nevertheless, the results are presented in Table 24 and Figure 10 below. Table 24. The effect of Stress management on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 5.03 2 2.52 .56 .574 .013 Perception of difficulties in expression 53.57 2 26.79 6.15.003**.117 of emotions in L2 Feeling different when using L2 29.12 2 14.56 1.67.194 .035 L2 use 108.53 2 54.26 1.09.341 .024 Expression of emotions in L2 10.54 2 5.27 .17 .840 .004 L2 dominance 82.57 2 41.29 1.28.282 .026

Figure 10 below shows that low scorers on Stress management were high scorers on the perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2. Low scores on the Stress management facet suggest an avoidance of stressful situations rather than dealing with the associated tension. It could be speculated that expression of emotions in a foreign language might be a stressful situation and informants who have problems coping with stress are more likely to report self-perceived difficulties in expression of emotion in an L2.

Quantitative Data Analysis

109

Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2

Figure 10. The effect of Stress management on the perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2 8

7

6

5.57

5

4.28 4

2.94 3

2

1

0

Low

Medium

High

Stress management

4.8.2.11. The effect of Emotion management on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Emotion management proved to have an effect on the feeling different when using L2 (F= 4.86, p < .01, R²= .095) showing a small effect size. Detailed results are presented in Table 25 below. Table 25. The effect of Emotion management on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 36.31 2 18.16 2.10.128 .043 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions .26 2 .13 .03 .974 .001 79.51 2 39.76 4.86.010**.095 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use 117.36 2 58.68 1.18.312 .026 Expression of emotions in L2 92.98 2 46.49 1.59.210 .032 L2 dominance 15.27 2 7.63 .23 .793 .005

110

Chapter Four

Figure 11 shows the graphical representation of the effect of Emotion management on the factor feeling different when using L2 for the three groups. Figure 11. The effect of Emotion management on feeling different when using L2 16

Feeling different when using L2

14

12

10

9.27 8

6.27

6.46

6

4

2

0

Low

Medium

High

Emotion management

The graph shows that high scorers on Emotion management (which suggests ability to influence other people’s feelings (Petrides, 2001)), were also high scorers on the feeling different when using L2 dimension. It could be speculated that the more emotionally skilled a given person is, the more he/she notices changes occurring while operating in a foreign language. 4.8.2.12. The effect of Optimism on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The EI facet of Optimism influences only one dimension of feeling different when using L2 (F = 6.79, p < .01, R² = .127). We could describe this effect size as a medium one. Detailed results are presented in Table 26.

Quantitative Data Analysis

111

Table 26. The effect of Optimism on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 4.12 2 2.06 .46 .635 .011 Perception of difficulties in expression 7.74 2 3.87 .80 .454 .017 of emotions 107.00 2 53.50 6.79.002**.127 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use 35.61 2 17.80 .35 .705 .008 Expression of emotions in L2 24.70 2 12.35 .41 .664 .008 L2 dominance .71 2 .35 .01 .989 .000

Subsequently, scorers on the Optimism facet were analysed in terms of the factor feeling different when using L2. Results are presented below. Figure 12. The effect of Optimism on feeling different when using L2

High scorers on Optimism were also high scorers on the factor feeling different when using L2. It could be speculated that people who “look on the bright side” and expect positive things to happen in their life are more open to new situations and experiences, as they are not afraid of them. As a result, they would probably interact more and actively seek opportunities to practice their L2. Having more interactions in a foreign language might

112

Chapter Four

lead to noticing changes in behavior while operating in that language. On the other hand, low scorers (characterized as pessimistic and viewing things from a negative perspective) gained higher scores on feeling different when using L2 than medium scorers. This could potentially be explained by the fact that pessimistic and risk-averse people are not willing to seek opportunities to practice their L2 skills and thus, operating in it might cause a lot of stress that was later reported as feeling different when using L2. 4.8.2.13. The effect of Relationship skills on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The EI facet of Relationship skills (concerning one’s personal relationships, starting, and maintaining emotional bonds with others) proved not to influence the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. Trait Relationship skills concerns mainly one’s personal relationships, including close friends, partners and family. It could be speculated that in the case of the present informants, who rarely declared talking to partner or kids in the L2, this trait could not influence perception and expression of emotions in the L2. It would only apply to those who operate in the L2 while talking with close friends and family. Detailed results of the analysis of variance are presented in Table 27. Table 27. The effect of Relationship skills on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 22.88 2 11.44 2.67.075.061 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions 11.13 2 5.57 1.16.319.024 Feeling different when using L2 14.80 2 7.40 .83 .438.018 L2 use 69.16 2 34.58 .69 .506.015 Expression of emotions in L2 42.38 2 21.19 .71 .494.014 L2 dominance 84.34 2 42.17 1.31.274.026

Quantitative Data Analysis

113

4.8.2.14. The effect of Adaptability on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The analysis of variance showed that Adaptability has an effect on two dimensions: L2 use (F = 3.37, p < .05, R² = .071) and Expression of emotions in L2 (F = 5.52; p < .01, R² = .102). In both cases, the effect size could be described as small. Detailed results are presented in Table 28 and Figure 13. Table 28. The effects of Adaptability on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 23.31 2 11.65 2.72.072 .062 Perception of difficulties in expression 14.64 2 7.32 1.53.222 .032 of emotions Feeling different when using L2 14.10 2 7.05 .79 .455 .017 319.84 2 159.92 3.37.039* .071 L2 use 299.80 2 149.90 5.52.005**.102 Expression of emotions in L2 L2 dominance 188.48 2 94.24 3.03.053 .058

Scores on the Adaptability measure were recoded into three groups (“low”, “medium” and “high”) to analyzing the effect this had on L2 use and expression of emotions in the L2. A graphical representation of findings is presented below. As can be observed in both cases, high scorers on Adaptability were also high scorers on L2 use and Expression of emotions in L2 factors. High scorers on Adaptability could be characterized as flexible in their approach to work and life and willing to adapt to new environments and conditions (Petrides, 2001). It could be speculated that people who enjoy novelty and change would opt for using L2 on everyday basis more frequently than those people who are changeresistant, including using it for such purposes as expressing of emotions.

114

Chapter Four

Figure 13. The effect of Adaptability on the L2 use and expression of emotions in the L2

4.8.2.15. The effect of Assertiveness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Assertiveness showed no effect for any of the six dimensions of the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 questionnaire. Detailed results are presented in Table 29.

Quantitative Data Analysis

115

Table 29. The effect of Assertiveness on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 5.83 2 2.91 .65 .525.016 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions 15.52 2 7.76 1.63.202.034 Feeling different when using L2 49.59 2 24.80 2.92.059.059 L2 use 72.07 2 36.04 .72 .491.016 Expression of emotions in L2 60.04 2 3.02 1.01.367.020 L2 dominance 7.05 2 3.52 .11 .899.002

4.8.2.16. The effect of Well-being on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Well-being, one of the four EI factors of broader relevance, showed an effect on feeling different when using L2 (F= 5.68, p < .01, R²= .109). The effect size was small. Nevertheless, the results of the analysis of variance performed on Well-being and perception and expression of emotions in the L2 factors are presented below. Table 30. The effect of Well-being on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 3.43 2 1.71 .38 .686 .009 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions 10.08 2 5.04 1.04.356 .022 91.43 2 45.72 5.68.005**.109 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use 118.27 2 59.14 1.19.309 .026 Expression of emotions in L2 40.93 2 20.47 .69 .506 .014 L2 dominance 22.16 2 11.08 .34 .714 .007

The analysis showed that high scorers on the Well-being factor were also high scorers on felling different when using L2. It could be suggested that individuals who feel positive, happy, and fulfilled are more likely to pay attention to any changes that take place while conversing in a foreign language than those who gained low or medium scores on the well-being factor. It was interesting to note that low scorers on the Well-being factor gained higher scores on feeling different when using L2 than medium scorers. It could be speculated that both positive and negative senses of

116

Chapter Four

Well-being are connected with higher emotional sensitivity and is thus correlated with a concentration on subtle changes that occur while using L2. The only hypothesized difference between high and low scorers on Well-being factor might be in the direction of such self-perceived perception of changes while using L2, as the high scorers would be more likely to focus on positive changes and low scorers on negative changes. A graphical representation of findings is presented in Figure 14. Figure 14. The effect of Well-being on feeling different when using L2 14

Feeling different when using L2

12

10

8.60 8

6.72 6.12 6

4

2

0

Low

Medium

High

Well-being

The effect of Self-control on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The Self-control EI factor showed no effect for any factors from the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 questionnaire. Since high scorers on Self-control can control their urges and desires well and fend off impulses, they might not pay attention to the perception and expression of emotions in L2 as they can control these well in both L1 and L2 and

Quantitative Data Analysis

117

therefore do not notice changes that might be salient to those less skilled in Self-control. Detailed results of the ANOVA are presented in Table 31. Table 31. The effect of Self-control on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 2.84 2 1.42 .31 .732.008 Perception of difficulties in expression 25.82 2 12.91 2.77.068.056 of emotions Feeling different when using L2 45.63 2 22.82 2.67.074.054 L2 use 101.94 2 50.97 1.02.365.023 Expression of emotions in L2 17.90 2 8.95 .30 .743.006 L2 dominance 62.00 2 31.00 .96 .388.019

4.8.2.17. The effect of Emotionality on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The EI factor of Emotionality had an effect on two dimensions of perception and expression of emotions in the L2 questionnaire: L2 use (F = 3.52, p < .05, R² = .074) and feeling different when using L2 (F = 5.19, p < .01, R² = .100). In both cases, the effect size was small. Detailed results are in Table 32 and Figure 15. Table 32. The effects of Emotionality on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 16.75 2 8.38 1.92.153 .045 Perception of difficulties in expression 4.75 2 2.38 .49 .616 .010 of emotions 84.29 2 42.14 5.19.007**.100 Feeling different when using L2 333.49 2 166.74 3.52.034* .074 L2 use Expression of emotions in L2 148.83 2 74.41 2.59.080 .051 L2 dominance 123.03 2 61.52 1.94.150 .038

118

Chapter Four

Figure 15. The effect of Emotionality on L2 use and feeling different when using L2

The graph shows that high scorers on the Emotionality factor were also high scorers on L2 use and the dimension of feeling different when using L2. It could be speculated that individuals who gained high scores on Emotionality (and thus can perceive and express emotions and use these abilities to develop and sustain close relationships (Petrides, 2001)), seek opportunities to practice a foreign language more actively. Therefore, they report using L2 on an everyday basis, as well as with kids, partner and friends. At the same time, with greater use of L2, these individuals are able to notice differences that occur while operating in it. Having a wide range of emotion-related skills, as demonstrated by the Emotionality factor, contributes to greater emotional awareness and thus the ability to notice changes in behavior while using a foreign language.

Quantitative Data Analysis

119

4.8.2.19. The effect of Sociability on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The sociability factor of EI trait showed an effect for one dimension from the perception and expression of emotions in L2 questionnaire (F = 6.23, p < .01, R² = .118). The effect size presented was medium. Detailed results of the analysis of variance are presented in Table 33 and Figure 16. Table 33. The effect of Sociability on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 5.36 2 2.68 .60 .554 .014 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions 4.66 2 2.33 .48 .622 .010 99.29 2 49.65 6.23.003**.118 Feeling different when using L2 L2 use 172.40 2 86.20 1.75.179 .038 Expression of emotions in L2 20.77 2 10.38 .35 .709 .007 L2 dominance 36.36 2 18.18 .56 .575 .011

The three groups of scorers “low”, “medium” and “high” (recoded from the Sociability factor), were analysed in terms of the dimension of feeling different when using L2. A graphical representation of findings as well as a brief discussion can be found below.

