I'd say: When you can communicate with other speakers of that language. Then, since you can communicate in two languages you'd be bi-lingual.
At what point when accumulating grains of sand do they become a heap?
It's complicated; different people put the cut-off point in different places. And to complicate it further language proficiency isn't just one but at least two (production vs. reception), if not four (hearing, speaking, reading, writing).
That said, in my personal and subjective view, a person is proficient enough in a language to say "I speak it" when they're able to use it for a simple conversation about a topic that they know, without too much effort or reliance on external tools.
When you can dream in the language
Well, then I'm nolingual, I guess.
I like to say that English is my second language. I have no first language.
I don't think that dreams are a good threshold. Mostly based on personal anecdote - sometimes I dream with random stuff in Talian, for example, and I'm definitively not proficient in it. (Including some shitty bilingual jokes, like an angry pig surrounded by bananas praying to the sky.)
I think I am basically 95% bilingual, my native language is not English, but it was thought in school from first grade (age 5 or 6) all the way to high school (17 years old), and then in post-highschool education, I also had 2 mandatory English courses. The thing is having learned so early is I was too young to realize when I could start entertaining a conversation in English without thinking because it was almost always like that for me.
I do think though that when you can think in your 2nd language without having to mentally translate in your head to your native language is when you've reached a level of fluency that is good enough to be called bilingual. I would probably say, if you can understand jokes and plays on words in your second language, that's probably a good indicator that you are fluent
I felt I was bilingual when I started thinking in spanish. I'm not completely fluent but I speak well and can understand most things with context if I don't know the words.
When you can speak and think in the new language without translating to your native language in your head, maybe? That can actually happen pretty fast. You don't have to become anywhere near fluent.
One practical way to informally assess your bilingual level:
You are bilingual when you have a friend who can only speak your second language.
People with no friends confirmed as nihillingual. /s
Bilingualism is a bit overloaded nowadays, which I find kinda annoying given that word “polyglot” exists.
Anyways, if you can freely use another language in an informal exchange with a few people of different sobriety levels while failing to remember key words and recovering from that - you’re a fluent polyglot. Ability to exchange information is a key part of what language is, and that’s how you measures your proficiency.
Bilingual can also mean “natively proficient in two languages”. And if you’re older than three years old and are not native speakers of multiple languages already, the chances of you becoming one are slim.
Native proficiency is a result of a language acquisition ability that is not well understood and disappears early into child development. It results in a level of effortless mastery that seems to be impossible to achieve as an adult, i.e. a dedicated or merely attentive native speaker will be able to recognize that you are not one.
[Caveat lector: I'm not from language acquisition, my main area of knowledge within Linguistics is Historical Linguistics.]
Native proficiency is a result of a language acquisition ability that is not well understood and disappears early into child development.
That's the critical period hypothesis. It's more complicated than it looks like, and academically divisive; some say that it's simply the result of people having higher exposure and incentive to learn a language before they're 12yo, while some claim that it's due to changes in cerebral structures over time.
And then there's people like Chomsky who claim that the so-called "window of opportunity" is to learn Language as a human faculty, not to learn a specific language like Mandarin, Spanish, English etc.
I’ve legitimately never heard polyglot used to mean “speaks two languages”, I thought it meant “speaks three or more languages.” I can understand it being useful to have a specific term for people raised with two languages from birth/very early childhood though.
This is not a word that has a strict definition nor is certified by any agency or standard. As you can see by this thread, there may be a variety of personal opinions about what should count. But it’s like asking at what point in learning to ride a bike do you become a bicyclist? Is it enough to just know how to ride? It’s a semantic question, which, if you’re not familiar with that term, just means that it all depends on what you want to call something and is not a question of any objective criteria.
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!