No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
When bilinguals choose a single word to speak: Electrophysiological evidence for inhibition of the native language
Abstract
Behavioral and event-related potential (ERP) measures are reported for a study in which relatively proficient Chinese-English bilinguals named identical pictures in each of their two languages. Production occurred only in Chinese (the first language, L1) or only in English (the second language, L2) in a given block with the order counterbalanced across participants. The repetition of pictures across blocks was expected to produce facilitation in the form of faster responses and more positive ERPs. However, we hypothesized that if both languages are activated when naming one language alone, there might be evidence of inhibition of the stronger L1 to enable naming in the weaker L2. Behavioral data revealed the dominance of Chinese relative to English, with overall faster and more accurate naming performance in L1 than L2. However, reaction times for naming in L1 after naming in L2 showed no repetition advantage and the ERP data showed greater negativity when pictures were named in L1 following L2. This greater negativity for repeated items suggests the presence of inhibition rather than facilitation alone. Critically, the asymmetric negativity associated with the L1 when it followed the L2 endured beyond the immediate switch of language, implying long-lasting inhibition of the L1. In contrast, when L2 naming followed L1, both behavioral and ERP evidence produced a facilitatory pattern, consistent with repetition priming. Taken together, the results support a model of bilingual lexical production in which candidates in both languages compete for selection, with inhibition of the more dominant L1 when planning speech in the less dominant L2. We discuss the implications for modeling the scope and time course of inhibitory processes.
... In these experiments, participants are briefly shown a prime in one language (typically presented so rapidly that participants are not conscious of its presence) followed by a target word in a different language. Advantage for words receiving treatment for aphasia in another language Kohnert, 2004 Lexical decision Faster responses to cognates and/or interlingual homonyms de Groot et al., 2002;Dijkstra et al., 1999;Haigh & Jared, 2007;Lalor & Kirsner, 2001a;Miwa et al., 2014 Positive translation or homonym priming Basnight-Brown & Altarriba, 2007;Chen et al., 2014;Cristoffanini et al., 1986;de Groot & Nas, 1991;Duñabeitia et al., 2009;Duyck & Warlop, 2009;Gerard & Scarborough, 1989;Gollan et al., 1997;Jiang, 1999;Kim & Davis, 2003;Lee et al., 2018;McPhedran & Lupker, 2021;Miwa et al., 2014;Nakayama et al., 2013Nakayama et al., , 2016Voga & Grainger, 2007;Wang, 2013 Picture naming Faster responses to cognates and/or interlingual homonyms Acheson et al., 2012;Costa et al., 2000;Gollan & Acenas, 2004;Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Ivanova & Costa, 2008;Jacobs et al., 2016;Li & Gollan, 2021;Roberts & Deslauriers, 1999;Rosselli et al., 2014;Stadie et al., 1995;Strijkers et al., 2010 Cross-language repetition improves performance Branzi et al., 2014;Misra et al., 2012;Runnqvist & Costa, 2012 Knowing a phonological neighbor or morphological family member improves performance Hameau et al., 2021;Mulder et al., 2015 Knowing a translation equivalent improves performance Gollan et al., 2005;Gollan & Acenas, 2004;Higby et al., 2020 Superimposition of translation equivalent improves performance Dylman & Barry, 2018;Giezen & Emmorey, 2016;Hermans, 2004;Roelofs et al., 2016 Advantage for words receiving treatment for aphasia in another language Edmonds & Kiran, 2006;Kiran & Roberts, 2010 Semantic decision Faster responses to cognates Degani et al., 2018;van Hell & de Groot, 1998;van Hell & Dijkstra, 2002 Positive translation priming Chen et al., 2014;Grainger & Frenck-Mestre, 1998;Kim & Davis, 2003;McPhedran & Lupker, 2021;Wang & Forster, 2010 Knowing translation equivalent improved performance Poulin-Dubois et al., 2018 ...
... Chen et al., 2014;de Groot & Nas, 1991;Duñabeitia et al., 2009;Duyck & Warlop, 2009;Goral et al., 2001;Grainger & Frenck-Mestre, 1998;Jiang, 1999;Lee et al., 2018;McPhedran & Lupker, 2021;Nakayama et al., 2016;Wang, 2013;Wang & Forster, 2010; see Wen & van Heuven, 2017 for a meta-analysis). Similarly, bilinguals name pictures more rapidly if the same picture was previously named in another language (Branzi et al., 2014;Misra et al., 2012;Runnqvist & Costa, 2012). Cross-language priming effects tend to be stronger for cognates (overlapping semantics, orthography, and phonology) than noncognates (Cristoffanini et al., 1986;Gerard & Scarborough, 1989;Kim & Davis, 2003;Nakayama et al., 2013), and may even be observed across languages employing different scripts (overlapping semantics and phonology, but not orthography) (Greek-English: Voga & Grainger, 2007;Hebrew-English: Gollan et al., 1997;Korean-English: Kim & Davis, 2003;Japanese-English: Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Miwa et al., 2014;Nakayama et al., 2012Nakayama et al., , 2013. ...
... Switch costs have also been demonstrated in blocked languageswitching paradigms in which the response language changes between blocks of stimuli (Branzi et al., 2014;Casado et al., 2022;Degani et al., 2020;Kleinman & Gollan, 2018;Misra et al., 2012;Wodniecka et al., 2020). It is worth noting that such effects are not confined to translation equivalents: naming any pictures in one language can interfere with lexical access in another, although in some cases naming translation equivalents incurs a greater cost (e.g., Kleinman & Gollan, 2018). ...
For bilinguals, lexical access in one language may affect, or be affected by, activation of words in another language. Research to date suggests seemingly contradictory effects of such cross-linguistic influence (CLI): in some cases CLI facilitates lexical access while in others it is a hindrance. Here we provide a comprehensive review of CLI effects drawn from multiple disciplines and paradigms. We describe the contexts within which CLI gives rise to facilitation and interference and suggest that these two general effects arise from separate mechanisms that are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, we argue that facilitation is ubiquitous, occurring in virtually all instances of CLI, while interference is not always present and depends on levels of cross-language lexical competition. We discuss three critical factors – language context, direction, and modality of CLI – which appear to modulate facilitation and interference. Overall, we hope to provide a general framework for investigating CLI in future research.
... The study found a negative correlation between L2 proficiency and overall processing time and reactive control, with the more proficient L2 users reacting faster overall as well as on trials measuring reactive control. Across studies, however, results have been mixed, with a relationship between cognitive control and second language learning occurring only sometimes and varying as a function of proficiency and task (Luk et al. 2011;Bak et al. 2014;Misra et al. 2012;Vega-Mendoza et al. 2015;Xie 2018). ...
... The asymmetrical switching costs discussed above showed that the L1 could be inhibited immediately after L2 use (e.g., Meuter and Allport 1999). Misra et al. (2012) found evidence that translation equivalents were inhibited in L1 after L2 use and that this inhibition lasted for longer than just a few trials (it lasted across at least two blocks, see also Van Assche et al. 2013). On a scale of months, a study by Linck et al. (2009) found that learners immersed in an L2 environment had temporarily reduced access to L1 while immersed. ...
... However, neurolinguistic evidence for a potential special status of the first-acquired language persists (e.g., Cargnelutti et al. 2022). Similarly, psycholinguistic evidence for the need to inhibit a dominant (often the first-acquired) language while processing non-L1 (or a less-proficient language) (e.g., Misra et al. 2012) is consistent with the possibility of a unique status for that first-acquired language. The notion of L1 inhibition has been examined in a variety of studies in relation to nonselective lexical activation (e.g., Kroll et al. 2012), language switching processing cost (e.g., , and the extra activation during L2 processing (Abutalebi and Green 2007). ...
For multilinguals, acquiring and processing language is similar to other cognitive skills: they are grounded in mechanisms of sensory processing and motor control (Paradis, 2019). Recent clinical and experimental research on multilingualism have introduced innovative neuroimaging measures and psychological methods that have significantly shed light on what we know (and do not know) about how multiple languages are processed, represented, and controlled in the mind/brain (Schwieter, 2019).
Since the 1990s and 2000s, a plethora of behavioral and neurological research has demonstrated that for multilinguals, all languages are active to some degree in the mind, even when only using one. Furthermore, the need for the mind to manage the ongoing competition that arises from this parallel activation has been shown to affect cognition (e.g., executive functioning) (Giovannoli et al., 2020), modify the structure and functioning of the brain (e.g., changes in the areas where language control and executive control overlap) (Costa and Sebastian-Galles, 2014), and slow the onset or progression of cognitive and neural decline (Bialystok, 2017).
The goal of “Multilingualism: Consequences for brain and mind” is to bring together state-of-the art papers that examine the cognitive and neurological consequences of multilingualism through an exploration of how two or more languages are processed, represented, and/or controlled in one brain/mind. The included peer-reviewed papers are either theoretically or empirically oriented and present new findings, frameworks, and/or methodologies on how multilingualism affects the brain and mind.
... Switching between languages causes a processing delay, typically called a switch cost. These switch costs are measurable indicators of language control (Blanco-Elorrieta et al., 2018;Costa & Santesteban, 2004;Declerck & Koch, 2022;Liu et al., 2021;Schwieter & Sunderman, 2008;Zhu et al., 2022) which represent transient, trial-to-trial control processes and engagement of additional cognitive resources (Christoffels et al., 2007;Jackson et al., 2001;Linck et al., 2012;Liu et al., 2021;Martin et al., 2013;Misra et al., 2012;Verhoef et al., 2009;Zhu et al., 2022). The picturenaming task with cued language switches is one of the most common measures of language control in bilinguals. ...
... This increased demand for cognitive resources on switch trials has a significantly larger effect than on non-switch trials (Christoffels et al., 2007;Martin et al., 2013;Verhoef et al., 2009;Zheng et al., 2020). These findings have been evidenced by an event-related potential (ERP) component, the N2a, which is believed to be an indicator of attentional control during language schema selection (Liu et al., 2014;Liu et al., 2018;Misra et al., 2012;Verhoef et al., 2010). ...
... Some research has revealed that language control may be implicated during the lexical response phase in which an N2 effect occurred after picture onset (N2b), suggesting that selective inhibition was engaged to reduce competition during lexical selection and/or phonological encoding (Cheng et al., 2010;Piai et al., 2014;Roelofs, 2003;Shao et al., 2014). Other research, however, has suggested that the lexical response phase involves cognitive processes related to lexical processing (Green, 1998;Linck et al., 2012;Liu et al., 2014Liu et al., , 2018Misra et al., 2012), such as conceptual identification, lemma retrieval, and word-form encoding. Whether executive functions also play an important role in both the language schema and lexical response phases is an ongoing question (Cheng et al., 2010;Jackson et al., 2001;Martin et al., 2013;Roelofs, 2003;Verhoef et al., 2010). ...
Previous studies have debated whether the ability for bilinguals to mentally control their languages is a consequence of their experiences switching between languages or whether it is a specific, yet highly-adaptive, cognitive ability. The current study investigates how variations in the language-related gene FOXP2 and executive function-related genes COMT, BDNF, and Kibra/WWC1 affect bilingual language control during two phases of speech production, namely the language schema phase (i.e., the selection of one language or another) and lexical response phase (i.e., utterance of the target). Chinese-English bilinguals (N = 119) participated in a picture-naming task involving cued language switches. Statistical analyses showed that both genes significantly influenced language control on neural coding and behavioral performance. Specifically, FOXP2 rs1456031 showed a wide-ranging effect on language control, including RTs, F(2, 113) = 4.00, FDR p = .036, and neural coding across three-time phases (N2a: F(2, 113) = 4.96, FDR p = .014; N2b: F(2, 113) = 4.30, FDR p = .028, LPC: F(2, 113) = 2.82, FDR p = .060), while the COMT rs4818 (ts >2.69, FDR ps < .05), BDNF rs6265 (Fs >5.31, FDR ps < .05), and Kibra/WWC1 rs17070145 (ts > -3.29, FDR ps < .05) polymorphisms influenced two-time phases (N2a and N2b). Time-resolved correlation analyses revealed that the relationship between neural coding and cognitive performance is modulated by genetic variations in all four genes. In all, these findings suggest that bilingual language control is shaped by an individual's experience switching between languages and their inherent genome.
