Troike (1978) is an addition in support of bilingualism in children, describing that such a learning makes the children more able to understand emotions of more than one language, and making them creative by improving their executive function of their brain. This support is apparent assuming the good results and the proven examples of children having grown well after learning two languages. It would be naïve if the proposition is not investigated for its legitimacy, because all propositions must have a sound reasoning, and must be able to prove the outweighing of benefits over disadvantages. There are benefits which are visible and proven, as much as there are disadvantages derived from the damages of the child in using perfect communication which is considered acceptable in normal standards. Thus, the analysis always has two sides and no one side or proposition is superior to another, but the long term benefits, long term damages, long term consequences, including the unexpected and unrecognised or unperceived occurrence of bilingualism must receive scholarly attention and analysis to make the conclusion more sound with less temptations of questioning its supported reasoning.
Saer (1923) has been a rejecter of bilingualism, due to its impact on intelligence and lack of the child to strive for intellectual pursuits and succeeding on none, thus remaining in limbo. This article proves the fatality of teaching two languages to children aged 3-5 by convincing that the monolinguals have been faring well in IQ tests compared to bilinguals, and its associated consequences on the child’s overall development potential. Considering this article, it is seen that there are all kinds of children, some picking up a second language by their own willingness, some rejecting it outright during childhood and adulthood, some children not able to learn a new language even as an adult, and some having difficulty in choosing the better language in different circumstances and situations. In addition, while the second language or both languages are being taught, the child’s attention span, the intensity of grasping what is taught; the innovativeness and creative attitude of the teacher; the patience of the teacher; and the child’s internal cognition to differentiate between the words of two languages makes an immense addition in the altering of the conclusion arrived at by analysing the bilingual and monolingual children. This infers that the intelligence of children may be impacted when their minds are overstressed by imposing two languages, and there are equally exceptional children having learned two languages at early age that are equally competitive in adult life.