Abstract
This paper uses the pooled data from 2005 to 2009 American Community Survey to analyze the economic benefits associated with bilingualism for adult men born in the United States. Bilingualism among the native born is defined as speaking a language at home other than or in addition to English. Native born bilingualism is rare; only 6.5% report a non-English language, and of those 71% report Spanish. Most of the native-born bilinguals report speaking English “very well” (85%), with most of the others speaking it “well” (10%). Other variables the same, overall bilinguals earn 4.7% less than monolingual English speakers, but the earnings differential varies sharply by the language spoken. Those who speak Native American languages, Pennsylvania Dutch and Yiddish have very low earnings due to a tendency to live in geographic or cultural enclaves. Spanish speakers earn 20% less than the monolingual English speakers overall, and other variables the same, have statistically significant 7% lower earnings. On the other hand, those who speak certain Western European and East Asian languages and Hebrew earn significantly more than monolingual English speakers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
While the focus in this paper is on the economic (earnings) consequences of bilingualism, it is noted that bilingualism may be associated with, and motivated by, a wider set of outcomes. As Christofides and Swidinsky (2010: 138) note, the factors behind the choice to learn a second language “…include, among others, cultural, intellectual, linguistic, scientific, political, personal, and economic reasons.”
Important studies on the earnings effects for US native-born men of bilingualism include Chiswick and Miller (2007, Chapter 14), Fry and Lowell (2003, 2005), Saiz and Zoido (2005), Altonji (1995), and for Europe, Ginsburgh and Peito-Rodrigues (2011). For other studies of bilingualism, see Coomer (2011), Henley and Jones (2005), Linton (2004), Toomet (2011).
The data used in this analysis do not include information on the parents of adult native-born men or their immigrant generation. For an analysis of the transmission of ethnic identity across generations from immigrant parents to teenage children living at home among those of Mexican heritage, see Duncan and Trejo (2011a). See also Duncan and Trejo (2011b).
The language questions ask if the respondent speaks a language other than English at home, other than just a few words. If the response is yes it asks to identify that language (only the first language is coded) and the respondent’s proficiency in spoken English: very well, well, not well, or not at all (just a few words). There is no additional information on language.
The cut-off for the inclusion of a language group in the table was specified as having 500 speakers (unweighted data).
There is a high correspondence between being of Hispanic origin and speaking Spanish at home among native-born adult men. In the sample under study, 55% of Hispanic men report they speak Spanish at home, while this is the situation for only 1% for non-Hispanic men. Among Spanish-speakers, 72% are of Hispanic origin.
The ACS data do not permit the identification of the location of indigenous peoples who live in isolated rural areas or on Native American reservations. By their own choice the Amish leave school at very young ages (mean schooling of adult men who speak Pennsylvania Dutch is 8.9 years). By the year 2005, the adult male Yiddish speakers in the US are primarily ultra-orthodox Ashkenazic Jews who sacrifice learning secular skills in their own schools for religious studies and after leaving school often devote a considerable amount of time to religious studies and practice, at the expense of obtaining secular schooling and on-the-job training that would increase their labor market earnings.
The “major second languages” are defined on the basis of numerical representation, and are the languages separately identified in Table 2.
The annual unemployment rate in the United States from 2005 to 2009 was
Year
Percent
2005
5.1
2006
4.6
2007
4.6
2008
5.8
2009
9.3
This is consistent with analysis of the 1990 Census data by Chiswick and Miller (2002) that used a similar model of the earnings determination process.
The “other major second languages” are the most frequent 21 non-English languages, other than Spanish, listed in Table 2.
In the aggregate, these constitute only 5.5% of foreign language speakers, including those for whom the specific language was not identified.
References
Altonji, J. G. (1995). The effects of high school curriculum on education and labor market outcomes. Journal of Human Resources, 30(3), 409–438.
Becker, G. S. (1957). The economics of discrimination. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital. New York, NY: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Chiswick, B. R. (1977). Sons of immigrants: Are they at an earnings disadvantage? American Economic Review, 67(1), 376–380.
Chiswick, B. R., & Gindelsky, M. (2016). The determinants of bilingualism among children: an econometric analysis. Review of Economics of the Household, 14(3), 489–506.
Chiswick, B. R., Le, A. T., & Miller, P. W. (2008). How immigrants fare across the earnings distribution: International analyses. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 61(3), 353–373.
Chiswick, B. R., Lee, Y. L., & Miller, P. W. (2005). Parents and children talk: english language proficiency within immigrant households. Review of Economics of the Household, 3(3), 243–268.
Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (2002). Immigrant earnings: linguistic concentrations and the business cycle. Journal of Population Economics, 15(1), 31–57.
Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (2005). Do enclaves matter in immigrant adjustment? City and Community, 4(1), 5–35.
Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (2007). The economics of language: International Analyses. London: Routledge.
Christofides, L., & Swidinsky, R. (2010). The economic returns to the knowledge and use of a second official language: english in Quebec and French in the rest-of-Canada. Canadian Public Policy, 36(2), 137–158.