... Our paper explores engagement of language control as a function of individual differences in activation levels of the native language (L1) and the second language (L2). The methodological approach adopted both here and in previous studies is based on the assumption that involvement of language control can be inferred indirectly via assessment of its side effects (Branzi, Martin, Abutalebi, & Costa, 2014;Costa & Santesteban, 2004;Declerck, Thoma, Koch, & Philipp, 2015;Declerck & Philipp, 2018;Declerck et al., 2020;Degani, Kreiner, Ataria, & Khateeb, 2020;Guo, Liu, Chen, & Li, 2013;Misra et al., 2012;Schwieter & Sunderman, 2008;Van Assche et al., 2013;Wodniecka, Szewczyk, Kałamała, Mandera, & Durlik, 2020). In this vein, the increased difficulty in L1 lexical access following the use of L2 (hereafter the "L2 aftereffect") has been interpreted as a consequence of engagement of control during or after L2 use. ...
... The L2 after-effect can be measured in a blocked picture-naming paradigm by comparing the processing costs of production in the native (or stronger) language when it follows longer (blocked) production in a second (or a weaker) language (e.g., Branzi et al., 2014;Wodniecka et al., 2020;see Branzi, Della Rosa, Canini, Costa, & Abutalebi, 2016 for fMRI evidence). In this paradigm, participants have to name pictures in either L1 or L2, and the language of naming changes between blocks ( Branzi et al., 2014;Misra et al. 2012;Wodniecka et al., 2020). For instance, in a recent study by Wodniecka et al. (2020), Polish (L1) learners of English (L2) named pictures in L1 following the naming of pictures in either L1 or L2. ...
... Finally, our results bring some new insights into the time-course of L2 after-effects. Previous studies showed that the effect is relatively long lasting (Branzi et al., 2014;Misra, Guo, Bobb, & Kroll, 2012;Wodniecka et al., 2020): it was observed even after approximately 5 min (Branzi et al., 2014;Wodniecka et al., 2020) or up to two blocks of naming in L1 (Misra et al., 2012) after L2 use. This suggests that activation of L1 lemmas remains low for quite some time after a bilingual speaker returns to using her L1. ...
After naming pictures in their second language (L2), bilinguals experience difficulty in naming pictures in their native language (L1). This phenomenon, the “L2 after-effect”, is a lingering consequence of language control mechanisms regulating the activation of L1 and L2 to facilitate L2 production. Building on the Inhibitory Control model proposed by Green (1998), we propose that how much language control is applied depends on the relative balance between the current activation of L1 and L2. In two experiments, Polish-English bilinguals immersed in their L1 performed a blocked picture-naming task. This paradigm provided a continuous measure of the relative balance between the two languages and made it possible to index engagement of control by measuring the L2 after-effect. The results indicate that the higher the activation level of L1 and the lower the activation level of L2, the bigger the L2 after-effect. The results also revealed an enduring down-regulation of L1 activation level in more language-balanced speakers.
... As can be seen in Table 3 (see also (Branzi et al., 2014;Degani et al., 2020;Guo et al., 2011;Kreiner & Degani, 2015;Misra et al., 2012;Van Assche et al., 2013;Wodniecka, Szewczyk et al., 2020; for an overview, see Declerck, 2020;Wodniecka, Casado et al., 2020). Because the number of blocked language order studies is still limited, it is not clear yet to what degree the blocked language order effect is replicable. ...
... For example, the blocked language order effect is mainly observed in L1 (i.e., when a single L1 block is preceded by a single L2 block), whereas this is not always the case for L2 (Branzi et al., 2013;Van Assche et al., 2013;however, see Kreiner & Degani, 2015). Moreover, the blocked language order effect is typically not observed when the same stimuli are used across the single language blocks (Branzi et al., 2013;Misra et al., 2012). That is, the blocked language order effect has been demonstrated with non-repeating stimuli, but a reversed, facilitatory effect has been observed with repeating stimuli across blocks, which has been explained with positive stimulus repetition priming that counteract the influence of language inhibition (e.g., Misra et al., 2012). ...
... Moreover, the blocked language order effect is typically not observed when the same stimuli are used across the single language blocks (Branzi et al., 2013;Misra et al., 2012). That is, the blocked language order effect has been demonstrated with non-repeating stimuli, but a reversed, facilitatory effect has been observed with repeating stimuli across blocks, which has been explained with positive stimulus repetition priming that counteract the influence of language inhibition (e.g., Misra et al., 2012). Table 3. Overview of blocked language order studies with a focus on the blocked language order effect relative to language (L1 and L2) and whether the stimuli were new or repeated. ...
To achieve fluent language processing as a bilingual, a dominant theoretical framework assumes that the nontarget language is inhibited. This assumption is based on several empirical effects that are typically explained with inhibitory control. In the current article, we discuss four prominent effects linked to bilingual inhibition in language production (i.e., asymmetrical switch costs, n-2 language repetition costs, reversed language dominance, and the blocked language order effect). We argue that these effects require more empirical examination in order to arrive at a firmer basis for the assumption that inhibition plays a major role during bilingual language control. In particular, the empirical replicability of the phenomena themselves needs to be established more firmly, the underlying theoretical assumptions need further examination, and the alternative explanations of the empirical effects need to be scrutinized. In turn, we conclude that inhibitory control may provide a coherent framework for bilingual language production while outlining the challenges that the inhibition account still needs to face. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
... Bilinguals experience additional challenges in resolving lexical competition relative to monolinguals, as the two languages are activated in parallel and compete for selection (for reviews, see Costa, 2005;Kroll, Bobb, Misra & Guo, 2008;Kroll & Gollan, 2014), regardless of whether bilinguals speak (e.g., Colomé & Miozzo, 2010;Costa, Caramazza & Sebastian-Galles, 2000;Hoshino & Kroll, 2008) or hear (e.g., Canseco-Gonzalez et al., 2010;Lagrou, Hartsuiker & Duyck, 2011;Marian & Spivey, 2003b) one language alone. Since bilinguals cannot "switch off" the unintended language (Colomé & Miozzo, 2010;Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Lagrou et al., 2011;Martín, Macizo & Bajo, 2010), they must resolve conflict from competing cross-linguistic responses (e.g., Meuter & Allport, 1999;Misra, Guo, Bobb & Kroll, 2012) in addition to the within-language competition experienced by monolingual speakers of each of the two languages (e.g., Marian & Spivey, 2003a). Available data suggest a possible involvement of a domain-general mechanism in the resolution of lexical competition (Green, 1998). ...
... Experiment 2 investigated whether individual differences in L2 production fluency (i.e., performance on L2 discourse, semantic and phonemic fluency tasks) and cognitive control (i.e., Simon task performance) among native English L2 learners were associated with variation in competition resolution dynamics in L1 spoken word recognition. Fluent L2 speech production has also Mona Roxana Botezatu et al. been linked to efficient suppression of co-activated competitors from the irrelevant (native) language Linck et al., 2009;Meuter & Allport, 1999;Misra et al., 2012;Philipp, Gade & Koch, 2007) and engagement inhibitory control processes (Bialystok et al., 2008;Korko & Williams, 2017;Luo et al., 2010;Pivneva et al., 2012;Suarez et al., 2014). The resolution of lexical competition during L1 spoken word recognition is potentially complicated by L2 proficiency, as L2 learners must suppress temporarily co-activated competitors from both languages Spivey & Marian, 1999). ...
... Phonemic fluency was assessed in Spanish (P, M or R), but not in Chinese due to no agreed-upon equivalent measure. Learners were tested in the L1 first and L2 last to avoid L1 inhibition following L2 performance (Levy, McVeigh, Marful & Anderson, 2007;Misra et al., 2012). ...
We investigated whether fluent language production is associated with greater skill in resolving lexical competition during spoken word recognition and ignoring irrelevant information in non-linguistic tasks. Native English monolinguals and native English L2 learners, who varied on measures of discourse/verbal fluency and cognitive control, identified spoken English words from dense (e.g., BAG) and sparse (e.g., BALL) phonological neighborhoods in moderate noise. Participants were slower in recognizing spoken words from denser neighborhoods. The inhibitory effect of phonological neighborhood density was smaller for English monolinguals and L2 learners with higher speech production fluency, but was unrelated to cognitive control as indexed by performance on the Simon task. Converging evidence from within-language effects in monolinguals and cross-language effects in L2 learners suggests that fluent language production involves a competitive selection process that may not engage all domain-general control mechanisms. Results suggest that language experience may capture individual variation in lexical competition resolution.
... acquisition (Weissberger et al., 2015). Another issue is the widespread use of self-assessment test and the lack of objective measurements to test language proficiency (Misra, Guo, Bobb, & Kroll, 2012) even though it has already been stated that the correlations between selfassessment and formal tests for language proficiency are generally low (de Bot, 2008). In addition, some studies focused their attention only on the assessment of the L2 and not on the native one, forgetting that the mother tongue is not always the best well-known or the dominant language. ...
... It is known that when a bilingual intends to speak one language, alternatives in both languages are activated (Costa et al., 1999;Hermans et al., 1998;Kroll, Bobb, & Wodniecka, 2006) and for this reason, a higher rate of errors is expected in combination of higher response latencies when using the less dominant language. This effect has been interpreted as an effect of execution of a more difficult task due to the dominance of one language over another (Misra et al., 2012). But in our study, no difference was found in terms of response latencies and this result is consistent with the functional activations observed for naming in L1 and L2. ...
... Moreover, it has been said that few bilinguals are truly balanced, and even when high proficiency is achieved, late bilinguals remain dominant in one language, i.e. L1 (Misra et al., 2012). Hence, even if symmetrical switch cost is observed, naming in L1 is often slower than in L2, suggesting that the L1 is indeed inhibited under mixed language condition (Kroll, Bobb, Misra, & Guo, 2008). ...
It is estimated that more than half of the world's population speaks two languages and that 40% of the population uses both languages on a daily basis. Psycholinguists and neuropsycholinguists became interested early in the way in which two languages could share a single brain. They have therefore been interested in the representation of several languages in the bilingual brain, in the sensitive period during which languages are learned and also in the mechanisms that allow bilinguals to switch from one language to another without apparent effort. In this work, we investigated the role of the age of acquisition and proficiency of languages and the influence of two languages a) on the representation of cerebral substrates of two languages, b) on the cerebral plasticity, c) and on the mechanisms of language control. For this purpose, we compare early bilingual speakers, who learned both languages before the age of 3 years, and late bilingual speakers who learned the second language after 10 years, both of whom had a very good level of proficiency in both languages. Participants were assessed in a wide range of linguistic and non-linguistic tasks to measure language level and executive functioning. Using the functional magnetic resonance imaging technique, we were able to identify the neuronal substrates of the two languages for each group and the areas involved in language control, as well as cerebral changes due to the early learning of two languages. In general, the results show that language proficiency, rather than the age of acquisition, has an essential role on the representation of languages, but that the age of acquisition is decisive in regards of cerebral structure of certain areas related to language.
... Critically, the efficiency of L2 lexical access, operationalized as L2 vocabulary knowledge (Hilton, 2008;Koizumi and In'nami, 2013;Uchihara and Saito, 2019) and retrieval speed , plays a key role in determining the quality of L2 speech Liu, 2020). The efficient retrieval of L2 lexical items is dependent not only upon L2 vocabulary knowledge (Hilton, 2008), but also on the ability to resolve high levels of competition from the more dominant L1 (e.g., Meuter and Allport, 1999;Misra et al., 2012), which is co-activated and competes for selection (e.g., Costa et al., 2000;Hoshino and Kroll, 2008;Colomé and Miozzo, 2010). Additionally, speakers have to deal with a limited amount of cognitive resources to provide the system with the necessary energy to operate. ...
... During one in-person testing session, participants completed the picture description, semantic fluency and phonemic fluency tasks in both the L1 and the L2, as well as a language history questionnaire administered in the L1. Participants were tested in the L1 first and L2 second to avoid L1-inhibition following performance in the weaker L2 (Misra et al., 2012). The experimental tasks were presented electronically using the E-Prime 2.0 software (Psychology Software Tools Incorporated, 2012). ...
