Language Barometer 5: Factsheet

With over 180 nationalities living together in the Brussels Capital Region, it is no surprise that this unique diversity is also present in Brussels’ language situation. But which languages are spoken by the residents of Brussels? Who speaks what language, where, when, and with whom? Does linguistic diversity lead to multilingual inhabitants? And what status does the Dutch language have in Brussels? The BRIO Language Barometer (LB), a unique and comprehensive representative survey, provides an overview of the linguistic situation in Brussels. 

As a (small) world city, an ever-increasing linguistic diversity characterises Brussels. Based on the ‘good to excellent’ command of a language, 72 different languages were spoken among the 2,500 respondents of LB1 (2001). This number rose to 106 languages in LB3 (2013) and almost 100 languages with LB4 (2018). Despite the smaller sample of 1,627 respondents in LB5 (2024), the diversity of languages remains high. This fifth Language Barometer recorded 104 different languages. This observation suggests that the linguistic and cultural base of Brussels is widening. Not only the linguistic diversity itself, but also the speed of this evolution is striking.

A relevant question that builds on the prior observation is whether the increased linguistic diversity also leads to multilingual individuals in Brussels. The first assessment we can make is that the recorded language diversity reflects the inhabitants’ language skills and usage. Looking at the top 10 most spoken languages, the languages and their proportions tend to shift, but the languages remain mostly identical over the five measurement periods (see Table 1). French unsurprisingly remains the most widely spoken language in Brussels. Yet the knowledge of French has dropped significantly over the past two decades. At the same time, English strengthened its position as the second most known language. English is primarily a language that is learned in school. To a lesser extent, English appears to be a home language. It remains the most popular amongst the youngest generation of Brussels residents and is especially salient in the workplace.

As far as Dutch is concerned, people not only speak more Dutch but also relatively better Dutch. At the basis of this evolution, there is a growing group of primarily youngsters with a 'good to excellent' command of the language and a relative influx of Dutch speakers from Flanders. The fluctuations of Arabic, Spanish, Italian, German, Portuguese and Turkish illustrate a more erratic pattern over the five measurement periods. In LB4 and LB5, we also record an Eastern European language (Romanian) in the top 10 most-spoken languages.

Dutch, French and English constitute the contact languages. Knowledge of these languages is paramount for anyone living or working in Brussels. These languages provide opportunities for communication in various formal and informal areas. This is, for example, evident in the workplace: those who know several contact languages are eligible for more jobs. 

About half of Brussels’ inhabitants know at least two contact languages. At the same time, we see an increase in the proportion of residents who know neither of these languages. Given the general importance of language in Brussels, insufficient knowledge of these contact languages implies fewer opportunities within Brussels. The table above exemplifies the increasing risk of social dualization resulting from the 'language competence gap'. 

Half of Brussels’ inhabitants grew up in a language-mixed household. Table 3 gives an overview of the original home language in simplified form for the population of Brussels. 

Numerically, French remains the main home language group, although its share as a home language is declining. Dutch maintains its position and even gains some ground as an original home language. Moreover, Dutch is passed on by all generations of Dutch speakers through intergenerational transmission, indicating a degree of language preservation. A third of Brussels residents grew up in a family where neither Dutch nor French was spoken. 

If someone does not acquire a language through their family, they rely on their schooling. Although we should be careful in interpreting Table 4, the trend is clear: of the youngest respondents (18-30) who were educated in French-speaking schools, whether in Brussels or Wallonia, less than 10% are proficient in Dutch. Meanwhile, eight in ten respondents of the same age group who went to the Dutch educational system in Brussels are proficient in French. At the same time, the demand for bilingual or multilingual education remains high: 86% favours such an education system. 

Language courses for adults also remain popular. A quarter of respondents who already took a language course opted for a Dutch language course. Among the French speakers, 26% opted for a Dutch language course. The motives for taking or not taking a Dutch language course are diverse. Nevertheless, half of the course participants follow a Dutch course for work-related reasons.

The previous finding is partly explained by the knowledge of Dutch as a prerequisite to access the labour market in Brussels. In half of Brussels' employment situations, bilingualism or multilingualism is the norm. The combination of French and English appears to be the most used language combination. As Table 6 further explains, Dutch is also used 'often to always' in one in four work situations, mostly in combination with French and/or English. 

Language usage in Brussels’ work environment is only one of the language domains studied. Language usage in other formal and informal areas was also surveyed. The formal sphere consists of contacts with institutions and administrations, while the informal sphere deals with contacts with neighbours or within the context of leisure activities. Overall, the identified language diversity results in a changing use of the three contact languages. Underlying the latter is a shift from monolingual communication to combining two or three contact languages, regardless of respondents’ actual language proficiency.

In Brussels municipal administrations, where language usage has traditionally been an issue, French is less used than in previous editions. Two language shifts underlie this: on the one hand, more inhabitants choose to use Dutch in combination with French, and on the other hand, English is gaining a more prominent place in oral communication with municipal officials. Moreover, English is mostly combined with the two official languages. In turn, 10% of Brussels residents use the three contact languages together. 

Brussels’ associations fulfil a clear societal role as a meeting place for people with different linguistic profiles. Looking specifically at Dutch-speaking associations, 75% of these organisations use Dutch as their prime language of communication. In the remaining cases, Dutch is combined with French and/or English. This praxis does not only imply a stepping stone to Dutch for many non-Dutch speakers. These associations also serve as a lever for community building while contributing to a shared sense of belonging within the community.

Looking at the evolution of Brussels linguistic situation, at the level of a dynamic urban environment, we observe a trend towards a more 'complex' urban diversity on the one hand and experiencing a convergence towards a multilingual society on the other. Both tendencies are present and not mutually exclusive. The fifth Language Barometer survey illustrates an evolution of increased linguistic diversity, changed language usage, and both individual and societal language shifts. When it comes to language choice, it is not an 'either/or' situation but rather an 'and/and' story. The combination of contact languages, which in many cases are at the basis of the identified language shifts, are for many inhabitants not only a norm but also a condition to participate in society.

Finally, if we shift our focus to the position of Dutch in Brussels’ multilingual setting, the balance is moderately positive. Growing multilingualism does not imply a deficit on account of the Dutch language. Quite the opposite seems to be the case: multilingualism is a lever. A significant proportion of inhabitants recognise the multilingual character of Brussels and endorse the importance of the Dutch language in this setting. The scope of the language is certainly not limited to the economic sector (because of labour market prospects) but also finds its way into the other language domains, albeit often in combination with French and/or English. The growing demand for Dutch language courses is an indication of this. At the same time, with the Dutch education system and many Dutch associations in Brussels, Brussels has valued instruments to pass on Dutch to both Dutch speakers and non-Dutch speakers. Within the Brussels context, these institutions act as catalysts, turning the 'demand' for Dutch into a 'supply'. Dutch is more than just an official language within the Region. Because of its multiple roles, it is a key to multilingualism in Brussels. 

The fifth Language Barometer survey was conducted by Mathis Saeys (BRIO-Brussels Information, Documentation and Research Centre, Vrije Universiteit Brussel) on behalf of and with the support of the Flemish government.