It is a commonly shared fact that defining metalinguistic awareness and other related concepts is fuzzy and complicated.
Bialystok (2001) made a clear distinction between three metalinguistic constructs: knowledge, ability and awareness. Metalinguistic knowledge, or knowledge about language, represents stored information concerning abstract principles of language as a general entity (as opposed to ‘knowledge of grammar’, which refers to knowledge of different languages’ rules). Metalinguistic ability, on the other hand, points to a capacity to use metalinguistic knowledge “as opposed to the ability to use language” (Bialystok, 2001, p. 124). Finally, metalinguistic awareness implies the activation of attention to focus on knowledge, in order to describe explicit properties of languages.

Roehr-Brackin (2025) provides a theoretical synthesis of how children’s metalinguistic awareness (MLA) has been defined, theorized, and measured. The paper integrates existing definitions, two classic frameworks: Bialystok’s (1994, 2001) analysis/control model and Ellis’s (2004–2006) model of explicit knowledge. Then, she proposes a new two-axis model (implicit–explicit × specific–schematic) to map knowledge representations and learning processes. To establish general features of what metalinguistic awareness refers to, Roehr-Brackin’s core description is useful: “Metalinguistic awareness as a higher-order skill is related to general cognitive development (Bialystok, 2001; Birdsong, 1989; Cummins, 1987).” Then, we can agree it’s a cognitive construct subject to natural human development.

Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. Cambridge University Press.

Roehr-Brackin, K. (2025). Measuring children’s metalinguistic awareness. Language Teaching, 58(1), 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444824000016