... Any task involving language production in L2 can lead to 196 the L2 after-effect: simply reading a list of words aloud (Degani et Available theories of bilingual speech production provide different explanations of the L2 after-200 effect. According to inhibition-based accounts, the retrieval difficulty that speakers experience in L1 201 after using L2 is a lingering consequence of the strong inhibition that had to be applied to L1 202 representations during L2 use (Green, 1998;Guo et al., 2011;Misra et al., 2012). Under the inhibitory 203 accounts, the control mechanism responsible for the resolution of the interference that drives the L2 204 after-effect relies on a set of domain-general mechanisms (e.g., Abutalebi & Green, 2016;Green, 1998;205 Green & Abutalebi, 2013). ...
... The results of the localizer-based analyses provide a rather unexpected characterization of the 721 neural correlates of the L2 after-effect. Contrary to the previous interpretations (Branzi et al., 2014, 722 2016; Guo et al., 2011;Misra et al., 2012;Declerck & Koch, 2022), the current results indicate that the 723 L2 after-effect reflects neither lexical access difficulty, nor articulatory difficulty, nor the additional 724 engagement of language-specific mechanisms that support word retrieval. In other words, our results 725 suggest that the L2 after-effect does not arise from within the language system itself (or from within 726 language-specific representations). ...
When bilingual speakers switch back to speaking in their native language (L1) after having used their second language (L2), they often experience difficulty in retrieving words in their L1: this phenomenon is referred to as the L2 after-effect. We used the L2 after-effect as a lens to explore the neural bases of bilingual language control mechanisms. Our goal was twofold: first, to explore whether bilingual language control draws on domain-general or language-specific mechanisms; second, to investigate the precise mechanism(s) that drive the L2 after-effect. We used a precision fMRI approach based on functional localizers to measure the extent to which the brain activity that reflects the L2 after-effect overlaps with the language network (Fedorenko et al., 2010) and the domain-general Multiple Demand network (Duncan et al., 2010), as well as three task-specific networks that tap into interference resolution, lexical retrieval, and articulation. Forty-two Polish-English bilinguals participated in the study. Our results show that the L2 after-effect reflects increased engagement of domain-general but not language-specific resources. Furthermore, contrary to previously proposed interpretations, we did not find evidence that the effect reflects increased difficulty related to lexical access, articulation, and the resolution of lexical interference. We propose that difficulty in speech production – manifested as the L2 after-effect – reflects interference at a non-linguistic level of task schemas or a general increase of engagement of cognitive control in speech production in L1 after L2.
Highlights
We use fMRI to explore brain correlates of the L2 after-effect
The L2 after-effect is a hallmark of proactive bilingual control
The effect overlaps with the Multiple Demand network but not the language network
It likely reflects domain-general but not language-specific difficulty
It likely reflects interference between higher-level task schemas
... Critically, the efficiency of L2 lexical access, operationalized as L2 vocabulary knowledge (Hilton, 2008;Koizumi and In'nami, 2013;Uchihara and Saito, 2019) and retrieval speed (De Jong et al., 2013), plays a key role in determining the quality of L2 speech (Kormos, 2006;Liu, 2020). The efficient retrieval of L2 lexical items is dependent not only upon L2 vocabulary knowledge (Hilton, 2008), but also on the ability to resolve high levels of competition from the more dominant L1 (e.g., Meuter and Allport, 1999;Misra et al., 2012), which is co-activated and competes for selection (e.g., Costa et al., 2000;Hoshino and Kroll, 2008;Colomé and Miozzo, 2010). Additionally, speakers have to deal with a limited amount of cognitive resources to provide the system with the necessary energy to operate. ...
... During one in-person testing session, participants completed the picture description, semantic fluency and phonemic fluency tasks in both the L1 and the L2, as well as a language history questionnaire administered in the L1. Participants were tested in the L1 first and L2 second to avoid L1-inhibition following performance in the weaker L2 (Misra et al., 2012). The experimental tasks were presented electronically using the E-Prime 2.0 software (Psychology Software Tools Incorporated, 2012). ...
Language experience shapes the gradual maturation of speech production in both native (L1) and second (L2) languages. Structural aspects like the connectedness of spontaneous narratives reveal this maturation progress in L1 acquisition and, as it does not rely on semantics, it could also reveal structural pattern changes during L2 acquisition. The current study tested whether L2 lexical retrieval associated with vocabulary knowledge could impact the global connectedness of narratives during the initial stages of L2 acquisition. Specifically, the study evaluated the relationship between graph structure (long-range recurrence or connectedness) and L2 learners’ oral production in the L2 and L1. Seventy-nine college-aged students who were native speakers of English and had received classroom instruction in either L2-Spanish or L2-Chinese participated in this study. Three tasks were used: semantic fluency, phonemic fluency and picture description. Measures were operationalized as the number of words per minute in the case of the semantic and phonemic fluency tasks. Graph analysis was carried out for the picture description task using the computational tool SpeechGraphs to calculate connectedness. Results revealed significant positive correlations between connectedness in the picture description task and measures of speech production (number of correct responses per minute) in the phonemic and semantic fluency tasks. These correlations were only significant for the participants’ L2- Spanish and Chinese. Results indicate that producing low connectedness narratives in L2 may be a marker of the initial stages of L2 oral development. These findings are consistent with the pattern reported in the early stages of L1 literacy. Future studies should further explore the interactions between graph structure and second language production proficiency, including more advanced stages of L2 learning and considering the role of cognitive abilities in this process.
... The study found a negative correlation between L2 proficiency and overall processing time and reactive control, with the more proficient L2 users reacting faster overall as well as on trials measuring reactive control. Across studies, however, results have been mixed, with a relationship between cognitive control and second language learning occurring only sometimes and varying as a function of proficiency and task (Luk et al. 2011;Bak et al. 2014;Misra et al. 2012;Vega-Mendoza et al. 2015;Xie 2018). ...
... The asymmetrical switching costs discussed above showed that the L1 could be inhibited immediately after L2 use (e.g., Meuter and Allport 1999). Misra et al. (2012) found evidence that translation equivalents were inhibited in L1 after L2 use and that this inhibition lasted for longer than just a few trials (it lasted across at least two blocks, see also Van Assche et al. 2013). On a scale of months, a study by Linck et al. (2009) found that learners immersed in an L2 environment had temporarily reduced access to L1 while immersed. ...
In individuals who know more than one language, the languages are always active to some degree. This has consequences for language processing, but bilinguals rarely make mistakes in language selection. A prevailing explanation is that bilingualism is supported by strong cognitive control abilities, developed through long-term practice with managing multiple languages and spilling over into more general executive functions. However, not all bilinguals are the same, and not all contexts for bilingualism provide the same support for control and regulation abilities. This paper reviews research on hearing sign–speech bimodal bilinguals who have a unique ability to use and comprehend their two languages at the same time. We discuss the role of this research in re-examining the role of cognitive control in bilingual language regulation, focusing on how results from bimodal bilingualism research relate to recent findings emphasizing the correlation of control abilities with a bilingual’s contexts of language use. Most bimodal bilingualism research has involved individuals in highly English-dominant language contexts. We offer a critical examination of how existing bimodal bilingualism findings have been interpreted, discuss the value of broadening the scope of this research and identify long-standing questions about bilingualism and L2 learning which might benefit from this perspective.
... For instance, access to the dominant L1 is typically disrupted after speaking in the weaker L2 (e.g. Guo et al., 2011;Misra et al., 2012;Rossi et al., 2018;Van Assche et al., 2013) or during prolonged immersion in an L2 environment (Baus et al., 2013;Linck et al., 2009). ...
... Thus, for bilinguals to effectively communicate in one language at any given point, regulation of the dominant language seems crucial. Studies examining the neural basis of these regulatory effects indicate that domain-general cognitive control networks are involved (Branzi et al., 2016;Misra et al., 2012;Rossi et al., 2018;Zhang et al., 2021). We refer to the ability to coordinate an adequate balance between down-regulatory (i.e. ...
What we say generally follows distributional regularities, such as learning to avoid "the asleep dog" because we hear "the dog that's asleep" in its place. However, not everyone follows such regularities. We report data on English monolinguals and Spanish-English bilinguals to examine how working memory mediates variation in a-adjective usage (asleep, afraid), which, unlike typical adjectives (sleepy, frightened), tend to resist attributive use. We replicate previous work documenting this tendency in a sentence production task. Critically, for all speakers, the tendency to use a-adjectives attributively or non-attributively was modulated by individual differences in working memory. But for bilinguals, a-adjective use was additionally modulated by an interaction between working memory and category fluency in the dominant language (English), revealing an interactive role of domain-general and language-related mechanisms that enable regulation of competing (i.e. attributive and non-attributive) alternatives. These results show how bilingualism reveals fundamental variation in language use, memory, and attention.
... Past studies with adults have shown that when individuals know fewer words in their non-dominant language, they require more active suppression of their dominant language while the non-dominant language is engaged. More practice actively suppressing the dominant language may then lead to greater gains in executive functioning skills (Gollan and Ferreira 2009;Meuter and Allport 1999;Misra et al. 2012). The partial correlation results for each sub-scale, including CEF, were non-significant (p-value range: 0.411-0.909), ...
... Studies on language switching provide evidence as to why inhibitory control is more efficient in bilinguals. Bilinguals who are less proficient in their non-dominant language must inhibit their dominant language more strongly in order to avoid interference while using their non-dominant language (e.g., Gollan and Ferreira 2009;Meuter and Allport 1999;Misra et al. 2012). In line with the hypothesis that the proposed bilingual cognitive advantage stems from practice in language control (i.e., selecting the target language and/or inhibiting the non-target language), the frequency of code-switching behaviors calling for such cognitive processes has been found to correlate with executive measures in both adults and children (Bosma and Blom 2019;Gross and Kaushanskaya 2015;Lai and OBrien 2020;Soveri et al. 2011). ...
The present study aims to assess differences in executive functioning between monolingual and multilingual 23-month-old toddlers, both when dichotomizing multilingualism and assessing it on a continuum. It is hypothesized that multilinguals, individuals with greater non-dominant language exposure, and individuals with more translation equivalents, would perform better in the following domains: response inhibition, attentional flexibility, and regulation. No differences are expected for working memory. The Early Executive Functions Questionnaire, a newly developed parental report, is used to measure the four executive functions of interest. Multilinguals and individuals with greater non-dominant language exposure have significantly higher response inhibition; however, no differences are noted for any other executive function. Additionally, no associations between translation equivalents and executive functioning are found. Post-hoc analyses reveal that non-dominant language production had a positive correlation with working memory. The present findings support the notion of a domain-specific cognitive advantage for multilingual toddlers.
... In contrast, the stimuli in the adult study were mixed with consecutive trials appearing randomly in either English or Spanish. Bilingualism research has shown that switching between languages causes asymmetric interference effects in a dominant versus non-dominant language [29][30][31][32]. In turn, the adult bilingual task may have elicited differences across languages, not because of differences in access to the multiplication facts, but because of asymmetric language switching effects. ...
... While in this study problems were blocked by language, Salillas and Wicha [4] presented the stimuli mixed with consecutive trials appearing at random, with alternating languages. Research has shown that switching between languages on linguistic tasks causes asymmetric interference effects in a dominant versus non-dominant language [29][30][31][32]. In turn, the task used by Salillas and Wicha [4] may have elicited differences across languages, not because of differences in access to the multiplication facts, but because of asymmetric language switching costs. ...
Many studies of bilingual arithmetic report better performance when verifying arithmetic facts in the language of learning (LA+) over the other language (LA−). This could be due to language-specific memory representations, processes established during learning, or to language and task factors not related to math. The current study builds on a small number of event-related potential (ERP) studies to test this question while controlling language proficiency and eliminating potential task confounds. Adults proficient in two languages verified single-digit multiplications presented as spoken number words in LA+ and LA−, separately. ERPs and correctness judgments were measured from solution onset. Equivalent P300 effects, with larger positive amplitude for correct than incorrect solutions, were observed in both languages (Experiment 1A), even when stimuli presentation rate was shortened to increase difficulty (Experiment 1B). This effect paralleled the arithmetic correctness effect for trials presented as all digits (e.g., 2 4 8 versus 2 4 10), reflecting efficient categorization of the solutions, and was distinct from an N400 generated in a word–picture matching task, reflecting meaning processing (Experiment 2). The findings reveal that the language effects on arithmetic are likely driven by language and task factors rather than differences in memory representation in each language.