Chapter Four

120

Figure 16. The effect of Sociability on feeling different when using L2 14

Feeling different when using L2

12

10

9.00

8

6.00

6.39

6

4

2

0

Low

Medium

High

Sociability

The graph shows that high scorers on the Sociability factor were also high scorers on feeling different when using L2. It could be speculated that individuals who have greater skills in listening and social interactions, and are able to communicate with people from diverse backgrounds clearly and confidently also more frequently notice the changes in personality that occur while using a foreign language. 4.8.2.20. The effect of Global trait EI on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The analysis of variance showed no effect of the Global trait EI on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. Detailed results are presented in Table 36. It is difficult to speculate why the Global trait EI showed no effect on any of the dimensions but this might suggest that it is important to search for potential relationship between variables even if the global trait shows no effect. The relationship between personality, language, culture, and expression and perception of emotions in the L2 is very complex; thus closer and more detailed analysis is needed. In the current case, EI facets showed a number of effects on the perception and

Quantitative Data Analysis

121

expression of emotions in the L2 dimensions even though the Global trait EI did not. Table 34. The effect of Global trait EI perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dependent variable Sum of SquaresdfMean SquareF Sig. R² Change of attitudes towards the L2 .12 2 .06 .01 .986.000 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions 3.31 2 1.66 .34 .714.007 Feeling different when using L2 36.45 2 18.23 2.11.127.043 L2 use 101.19 2 50.59 1.01.367.023 Expression of emotions in L2 38.81 2 19.41 .65 .524.013 L2 dominance 55.80 2 27.90 .86 .427.017

4.8.3. Summary of effects of higher and lower order personality traits on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 The hypothesis that personality might influence perception and expression of emotions in the L2 was confirmed. Both higher order (OCEAN) and lower order (TEIQue) personality traits were found to influence some aspects of perception and expression of emotions in the L2. Below is a detailed summary of the effect that each personality trait had on the dimensions of perception and expression on emotions in the L2 questionnaire.

Chapter Four

122

Table 35. Summary of the effects of personality traits on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 Dimension

Higher and lower order personality traits

Change of attitudes towards the L2 Perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 Felling different when using L2

Empathy, Emotion perception

L2 use

Happiness, Adaptability, Emotionality

Expression of emotions in L2

Adaptability

Extraversion, Self-esteem, Stress management,

Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Openness, Emotion expression, Emotion management, Optimism, Well-being, Emotionality, and Sociability

It can be seen that almost all dimensions were influenced by higher and lower personality traits. Within these, feeling different when using L2 dimension was most frequently influenced by both higher and lower order personality traits. Therefore, it could be speculated that the ability to notice changes occurring in personality and behavior while operating in a foreign language is largely dependent on personality. Similarly, expression of emotions in the L2, perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2, L2 use, and change of attitudes towards the L2 could be said to be largely dependent on personality traits. Thus, it could be speculated that people who are highly socially and emotionally skilled can notice subtle changes in personality and behavior while using L2, and are more aware of any changes occurring in their linguistic repertoire.

4.9. Difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2 Participants of the study were asked an open-ended question: “In what situations do you find any problems in expressing emotions in English?”

Quantitative Data Analysis

4.9.1.

123

Analysis of findings

All answers to the open-ended question were carefully analysed and divided into seven categories that seemed to emerge from the data provided by respondents: 1- Never 2- Always 3- Intimate situation 4- Negative emotions 5- Positive emotions 6- Controlling or suppressing emotions 7- Stressful situations All categories are firstly presented by means of a table and in the next chapter discussed using extracts from participants’ responses. Table 36 shows the seven categories presented above and the percentage of answers corresponding to each. Table 36. Answers to “In what situations do you find any problems in expressing of emotions in English?” Frequency Stressful situations 21 Negative emotions 8 Always 7 Never 6 Controlling or suppressing emotions 3 Positive emotions 2 Intimate situations 2 Total 49

Percent 42.9 16.3 14.3 12.2 6.1 4.1 4.1 100.0

The table above presents the distribution in answers to an open-ended question of facing difficulties in expressing emotions in the L2. The highest percentage of answers (43%) was assigned to the “stressful situations” category. The next largest category concerned the expression of negative emotions (17%). Twelve per cent of participants reported not to have any problems with the expression of emotions in L2. On the other hand, 14% of participants claimed to always face difficulties in expression

124

Chapter Four

of emotions in English. Six percent of respondents answered that they face some problems in expression of emotions when they are required to control or suppress their emotions. Almost the same number of informants (4%) reported encountering difficulties in the expression of emotions in the L2 in intimate situations and while expressing positive emotions. It can be concluded that 88% of informants face difficulties in expressing emotions in the L2 on various occasions and the remaining 12% consider themselves not to have any problems with emotional expression in a foreign language. Examples of participants’ responses will be presented in the next chapter. Most participants reported difficulties in expressing emotions in stressful situations. The next largest category was expressing negative emotions. These findings once again support those of Dewaele (2010) who suggests that in emotional interactions multilinguals need quick access to the largest and richest linguistic vocabulary, typically in their dominant language. Dewaele explains: “It is also possible that the emotion vocabulary is present in both languages, but that the speaker may be aware of the nonequivalence of emotion concepts in both languages. A realisation that the emotion concepts the weaker language may be incomplete (Pavlenko, 2008a), combined with possible gaps in the prototypical scripts, may push the speaker to switch to the language in which emotion concepts are more complete, where the emotionality and valence of an emotion word,–or an emotion-laden word,–are known and where they will have the intended illocutionary effects (Dewaele, 2008b, 2008c)” (Dewaele, 2010: 210).

4.10. Discussion of quantitative data analysis findings The findings from this study as a whole suggest that a number of independent variables can influence the perception and expression of emotions in L1 and L2, including personality, EI traits and self-perceived proficiency. The results from those participants who had spent some time in an ESC showed a positive correlation between the higher order personality traits of Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism, and Openness and such dimensions of perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 questionnaire as feeling different when using L2, L2 use, or perception of difficulties in expression of emotions. This would suggest that personality influences perception of the world and how speakers function and adapt in it. This suggestion is in line with the findings of a number of researchers (Dewaele & van Oudenhoven, 2009; Furnham and Heaven, 1999; Jang et

Quantitative Data Analysis

125

al. 1996; McCrae et al. 2000) who claim that personality dimensions could be shaped by environmental factors. Dewaele & van Oudenhoven (2009) suggested that multilingualism might influence personality as they found a link between the number of known and used languages and such personality traits as Openmindedness and Cultural Empathy. The current research also reveals that self-perceived L2 proficiency is linked to such personality traits as Agreeableness, Openness, and EI trait of Empathy; informants who gained high scores on these traits also reported higher self-perceived L2 proficiency. There was no direct relationship between immersion in a foreign language and culture (measured by the length of stay in a foreign country) and personality traits; however, there was a relationship between the length of stay in a foreign country and selfperceived L2 proficiency, which in turn was shown to be related to certain personality traits. Thus, it can be claimed that even if there is no direct evidence for a relationship between immersion in a foreign language and culture and certain personality traits, these variables are related and the relationship between them could be described as reciprocal. It has already been shown that knowledge of a foreign language and socialization into its culture leads to cognitive changes in the expression of emotions (Jarvis & Pavlenko, 2008; Pavlenko, 2008; Pavlenko and Driagina, 2007; Stepanova Sachs and Coley, 2006) and influences our perceptions and thoughts, even language-less ones (Athanasopoulos, 2006, 2009; Czechowska & Ewert, in press). The current study is the first to demonstrate that immersion in a foreign language and culture, knowledge of foreign languages and lower and higher order personality traits might influence the way emotions are perceived and expressed in both L1 and L2. The analysis showed that both length of stay in an ESC and selfperceived proficiency might influence change of attitudes towards the L2, L2 use, and L2 dominance. There was also a positive correlation between EI facets and the following factors: Self-esteem, Emotion expression, Empathy, Social awareness, Emotion perception, Stress management, Emotion management, Adaptability, Well-being, Self-control, Emotionality, Sociability, and Global EI trait. This was also the case for the following dimensions of the perception and expression of emotion questionnaire: feeling different when using L2, L2 use and perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2. On the basis of this data analysis, it could be suggested that higher and lower order personality traits influence not only perception and expression of emotions in L1 and L2 but also self-perceived L2 proficiency. Consequently, it can be clearly seen that there is a relationship between a number of personality traits (including some of the EI traits) and the level of proficiency in a foreign

126

Chapter Four

language. What is suggested here is that this relationship could be reciprocal and researchers should account for the mutual relationship between personality and L2 proficiency. As already mentioned by OĪaĔska-Ponikwia (2012) the notion of feeling different when using a foreign language has previously been examined by Dewaele and Pavlenko (2002-2003) and Wilson (2008). In Dewaele & Pavlenko’s (2002-2003) web questionnaire responses, almost half of the 1,000 multilinguals reported that they always felt different when using a foreign language; with others saying that, they felt different sometimes or occasionally. However, about a third claimed that they never felt different. Wilson (2008: 153) researched the notion of Feeling different with relation to higher order Personality traits. She found that that a number of independent variables, including personality traits, perceived proficiency and when and how the language was acquired, can influence how individuals feel about foreign language use. She also found that individuals who are more “reserved”, “quiet” and “shy” are more likely, according to their responses to the feelings questionnaire, to affirm that operating in a foreign language not only creates objective differences in their voice and manner but also liberates them in some way from their inhibitions (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012:231). OĪaĔska-Ponikwia’s (2012:231) findings show that both higher order personality traits of Extraversion, Agreeableness and Openness, as well as EI traits of Emotion expression, Empathy, Social awareness, Emotion perception, Emotion management, Emotionality and Sociability influence feeling different when using L2. On the basis of these results it could be speculated that the debate concerning whether people feel different while using a foreign language or show other personalities by “putting on a mask” while conversing in a foreign language (Wilson, 2008) might not be simply related to the existence of such changes but rather related to noticing them. The very fact that such EI traits as Emotion perception/expression/ management, Emotionality, Empathy or Social awareness influence the perception of changes in behavior while operating in a foreign language suggests that only people that are emotionally and socially skilled are able to notice such subtle changes in personality (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012:231). Thus, it might be useful to consider that some people do not report any changes in behavior, perception or expression of emotions in a foreign language not because they do not exist but because they are unable to notice them. This study has also shown that including an emotional intelligence variable in a research on the perception and expression of emotions contributes to creating a better understanding of these very complex phenomena (OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, 2012:231).

Quantitative Data Analysis

127

Quantitative analysis of the data gathered from the open-ended questions dealing with difficulties in expression of emotions in a foreign language confirm previous findings (Dewaele, 2004, 2010; Pavlenko, 2005) that bilinguals experience difficulties in expressing emotions in L2, most typically in stressful situations or while expressing negative emotions. At the same time, the current respondents noted code-switching from L2 to L1 in emotionally charged situations with interlocutors who also speak their L1, a similar finding to that of Dewaele (2010). It seems that multilinguals may prefer to discuss certain topics in certain languages and can use code-switching strategically. However, in some instances strong emotional arousal can force the speaker from monolingual to bilingual language mode with more code-switching (Grosjean, 2001) (cf. Dewaele, 2010).