Coomer, N. M. (2011). Returns to bilingualism in the nursing labor market – demand or ability? The Journal of Socio-Economics, 40(3), 274–284.
Duncan, B., & Trejo, S. J. (2011a). Intermarriage and the intergenerational transmission of ethnic identity and human capital for Mexican Americans. Journal of Labor Economics, 29(2), 195–227.
Duncan, B., & Trejo, S. J. (2011b). Tracking intergenerational progress for immigrant groups: the problem of ethnic attrition. American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings, 101(3), 603–608.
Fry, R., & Lowell, B. L. (2003). The value of Bilingualism in the US labor market. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 57(1), 128–140.
Fry, R, Lowell, B. L. (2005). The characteristics of bilingual and monolingual U.S. workers. In James. Cohen, Kara. McAlister, Kellie. Rolstad, Jeff. MacSwan (eds), Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism (pp. 787–799). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Ginsburgh, V., & Prieto-Rodriguez, J. (2011). Returns to foreign languages of native workers in the European Union. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 64(3), 599–618.
Henley, A., & Jones, R. E. (2005). Earnings and linguistic proficiency in a bilingual economy. The Manchester School, 73(3), 300–320.
Linton, A. (2004). A critical mass model of bilingualism among US-born hispanics. Social Forces, 83(1), 279–314.
Martins, P. S., & Pereira, P. T. (2004). Does education reduce wage inequality? Quantile regression evidence from 16 countries. Labour Economics, 11(3), 355–371.
Patrinos, H.A., Ridao-Cano, C. and Sakellariou, C. (2006). Estimating the returns to education: accounting for heterogeneity in ability. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 4040.
Phelps, E. S. (1972). The statistical theory of racism and sexism. American Economic Review, 62(4), 659–661.
Rumbaut, R. (2009). The evolution of language competencies, preferences and use among young adult children of immigrants. In T. G. Wiley, J. S. Lee, R. Rumberger (Eds.), The Education of language minority immigrants in the United States (pp. 35–71). Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
Rumbaut, R., Massey, G. D., & Bean, F. D. (2006). Linguistic life expectancies: immigrant language retention in Southern California. Population and Development Review, 32, 447–460.
Saiz, A., & Zoido, E. (2005). Listening to what the world says: Bilingualism and earnings in the United States. Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(3), 523–538.
Shin, H., & Alba, R. (2009). The economic value of bilingualism for Asians and hispanics. The Sociological Forum, 24(2), 254–275.
Toomet, O. (2011). Learn english, not the local language! Ethnic Russians in the Baltic states. American Economics Review, Papers and Proceedings, 101(3), 526–531.
Acknowledgements
The research assistance of Marina Gindelsky, Derby Voon, and RaeAnn Robinson is appreciated. Comments from the referees and the editor are appreciated. Miller acknowledges financial assistance from the Australian Research Council. Miller passed away after a long illness during the preparation of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Appendices
Appendix A: Definitions of the Variables
Data Source: American Community Survey, 2005–2009, PUMS.
Definition of Population: Adult men (ages 25–64) born in the United States who had non-zero earnings and worked in the prior year.
Dependent Variable: Natural logarithm of earnings in the prior year expressed in 2005 dollars, where earnings are the sum of wage, salary and self-employment income. Observation deleted if there were zero earnings or zero weeks worked.
Explanatory Variables
Educational Attainment: Years of full time equivalent schooling attained.
Experience: Age minus schooling minus 6.
Married/Co-habitation: Dichotomous variable equal to unity if currently married or cohabitating, otherwise equals zero.
Log Weeks Worked: Natural logarithm of weeks worked in the prior year. Observation deleted if there were zero weeks worked.
Black: Dichotomous variable equal to unity for men reporting their race as Black or African-American, otherwise equals zero.
South: Dichotomous variable equal to unity for persons living in one of the 17 southern states and the District of Columbia, otherwise equals zero.
Year: Dichotomous variable equal to unity for the survey year, equal to zero otherwise. Year 2005 is the benchmark.
English Proficiency: Dichotomous variables for speaking at home: Speaks English very well, well, not well, or not at all equals unity, otherwise equals zero. The benchmark is speaks only English at home (monolingual English speakers).
Indigenous Languages: Dichotomous variable equal to unity for Navaho, other North American Indian languages, and Eskimo, otherwise equals zero.
Spanish, Other Major Second Languages, and Residual Second Languages:
Dichotomous variables equal to unity if the person speaks at home Spanish, any of the 21 other most frequently spoken languages by the native-born (listed in Table 2), and all other second languages, otherwise equals zero.
Languages: Dichotomous variables for individual languages coded as unity, otherwise equals zero.
Quantile regressions
Table 5
Table 6
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chiswick, B.R., Miller, P.W. Do native-born bilinguals in the US earn more?. Rev Econ Household 16, 563–583 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-017-9398-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-017-9398-5