... Importantly, the presence or absence of increased crosslanguage activation in noise will not enable us to distinguish between these two accounts. However, since language control processes are more likely to be engaged when listening in the less dominant language (i.e., when the non-target language is more dominant; Mercier et al., 2014; see also Green, 1998 andMisra et al., 2012), the present study provides a stronger test of the phonetically based account. By examining recognition of the dominant language by proficient speakers of a non-dominant language, the current study tests the effects of noise on cross-language activation while minimizing the role of language control processes. ...
... Block order was fixed to keep any ordering effects constant across participants rather than further complicate the design. The E2TB block was ordered before the S2TB block to prevent any carryover effects of cross-language activation from one block to the next (Misra et al., 2012). The full set of stimuli was divided into four sets, with the cognates and non-cognates within each set matched as closely as possible (see "Materials"). ...
Previous research has shown that as the level of background noise increases, auditory word recognition performance drops off more rapidly for bilinguals than monolinguals. This disproportionate bilingual deficit has often been attributed to a presumed increase in cross-language activation in noise, although no studies have specifically tested for such an increase. We propose two distinct mechanisms by which background noise could cause an increase in cross-language activation: a phonetically based account and an executive function-based account. We explore the evidence for the phonetically based account by comparing cognate facilitation effects for three groups of native English listeners (monolinguals, late (L2) learners of Spanish, and heritage Spanish speakers) and four noise conditions (no noise, speech-shaped noise, English two-talker babble, and Spanish two-talker babble) during an auditory lexical decision task in English. By examining word recognition in the dominant language, the role of language control mechanisms is minimized, and by examining three different types of competing noise, the role of energetic vs. informational masking can be assessed. Contrary to predictions, we find no evidence that background noise modulates cross-language activation; cognate facilitation is constant across the four noise conditions. Instead, several indices of word recognition performance are found to correlate with aspects of linguistic experience: (1) The magnitude of the cognate facilitation effect is correlated with heritage listeners’ self-ratings of Spanish proficiency; (2) Overall noise deficits are marginally larger for heritage listeners with lower English vocabulary scores; (3) Heritage listeners’ Spanish self-ratings predict their magnitude of informational masking; (4) For all bilinguals, the degree of masking incurred in both English and Spanish two-talker babble is correlated with self-reported daily exposure to Spanish; and (5) The degree of masking incurred by Spanish babble is correlated with Spanish vocabulary knowledge. The results enrich our understanding of auditory word recognition in heritage speakers in particular and provide evidence that informational masking is most subject to modulation due to variation in linguistic experience. It remains to be seen whether cross-language activation is modulated by noise when the target language is the less dominant one.
... Cognate facilitation effects have been reported in samples using both similar language pairs (Costa et al., 2000;Dijkstra et al., 1999;Lallier et al., 2013;van Hell & Dijkstra, 2002) and distant pairs (Chen et al., 2014;Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Sumiya & Healy, 2004;Zhang et al., 2011). There are also reports of linguistic interference (Misra et al., 2012;van Heuven et al., 2011) as well as null results (Costa et al., 2006). ...
The purpose of the current report is to study the effects of language distance on noun and verb processing in bilingual speakers. We recruited two groups of bilingual speakers: one group spoke two typologically distant languages (Cantonese and English) and the other group spoke two typologically similar languages (Mandarin-Cantonese). Participants named object and action pictures in their first language. We controlled psycholinguistic properties of words such as frequency, AoA, imageability, name agreement, visual complexity, familiarity, and participants’ bilingual language experiences. Our findings revealed a significant role for language distance. We observed a difference between noun and verb processing in the similar language pair (Mandarin-Cantonese) due to interference induced by language similarity. However, in the distant language pair (Cantonese-English), the difference disappeared because of the lack of cross-language interference. Our findings support that current and future models of bilingual language processing should take into account the effects of language distance.
... ERP components were defined based on grand means and analyzed in time windows that are typically used in picture naming: locked P2 (170-220 ms), N2 (240-290 ms), LPC (450-600 ms) (Branzi et al., 2014;Liu et al., 2016;Misra et al., 2012), and in sound judgments in listening tasks: locked LPC (760-950 ms) (Davis & Jerger, 2014). Spatially, we pre-defined frontalparietal (sensors: F3, F1, Fz, F2, F4, FC3, FC1, FCz, FC2, FC4, C3, C1, Cz, C2, C4) regions of interest. ...
When bilinguals switch between their two languages, they often alternate between words whose formation rules in one language are different from the other (e.g., a noun-verb compound in one language may be a verb-noun compound in another language). In this study, we analyze behavioral performance and electrophysiological activity to examine the effects of morphological configuration on language control during production and comprehension. Chinese–English bilinguals completed a joint naming-listening task involving cued language switching. The findings showed differential effects of morphological configuration on language production and comprehension. In production, morphological configuration was processed sequentially, suggesting that bilingual production may be a combination of sequential
processing and inhibition of morphological levels and language interference. In comprehension,
however, bottom-up control processes appear to mask the influence of sequential processing on
language switching. Together, these findings underscore differential functionalities of language
control in speaking and listening.
... The cognitive mechanisms and neural resources used for language control are thought to overlap at least partially with those of domaingeneral EF, which leads to a reinforcement of bilinguals' EF both at the behavioral and neural levels (Abutalebi & Green, 2007). Within the multi-componential construct of EF (Diamond, 2013), for many years bilingualism research attributed a primary role for language control to inhibitory control (e.g., Blumenfeld & Marian, 2011;Liu et al., 2016;Misra et al., 2012). Inhibitory control is a cognitive ability that allows individuals to avoid natural, habitual, or dominant behavioral responses to stimuli, in favor of selecting the correct response to complete their goals (Diamond, 2013). ...
The umbrella term cognitive reserve-enhancing factors refers to those experiential and lifestyle factors (such as intellectual activities, regular physical exercise, healthy nutrition, educational attainment, etc.) that may help individuals to compensate for age-related neural deterioration, thus enabling them to maintain relatively stable cognitive functioning during senescence. In the last 10 years, mounting evidence has shown that speaking a second language is a powerful cognitive reserve contributor, which could mitigate the consequences of healthy aging and contribute to the delay of dementia onset. In this piece, we argue that bilingualism may play a unique role among the well-known cognitive reserve-enhancing factors, thus contributing to the achievement of successful aging in a distinctive fashion. After reviewing behavioral and neuroimaging evidence for bilingualism-induced protection against healthy and pathological cognitive aging, we discuss theoretical reasons and experimental findings supporting the view that bilingualism should be granted an individual spot among reserve-enhancing life experiences.
... This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Spanish self-rated proficiency of testing order given that some studies showed the dominant language affected by first testing bilinguals in the nondominant language (e.g., Guo et al., 2011;Misra et al., 2012;Wodniecka et al., 2020), though note that in our studies with the MINT we found no order effects on either the dominant or the nondominant languages (i.e., naming scores in each language did not differ as a function of whether testing was done in that language first or after naming the same pictures in the other language first; Garcia & Gollan, 2022;Van Assche et al., 2013). ...
Objective:
This study examined the joint consequences of bilingualism and Alzheimer's disease (AD) for picture naming ability to determine which language is more affected by AD and what scoring methods best distinguish patients from controls.
Method:
Sixty-five Spanish-English bilinguals including 26 with dementia and 39 controls with equivalent age, education, and bilingual proficiency level, were tested on the Multilingual Naming Test (Gollan et al., 2012).
Results:
Bilinguals with AD named fewer pictures than controls, and overall AD seemed to affect both languages about equally, but exploratory analyses suggested that this varied with item difficulty. In the dominant language difficult items exhibited a larger effect of AD than easy items (which were at ceiling for both patients and controls), whereas in the nondominant language items of all difficulty levels were about equally affected by AD. An "either-language" scoring procedure (that counted items as correct if produced only in one of the two languages) increased naming scores especially in balanced bilinguals, and to an equal extent in patients and controls. Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses revealed that dominant language and either-language naming scores classified bilinguals as patients versus controls equally well and adding nondominant language scores did not improve diagnostic sensitivity.
Conclusions:
Testing primarily or exclusively in the dominant language is best for detecting AD naming impairments in bilinguals. However, AD affects the ability to access names in both languages, possibly for different reasons, and simple descriptions of language decline as "parallel" or "asymmetrical" (i.e., AD affecting one language more than the other) may be misleading in terms of the theoretical implications for bilingual language processing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
... Bilinguals have been widely investigated so far (Grundy, 2020); the main idea is that bilinguals in addition to their daily activities should also use the EFs to control and manage their different languages (Bialystok, 2017). They should inhibit one of the languages when speaking (Misra et al., 2012), switch to another language when necessary (Prior and Gollan, 2011), and constantly monitor and control the language output to produce an acceptable content (Abutalebi et al., 2012). The question in bilingualism studies was if these . ...
The purpose of this paper is to examine whether and how training and professional experience in interpreting affect task switching in this bilingual population. In the first experiment, we compared a group of interpreting students to a group of translation students using the bilingual categorization task to assess their domain-specific language switching before and after training. In the second experiment, we added a group of professional interpreters to the participants in experiment 1 to test prepotent response inhibition using the Simon task (domain-general). First, the results showed training-related improvement in the bilingual categorization task in both student groups, indicating a similar effect for translation and interpreting training. Second, both student groups showed better performance on the Simon task compared to professional interpreters, but only on response times and not on accuracy. The correlation analyses of the two tasks in student groups only showed significant correlations between the global RTs and supported the hypothesis that proactive language control may depend more on inhibition than on the switching-specific factor. Considering language background, the lower onset age of L2 acquisition (AOA2) in the interpreting students (compared to the translation students) was significantly correlated with the congruency effect in the Simon task, indicating an impact of language background on domain-general control. Results were discussed in light of the different engaging elements, including task specificity, training length, research method, and participants' linguistic profile.
... Despite the two tasks differed substantially in terms of the type of response given, they both required access to some semantic knowledge. Participants were not familiarized with the picture names beforehand to avoid repetition priming effects (Guo et al. 2011;Misra et al. 2012). ...
The intention to name an object modulates neural responses during object recognition tasks. However, the nature of this modulation is still unclear. We established whether a core operation in language, i.e. lexical access, can be observed even when the task does not require language (size-judgment task), and whether response selection in verbal versus non-verbal semantic tasks relies on similar neuronal processes. We measured and compared neuronal oscillatory activities and behavioral responses to the same set of pictures of meaningful objects, while the type of task participants had to perform (picture-naming versus size-judgment) and the type of stimuli to measure lexical access (cognate versus non-cognate) were manipulated. Despite activation of words was facilitated when the task required explicit word-retrieval (picture-naming task), lexical access occurred even without the intention to name the object (non-verbal size-judgment task). Activation of words and response selection were accompanied by beta (25-35 Hz) desynchronization and theta (3-7 Hz) synchronization, respectively. These effects were observed in both picture-naming and size-judgment tasks, suggesting that words became activated via similar mechanisms, irrespective of whether the task involves language explicitly. This finding has important implications to understand the link between core linguistic operations and performance in verbal and non-verbal semantic tasks.
... Furthermore, this argument has led some of the literature on language switching and bilingual language control to argue that some component of language control processes could occur in a Frontiers in Psychology 05 frontiersin.org preparatory cue-to-stimulus interval (CSI) and the remaining components could occur following the stimulus onset (e.g., Green, 1998;Misra et al., 2012;Zhu et al., 2018). However, despite fruitful findings regarding the preparation effect in the task switching literature, very few language switching studies, except Mosca and Clahsen (2015) study, have specifically examined the effects of active preparation on switching costs. ...