CHAPTER FIVE QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS

5.1. Introduction “(…) Different languages are linked with different ways of thinking as well as different ways of feeling; they are linked with different attitudes, different ways of relating to people, different ways of expressing one’s feelings and so on (cf. Lutz, 1988). They are linked with different ‘cultural scripts’, including ‘emotional scripts’ (Goddard, 1997, 2000; Wierzbicka, 1994, 1999). The experience of bilingual people is an invaluable source of insight into such differences.” (Wierzbicka, 2004: 98)

Part of the questionnaire consisted of an open question. The question was: “In what situations do you find any problems in expressing emotions in English?” Informants were asked to explain whether they face any difficulties in expressing emotions in a foreign language and to describe the situations that cause such difficulties.

5.2. Difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2- Analysis of findings All answers to this open-ended question were carefully analysed and divided into seven categories that seemed to emerge from data provided by respondents: 1- Never 2- Always 3- Intimate situation 4- Negative emotions 5- Positive emotions 6- Controlling or suppressing emotions 7- Stressful situations Examples from each of these seven categories are presented below.

Qualitative Data Analysis

5.2.1.

129

Never

Twelve percent of informants reported that they never face any difficulties in expression of emotions in L2: “I never have any problems in expressing my emotions. Why would I?”(Male, 24, Secondary education, LGS 7 months) “Never” (Male, 22, Vocational education, LGS 3months) “I used to have problems with expressing emotions but since I’ve learned how to do that I don’t face them anymore. My husband is English, and with time I learned how to express myself fully in English.” (Female, 58, BA, LGS 324 months)

These observations show that some people don’t find it difficult to express emotions in L2. The first two extracts from male participants demonstrate that they do not face any problems while expressing emotions, which might be influenced either by the short duration of their residence in an ESC (7 and 3 months respectively) or by L2 proficiency level, self assessed as intermediate. The third extract, from a female participant who had spent a considerable amount of time in an ESC and used English on everyday basis, is extremely interesting as it suggests that socialization into L2 language and culture might indeed change the perceived emotionality of her L2. She states that she used to have problems but with time and acculturation, these difficulties disappeared. This claim is reminiscent of Pavlenko’s (2008) and Panayiotou’s (2004) findings concerning ability to learn L2 emotions by affective socialization into L2 culture and language.

5.2.2.

Always

One participant claimed to always experience problems while expressing emotions in L2: “I always find it difficult to express myself in English. I feel that there are no words corresponding to my feelings, and that happens most of the time in various situations. I feel that expressing my emotions in English doesn’t make any sense as it simply shows the surface of it, like an indication whether I feel bad or good, but it doesn’t go beyond. My Polish soul dies when I speak in English.” (Female, 28, MA, LGS 48 months)

This very insightful comment shows that some people find it impossible to express their emotions in L2. Despite a high educational

Chapter Five

130

level, fluency in a second language, or a long duration of exposure to the foreign language and culture, this female participant reports inability to express emotions in L2. This supports Wierzbicka’s (1999, 2004) statement that emotions are culture-specific and cannot be translated into a foreign language, or that operating in a foreign language projects a different personality and way of feeling. Unfortunately, the question of why this participant is unable to socialise and adopt L2 ways of expressing emotions remains unanswered, as she does not provide any insight into this. It can be speculated that the explanation may lie in a lack of motivation.

5.2.3.

Intimate situations

Five percent of answers described facing problems in expression of emotions in L2 in intimate situations: “I really find it difficult to express myself fully in those moments where I’m very close with my partner. I seem to lack appropriate vocabulary even if I know English quite well.”(Female, 24, BA, LGS 32 months) “When I want to express very intimate emotions I seem to try to translate them from Polish and I’m usually unsuccessful. It’s so hard to talk about so important feelings in English.” (Female, 30, MA, LGS 43 months)

Participants’ views on expressing emotions in L2 seem to be in agreement with Pavlenko’s (2004) and Wierzbicka’s (2004) findings that L1 is a more emotional choice for expressing emotions. The fact that only female participants mentioned intimate situations as causing difficulties in expressing emotions in L2 might be accounted for by the suggestion that women may be willing to encode their emotional experience in more detail than men (Hyde, 2007).

5.2.4.

Negative emotions

Almost one fifth of answers concerning difficulties in expressing emotions in L2 were related to negative emotions: “When I’m furious I always seem to use Polish. I just can’t find the right words in English and anyway, when you’re really mad the last thing you do is try to find appropriate vocabulary…when you’re all boiling with anger you’re not analytical about your feelings, you just blow up. I always do that in Polish.” (Female, 25, MA, LGS 24 months)

Qualitative Data Analysis

131

“When I’m really mad I always use Polish. It seems to be the only subconscious option as arguing in English seems pointless. My partner knows that when he can hear Polish in our argument it means that I’m really angry and I really mean it.” (Female, 31, MA, LGS 54 months) “When I’m losing it I always use Polish. Swearing in English does not seem right as it’s not strong enough to express what I feel.” (Male, 26, Secondary education, LGS, 48 months)

All the above extracts point to the fact that in cases of great agitation L2 seems to be inappropriate. Dewaele (2004b) stated that the perceived emotional force of swear words is stronger in the first language of speakers and swear words occur more often in speakers’ L1. At the same time, he points out that such variables as language dominance and the context of the acquisition of L2 may play an important role in language choice for swear words (Dewaele, 2004a). The current informants’ responses also support Pavlenko’s (2004) claim that L1 is more emotional than L2. Equally, it supports Dewaele’s (2010) claim that it takes years before the positive language characteristics and emotional strength of swearwords in the L2 will equal those of the L1.

5.2.5.

Positive emotions

The expression of positive emotions in L2 also seems to cause difficulties. According to 5% of participants, positive emotions were the most difficult to express in a foreign language. “In those rare moments of happiness when your emotions are so intense and you feel like dancing on the street or kissing a person who passes by, all attempts to find an English word to explain this mixture of feelings seems to ruin the moment. Saying that ‘I’m happy’ makes me feel kind of weird as I feel so much more than that. How to express that if there’s no vocabulary in English that is corresponding to my Polish emotions? Well, I simply don’t.” (Male, 45, MA, LGS 65 months) “It was so natural for me to talk in Polish to and about my newborn child. My husband is English and he noticed that I’m way happier when I speak in Polish about our son than in English. When such positive emotions fill you up, using English, even though I know it quite well, seemed to be totally inappropriate. I couldn’t find words in English that would express this state when you hold a newborn child in your arms.” (Female, 27, BA, LGS 48 months)

Chapter Five

132

Informants point out that in some cases of intense positive emotions, translation to L2 not only seems impossible but also doesn’t feel right. In such cases, they would rather opt for L1 use. In the case of the first extract, the respondent clearly states that he feels in Polish and his lack of appropriate L2 vocabulary prevents him from using L2 in this situation. The second participant’s insights are reminiscent of Wierzbicka’s experience of the inability to use English when talking about her granddaughter as English “(…) register does not fit the emotional world to which this baby belongs for me” (Wierzbicka, 2004: 100). It is important to note that both of these participants had spent a considerable amount of time in an ESC and there is a high probability that they have been socialized into the L2 culture and language. Even more significantly, the ability to operate fluently in both L1 and L2 and socialization in L2 culture does not provide the emotional register for the expression of some emotions in a foreign language.

5.2.6.

Controlling or suppressing emotions

Sixteen percent of answers to the open-ended question regarding facing difficulties in expression of emotions in L2 described controlling or suppressing emotions in L2: “I feel that I have to control my emotions and in such instances I find it really difficult to express myself in English. I feel the need to show what I feel but I know it’s not appropriate. It’s like being in constant conflict between what I feel and what I’m supposed to feel, or rather how I am not to express what I feel. I find it very difficult.” (Female, 45, MA, LGS 87 months) “Sometimes I’m forced to suppress my emotions while operating in English. It’s as if I can’t feel what I want to feel in English because it’s inappropriate. I think my emotions are so different in Polish than in English. I find myself being cold and analytic in English and very emotional in Polish.” (Female, 31, BA, LGS 45 months)

Both informants note that operating in English requires controlling or suppressing emotions. Wierzbicka (1999) suggests that Polish culture encourages uninhibited expression of emotions in general. It also encourages people to show emotions both verbally and non-verbally rather than to speak about them. In English, the situation is reversed, as one needs to control emotions in order to gain more control over life. In English “It’s shameful to admit that sometimes things go very wrong and we have no control” (Wierzbicka, 1999: 258). Respondents’ insightful

Qualitative Data Analysis

133

comments support Wierzbicka’s analysis concerning differences in culturally appropriate ways to express emotions in Polish and English. This difference may cause a dilemma in bilinguals as to whether to express their feelings according to Polish social scripts or to control or suppress emotions according to English ones. Being a Polish-English bilingual may require making such decisions, as was fully supported by participants’ comments.

5.2.7.

Stressful situations

Almost half of respondents commented that stressful situations were the occasions in which they face most difficulties in expressing of emotions: “When I’m totally stressed out I’m unable to express this mixture of emotions I’m facing. It’s simply impossible to explain all that by means of English. I find it totally wrong to use English for such purposes and that’s why I usually mumble something to myself in Polish as I feel I simply need to express what I feel.” (Female, 23, BA, LGS 24 months) “In stressful situations at work when I need to do or get something fast I always opt for Polish. I work with Polish people and even if we all know that use of Polish at work is inappropriate and certainly not welcomed by our boss, and we’re all fully fluent in English, when it’s really busy we always shout or snap in Polish. We could do that in English as well but it seems so artificial and unemotional and at the same time loses its meaning.”(Female, 29, MA, LGS 48 months). “When I’m in stressful situations I often choose Polish for expressing emotions even if my colleagues don’t understand. I do it unconsciously and they have just got used to my Polish when everything is going crazy. It seems to be the only way for me to cope with such situations.” (Male, 27, BA, LGS 45 months)

All these situations show that L1 is the choice for expressing emotions in a stressful situation or even getting the message across as in the case of the second extract. Dewaele (2006) reflects on a stressful situation he faced once, being unable to board a plane in Spain: “My boiling frustration and indignation could not be channelled into Spanish sentences. I then switched to English, and although it is my third language, I felt I could express anger in it much better than in Spanish. When I later realized what had happened, I realized that a number of factors had contributed to my preference for English to express anger. I

134

Chapter Five lacked repertoire in Spanish and I lacked the fluency needed to gain upper hand. When engaging a linguistic confrontation, one needs to be quite sure of oneself.” (Dewaele, 2006: 119)

Dewaele’s account of expressing emotions in a foreign language shows that the lack of linguistic repertoire mixed with a lack of fluency might result in choosing a language in which one feels one is better able to express emotions. In some cases, as described in the extract from Dewaele above, L3 might even be used if this provides greater opportunity for fluency. In the case of the informants in the current study, it was the L1, which was employed, as they feel sure of themselves while using it. It could be concluded that in a stressful situation one has no time to search for appropriate vocabulary to best express the emotion. Instead, it is necessary to express oneself as quickly and accurately as possible and therefore the dominant language is selected for this purpose.