Introduction
Previous language-switching studies have received scholastic attention and the observed switching cost patterns have provided empirical evidence for bilingual language control. However, results are inconsistent as the size of and (a)symmetry in switching costs differ across studies. In addition, there are various methodological differences that go beyond stimulus differences, such as the language proficiency of the participants (the participant-level factor) and the preparation time (a task-related level factor), which might be responsible for these inconsistent results.
Methods
With a focus on task-related factors, the present study was designed to examine whether and how preparation time modulates the size and (a)symmetry in switching costs by using the language-switching paradigm with cue-to-stimulus and response-to-cue intervals manipulated.
Results
Replicating previous literature on language switching and task switching, a clear preparation effect was observed in all trials (stay and switch trials) for both L1 and L2. The switching costs were modulated by the cue-to-stimulus intervals, and specifically, switching costs decreased when the preparation time increased. Another intriguing finding was that even when participants were offered enough time to fully prepare for selecting the target language at the cue window, the switching costs were not completely eliminated. In terms of the passive preparation at the response-to-cue interval, switching costs could be modulated by the response-to-cue interval – the time for passive dissipation of inhibitory control applied in previous trials. The size of switching costs was clearly modulated by manipulating response-to-cue intervals and switching costs decreased as the waiting time after a naming response increased.
Discussion
This study provides empirical evidence for the modulation of preparation effects on switching costs and inhibitory control mechanisms in bilingual language production.
... This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly. Spanish self-rated proficiency of testing order given that some studies showed the dominant language affected by first testing bilinguals in the nondominant language (e.g., Guo et al., 2011;Misra et al., 2012;Wodniecka et al., 2020), though note that in our studies with the MINT we found no order effects on either the dominant or the nondominant languages (i.e., naming scores in each language did not differ as a function of whether testing was done in that language first or after naming the same pictures in the other language first; Garcia & Gollan, 2022;Van Assche et al., 2013). ...
Background
The present study aimed to determine if Alzheimer’s disease (AD) affects bilinguals’ ability to name pictures in both languages equally, and to determine what testing procedures best distinguish bilingual patients from controls.
Method
Sixty Spanish‐English bilinguals, including 19 with dementia and 41 controls with equivalent age, education, and bilingual proficiency level, were tested on the full 68‐items of the Multilingual Naming Test (MINT; Gollan et al., 2012) first in their dominant language and then in the nondominant language. Four naming scores were derived for each participant: one for each language, one for either‐language that counted items as correct if produced only in one of the two languages, and one for both‐languages that only counted as correct items that bilinguals named in both languages. We also considered whether item difficulty modulates which naming score is most affected by AD by dividing the MINT test into difficulty tertiles (easy = items 1–20; medium = 21‐44; difficult = 45‐68).
Result
Bilinguals with AD named fewer pictures than controls, but this group effect varied with naming score and item difficulty. With difficult and medium items the difference between patients and controls was significant only in the dominant‐language, whereas with easy items the opposite was true (i.e., the group effect was significant only in the nondominant‐language), a significant interaction between participant group, language‐dominance, and item difficulty ( F (1,58) = 5.449, partial‐eta‐squared = .086, p = .023). The either‐language scoring procedure increased naming scores especially in balanced bilinguals, and to an equal extent in patients and controls. Critically, ROC analyses revealed that dominant‐language and either‐language naming scores are superior for classifying bilinguals as patients versus controls, and significantly better than nondominant‐language and both‐languages naming scores.
Conclusion
For assessment purposes, testing primarily or exclusively in the dominant language is best for detecting bilingual naming impairments. However, AD likely affects the ability to access names in both languages, and simple descriptions of language decline as “similar in both languages” or as affecting one language more than the other may be misleading in terms of theoretical implications for how two languages are represented and processed in the bilingual brain.
... However, neurolinguistic evidence for a potential special status of the first-acquired language persists (e.g., Cargnelutti et al. 2022). Similarly, psycholinguistic evidence for the need to inhibit a dominant (often the first-acquired) language while processing non-L1 (or a less-proficient language) (e.g., Green 1998;Misra et al. 2012) is consistent with the possibility of a unique status for that first-acquired language. The notion of L1 inhibition has been examined in a variety of studies in relation to nonselective lexical activation (e.g., Kroll et al. 2012), language switching processing cost (e.g., Costa and Santesteban 2004), and the extra activation during L2 processing (Abutalebi and Green 2007). ...
Recent neurolinguistic theories converge on the hypothesis that the languages of multilingual people are processed as one system in the brain. One system for the multiple languages is also at the core of a translanguaging framework of multilingualism—a framework that focuses on each speaker’s complete linguistic repertoire rather than on the separate languages they know. However, evidence from neuroimaging studies suggests at least some nonoverlapping activations of the first-acquired language (L1) and other (non-L1) languages of multilingual people, especially when the age of acquisition and/or levels of proficiency differ across the languages. Neurolinguistic studies of acquired language disorders have demonstrated that in multilingual people who experience language impairments due to brain lesion, L1 may be less impaired or better recovered than non-L1. This paper explores the evidence available to date from the study of acquired language impairment regarding this potential primacy of the first-acquired language. Findings suggest that L1 may be better preserved in many instances of language impairment, challenging the theory of a single system for multiple languages.
... Evidence from language switching studies may also offer an explanation as to why inhibitory control is more efficient in bilinguals. Bilinguals who are less proficient in their L2 must inhibit their native language (L1) more strongly in order to avoid interference while using their L2 (e.g., Gollan & Ferreira, 2009;Meuter & Allport, 1999;Misra, Guo, Bobb, & Kroll, 2012). Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) studies have suggested that the same cortical regions required to overcome L1 inhibition are also recruited in non-linguistic cognitive control tasks (e.g., interference suppression as measured by the Flanker task). ...
... However, because only one language is used at any given time (with the exception of code-switching), the other languages need to be appropriately inhibited. Such inhibitory control is therefore thought to enhance mechanisms involved in executive functions in individuals who regularly deploy inhibitory control in their language processing(Liu et al., 2016;Martin-Rhee & Bialystok, 2008;Misra et al., 2012;Philipp & Koch, 2009), which, in turn, generalise to tasks or situations that engage similar cognitive resources. Importantly, ...
Global multilingualism is undoubtedly increasing, yet some contexts are linguistically more diverse than others purely as a result of the nature of linguistically diverse communities and, by proxy, passive linguistic exposure that individuals may experience by being immersed in the contextual milieu. How the sociolinguistic context of language use contributes to an individual's linguistic repertoire has yet to be fully conceptualised or quantitatively investigated within the language sciences. To meet this goal, I first explore this overlooked contextual linguistic feature through the development, validation, and application of a holistic language profiling measure, the Contextual Linguistic Profile Questionnaire (CLiP-Q). To this end, three research studies are presented. First, I develop and validate a psychometric tool, the Contextual and Individual Linguistic Diversity Questionnaire (CILD-Q as part of the larger CLiP-Q), which measures multilingual exposure and endorsement as pertaining to particular linguistic contexts. From an exploratory factor analysis with data from 353 participants (62.9% South African, 37.1% UK), a three-factor solution best describes the structure of the CILD-Q: Multilingualism in Context (contextual use and societal practice of multiple languages within a community), Multilingualism in Practice (direct and indirect linguistic exchanges and conversational interaction), Linguistic Diversity Promotion (societal and governmental endorsement of linguistic variation). The CILD-Q positively correlates with a metric of the social diversity of language use (language entropy) further evincing its convergent validity, and item scores corresponding to the three factors have sufficient reliability (α’s > .80). Second, I apply the CILD-Q to evaluate whether people who live in a multilingual context (South Africa) report greater contextual linguistic diversity than those from a predominantly unilingual context (England), as well as evaluate the role of language entropy, lingualism status (monolingualism, bilingualism, multilingualism), socio-economic status, and code-switching practice on this effect. Results demonstrate that contextual linguistic diversity differs between nations with South Africans scoring higher. The promotion of multilingualism is dependent on SES only in the England group, where England participants with higher SES score higher on Linguistic Diversity Promotion. Lingualism status is not contextually comparable when measured categorically, and code-switching accounts for linguistic features of South Africans. Finally, a positive relationship emerged between language entropy and contextual linguistic diversity, suggesting complementarity between measures that capture the social influence of language experience. Third is the application of the CLiP-Q to contextualise and appropriately categorise the language experience of South Africans completing tertiary education to investigate high-level text comprehension ability. The ability to draw inferences from auditory and written input is crucial for comprehension and successful educational outcomes, and is especially relevant in linguistically diverse contexts where learners have heterogeneous language backgrounds but are educated in the predominant language of the country. Such a case is South Africa, where tertiary education is almost exclusively received through the medium of English, though it is not the first language (L1) for the majority of citizens. Accordingly, the third study assesses the role of language experience (L1, multilingualism, and contextual linguistic diversity) and inhibitory control on high-level listening comprehension in undergraduate multilingual South Africans with advanced English proficiency. Results indicate that L1-English participants were more efficient and accurate at monitoring and revising their listening comprehension, while participants with higher contextual linguistic diversity were less efficient at monitoring and less accurate at revising the comprehension content. Furthermore, individual differences in inhibitory control were associated with differences in revision where participants with lower inhibitory control took longer to update the content and replace their initial interpretation for a new one. Participants’ L1 appears to supersede their advanced English proficiency on highly complex listening comprehension involving revision. In this dissertation, I demonstrate that the CLiP-Q is a holistic instrument with which to measure and quantify contextual linguistic diversity which, in turn, is relevant to a range of higher order linguistic skills essential for academic development.
... Misra et al. 2012). 169 ...
The intention to name an object modulates neural responses during object recognition tasks. However, the nature of this modulation is still unclear. We established whether a core operation in language, i.e., lexical access, can be observed even when the task does not require language (size- judgment task), and whether response selection in verbal versus non-verbal semantic tasks relies on similar neuronal processes. We measured and compared neuronal oscillatory activities and behavioural responses to the same set of pictures of meaningful objects, while the type of task participants had to perform (picture-naming versus size-judgment) and the type of stimuli to measure lexical access (cognate versus non-cognate) were manipulated. Despite activation of words was facilitated when the task required explicit word-retrieval (picture-naming task), lexical access occurred even without the intention to name the object (non-verbal size-judgment task). Activation of words and response selection were accompanied by beta (25-35 Hz) desynchronisation and theta (3-7 Hz) synchronisation, respectively. These effects were observed in both picture-naming and size-judgment tasks, suggesting that words became activated via similar mechanisms, irrespective of whether the task involves language explicitly. This finding has important implications to understand the link between core linguistic operations and performance in verbal and non-verbal semantic tasks.
... There were a total of 240 trials, evenly split across four noise conditions, which were blocked and presented in a fixed order: all participants transcribed keywords first in the clear, followed by speech-shaped noise (SSN), then Spanish two-talker babble (S2TB), and finally in English two-talker babble (E2TB). We presented the E2TB block after the S2TB block in order to minimize any carryover effects of non-target language activation (e.g., Misra et al. 2012). Each block was preceded by the same three practice sentences, which were unrelated to the critical sentences. ...
Auditory word recognition in the non-dominant language has been suggested to break
down under noisy conditions due, in part, to the difficulty of deriving a benefit from contextually constraining information. However, previous studies examining the effects of sentence constraints on word recognition in noise have conflated multiple psycholinguistic processes under the umbrella term of “predictability”. The present study improves on these by narrowing its focus specifically on prediction processes, and on whether the possibility of using semantic constraint to predict an upcoming target word improves word recognition in noise for different listener populations and noise conditions. We find that heritage, but not second language, Spanish listeners derive a word recognition-in-noise benefit from predictive processing, and that non-dominant language word recognition benefits more from predictive processing under conditions of energetic, rather than informational, masking. The latter suggests that managing interference from competing speech and generating predictions about an upcoming target word draw on the same cognitive resources. An analysis of individual differences shows that better inhibitory control ability is associated with reduced disruption from competing speech in the more dominant language in particular, revealing a critical role for executive function in simultaneously managing interference and generating expectations for upcoming words.
... In the mandatory language switching task, bilinguals are specifically instructed to name items in the L1 or L2 depending on a cue (e.g., national flag, colour of background screen, etc.). Numerous studies have found evidence of inhibitory control during mandatory language switching (Declerck and Philipp, 2015;Guo et al., 2011;Misra et al., 2012). One consistent finding is that language switch costs are observed in mandatory language switching tasks (Meuter and Allport, 1999). ...
The present study measured event-related potentials (ERP) and behavioral performance to examine whether inhibitory control is involved in voluntary language switching, and if so, to explore the differences in inhibitory control between voluntary and mandatory language switching. Unbalanced Chinese-English bilinguals completed two picture naming tasks: one involving mandatory language switches and one in which participants could voluntarily switch between the two languages. Behavioral data showed significant switch costs and a reversed language dominance effect in both switching tasks. Critically, both effects were larger in mandatory compared to voluntary switching. ERP results revealed that neural switch costs during mandatory switching was significantly different than voluntary switching in both N2 and LPC amplitudes. In contrast, a significant difference in the reversed language dominance effect between both tasks was only observed in LPC amplitude. Together, these findings suggest the involvement of inhibitory control in both mandatory and voluntary language switching, but the degree of inhibition and the time-course of control processes between both tasks appear to be distinct.
... Ezeket a hatásokat nemcsak nyelvtanulóknál, de mindkét nyelven magas nyelvtudással rendelkező kétnyelvűeknél is kimutatták. Például Misra és munkatársai (Misra et al. 2012) kínai (L1) -angol (L2) kétnyelvűeknél, illetve japán-angol kétnyelvűeknél képmegnevezéses tesztekben azt találták, hogy ha L2 után az L1-en kell megnevezni a képet, akkor a reakcióidő lassabb ezek alapján kijelentik, hogy az L1 szabályozására szükség van a sikeres L2 elsajátításához. Az L1 kimutatható változásai olyan következménnyel is járnak az L2 elsajátítására, hogy a felnőttek L2tanulásának a célja nem az, hogy az egyén L1-e az egynyelvű anyanyelvi beszélőéhez hasonló szinten maradjon, hanem az, hogy az L1 kétnyelvű beszélője legyen. ...
This study examines the impact of different language learning contexts on the mother tongue. The study covers the spoken and written language production of Russian-speaking students starting their studies in Hungary and compares their results with those of their English-speaking and monolingual peers in Russia. The research instruments include a language use and proficiency questionnaire, semantic and letter fluency tests, storytelling on the basis of a comic strip, and written production. The study is longitudinal: participants′ language performance is measured at the start of the study and after four months. The results show the impact of the non-native language learning environment on the native language, as reflected in a decrease in vocabulary richness and an increase in the percentage of pauses.
... Changes to the native language can be observed in long-term studies of language attrition (Schmid 2010) but they can also be seen during briefer periods of immersion in the second language (Linck et al. 2009), and in the laboratory when speakers use the native language after a very brief exposure to the second language (Misra et al. 2012). Contrary to the view that maturation alone determines the presence of sensitivity to the syntax of the second language, recent studies show that the form of language usage, such as whether bilinguals code switch across their two languages, comes to affect the way they process each language and influences the observed patterns of brain activity in both comprehension and production (Beatty-Martinez & Dussias 2017, Green & Wei 2016). ...
... The bilinguals in the present study displayed a reversed language dominance effect through longer RTs and stronger N2 effects. These patterns are consistent with a study by Misra et al. (2012) in which Chinese-English bilinguals were asked to name pictures in one language during an experimental block followed by another block in which they named pictures in the other language. The results of the study indicated poorer L2 behavioral performance and greater N2 effects when an L2 block followed an L1 block compared to the reverse, suggesting persistent inhibition of L1 interference during the early phase of language task schema competition. ...
A growing body of research suggests that the language in which bilinguals make decisions affects the rationality of such decisions. Furthermore, bilinguals constantly confront cross‐language interference that requires complex language control processes to resolve this competition. However, the relationship between language control and decision‐making is unclear. In the current study, we analyze electrophysiological and behavior data elicited from two groups of Chinese‐English bilinguals. One group was trained in intensive language switching and then completed the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and the other group completed the two tasks in the reverse order. We found that bilinguals who first received language switching training significantly scored higher on the IGT, with the score positively correlating with L1 and L2 switch costs. More importantly, training with language switching first led to an N2 component for L1 switching costs that negatively correlated with both loss feedback‐related negativity and the P3 component. These effects did not emerge among the group of bilinguals who performed the IGT first. Taken together, the findings suggest that bilinguals are assisted in making rational decisions by language control on feedback evaluation. We uncovered the benefits of language control on rational choices using event‐related potentials (ERP). First, bilinguals who benefit from language control tend to get higher net scores on decision‐making than those who do not. Second, stronger language control induces a deeper feedback evaluation, showing more rational choices. Lastly, language control influences decision‐making via inhibition on feedback evaluation.
... Finally, research has extensively demonstrated that, in bilinguals, both languages are co-activated even in contexts where only one is necessary (e.g., Hatzidaki et al., 2011;Bobb et al., 2020). This co-activation involves the recruitment of capacitylimited cognitive resources and mechanisms of control aimed to avoid interference from the non-intended language that may result in differences in how bilinguals process their L1 (e.g., Titone et al., 2011;Misra et al., 2012). Several circumstances can increase a load of resources, for instance, the unbalance between languages proficiency (e.g., the unintended language being more dominant), the complexity of sentence structure, or the similarity across languages. ...
The native language changes as a result of contact with a second language, and the pattern and degree of such change depend on a variety of factors like the bilingual experience or the linguistic level. Here, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of works that explore variations in native sentence comprehension and production by comparing monolinguals and bilinguals. Fourteen studies in the meta-analysis provided information regarding the bilingual experience and differences at the morphosyntactic level using behavioral methods. Overall, we observed that first language processing is subject to small transformations in bilinguals that occur in sentence comprehension and production. The magnitude of the changes depended on bilingual experiences, but only length of residence in an L2 setting predicted the degree of change, where shorter length of residence was associated with larger changes. Results are discussed and related to the cognitive processes that potentially cause the transformations in the first language. The present work reveals some limitations in the field that should be addressed in future studies to better understand the mechanisms behind language attrition.
... A large body of psycholinguistic research has shown that both languages are always active in the bilingual brain, despite the absence of any conscious awareness of the non-used language (Costa et al., 1999;Francis, 1999;Kroll et al., 2014;Marian & Spivey, 2003;Wu & Thierry, 2010). Because bilinguals rarely commit intrusion errors from the unwanted language, inhibitory control seemed to be an obvious mechanism for excluding the non-target language from ongoing processing (Liu et al., 2016;Martin-Rhee & Bialystok, 2008;Misra et al., 2012;Philipp & Koch, 2009). Evidence from brain imaging demonstrated that overlapping networks were used for language selection and nonverbal selection (review in Wong et al., in press). ...
It has been claimed that bilingual experience leads to an enhancement of cognitive control across the lifespan, a claim that has been investigated by comparing monolingual and bilingual groups performing standard executive function (EF) tasks. The results of these studies have been inconsistent, however, leading to controversy over the essential assumptions underlying the research program, namely, whether bilingualism produces cognitive change. We argue that the source of the inconsistency is not in the evidence but rather in the framework that has typically been used to motivate the research and interpret the results. We examine the componential view of EF with its central role for inhibition and argue that it provides a poor fit to both bilingual experience and the results of these studies. As an alternative, we propose a more holistic account based on attentional control that overrides the processes in the componential model of EF and applies to a wider range of tasks. The key element in our account is that behavioral differences between monolingual and bilingual individuals reflect differences in the efficiency and deployment of attentional control between the two language groups. In support of this point we show how attentional control provides a more satisfactory account for a range of findings that cannot reasonably be attributed to inhibition. We also suggest that group differences will emerge only when the attentional demands of a task exceed the control abilities of one of the groups, regardless of the EF components involved. We then review literature from across the lifespan to evaluate the extent to which this account is consistent with existing evidence, and conclude with some suggestions on how the field may be advanced by new lines of empirical enquiry.
... We first consider how each of these effects of training and immersion might emerge, then generate predictions about how language training may differ for bilinguals immersed in their L2 rather than in the L1 environment. In particular, since the two languages are always active (Green, 1998;Kroll & Gollan, 2014), bilinguals may need to inhibit the more dominant language to enable production in the less dominant language (e.g., Guo, Liu, Misra, & Kroll, 2011;Misra, Guo, Bobb, & Kroll, 2012;Van Assche, Duyck, & Gollan, 2013). However, the requirement to regulate two languages may differ under different circumstances, as proposed by the Adaptive Control Hypothesis (Green & Abutalebi, 2013). ...
When bilinguals switch languages they regulate the more dominant language to enable spoken production in the less dominant language. How do they engage cognitive control to accomplish regulation? We examined this issue by comparing the consequences of training on language switching in two different contexts. Chinese-English bilinguals were immersed in English (L2) while studying abroad (this study) or in Chinese (L1) in their native language environment (Zhang et al., 2015). In each study, participants performed the AX-CPT task while EEG was recorded and were then trained on language switching. While Zhang et al. found that training enhanced proactive control in the L1 context, there were no effects of training under L2 immersion conditions. Critically, L2 immersed bilinguals revealed enhanced proactive control at pre-test and greater L1 inhibition on language switching relative to L1 immersed bilinguals. We hypothesize that L2 immersion creates a natural training context that increases reliance on proactive control to enable regulation of the L1.
... The LPC is a positive-going ERP component with a scalp distribution in the parietal region, reflecting a different pattern of inhibition from the N2 effect. Specifically, during the language switching task, the suppression of language task schema competition is reflected by the N2 effect, and the inhibition function during the later lexical selection response phase may be reflected by the LPC effect (e.g., Declerck, Philipp, & Koch, 2013;Liu et al., 2016;Misra, Guo, Bobb, & Kroll, 2012). ...
The Adaptive Control hypothesis and relevant empirical evidence in bilingualism literature have revealed the adaptive nature of bilingual language control in skilled languages, while the language control processes at the very initial stage of new language learning have not been examined. The present study investigated how the individual differences in inhibition ability and language switching experience influence the controlling process of newly learned languages, using event related potentials (ERPs) technology. We first assessed the language switching frequency and inhibition ability of Chinese-English bilinguals on Day 1. Then, all bilinguals learned words from new languages (namely German and Japanese words) during the next six days and completed a comprehension-based language switching task between the newly learned languages on Day 8. Results of mixed-effects models on the behavioral data showed that there were no switching costs (i.e., derived by contrasting switch trials with repeat trials) and no predictive effect of individual difference on the language switching between newly learned languages. However, the ERPs results revealed switching costs and individual difference effects in N2 and LPC. The language switching frequency significantly predicted the variability of the N2 and LPC, and the inhibition ability modulated the switch effect in Japanese as showed in the LPC. These findings suggest that individual differences predict comprehension-based language control between the newly learned languages, providing new evidence for the adaptability of language control from a language comprehension perspective.
... Visual inspection of the voltage amplitudes for the selected channels revealed the characteristic P1/N2 complex for early visual processing (Cheng et al., 2010;Eulitz et al., 2000;Misra et al., 2012;Schendan and Kutas, 2003). Further, visual inspection also revealed a positive-going wave between 350 ms and 600 ms, consistent with the topographic distribution of a P300 (Barry et al., 2020). ...
Characterising the time course of non-native language production is critical in understanding the mechanisms behind successful communication. Yet, little is known about the modulating role of cross-linguistic influence (CLI) on the temporal unfolding of non-native production and the locus of target language selection. In this study, we explored CLI effects on non-native noun phrase production with behavioural and neural methods. We were particularly interested in the modulation of the P300 as an index for inhibitory control, and the N400 as an index for co-activation and CLI. German late learners of Spanish overtly named pictures while their EEG was monitored. Our results indicate traceable CLI effects at the behavioural and neural level in both early and late production stages. This suggests that speakers faced competition between the target and non-target language until advanced production stages. Our findings add important behavioural and neural evidence to the underpinnings of non-native production processes, in particular for late learners.