5.3. Discussion of the qualitative data analysis findings Data gathered in the emic part of the current research seems to support Pavlenko’s (2008) and Dewaele’s (2008) view that it is necessary to incorporate participants’ views and insights in order to potentially shed new light on the interplay of language, culture and emotions. The present research aimed to address the complex topics of language switch and difficulties in expression of emotions in L2. In the case of difficulties in expression of emotions in L2, several situations were clearly signalled by respondents. Most reported experiencing problems expressing their feelings on various specific occasions such as in stressful situations, when controlling or suppressing emotions, and expressing both negative and positive emotions. Most participants reflected on the inability to translate or verbalise their feelings from L1 into L2, as it seemed impossible due to a lack of appropriate vocabulary. Participants’ insights support Pavlenko’s (2004) claim that the L1 is more emotional than the L2 and Wierzbicka’s (2004) suggestion that culture and language are responsible for shaping one’s emotion repertoire. Respondents’ insights into difficulties in expressing emotions while operating in L2 due to the necessity of controlling or suppressing them is a good example of the suggestion that cultural scripts for expressing emotions both shape the affective repertoire of L2 users and at the same time can be acquired by them. Operating in a foreign language with different social scripts for expressing emotions might therefore result in creation of alternative means of expressing emotions while at the same time not violating L2 social scripts. The qualitative data provided by

Qualitative Data Analysis

135

informants also supported Dewaele’s (2004a, 2004b) claim that in cases of great agitation the L2 seems to be inappropriate, as it seems more like a language of emotional detachment.

CHAPTER SIX “EMOTIONS FROM A BILINGUAL POINT OF VIEW”: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

6.1. Introduction The aim of this study was to establish whether immersion in a foreign language and culture influences the perception and expression of emotions in the first and second language, and if so, which factors might contribute to this. As discussed in Chapters One and Two, the significance of this study was to research the complex relationship between culture, language and personality with respect to emotions, between two typologically distant languages. By considering the perception and expression of emotions in a first and a second language that differ radically in their emotion scripts, the intention was to determine to what extent multilingualism and multiculturalism are dynamic processes, with mutual influences between both languages. Aside from seeking to establish whether immersion in a foreign language and culture changes the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2, the study also sought to examine the influence of personality traits. The findings detailed in the previous two chapters are first summarized and then discussed with reference to the main themes of this investigation. Next, limitations of the empirical study are detailed and discussed with regard to the design of the survey instrument, the recruitment of participants and the constraints of the research design. Finally, suggestions are made for future investigations.

6.2. Summary of findings Eight hypotheses were tested concerning relationship between independent variables reflecting participants’ sociobiographical, psychological and

“Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View”: Discussion and Conclusion

137

linguistic profiles and perception and expression of emotions in L1 and L2. Below each of these hypotheses are evaluated and discussed.

6.2.1.

Hypothesis 1

The first hypothesis was: “Immersion in an L2 language and culture will have an influence on the perception of emotions in the L2 as well as on choice of language for the expression of emotions, with participants who spend a longer time in an ESC being more likely to choose the L2 for expressing emotions, and to choose the L2 as a dominant language”. The study showed that length of stay (LGS) in the foreign country did not affect the expression of emotions in L2, but that it had a negative effect on the frequency of use of the L1 to express emotions. At the same time, LGS was linked to a change of attitudes toward the L2, with informants commenting on changes in their attitude toward the L2 language and culture caused by their stay in an ESC as well as the degree of L2 use.

6.2.2.

Hypothesis 2

The second hypothesis stated that: “Self-perceived L2 proficiency will have an influence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 as well as on the language choice for the expression of emotions, with informants who spend a longer amount of time in an ESC more likely to choose the L2 for expressing emotions, and to perceive the L2 as a dominant language.” The research showed that self-measured L2 proficiency had an effect on expression of emotions in L2 as well as the degree of L2 use and L2 language dominance. However, it is important to mention that the analysis relates to the self-reports regarding language proficiency and such reports might be more indicative of language attitudes, rather than objective proficiency. In this case, correlations between self-reported proficiency in the L2 and change of attitude towards L2 might measure the same phenomenon.

6.2.3.

Hypothesis 3

The third hypothesis concerned the influence of immersion in L2 language and culture on self-perceived L2 proficiency: “Immersion in an L2 language and culture will have an influence on self-perceived L2

Chapter Six

138

proficiency, with participants who spend a long time in an ESC more likely to score higher on the self-perceived L2 proficiency scale.” The analysis showed that the length of stay in an ESC influenced selfmeasured L2 proficiency and that participants who had spent a longer time abroad rated their command of the foreign language higher than those who had not lived in a L2 country, or who did so for a limited period of time only.

6.2.4.

Hypotheses 4, 5, 6

These three hypotheses have been combined as they all concern higher order personality traits. In that respect the fourth hypothesis considered the Extraversion trait stating that: “Extraversion will have an effect on L2 use as well as on feeling different while using the L2, with participants with higher scores on the extraversion trait using the L2 to a greater extent and being more likely to feel different while operating in L2.” The fifth hypothesis was: “Openness will have an influence on the use of L2 as well as on feeling different while using L2, with participants who are more open to new experiences being more likely to use the L2 more frequently or to report feeling different while operating in the L2.” The sixth hypothesis was that: “Neuroticism will have an influence on the use of L2 and the expression of emotions in the L2, with participants who gained higher scores on the Neuroticism scale being more likely to report limited L2 use and to find it difficult to express emotions in the L2.” The results showed that hypotheses four and five were fully confirmed, with Extraversion having an effect on both the degree of L2 use as well as on feeling different while using L2, and Openness influencing both feeling different while using L2 and the degree of L2 use. The last hypothesis was rejected as the results of this study indicated a negative relationship between Neuroticism and perception of difficulties in expressing emotions in L2 and expressing emotions in L1.

6.2.5.

Hypothesis 7

The seventh hypothesis considered the influence of the lower-order personality trait EI on the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2: “Specific EI traits will affect the extent to which individuals perceive difficulties in the expression of emotions in L2, L2 use, feeling different while using L2, and the choice of language for expressing emotions, with informants who are more socially skilled being more likely

“Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View”: Discussion and Conclusion

139

to notice possible changes in behavior, body language, or expression of emotions while operating in a foreign language.” The results showed that EI, consisting of 15 facets and four factors of broader relevance, had an effect on the perception of difficulties in the perception and expression of emotions in the L2, feeling different when using L2, L2 use, expression of emotions in L2, and L2 dominance. Meanwhile, such EI traits as Self- esteem, Stress-management, Adaptability, and Self-control were shown to have an influence on the perception of difficulties in expression and perception of emotions in the L2. In all cases, lower scorers on all of the EI traits were at the same time higher scorers on the dimension measuring perception of difficulties in the perception and expression of emotions in the L2. Feeling different when using L2 was related to such EI traits as Emotion expression, Empathy, Social awareness, Emotion perception, Emotion management, Emotionality, and Sociability. This suggests that informants who were emotionally and socially skilled noticed changes occurring in their behavior with the change of the language use. L2 use was linked to Self-esteem, Stressmanagement, Adaptability, Well-being, and Global trait EI. In all instances, high scorers on the EI traits reported more frequent use of the foreign language for both professional and private purposes. Further, the L2 dominance dimension was shown to be related to Adaptability. Respondents who gained high scores on Adaptability reported their second language to be dominant.

6.2.6.

Hypothesis 8

The eighth hypothesis was: “Length of stay in an ESC as well as selfperceived L2 proficiency will have an effect on Personality traits and EI, with participants who have been in an ESC for a long time and selfreported higher scores on L2 proficiency scale being more likely to score higher on Empathy, Extraversion, and Global EI scales.” The findings showed that only self-perceived L2 proficiency had an effect on Agreeableness and Openness and the Empathy facet of the EI. The hypothesis concerning the influence of the length of stay in an ESC on lower and higher order personality traits was rejected.

6.3. Discussion of findings This section discusses the findings with reference to the main themes of this investigation and the relevance of the previous studies to the current research. It will address several main themes, namely the relationship

140

Chapter Six

between language and thought, immersion in an L2 culture and language, self-perceived L2 proficiency, and the notion of feeling different when using L2 as well as personality traits and the EI traits and their influence on the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2. The main aim of this study was to investigate the effect of immersion in a foreign language and culture on the perception and expression of emotions in L1 and L2. The literature review suggested that the relation between the variables might in fact be reciprocal, with L1 influencing the expression and perception of emotions in L2 while L2 simultaneously affects their perception and expression in L1. As has been demonstrated in previous studies (Panayiotou, 2004, 2006; Pavlenko, 2002b; Pavlenko and Driagina 2007; Stepanova Sachs & Coley, 2006), such changes in the conceptualization of emotions by bilinguals or L2 users are observable and there are some empirically evidenced cognitive changes that take place in the mental lexicon of bilinguals and L2 users who were socialized into a foreign language and culture (Altarriba & Basnight-Brown, 2007; Athanasopoulos, 2008, 2009; Czechowska & Ewert, in press). It appears that there is no study that empirically researches differences in perception and the expression of emotions in Polish and English, possible changes due to immersion in English culture and language and the process of undergoing affective socialization. Our research is the first that aimed to research this phenomenon. The current findings suggest that the length of stay in an ESC does not directly influence the expression of emotions in the L2, but that it might lower the frequency of use of the L1 to express emotions. Although the length of stay in an ESC was not directly linked with expression of emotions in the L2, it was shown to have a strong effect on self-perceived L2 proficiency, which in turn influenced expression of emotions in the L2. It could therefore be suggested that both immersion in a foreign language and culture and the affective socialization process change the way emotions are expressed in the L2. The qualitative data analysis shows that such immersion influences not only the expression of emotions in the L2 but also the perception and expression of emotions in the L1. Some of the current informants who were immersed in English culture to various degrees expressed their insights on living with two worlds, languages and personalities and the cognitive changes resulting from immersion in an L2 culture. Similar testimonies are widely present in the autobiographical literature (BaraĔczak, 1990; Besemeres, 2004, 2006; Hoffman, 1989; Parks, 1996; Wierzbicka, 1999, Ye, 2003) and suggest that the insights of bilinguals and L2 users are a vast source of data that complements quantitative

“Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View”: Discussion and Conclusion

141

analysis and sheds additional light on changes occurring in the bilingual mental lexicon (Pavlenko, 2008, 2009). When discussing the notion of bilingual and L2 user’s lexicon it is important to mention that how and where the L2 was acquired and used are important factors with regard to the perception and expression of emotions. As has been shown in the present study, acquisition of an L2 in naturalistic settings and its frequent use outside the classroom favours the expression of emotion in that language as well as the degree of L2 use and L2 dominance. It could be suggested that learning a language in naturalistic settings provides the learner with the opportunity to acquire social norms for expressing emotions that might vary in different languages (Matsumoto, 2006; Regan, Howard & Lemée, 2009), and therefore results in more confident and frequent expression of emotions in the L2. Wilson (2008: 163) also found that the context of acquisition played a part in feeling different, with individuals who had learnt their L2 through a mixture of instruction and naturalistic exposure are more likely to feel different from those with no naturalistic exposure. Naturalistic exposure implies a different quality of contact with a language and more contextualized exposure, with possibly more immediate reinforcement from interlocutors. She suggested that both quality and quantity of exposure have an emotional impact that conventional classroom instruction may find hard to emulate (Wilson, 2008: 163). Another point to consider is the notion of feeling different when using L2. This was investigated by Dewaele and Pavlenko (2001-2003) and further analysed by Wilson (2008); the main outcome of these studies was that bilinguals and L2 users indeed report feeling different or being a different person while operating in a foreign language (Pavlenko, 2006) and that some personality traits or sociobiographical data might contribute to this (Wilson, 2008). Wilson (2008) found a negative relationship between Extraversion and feeling different when operating in a foreign language for participants who rated their foreign language proficiency at an intermediate level or above. In the current research feeling different was one of eight dimensions of the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 questionnaire. Such higher-order personality traits as Extraversion, Openness and Conscientiousness as well as EI traits of Emotionality, Sociability, Emotion management, Emotion perception, Social awareness, Empathy or Emotion expression had an effect on feeling different while operating in the L2. Thus, it could be speculated that the ability to notice changes occurring in personality and behavior while operating in a foreign language is largely dependent on personality. Similarly, it could be speculated that people who are socially and

142

Chapter Six

emotionally skilled are better able to notice subtle changes in personality and behavior while using the L2, and are also more aware of any changes occurring in their linguistic repertoire. Following this line of argument, it could be hypothesized that feeling different when using L2 or reporting self-perceived changes in personality while operating in a foreign language is more a matter of self/social awareness as well as emotional intelligence rather than reflecting the existence of these changes. The current book therefore suggests a totally different approach to the notion of feeling different when using L2, as further focus on personality traits and EI traits may prove fruitful while trying to research this complex phenomenon. If participants are required to report their subjective feelings and perceptions it is important to bear in mind that emotional intelligence and personality predispositions play a crucial role in this regard, as only those who are emotionally sensitive will be able to notice such subtle changes and report them. Many of the same arguments could be mustered in support of the finding that higher-order and lower-order personality traits influence the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2. Of six dimensions of perception and expression of emotions in the L2, five were linked with different personality traits and EI. These were: changes of attitudes toward L2, perception of difficulties in expression of emotions in the L2, feeling different when using L2, L2 use and expression of emotions in the L2. Different personality traits and EI facets had an effect on these dimensions; nevertheless, a strong influence of higher and lower order personality traits on the perception and expression of emotions in the L2 was shown. This complex relationship might account for the finding that some people report finding it difficult to express emotions in the L2 or notice personality changes while using L2, while some do not. At the same time, the current study shows that incorporation of personality traits and trait emotional intelligence in any research on emotions is vital, as it might explain some of the results and contribute to a broader understanding of the subject.

6.4. Limitations of this study The methodological limitations of this study relate to the choice to use an online questionnaire and the recruitment of participants. These points will now be discussed in turn and recommendations made for future investigations.

“Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View”: Discussion and Conclusion

6.4.1.

143

The perception and expression of emotions in L1 and L2 questionnaire

The questionnaire measuring the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 did not have a negatively loaded item presented for each positively loaded one that is items which require a response of “agree” if participants feel different (disagree), and items which require a response of “disagree” if they felt the opposite. This is in contrast to psychological tests such as the OCEAN questionnaire or TEIQue, which include items with both positive and negative loading for each trait. The lack of negatively loaded items rendered the cross-checking of participants’ responses impossible, which means that less thoughtful participants could automatically choose “agree” or “disagree” responses for the majority of questions.

6.4.2.

The online questionnaire

The online version of the questionnaire on bilingualism and emotions comprised seven sub-questionnaires: personal background questionnaire, questionnaire measuring the perception and expression of emotions in a first and second language, open-ended task consisting of description of situations in Polish and English, perception questionnaire, questionnaire on the exposure to English, OCEAN personality test, and TEIQue (Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire). The average time required to complete the questionnaire was 50 minutes, which is approximately double the recommended length (Dörnyei, 2003). This information was provided prior to opening and downloading the questionnaire but it can be speculated that this might influence the results of the perception questionnaire, which was administered at the end of the test session. Another factor that might have contributed to the results of this study was a very brief introduction to the questionnaire. Participants of the study could have faced problems with understanding what was meant by emotions, as no detailed description was provided. A potential problem with methodology that becomes apparent in the analysis relates to the self-reports regarding language proficiency. Such reports might be more indicative of language attitudes, rather than objective proficiency. On the other hand, Dewaele (2007b) states that research has revealed that self-report measures of proficiency correlate highly with linguistic measures of proficiency. Mettewie (2004) correlated self-reported oral proficiency scores for Dutch and French with an objective measure of language proficiency (based on results for grammar

Chapter Six

144

tests, reading and listening comprehension exercises) among 338 pupils in Brussels. She found highly significant positive relationships between the measures which led her to conclude that self-reports provide valid measures to researchers. Equally, MacIntyre et al. (1997) found that selfperceived L2 competence and actual L2 competence were strongly intercorrelated. It thus seems that measures of perception of proficiency are acceptable indicators of actual proficiency (Dewaele, 2007b: 151). The current instrument is also subject to the general limitations of online questionnaires (Wilson & Dewaele, 2010), for example not being able to control the testing environment, the increased likelihood of participants omitting questions, clicking in the wrong place, choosing the neutral option for the ambiguous questions, clicking the wrong box or corrupting the scale and not being able to move back and correct it, being distracted by external stimuli or “speeding up” responses towards the end of the questionnaire.

6.4.3.

Recruitment of participants

The online survey took place over a twenty four-month period, from December 2006 to December 2008. The sampling strategy was not random and could rather be described as convenience sampling on a relatively large scale (Wilson & Dewaele, 2010). It must be remembered that access to the online questionnaire was limited to people with access to the internet. Nevertheless, it was not limited to people with sufficient knowledge of English as the target groups were Polish L2 users of English and Polish-English bilinguals, and it was therefore necessary to run a test which involved matching Polish culture-Specific emotions with their descriptions in order to ensure that all participants were Polish speakers. This study can therefore be accurately described as investigating multilingualism among Polish users of English and Polish-English bilinguals. The questionnaire was distributed among students and staff at several Polish universities, members of the Polish society in England (POSK), students and staff at several Irish and English Universities. It was advertised at various conferences and on Linguist List. Additionally the questionnaire was also advertised among students who were taking part in exchange programs both at Polish and English universities. The total number of respondents was only 137.

“Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View”: Discussion and Conclusion

145

6.5. Conclusions and suggestions for further work The present research was the first to attempt to empirically address the complex relationship between perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 and immersion in a foreign language with respect to the two typologically distant languages Polish and English. It also incorporated trait emotional intelligence, acknowledging for the first time its possible effect on the perception and expression of emotions in a native and a nonnative language. The findings of the study showed that the relationship between immersion in a foreign language and culture and the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 is reciprocal. It also demonstrated that a variety of factors might contribute to the perception and expression of emotions in the L1 and L2 including length of stay in an ESC, gender, self-perceived L2 proficiency, personality traits or emotional intelligence. The crucial findings are as follows: (1) The relationship between first and second language could be a mutual one and there is bidirectional transfer; thus, it was suggested that while researching the influence of immersion in a foreign language and culture on the perception and expression of emotions, possible changes might occur in the informants’ emotional repertoire as such, and therefore both L1 and L2 should be investigated; (2) Personality traits and EI should be considered as important variables in any study on emotions as it has been shown in the present study that they are linked to many dependent variables, with the potential to explain various issues, especially dealing with self-perceived behavioral or personality changes or subjective feelings and perceptions; (3) The present research revealed an interplay between many variables which influence perception and expression of emotions in both the L1 and the L2, including the following: higher-order personality traits, lower-order personality traits such as emotional intelligence, cultural and linguistic differences, length of exposure to a foreign language and culture, degree of socialization, gender and selfperceived L2 proficiency. Reviewing these complex relationships sheds some light on the complex relationship between personality, culture, language and emotions, and might suggest new directions for the future research.

146

Chapter Six

More research is needed to confirm these findings and to address some unresolved questions. One such question concerns whether there is some common semantic structure for the perception and expression of emotions that is shared among languages (Moore et al., 1999) and consequently how similar/dissimilar this model may be in Polish (L1) and English (L2). Further, it is unclear whether there is any emotion model shared by monolinguals, bilinguals and L2 users of these languages. A starting point for such studies concerning the extent to which semantic structures are universally shared or culture-specific could be to compare both similarities and differences. Another series of questions concerns the influence of immersion in a foreign language and culture on changes in perception of L1 cultureSpecific emotions as well as L1 and L2 universal emotions. That is, does exposure to a foreign language lead to a change in response times to universal and culture-specific emotions? It is also important to investigate further the role of personality traits and emotional intelligence in the perception and expression of emotions. It has already been noted by Matsumoto (2006) that personality has a significant influence on differences in emotion regulation and that some such differences could be entirely accounted for by individual differences in personality. Therefore, more cross-linguistic research is needed in the field of personality traits with a strong emphasis on the relatively new trait emotional intelligence (EI) and its role in the perception and expression of emotions in the first and subsequently acquired languages.

APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE MEASURING PERCEPTION AND EXPRESSION OF EMOTIONS IN THE L1 AND L2

148

Appendix A

APPENDIX B “LOW”, “MEDIUM” AND “HIGH” GROUPS’ STORES ON PERSONALITY TRAITS (ANOVA)

REFERENCES

Allik, J., & McCrae, R.R. (2004). Towards a geography of personality traits: patterns of profiles across 36 cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 13-28. Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait names. A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47(211), 171. Altarriba, J. (2003). Does cariño equal “liking”? A theoretical approach to conceptual nonequivalence between languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7, 305-322. —. (2006). Cognitive approaches to the study of emotion-laden and emotion words in monolingual and bilingual memory. Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 56, 232-256. Altarriba, J., & Basnight-Brown, D. M. (2007). Methodological considerations in performing semantic and translation priming experiments across languages. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 1-18. Altarriba, J., & Bauer, L. M. (2004). The distinctiveness of emotion concepts: A comparison between emotion, abstract, and concrete words. American Journal of Psychology, 117, 389-410. Altarriba, J., & Canary, T. M. (2004). Affective priming: The automatic activation of arousal. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 25, 248-265. Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R.R. (eds.) (2008). An introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Altarriba, J., & Mathis, K. M. (1997). Conceptual and lexical development in second language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 550-568. American Immigration Law Foundation (2002). ESL education helps immigrants integrate. Immigration Policy Report. http://www.ailf.org/ipc/policy_reports_2002_ESL.asp. (Internet web site accessed October, 2006). Andrews, D. (1994). The Russian color categories sinij and goluboj: An experimental analysis of their interpretation in the standard and émigré languages. Journal of Slavic Linguisitics, 2, 9-28. Arabski, J. (Ed.) ( 2006). Cross-linguisitic influence in the Second language Lexicon. Clevedon UK: Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

151

Athanasiadou, A & Tabakowska, E. (1998). Introduction, in: Athanasiadou, A. & Tabakowska, E. (Eds.) Speaking of Emotions: Conceptualization and Expression. Mouton de Gruyter, xi-xxii. Athansopoulos, P. (2006) Effects of the grammatical representation of number on cognition in bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9 (1), 89-96. —. (2009).Cognitive representation of color in bilinguals: The case of Greek blues. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition,12 (1), 83-95. Athanasopoulos, P., & Kasai, C.(2008). Language and thought in bilinguals: The case of grammatical number and nonverbal classification preferences. Applied Psycholinguistics,29, 105-123. Austin, E. J. (2004). An investigation of the relationship between trait emotional intelligence and emotional task performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1855-1864. Austin, E.J., Saklofske, D.H., & Egan, V. (2005). Personality, well-being and health correlates of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 547-558. BaraĔczak, S. (1990). Breathing under water and other East European essays . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Berman, R. & Slobin, D. (1994). Relating events in narrative: a crosslinguistic development study. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Besemeres , M. (2002). Translating One’s Self: Language and Selfhood in Cross-Cultural Autobiography. Oxford: Peter Lang. —. (2004). Different Languages, Different Emotions? Perspectives from Autobiographical Literature. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. Special Issue: Languages and Emotions: A Crosslinguisitic Perspective, 25: 2&3, 140-157 Block, J., von der Lippe, A., & Block, J.H. (1973). Sex role and socialization patterns: Some personality concomitants and environmental antecedents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41, 321- 341. Brody, L. R., & Hall, J. A. (2004). Gender, emotion, and expression. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2d ed., 338-349). New York: Guilford. Bucholtz, M., Laing, A.C. & Sutton, L.A. (Eds.), (1999). Reinventing identities: The gendered self in discourse. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Byram, M. S. (1994). Teaching-and-Learning Language-and-Culture. Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters Limited. —. (1997). Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence.Multilingual Matters Ltd.