The present study investigates bilinguals’ capacity to rapidly establish memory traces for novel word forms in a second language (L2), as a function of L2 linguistic proficiency. A group of Chinese-English bilinguals with various English proficiency levels were presented with a reading-aloud task, consisting of 16 pseudowords and 16 English words repeatedly presented across six training exposures. Behavioral and neurophysiological data were collected, and modulations in the word-length effect across repetitions were measured as an index of transition from sublexical to lexical involvement. Results revealed that higher L2 proficiency was associated with decreased word-length effect on novel words, reflected in both naming latencies and early N1 and P200 brain responses. In contrast, lower proficiency learners appeared to engage in effortful letter-to-sound decoding processes, with higher attentional allocation to the letter sequence and greater use of sublexical processing across exposures. Our findings highlight the need to tackle specific grapheme-to-phoneme skills for efficient learning of L2, particularly in populations where the L1 is nonalphabetic.
Adopting highly sensitive multivariate electroencephalography (EEG) and alpha-band decoding analyses, the present study investigated proactive and reactive language control during bilingual language production. In a language-switching task, Chinese-English bilinguals were asked to name pictures based on visually presented cues. EEG and alpha-band decoding accuracy associated with switch and non-switch trials were used as indicators for inhibition over the non-target language. Multivariate EEG decoding analyses showed that the decoding accuracy in L1 but not in L2, was above chance level shortly after cue onset. In addition, alpha-band decoding results showed that the decoding accuracy in L1 rose above chance level in an early time window and a late time window locked to the stimulus. Together, these asymmetric patterns of decoding accuracy indicate that both proactive and reactive attentional control over the dominant L1 are exerted during bilingual word production, with a possibility of overlap between two control mechanisms. We addressed theoretical implications based on these findings for bilingual language control models.
Bilingualism is a ubiquitous global phenomenon. Beyond being a language experience, bilingualism also entails a social experience, and it interacts with development and learning, with cognitive and neural consequences across the lifespan. The authors of this volume are world renowned experts across several subdisciplines including linguistics, developmental psychology, and cognitive neuroscience. They bring to light bilingualism’s cognitive, developmental, and neural consequences in children, young adults, and older adults. This book honors Ellen Bialystok, and highlights her profound impact on the field of bilingualism research as a lifelong experience. The chapters are organized into four sections: The first section explores the complexity of the bilingual experience beyond the common characterization of “speaking multiple languages.” The next section showcases Ellen Bialystok’s earlier impact on psychology and education; here the contributors answer the question “how does being bilingual shape children’s development?” The third section explores cognitive and neuroscientific theories describing how language experience modulates cognition, behavior, and brain structures and functions. The final section shifts the focus to the impact of bilingualism on healthy and abnormal aging and asks whether being bilingual can stave off the effects of dementia by conferring a “cognitive reserve.”
English monolinguals (Experiment 1) and first language (L1)-dominant, Spanish-English and Chinese-English bilinguals (Experiment 2), who differed in L1 orthographic depth (shallow: Spanish; deep: Chinese) and second language (L2-English) proficiency, decided whether visually presented letter strings were English words, while behavioral and EEG measures were recorded. The spelling-sound regularity and consistency of stimuli were covaried such that words had either regular/consistent (e.g., GATE) or irregular/inconsis-tent mappings (e.g., PINT). Irregular/inconsistent words elicited more positive P200 and less negative N400 amplitudes than regular/consistent words in monolinguals, yet only a P200 response in bilinguals. English proficiency modulated L2 reading strategies, such that bilinguals employed distinct reading unit sizes in the L2 than the L1 when L2 proficiency was low, but transferred L1 reading units to the L2 when L2 proficiency was high. ERP results suggest that high L2 proficiency may be a prerequisite to the cross-linguistic transfer of reading strategies.
Theories of speech production have proposed that in contexts where multiple languages are produced, bilinguals inhibit the dominant language with the goal of making both languages equally accessible. This process often overshoots this goal, leading to a surprising pattern: better performance in the nondominant vs. dominant language, or reversed language dominance effects. However, the reliability of this effect in single word production studies with cued language switches has been challenged by a recent meta-analysis. Correcting for errors in this analysis, we find that dominance effects are reliably reduced and reversed during language mixing. Reversed dominance has also consistently been reported in the production of connected speech elicited by reading aloud of mixed language paragraphs. When switching, bilinguals produced translation-equivalent intrusion errors (e.g., saying pero instead of but) more often when intending to produce words in the dominant language. We show this dominant language vulnerability is not exclusive to switching out of the nondominant language and extends to non-switch words, linking connected speech results to patterns first reported in single word studies. Reversed language dominance is a robust phenomenon that reflects the tip of the iceberg of inhibitory control of the dominant language in bilingual language production.
Most research on multilingual language control has focused on a bilingual’s first (L1) and second (L2) languages. Studies on third language (L3) acquisition suggest that, despite the L1 being more proficient, L3 learners experience more L2 than L1 interference. However, little is known about how a trilingual’s L2 and L3 interact after initial stages of language learning. In the current study (Experiment 1: 30 Spanish-Basque-English trilinguals; Experiment 2: 50 English-French-Spanish trilinguals), participants completed a speeded naming task to assess cross-language intrusions (e.g., using the Spanish “perro” instead of the French “chien”). Both experiments showed more L3 than L1 intrusions during L2 naming. Furthermore, using two different tasks, we assessed if this cross-language interference was related to language inhibition. Both experiments suggested that trilinguals inhibited their L1 more strongly than their L3. Together, this suggests that a trilingual’s non-native language might experience more interference from another non-native language than from their L1, possibly because trilinguals apply more inhibition over their L1.
A key question in studies of cognitive development is whether bilingual environments impact higher-cognitive functions. Inconclusive evidence in search of a “bilingual cognitive advantage” has sparked debates on the reliability of these findings. Few studies with infants have examined this question, but most of them include small samples. The current study presents evidence from a large sample of 6- and 10-month-old monolingual- and bilingual-exposed infants (N = 152), which includes a longitudinal subset (n = 31), who completed a cueing attentional orienting task. The results suggest bilingual infants showed significant developmental gains in latency performance during the condition that was most cognitively demanding (Incongruent). The results also revealed bilingual infants’ performance was associated with their parents’ dual-language switching behavior. Taken together, these results provide support that bilingual experiences (i.e., dual-language mixing) influence infants’ shifting and orienting of attention.
a b s t r a c t This study examines how Spanish–English bilinguals select meanings of words that share the same orthography across languages but differ in meaning (interlexical homographs such as pie, meaning foot in Spanish). Bilingual participants were required to decide whether pairs of English words were related. In Experiment 1, participants were slower to respond to homographs presented along with words related to the Spanish meaning of the homograph as compared to control words. More importantly, bilinguals were slower to respond when the English translation of the Spanish homograph meaning was presented after responding to homographs. This result suggests that bilinguals inhibited the irrele-vant homograph meaning. These inhibitory processes were independent of response type (yes/no) since participants were again slower to respond to the English translation when response type changed in Experiment 2. These results suggest that bilingual language selection in comprehension tasks implies inhibitory processes.
Models of bilingual speech production generally assume that translation equivalent lexical nodes share a common semantic representation. Though this type of architecture is highly desirable on both theoretical and empirical grounds, it could create difficulty at the point of lexical selection. If two translation equivalent lexical nodes are activated to roughly equal levels every time that their shared semantic representation becomes activated, the lexical selection mechanism should find it difficult to “decide” between the two (the “hard problem”) – yet in some cases bilinguals benefit from the presence of a translation equivalent “competitor”. In this article, we review three models that have been proposed as solutions to the hard problem. Each of these models has difficulty accounting for the full range of findings in the literature but we suggest that these shortcomings stem from their acceptance of the assumption that lexical selection is competitive. We argue that without this assumption each proposal is able to provide a full account of the empirical findings. We conclude by suggesting that the simplest of these proposals should be rejected before more complicated models are considered.
Two picture-word interference experiments were conducted to investigate whether or not words from a first and more dominant language are activated during lexical access in a foreign and less dominant language. Native speakers of Dutch were instructed to name pictures in their foreign language English. Our experiments show that the Dutch name of a picture is activated during initial stages of the process of lexical in English as a foreign language. We conclude that bilingual speakers cannot suppress activation from their first language while naming pictures in a foreign language. The implications for bilingual speech production theories are discussed.
Bilingual speech requires that the language of utterances be selected prior to articulation. Past research has debated whether the language of speaking can be determined in advance of speech planning and, if not, the level at which it is eventually selected. We argue that the reason that it has been difficult to come to an agreement about language selection is that there is not a single locus of selection. Rather, language selection depends on a set of factors that vary according to the experience of the bilinguals, the demands of the production task, and the degree of activity of the nontarget language. We demonstrate that it is possible to identify some conditions that restrict speech planning to one language alone and others that open the process to cross-language influences. We conclude that the presence of language nonselectivity at all levels of planning spoken utterances renders the system itself fundamentally nonselective.
We investigated the consequences of bilingualism for verbal fluency by comparing bilinguals to monolinguals, and dominant versus non-dominant-language fluency. In Experiment 1, bilinguals produced fewer correct responses, slower first response times and proportionally delayed retrieval, relative to monolinguals. In Experiment 2, similar results were obtained comparing the dominant to the non-dominant languages within bilinguals. Additionally, bilinguals produced significantly lower-frequency words and a greater proportion of cognate responses than monolinguals, and bilinguals produced more cross-language intrusion errors when speaking the non-dominant language, but almost no such intrusions when speaking the dominant language. These results support an analogy between bilingualism and dual-task effects (Rohrer et al., 1995), implying a role for between-language interference in explaining the bilingual fluency disadvantage, and suggest that bilingual fluency will be maximized under testing conditions that minimize such interference. More generally, the findings suggest a role for selection by competition in language production, and that such competition is more influential in relatively unconstrained production tasks.
In this article we discuss different views about how information flows through the lexical system in bilingual speech production. In the first part, we focus on some of the experimental evidence often quoted in favor of the parallel activation of the bilinguals' two languages from the semantic system in the course of language production. We argue that such evidence does not require us to embrace the existence of parallel activation of the two languages of a bilingual. In the second part of the article, we discuss the possibility that the language-not-in-use (or the non-response language) is activated via feedback from the sublexical representations and we devise some experimental procedures to assess the validity of such an assumption.
The regular use of two languages by bilingual individuals has been shown to have a broad impact on language and cognitive functioning. In this monograph, we consider four aspects of this influence. In the first section, we examine differences between mono-linguals and bilinguals in children's acquisition of language and adults' linguistic processing, particularly in terms of lexical retrieval. Children learning two languages from birth follow the same milestones for language acquisition as mono-linguals do (first words, first use of grammar) but may use different strategies for language acquisition, and they generally have a smaller vocabulary in each language than do monolin-gual children learning only a single language. Adult bilinguals typically take longer to retrieve individual words than monolin-guals do, and they generate fewer words when asked to satisfy a constraint such as category membership or initial letter. In the second section, we consider the impact of bilingualism on nonverbal cognitive processing in both children and adults. The primary effect in this case is the enhancement of executive control functions in bilinguals. On tasks that require inhibition of distract-ing information, switching between tasks, or holding information in mind while performing a task, bilinguals of all ages outperform comparable monolinguals. A plausible reason is that bilinguals recruit control processes to manage their ongoing linguistic per-formance and that these control processes become enhanced for other unrelated aspects of cognitive processing. Preliminary evi-dence also suggests that the executive control advantage may even mitigate cognitive decline in older age and contribute to cognitive reserve, which in turn may postpone Alzheimer's disease. In the third section, we describe the brain networks that are responsible for language processing in bilinguals and demon-strate their involvement in nonverbal executive control for bilinguals. We begin by reviewing neuroimaging research that identifies the networks used for various nonverbal executive control tasks in the literature. These networks are used as a ref-erence point to interpret the way in which bilinguals perform both verbal and nonverbal control tasks. The results show that bilinguals manage attention to their two language systems using the same networks that are used by monolinguals performing nonverbal tasks. In the fourth section, we discuss the special circumstances that surround the referral of bilingual children (e.g., language delays) and adults (e.g., stroke) for clinical intervention. These referrals are typically based on standardized assessments that use normative data from monolingual populations, such as vocabulary size and lexical retrieval. As we have seen, however, these measures are often different for bilinguals, both for children and adults. We discuss the implications of these linguistic differences for standardized test performance and clinical approaches. We conclude by considering some questions that have important public policy implications. What are the pros and cons of French or Spanish immersion educational programs, for example? Also, if bilingualism confers advantages in certain respects, how about three languages—do the benefits increase? In the healthcare field, how can current knowledge help in the treatment of bilingual aphasia patients following stroke? Given the recent increase in bilingualism as a research topic, answers to these and other related questions should be available in the near future.