152

References

Callahan, E. (2005). Interface design and culture. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 39(1), 255-310. Carruthers, P. (1996). Language, Thought and Consciousness: an essay in philosophical psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carruthers, P. & Boucher, J. (Eds.) (1998). Language and thought: interdisciplinary themes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Celce-Murcia, M., Dorneyi, Z., & Thurred, S. (1995). Communicative competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 5-35. Chan, B. H. S. (2004). Beyond “contextualization”: Code-switching as a “textualization” cue. Journal of Language and Social psychology, 23, 7-27. Child, D. (1986). Psychology and the Teacher. London: Cassell. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton. Chun, D.M. (1998). Signal analysis software for teaching discourse intonation. Language, Learning & Technology 2(1), 61-77. Cohen, A. D. & Olshtain, E. (1981).Developing a measure of sociocultural competence: The case of apology. Language Learning, 31(1), 17-30. Coleman, J.S. (1996). Reflections on Schools and Adolescents. In J. Clark (Ed.), James, S. Coleman, 17- 22.London- New York: Falmer Press. Cook, V. (Ed.) (2002). Portraits of the L2 user. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 853-863. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992a). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 653-665. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992b). Multiple uses for longitudinal personality data. European Journal of Personality, 6, 85-102. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992c). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Costa P.T., Terracciano A, & McCrae R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322-331. Czechowska, N. & Ewert, A. (2010). Perception of motion by PolishEnglish bilinguals. In Cook,V. & Bassetti, B. (Eds) Language in Bilingual Cognition, 287-314. New York: Psychological Press.

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

153

Darwin, C. (1872). The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals.(Second edition 2009). Penguin Books: London. Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94:369-389. De Courcy, M. (2003). French Takes Over Your Mind: Private Speech and Making Sense in Immersion Programmes. Journal of Educational Thought, Vol. 37 (3), 349-367. Dennett, D. (1991). In Allen Lane, (Ed.), Consciousness Explained. New York: Little Brown. De Rivera, J. (1992). Emotional Climate: Social Structure and Emotional Dynamics. International Review of Studies on Emotion, 2, 197-218. Dewaele, J-M. (2002). Psychological and sociodemographic correlates of communicative anxiety in L2 and L3 production. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 1, 23-28. —. (2004a). Blistering barnacles! What language do multilinguals swear in? Estudios de Sociolingüística, 5, 83 -106. —. (2004b). The emotional force of swearwords and taboo words in the speech of multilinguals. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 25 (2-3): 204-223. —. (2005a). Investigating the Psychological and Emotional Dimensions in Instructed Language Learning: Obstacles and Possibilities. The Modern Language Journal, 89 (iii) 367-380. —. (2006). Expressing anger in multiple languages. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.)Bilingual Minds: Emotional Experience, Expression and Representation (118-151) Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. —. (2007a). Becoming bi- or multi-lingual later in life. In P.Auer and Li Wei (Eds) Handbook of Multilingualism and Multilingual Communication (101-130) Berlin, New York: Mouton De Gruyter. —. (2007b). Interindividual Variation in Self-perceived Oral Proficiency of English L2 Users. In Alcón Soler, E. &Safont Jordà, M.P. (Eds) Intercultural Language Use and Language Learning (141- 166) Dordrecht: Springer —. (2008a). Appropriateness in foreign language acquisition and use: Some theoretical, methodological and ethical considerations. In R. Manchón and J. Cenoz (Eds.), Doing SLA research: Theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues. Special issue of the International Review of Applied Linguistics, 46 (4), 235-255. —. (2008b). Dynamic emotion concepts of L2 learners and L2 users: A Second Language Acquisition perspective. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11: 173-175.

154

References

—. (2008c). The emotional weight of “I love you” in multilinguals’ languages. Journal of Pragmatics, 40: 1753-1780. —. (2009).The effect of age of acquisition on self-perceived proficiency and language choice among adult multilinguals. Eurosla Yearbook, 9, 246-269. —. (2010). Emotions in multiple languages. Basingstoke: PalgraveMacMillan. Dewaele, J-M.& Furnham, A. (1999). Extraversion: The Unloved variable in Applied Linguisitic Research. Language Learning, 19 (3), 509-544. Dewaele, J-M. & Pavlenko, A. (2001-2003) Web questionnaire Bilingualism and Emotions London: University of London. Dewaele, J-M. & Pavlenko, A. (2002). Emotion vocabulary in interlanguage. Language Learning, 52, 2, 265- 324. Dewaele, J-M, Petrides, K.V.&Furnham, A. (2008). The effects of trait emotional intelligence and sociobiographical variables on communicative anxiety and foreign language anxiety among adult multilinguals: A review and empirical investigation. Language Learning 58 (4), 911-960. Dewaele, J-M. & Van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2009).The effect of multilingualism/multiculturalism on personality: no gain without pain for Third Culture Kids? International Journal of Multilingualism, 6 (4), 443-459. Digman JM. (1989). Five robust trait dimensions: Development, stability, and utility. Journal of Personality, 57,195-214. —. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41,417-440. Doi, T. (1990). The cultural assumtions of psychoanalysis. In Stigler, J., Shweder, R. & Herdt, G. (Eds.), Cultural psychology: Essays on comparative human development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 9446-9453). Dörnyei Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second Language Research Construction, Administration and Processing. Mahwal, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd. Edwards, D. ( 1997). Emotion, discourse and cognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Eilola, T. M., Havelka, J., & Sharma, D. (2007). Emotional activation in the first and second language. Cognition & Emotion, 21, 1064-1076. Ekman, P. (1973). Darwin and facial expression; a century of research in review New York: Academic Press. —. (1992). An argument for basic emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 6, 169-200.

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

155

—. (1994). Strong Evidence for Universals in Facial Expressions: A Reply to Russel’s Mistaken Critique. Psychological Bulletin, 115 (1994): 268-287. —. (1999). Basic emotions. In T. Dalgleish & T. Power (Eds.), The handbook of cognition and emotion, 45-60. Sussex, United Kingdom: Wiley. —. (2003). Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces and Feelings to Improve Communication and Emotional Life. London: Times Books. Ekman, P. & Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, use, and coding. Semiotica, 1, 49-98. Ekman, P. & Friesen, W.V. (2003). Unmasking the Face: A Guide to recognizing emotions from facial expressions. Malor Books: Cambridge, MA. Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Evans, D. (2001). Emotion: The Science of Sentiment. New York: Oxford University Press. Eysenck, H.J. & Eysenck, S.B.G. (1964). Manual of the Eysenck personality Inventory. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, M. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences: A natural science approach. New York: Plenum. Field A. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. London Thousand Oaks New Delhi: Sage Publications Fodor, J. A. (1987).Psychosemantics: The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Freed, B.F. (Ed.) (1995). Second Language Acquisition in a study abroad context. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Furnham, A., & Heaven, P. (1999). Personality and social behavior. London: Arnold. Goddard, C. (1997). Studies in the Syntax of Universal Semantic Primitives. Special Issue of Language Sciences, 19(3). —. (2000). “Cultural scripts” and communicative style in Malay (Bahasa Melayu). Anthropological Linguistics 42(1), 81-106. Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology: Vol. 2 (141-165). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

156

References

—. (1990). An Alternative “Description of Personality”: The Big-Five Structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.59 (6) 1216-1229. Graham, C.R., Hamblin, W. & Feldstein, S. (2001). Recognition of emotion in English voices by speakers of Japanese, Spanish and English. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. Vol. 39 (1) 19-37. Graziano, W.G. & Eisenberg, N. (1997). Agreeableness: A dimension of personality. In Hogan, R., Johnson, J. & Briggs, S. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology, (795-824). San Diego: Academic Press. Grosjean, F. (2001). The bilingual's language modes. In Nicol, J. (Ed.). One Mind, Two Languages: Bilingual Language Processing (pp. 122). Oxford: Blackwell. Also in Li Wei (Ed.). The Bilingual Reader (2nd edition). London: Routledge, 2007. Guiora A., M.Paluszny, B. Beit-Hallatimi, J. Catford, R. Cooley & C. Yoder Dull (1975). Language and Person Studies in Language Behavior. Language Learning Vol. 25 (1), 43-61. Haidt, J. & Keltner, D. (1999). Culture and emotion: Multiple methods find new faces and a gradient of recognition. Cognition and Emotion, 13, 225-266. Hall, K. & Bucholtz, M. (Eds.) (1995). Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self. New York: Routledge. Harbsmeier, C. (2004). Portrait. Epok 43, 50-51. Harkins, J. & Wierzbicka, A. (Eds). (2001). Emotions in Crosslinguistic Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter Harrison, K. , & Voelker, E. (2008). Two Personality Variables and the Cross-cultural Adjustment of Study Abroad Students. Frontiers: The International Journal of Study Abroad, XVII (Fall 2008), 69-87. Hassan, B.A. (2001). Extraversion/Inrtoversion and Gender in Relation to the English Pronunciation Accuracy of Arabic Speaking College Students. In Hassan, B. A. (Ed.), Extraversion/Introversion: Sociual Characterisitics and Learning Preferences. Egipt: Hillsade. Hoffman, E. (1998). Lost in Translation: A life in a New Language. Vintage: London. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hokanson, S. (2000). Foreign Language Immersion Homestays Maximizing the Accommodation of Cognitive Styles. Applied Language Learning Vol.11 (2), 239-264.

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

157

Hull, P.V.(1987). Bilingualism. Two Languages, two personalities. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. —. (1990). Bilingualism: two languages, two personalities? Unpublished PhD thesis Berkeley: University of California. —. (1996). Bilingualism: Some personality and cultural issues. In D. I. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, A. Kyratzis, & J. Guo (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language: Essays in honor of Susan Ervin-Tripp, 419-434. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hyde, J. S. (2007). Half the human experience: The psychology of women (7th edn.) Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. Imai, M. & Mazuka, R. (2003). Re-evaluation of linguistic relativity: Language-specific categories and the role of universal ontological knowledge in the construal of individuation. In D. Gentner &; S. Goldin- Meadow (Eds.), Language in Mind: Advances in the issues of language and thought, (430-464). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. International Personality Item Pool (2001). A Scientific Collaboratory for the Development of Advanced Measures of Personality traits and Other IndividualDifferences (http://ipip.ori.org/) (Internet web site accessed 27/01/06) Izard, C. E. (1977). Human Emotions. Plenum press: New York. James, W. (1884). What is an Emotion? Mind, 9, 188-205. Jang, K.L., Livesley, W.J., & Vemon, P.A. (1996). Heritability of The Big Five personality dimensions and their facets: A twin study. Journal of Personality, 64(3), 577-592. Jarvis, S. & Pavlenko, A. (2008). Crosslinguisitic Influence in Language and Cognition. Routledge: New York. Johnson-Laird, P.N & Oatley, K. (2004). Cognitive and Social Construction in Emotions. In Lewis, M. & Haviland-Jones, J. M. (Eds.), Handbook of Emotions (2nd edition),(458-475). New York: Guilford Press. Javier, R. A., Barroso, F., & Muñoz, M. A. (1993). Autobiographical memory in bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 319338. Kanno, Y. & Norton, B. (Eds) (2003). Imagined communities and educational possibilities: Introduction. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 2 (4), 241-249. Kasper, G. (1997). Can pragmatic competence be taught? Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center. http://www.lll.hawaii.edu/nflrc/NetWorks/NW6/ (accessed: 2009 November). Kassin, S. (2003). Psychology. USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

158

References

Keltner, D., &Bonanno, G. A. (1997). A study of laughter and dissociation: Distinct correlates of laughter and smiling during bereavement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 687702. Kim, Y.Y. (2001). Becoming intercultural: An integrative theory of communication and crosscultural adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kinginger, C. & Farrell, K. (2004). Assessing Development of MetaPragmatic Awareness in Study Abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of StudyAbroad, 10, 19-42. Kinginger, C. & K, Farrell Whitworth (2005). “Gender and emotional investment in language learning during study abroad”. CALPER Working Paper Series No. 2 The Pennsylvania State University, Center for Advanced Language Proficiency Education and Research. Klein, W. (1995). Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. Kline, P. (1999). The handbook of psychological testing (2nd edition). London: Routledge. Koven, M. (1998). Two languages in the Self/The Self in Two Languages: French-Portuguese Verbal Enactments and Experiences of Self in Narrative Discourse. Ethos, 26 (4), 410-455. —. (2004). Getting ‘emotional’ in two languages: Bilinguals’ verbal performance of affect in narratives of personal experience. Text 24 (4), 471-515. —. (2006). Feeling in two languages: A Comparative Analysis of a Bilingual’s Affective Displays in French and Portuguese. In A. Pavlenko (Ed) Bilingual Minds: Emotional Experience, Expression and Representation (84-117). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Lakoff, G. (1987).Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago. Lantolf, J. P. (1999). Second Culture Acquisition, Cognitive Considerations. In Hinkel, E. (Ed) Culture in Second Language Teaching and Learning. The Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 28-46. Lee, J. (2001). The Relationship between Personality traits and English Proficiency among Korean University Students. Dissertation Abstracts international Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences, (61), 34553467. Leibniz, G. (1704). New Essays on Human Understanding. Trans. P. Remnant and J. Bennett, (1981). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

159

Levinson, S. C. (1996). Introduction to part II. In J. J. Gumperz, & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (133-144). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. (2003). Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Levinson, S. C., Kita, S., Haun, D. B. M., & Rasch, B. H. (2002). Returning the tables: Language affects spatial reasoning. Cognition, 84(2), 155-188. Levy, R. (1984). Emotion, knowing, and culture. In R. Shweder and R. LeVine (Eds), Culture Theory: Essays on Mind, Self and Emotion (214-237). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Livesley, J.W. et al. (1998). Phenotypic and Genetic Structure of Traits Delineating Personality Disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 55, 941-948. Li Wei, (Ed.) (2007). The Bilingualism Reader. (2nd edition). London: Routledge. Lucy, J. (1992). Grammatical Categories and Cognition. Glasgow, Scotland: Cambridge University Press. —. (1996). The Scope of Linguistic Relativity: An Analysis and Review of Empirical Research. In J. Gumperz and S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, (37-69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. (1997). Linguistic Relativity. Annual Review of Anthropology 26, 291312. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews Inc. Lucy, J. and & Gaskins, S. (2001). “Grammatical Categories and the Development of Classification Prefer- ences: A Comparative Approach,” in S. Levinson and M. Bowerman (Eds.), Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development, (257-283). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lucy, J. & Gaskins, S. (2003). “Interaction of Language Type and Referent Type in the Development of Nonverbal Classification Preferences,” in D. Gentner and S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, (465-492). Cambridge, MA: The MIT. Press. Lutz, C. A. (1988). Unnatural Emotions: Everyday Sentiments on a Micronesian Atoll and Their Challenge to Western Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109:163-203. Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Kita, S., Haun, D.B.M., & Levinson, S.C. (2004). Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(3), 108-114.

160

References

Mackey, W.F. (2000). The description of bilingualism. In L. Wei (Ed.) The Bilingualism Reader, (22-50). London and New York: Routledge. Marian, V., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2003). Autobiographical memory and language in bicultural bilinguals. In Cohen, J., Mac Alister, K., Rolstad, K., & MacSwan, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism, (1478-1486). Somerville, Ma: Cascadilla Press. Marian, V., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2004). Self-construal and emotion in bicultural bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 190-201. Matsumoto, D. (1994). Culture and emotion. In L. Adler and U. Gielen (Eds.), Current perspectives in cross- cultural psychology. New York: Praeger. Matsumoto, D. (2006). Are cultural differences in emotion regulation mediated by personality traits? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37(4). 421-437. Matsumoto, D., & Assar, M. (1992). The effects of language on judgments of facial expressions of emotion. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 16, 85-99. Mayer, J.D., Roberts, R.D. & Barsade, S.G. (2008). Human Abilities: Emotional Intelligence. The Annual Review of Psychology,59, 507-36. McCrae R.R. & Costa, P.T. (1995). Domains and facets: Hierarchical personality assessment using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment 64: 21-50. McCrae R.R. (2004). Human nature and culture: a trait perspective. J. Res. Pers. 38(1): 3-14. McCrae, R., Costa Jr., P.T., Ostendorf, F., Angleitner, A., Hrebckova, M., Avia, M.D., et al. (2000). Nature over nurture: Temperament, personality, and life span development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 173-186. McCrae, R.R., et al. (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observer's perspective: Data from 50 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88: 547-561. MacIntyre, P.D., Noels, K. A., & Clément, R. (1997) Biases in self-ratings of second languageproficiency: the role of anxiety. Language Learning 47, 265-287 Medved Krajnoviü, M. & Juraga, I. (2008). Studia Romanica et Anglica Zagrabiensia, 53, 349-372. Mettewie, L. (2004). Attitudes en motivatie van taalleerders in België (Attitudes and motivation of language learners in Belgium). Unpublished PhD dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

161

Moore, C.C., Romney, A.K., Hsia, T.L., & Rusch, C.D. (1999). The Universality of the Semantic Structure of Emotions Terms: Methods for the Study of Inter- and Intra-Cultural Variability. American Anthropologist, 101 (3), 529-546. Myers, D. (2004) Theories of Emotion. Psychology: Seventh Edition, New York, NY: Worth Publishers. Norton, B. (2001). Non-participation, imagined communities and the language Classroom. In M.P. Breen (Ed) Learner Contributions to Language Learning, (159-171). London: Longman. O’Connor, R. M., & Little, I. S. (2003). Revisiting the predictive validity of emotional intelligence:Self-report versus ability-based measures. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 1893-1902. Ohara, Y. (2001). Finding one’s voice in Japanese: A study of the pitch levels of L2 Users. In A. Pavlenko,A. Blackledge, I. Piller, M. Teutsch-Dwyer (Eds) Multilingualism, Second Language learning, and Gender, (231-254). Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter. OĪaĔska, K. (2004). The Relationship between Personality traits Extraversion-Introversion and Engish-speaking Proficiency. Unpublished MA dissertation, Department of English, Opole Univeristy. OĪaĔska-Ponikwia, K. (2012). What has personality and emotional intelligence to do with ‘Feeling different’ while using a foreign language? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15:2, 217- 234. Parrott, W.G. & Harré, R. (1996). Introduction: Some complexities in the study of emotions. In Harré, R. and Parrott, W.G. (Eds.) The Emotions: Social, Cultural and Biological Dimensions, (1-20). London, UK: Sage. Panayiotou, A. (2001). The other within the self: Bilinguals and the construction of emotions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard University. —. (2004). Switching Codes, Switching Code: Bilinguals’ Emotional Responses in English and Greek. Journal of Multilingual and MulticulturalDevelopment Vol. 25 (2 & 3), 124-139. —. (2006). Translating Guilt: An Endeavor of Shame in the Mediterranean? In A. Pavlenko (Ed) Bilingual Minds: Emotional Experience,Expression and Representation, (183-208) Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Parks, T. (1996). An Italian Education. London: Vintage. Pavlenko, A. (1999). New approaches to concepts in bilingual memory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2 (3), 209-230.

162

References

—. (2001). “How am I to become a woman in an American vein?” Transformations of gender performance in second language learning. In A. Pavlenko, A. Blackledge, I. Piller, M. Teutsch-Dwyer (Eds) Multilingualism, Second Language learning, and Gender, (133-174) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. —. (2002a). Bilingualism and emotions. Multilingua, 21 (1), 45-78. —. (2002b). Emotions and the body in Russian and English. Pragmatics and Cognition, 10 (1-2), 201- 236. —. (2004). “Stop doing that,ia komu skazala!: Emotions and language choice in bilingual families.”Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 25 (1, 2/3), 179-203. —. (2005). Emotions and multilingualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press —. (Ed.) (2006). Bilingual minds: Emotional experience, expression, and representation. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. —. (2008). Emotion and emotion-laden words in the bilingual lexicon. Keynote article. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11 (2), 147164. . Pavlenko, A. & V. Driagina (2007). Russian emotion vocabulary in American learners’ narratives. Modern Language Journal, 91 (2), 213234. Pavlenko, A. & S. Jarvis (2002). Bidirectional transfer. Applied Linguistics, 23 (2), 190-214. Peabody, D., & Goldberg, L. R. (1989). Some determinants of factor structures from personality-trait descriptors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 552-567. Petrides, K. V. (2001). A psychometric investigation into the construct of emotional intelligence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Department of Psychology, University College London. —. (2001-2010). London Psychometric Laboratory at UCL ( Trait Emotional Intelligence) http://www.psychometriclab.com. (Internet web site accessed December 2009). Petrides, K. V. & Furnham, A. (2000). On the dimensional structure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 313-320. Petrides, K. V. & Furnham, A. (2003). Trait emotional intelligence: Behavioral validation in two studies of emotion recognition and reactivity to mood induction. European Journal of Personality, 17, 3957. Pertides, K.V., Furnham, A. & Mavraveli, S. (2007). Trait emotional intelligence: Moving forward in the field of EI. In G. Matthews, M.

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

163

Zeidner, & R. Roberts, R. (Eds.). Emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (Series in Affective Science). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Petrides, K. V., Pita, R., & Kokkinaki, F. (2007). The location of trait emotional intelligence in personality factor space. British Journal of Psychology, 98, 273-289. Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language. New York: HarperCollins. Plotnik, R. & Mollenauer, S. (1986). Introduction to Psychology. New York: Random House. Ramirez-Esparza, N., Gosling,S.D., Benet-Martinez,V., Potter, J. P., & Pennebaker, J.W. (2006). Do bilinguals have two personalities? A special case of cultural frame switching. Journal of Research in Personality Vol. 40 (2), 99-120. Ranney, S. (1992). Learning a New Script: An Exploration of sociolinguisitic Competence. Applied linguisitics, Vol. 13 (2), 25-50. Regan, V., Howard, M, &Lemée, I., (2009). The Acquisition of Sociolinguistic Competence in a Study Abroad Context. London: Multilingual Matters. Rintell, E. (1984). But how did you FEEL about that? The Learner’s Perception of Emotion in Speech. Applied Linguistics, Vol.5 (3), 255264. Roberson, D. (2005). Color categories are culturally diverse in cognition as well as in language. Cross-Cultural Research, 39, 56-71. Robinson, M. D., & Clore, G. L. (2002). Episodic and semantic knowledge in emotional self-report: Evidence for two judgment processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 198-215 Roccas, S., Sagiv, L., Schwartz, S. H., & Knafo, A. (2002). The Big Five personality factors and personal values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 789-801. Romney, A.K., Moore, C.C. & Rusch, C.D. (1997). Cultural universals: Measuring the semantic structure of emotion terms in English and Japanese. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94, 54895494. Rosaldo, M. (1980). Knowledge and Passion: Ilongot Notions of Self and Social Life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. —. (1984). “Toward an anthropology of self and feeling.” In R. A. Shweder and R. A. LeVine, (Eds.), Culture Theory: essays on mind, self, and emotion, (137-157). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Rosselli, M. et al. (2002). Stroop effect In spanish-English bilinguals. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 8, 819-827.

164

References

Russell, J.A. (1991a). The contempt expression and the relativity thesis. Motivation and Emotion, 15, 149-168. —. (1994). Is there universal recognition of emotion from facial expression?: A review of crosscultural studies. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 102-141. Santiago-Rivera, A. L., & Altarriba, J. (2002). The role of language in therapy with the Spanish-English bilingual client. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33, 30-38. Schmidt-Rinehart, B.C. & Knight, S.M. (2004). “The homestay component of Study Abroad: Three perspectives”. Foreign Language Annals, 30 (2), 254-262. Schrauf, R. W. (2000). Bilingual autobiographical memory: Experimental studies and clinical cases. Culture & Psychology, 6 (4), 387-417. Schrauf, R. W. & Rubin, D. C. (2000). Internal languages of retrieval: The bilingual encoding of memories for the personal past. Memory and Cognition, 28, 616-623. Schrauf, R. W. & Rubin, D. C. (2004). The “language” and “feel” of bilingual memory: Mnemonic traces and narrative framing. Sociolinguistica, 5(1), 21-39. Searle, J. (1983). Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. New York, Cambridge University Press. Singleton, D., Skrzypek, A., Kopeckova, R. & Bidzinska, B. (2007). Attitudes towards and perceptions of English L2 Acquisition among Polish immigrants in Ireland. Paper presented at the Royal Irish Academy “IN/DIFFERENCE” Research Symposium. (http://pdp.squarespace.com/presentations-and- publications/) (Internet web site accessed 01/09/2009). Slobin, D.I. (2003). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought, 157-191. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Smith, A. (1759). The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications. Smith, M., Giraud-Carrier, C., Dewey, D., Ring, S. and Gore, D. (2011). Social Capital and Language Acquisition during Study Abroad. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Third Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Snow, C.E. (1999). Social Perspectives on the Emergence of Language. In MacWhinney, B. (Ed), The Emergence of Language, (213-256). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

165

Solomon, R. C. (2004). The Philosophy of Emotions. In Lewis, M & Haviland-Jones, J. M. (Ed), Handbook of Emotions. (2nd edition),(316). New York: Guilford Press. —. (2003). Not Passion’s Slave: Emotions and Choice. New York: Oxford University Press. Spence, G., Oades, L., &Caputi, P. (2004). Emotional intelligence and goal self-integration: Important predictors of emotional well-being? Personality and Individual Differences, 37(3), 449-461. Spielman, G. & Radnofsky, M. L. (2001). Learning Language under Tension: New Directions from a Qualitative Study. The Modern Language Journal, 85 (2), 259-278 Srivastava, S., John, O. P., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2003). Development of personality in early and middle adulthood: Set like plaster or persistent change? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 1041-1053. Stepanova Sachs, O. & Coley, J.D. (2006). Envy and Jealousy in Russian and English: Labeling and Conceptualization of Emotions by Monolinguals and Bilinguals In A. Pavlenko (Ed.) Bilingual Minds: Emotional Experience, Expression and Representation (209-231). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Stern, H.H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Strelau, J. (2000). Temperament. In: J. Strelau (Eds.).Psychologia. PodrĊcznik akademicki [Psychology. An academic manual] (Vol. 2, 683-719). GdaĔsk: GdaĔskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662. Sutton, T. M., Altarriba, J., Gianico, J. L., & Basnight-Brown, D. M. (2007). The automatic access of emotion: Emotional Stroop effects in Spanish-English bilingual speakers. Cognition & Emotion, 21, 10771090. Sutton, T. M., & Altarriba, J. (2008). Representing emotion words in the mental lexicon: A new look at the emotional Stroop effect. The Mental Lexicon, 3, 19-46. Talmy, L. (2000). Towards a cognitive semantics (Vol. 2). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Tagiuri, R. (1968). The concept of organizational climate. In R. Tagiuri & G. H. Litwin (Eds.), Organizational Climate: Explorations of a Concept. Boston: Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Administration, 11-32.

166

References

Tett, R. P., Fox, K. E., & Wang, A. (2005). Development and Validation of a Self-Report Measure of Emotional Intelligence as a Multidimensional Trait Domain. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(7), 859888. Todorov, T. (1994). Dialog and schizophrenia. In Arteaga (Ed.), Another tongue. Nation and ethnicity in the linguisitic borderlands (203-214). Durnham, NC: Duke University Press. Ye, V.Z. (2003). “La Double Vie de Veronica: reflections on my life as a Chinese migrant in Australia.” Mots Pluriels No. 23. At http://www.arts.uwa.edu.au/motspluriels/MP2303vzy.html.(internet web site accessed March 2007). Young, R. (1999). Sociolinguisitic approaches to SLA. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 19, 105-132. Warwick, J., & Nettelbeck, T. (2004). Emotional intelligence is? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1091-1100. Wierzbicka, A. (1992). Semantics, Culture and Cognition: Universal human concepts in culture-specific configurations. New York: Oxford University Press. —. (1994a). “Cultural scripts”: A semantic approach to cultural analysis and cross-cultural communication. Pragmatics and Language Learning [Monograph Series] 5, 1-24. —. (1994b). Emotion, language, and “cultural scripts”. In: Shinobu Kitayama and Hazel Rose Markus (Eds), Emotion and Culture: Empirical studies of mutual influence. Washington: American Psychological Association. 130-198. —. (1997). Understanding Cultures Through Their Key Words: English, Russian, Polish, German, Japanese. New York: Oxford University Press. —. (1998). “Sadness” and “Anger” in Russian: The non-universality of the so-called “basic human emotions”. In A. Athanasiadou & E. Tabakowska (Eds.), Speaking of Emotions: Conceptualisation and expression, (3-28). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. —. (1999). Emotions across Languages and Cultures: Diversity and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. (2003). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: The semantics of human interaction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. —. (2004). Bilingual lives, bilingual experience. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 25(2&3), 94-104. (Preface to the Special edition on "Bilingualism and emotions" edited by Jean-Marc Dewaele and Aneta Pavlenko)

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View

167

—. (2006). English: Meaning and culture. New York: Oxford University Press. —. (2009). Language and metalanguage: Key issues in emotion research. Emotion Review 1(1), 3- 14. Whorf, B.L. (1956). Language, Thought, and Reality. Boston: MIT Press. Wilson, R.J. (2008). ‘Another language is another soul’: individual differences in the presentation of self in a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Birkbeck College, University of London. Wilson, R.J. & Dewaele, J.M. (2010). The use of web questionnaires in second language acquisition and bilingualism research. Second Language Research 26, (1) 103-123.

INDEX Affective socialization, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 28, 30, 35, 39, 55, 67, 68, 137, 149 Bidirectional transfer, 26, 153 Bilingualism, 1, 8, 36, 38, 39, 62 Cognitive conception of language, 22, 24 Communicative anxiety, 12 Concept comparability, 8 Conceptual shift, 9, 15, 16, 27, 56 Cross-linguistic differences, 25, 32 Cross-linguistic influence, 26 Culture, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 50, 51, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 72, 74, 75, 78, 90, 107, 111, 128, 133, 137, 138, 140, 142, 144, 145, 148, 149, 153, 154 Emotions ”Feeling different”, 2, 13, 17, 53, 54, 58, 62, 64, 65, 79, 81, 82, 85, 86, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 102, 103, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 121, 122, 123, 124, 126, 127, 128, 130, 132, 133, 134, 146, 147, 148, 150, 151 Cultural scripts for expressing emotions, 28, 33, 34, 66, 142 Cultural theory of emotions, 3 Culture-specific emotions, 5, 25, 153, 154 Emotion concepts, 4, 6, 8, 21, 30, 32, 36, 54, 132 Emotional climate, 1 Emotional scripts, 7, 13, 38, 136 Expression of emotion, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18,

19, 20, 22, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 38, 40, 42, 47, 50, 51, 52, 55, 57, 58, 60, 62, 64, 65, 66, 68, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 85, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 136, 137, 138, 140, 142, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155 Perception of emotion, 2, 4, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 39, 40, 51, 55, 57, 58, 62, 66, 67, 68, 92, 120, 126, 128, 145, 147, 148 Perception of emotions, 109 Universal emotions, 5, 19, 154 Immersion in a foreign language and culture, 9, 11, 12, 19, 32, 40, 54, 133 L2 use, 2, 28, 58, 62, 64, 65, 67, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 86, 87, 88, 90, 91, 93, 95, 97, 98, 99, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 109, 110, 112, 114, 116, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 130, 132, 133, 145, 146, 147, 149, 151 Linguistic relativity, 22, 24, 25 neo-Whorfians, 24 Personality, 1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, 28, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 47, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 62, 66, 71, 74, 79, 81, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 97, 128, 129, 130,

Emotions from a Bilingual Point of View 132, 133, 134, 138, 144, 146, 147, 148, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155 Adaptability, 49, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 119, 120, 130, 133, 147 Agreeableness, 10, 43, 44, 45, 50, 62, 79, 80, 81, 88, 89, 93, 94, 130, 132, 133, 134, 147 Assertiveness, 49, 84, 89, 120, 121 Conscientiousness, 10, 43, 44, 45, 50, 62, 79, 80, 89, 95, 96, 130, 150 Emotion expression, 30 Emotion management, 49, 83, 85, 89, 113, 114, 115, 130, 133, 134, 147, 150 Emotion perceptron, 11, 13 Emotion regulation, 49, 83, 89, 103, 104 Emotional intelligence (EI), 2, 9, 10, 12, 13, 18, 19, 22, 28, 46, 53, 56, 57, 60, 63, 66, 86, 87, 90, 134, 150, 151, 153, 154, 155 Empathy, 49, 52, 57, 94, 107 Extraversion, 10, 11, 16, 17, 28, 42, 43, 44, 45, 50, 53, 58, 59, 62, 79, 80, 81, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 130, 132, 134, 146, 147, 150 Happiness, 49, 139

169

Higher-order personality traits, 10, 12, 41, 42, 43, 46, 47, 150, 154 Impulsiveness, 49 Lower-order personality traits, 12, 53, 55, 57, 151, 154 Neuroticism, 10, 42, 43, 44, 45, 50, 51, 58, 79, 80, 81, 82, 89, 90, 91, 96, 97, 132, 146 OCEAN personality test, 12, 62, 71, 152 Openness, 10, 28, 42, 43, 44, 45, 50, 51, 58, 79, 80, 82, 88, 89, 90, 97, 98, 99, 130, 132, 133, 134, 146, 147, 150 Optimism, 49 Relationships, 49, 83, 89 Self-esteem, 49, 86, 99, 100, 130, 133, 147 Self-motivation, 49, 83, 89, 103 Social awareness, 49, 83, 85, 89, 108, 109, 133, 134, 147, 150 Stress management, 49, 83, 85, 86, 87, 89, 111, 112, 113, 130, 133 Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire (TEIQue), 12, 63, 71, 152 Trait theory, 10 Second language acquisition, 52, 88 Sociolinguistic competence, 7, 29, 78, 81 Stroop test, 15