Little is known in cognitive neuroscience about the brain mechanisms and brain representations involved in bilingual language processing. On the basis of previous studies on switching and bilingualism, it has been proposed that executive functions are engaged in the control and regulation of the languages in use. Here, we review the existing evidence regarding the implication of executive functions in bilingual processing using event-related brain potentials and functional magnetic resonance imaging. Several brain potential experiments have shown an increased negativity at frontocentral areas in bilinguals, probably related to the activation of medial prefrontal regions, for different tasks, languages, and populations. Enhanced cognitive control is required in bilinguals, which also involves the recruitment of the left dorso-lateral prefrontal cortex. The degree of activation of this mechanism is also discussed considering the similarity of languages in use at the lexical, grammatical, and phonological levels. We propose that the prefrontal cortex probably mediates cognitive control in bilingual speakers through the interplay between a top-down selection-suppression mechanism and a local inhibitory mechanism in charge of changing the degree of selection-suppression of the different lexicons.
The authors used a unilingual and bilingual primed lexical decision task to investigate priming effects produced by attended
and ignored words. In the unilingual experiment, accelerated lexical decisions to probe target words resulted when the word
matched the preceding target word, whereas slowed lexical decisions to probe target words resulted when the word matched the
preceding ignored nontarget word. In the bilingual (English-Spanish) experiment, between-language, rather than within-language,
priming manipulations were used. Although the ignored repetition negative priming effect replicated across languages, cross-language
attended repetition positive priming did not. This dissociation of priming effects in the inter- versus intralanguage priming
conditions contradicts episodic retrieval accounts of negative priming that deny the existence of selective inhibitory processes.
On the other hand, these results support an extension of inhibition-based accounts of negative priming, because they indicate
that inhibition can operate at two levels of abstraction — local word and global language — simultaneously.
The present review focuses on event-related potential (ERP) studies that have addressed two fundamental issues in bilingualism research, namely the processing of a first versus a second language in the bilingual brain and the issue of control of two languages. A major advantage of the ERP technique is its high temporal resolution that enables the study of task-related neural activity at the millisecond level. For example, ERP studies of bilingualism have shown that developmental changes in the ability to discriminate native and foreign speech sounds can experimentally be traced by the presence or absence of a specific ERP component (the mismatch negativity). They have also revealed latency delays in a semantic-related ERP component (the N400) in bilinguals compared to monolinguals, as well as in bilinguals reading in their L1 or L2 language. These studies have also highlighted the importance of L2 proficiency level and age of acquisition on bilingual language processing. Moreover, ERP studies have pointed out potential mechanisms of avoidance of interference between languages (the NoGo N200 effect). The present review aims to describe and integrate the main results of the selected ERP studies on bilingualism and to provide an overview of how different ERP components can be used to address important theoretical questions in this field. Finally, we suggest potential research directions to clarify unresolved issues and to advance this emerging field of research.
Five experiments are reported in which the picture naming performance of bilingual speakers in a language-switching task was explored. In Experiment 1, Spanish learners of Catalan and Korean learners of Spanish were asked to perform a switching task between their first and dominant language (L1, Spanish or Korean) and their second language (L2, Catalan or Spanish). For these two groups switching from the weaker language (L2) to the more dominant language (L1) was harder than vice versa. This asymmetrical switching cost was not present when highly proficient Spanish–Catalan bilinguals performed the task either in their two dominant languages (Experiments 2 and 3) or in their dominant language (L1) and in their much weaker language (L3 English; Experiment 4). Furthermore, highly proficient bilinguals showed faster naming latencies in their weaker languages (L2 and L3) than in their dominant language (L1). Experiment 5 tested whether a bias in the triggering of lexicalization is at the basis of such a difference. Together these results reveal that the switching performance of highly proficient bilinguals does not seem to be subject to the same mechanisms as that of L2 learners.
Picture naming is a widely used technique in psycholinguistic studies. Here, we describe new on-line resources that our project has compiled and made available to researchers on the world wide web at http://crl.ucsd.edu/~aszekely/ipnp/. The website provides access to a wide range of picture stimuli and related norms in seven languages. Picture naming norms, including indices of name agreement and latency, for 520 black-and-white drawings of common objects and 275 concrete transitive and intransitive actions are presented. Norms for age-of-acquisition, word-frequency, familiarity, goodness-of-depiction, and visual complexity are included. An on-line database query system can be used to select a specific range of stimuli, based on parameters of interest for a wide range of studies on healthy and clinical populations, as well as studies of language development.
Two hypotheses about the association between the equivalent words in a bilingual's two languages are considered. The word association hypothesis proposes that a direct association is established between words in the two languages. During second-language acquisition, that association is used to understand and produce words in the second language by retrieving a word in the first language. The concept mediation hypothesis proposes that the only connection between the two languages is via an underlying, amodal conceptual system, one to which pictured objects also have access. The hypotheses make different predictions about the time to name pictures in the second language relative to the time to translate first-language words into the second language. Two experiments are reported, one with proficient Chinese—English bilinguals and the second with nonfluent English—French bilinguals (American high school students). Subjects read words aloud, named pictures, and translated words; one Chinese—English group categorized pictures and words. The results were consistent with the concept mediation hypothesis and contradicted predictions of the word association hypothesis. There was no evidence for a direct association between words in the two languages in either bilingual group.
An adaptation of the phoneme monitoring task for speech production was used to determine whether the language that bilinguals are not using is nonetheless activated. Three experiments were conducted in which highly fluent Catalan-Spanish bilinguals had to decide whether a certain phoneme was in the Catalan name of a picture. Phonemes could be either part of the Catalan word, part of its Spanish translation, or absent from both nouns. Results showed that participants took longer to reject the phoneme appearing in the Spanish word than the control one. A fourth control experiment involving monolinguals indicated that these results were not due to specific characteristics of the material. The same pattern was replicated at different SOAs (−2000, +200, +400), which leads us to conclude that both the target language and the language not in use are simultaneously activated.
How do the two languages of bilingual individuals interact in everyday communication? Numerous behavioral- and event-related brain potential studies have suggested that information from the non-target language is spontaneously accessed when bilinguals read, listen, or speak in a given language. While this finding is consistent with predictions of current models of bilingual processing, most paradigms used so far have mixed the two languages by using language ambiguous stimuli (e.g., cognates or interlingual homographs) or explicitly engaging the two languages because of experimental task requirements (e.g., word translation or language selection). These paradigms will have yielded different language processing contexts, the effect of which has seldom been taken into consideration. We propose that future studies should test the effect of language context on cross-language interactions in a systematic way, by controlling and manipulating the extent to which the experiment implicitly or explicitly prompts activation of the two languages.
Bilinguals outperform monolinguals on measures of executive control, but it is not known how bilingualism introduces these advantages. To address this question, we investigated whether language-control failures increase with aging-related declines in executive control. Eighteen younger and 18 older Spanish-English bilinguals completed a verbal-fluency task, in which they produced words in 18 categories (9 in each language), and a flanker task. Performance on both tasks exhibited robust effects of aging, but cross-language and within-language errors on the verbal-fluency task differed in a number of ways. Within-language errors occurred relatively often and decreased with higher levels of education in both younger and older bilinguals. In contrast, cross-language intrusions (e.g., inadvertently saying an English word on a Spanish-language trial) were rarely produced, were not associated with education level, and were strongly associated with flanker-task errors in older but not younger bilinguals. These results imply that executive control plays a role in maintaining language selection, but they also suggest the presence of independent forces that prevent language-selection errors.
Disruptions to brain development associated with shortened gestation place individuals at risk for the development of behavioral and psychological dysfunction throughout the lifespan. The purpose of the present study was to determine if the benefit for brain development conferred by increased gestational length exists on a continuum across the gestational age spectrum among healthy children with a stable neonatal course. Neurodevelopment was evaluated with structural magnetic resonance imaging in 100 healthy right-handed 6- to 10-year-old children born between 28 and 41 gestational weeks with a stable neonatal course. Data indicate that a longer gestational period confers an advantage for neurodevelopment. Longer duration of gestation was associated with region-specific increases in gray matter density. Further, the benefit of longer gestation for brain development was present even when only children born full term were considered. These findings demonstrate that even modest decreases in the duration of gestation can exert profound and lasting effects on neurodevelopment for both term and preterm infants and may contribute to long-term risk for health and disease.
It has been debated how bilinguals select the intended language and prevent interference from the unintended language when speaking. Here, we studied the nature of the mental representations accessed by late fluent bilinguals during a rhyming judgment task relying on covert speech production. We recorded event-related brain potentials in Chinese-English bilinguals and monolingual speakers of English while they indicated whether the names of pictures presented on a screen rhymed. Whether bilingual participants focussed on rhyming selectively in English or Chinese, we found a significant priming effect of language-specific sound repetition. Surprisingly, however, sound repetitions in Chinese elicited significant priming effects even when the rhyming task was performed in English. This cross-language priming effect was delayed by ∼200 ms as compared to the within-language effect and was asymmetric, since there was no priming effect of sound repetitions in English when participants were asked to make rhyming judgments in Chinese. These results demonstrate that second language production hinders, but does not seal off, activation of the first language, whereas native language production appears immune to competition from the second language.
The current study examined the neural correlates associated with local and global inhibitory processes used by bilinguals to resolve interference between competing responses. Two groups of participants completed both blocked and mixed picture naming tasks while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). One group first named a set of pictures in L1, and then named the same pictures in L2. The other group first named pictures in L2, and then in L1. After the blocked naming tasks, both groups performed a mixed language naming task (i.e., naming pictures in either language according to a cue). The comparison between the blocked and mixed naming tasks, collapsed across groups, was defined as the local switching effect, while the comparison between blocked naming in each language was defined as the global switching effect. Distinct patterns of neural activation were found for local inhibition as compared to global inhibition in bilingual word production. Specifically, the results suggest that the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the supplementary motor area (SMA) play important roles in local inhibition, while the dorsal left frontal gyrus and parietal cortex are important for global inhibition.
Two experiments were conducted measuring self-paced reading to study language access and language selection in professional translators and bilinguals when they understood sentences randomly presented in their first language (L1, Spanish) and second language (L2, English). These sentences contained a critical cognate word or a control matched word. The effect of cognate words was considered an index of between-language activation while the inhibition of the non-target language was examined with the asymmetrical switching cost. In Experiment 1, participants read and repeated sentences while in Experiment 2 participants read sentences without repeating them after reading. The results indicated that lexical processing depended on the experience of participants in professional translation and the demands imposed by the understanding task (reading and repeating or only reading).
The concept of inhibition plays a major role in cognitive psychology. In the present article, we review the evidence for the inhibition of task sets. In the first part, we critically discuss empirical findings of task inhibition from studies that applied variants of the task-switching methodology and argue that most of these findings-such as switch cost asymmetries-are ambiguous. In the second part, we focus on n-2 task-repetition costs, which currently constitute the most convincing evidence for inhibition of task sets. n-2 repetition costs refer to the performance impairment in sequences of the ABA type relative to CBA, which can be interpreted in terms of persisting inhibition of previously abandoned tasks. The available evidence suggests that inhibition is primarily triggered by conflict at selection of stimulus attributes and at the response level.
We used language-defined response sets (digit names from 1 to 9 in different languages) to explore inhibitory processes in language switching. Subjects were required to switch between two (Experiment 1) or among three (Experiment 2) languages. In Experiment 1, we obtained a shift cost when subjects switched between their first and second language, between their first and third language, or between their second and third language. For each language pairing, the shift cost was larger for the relatively dominant language than for the nondominant language (i.e., asymmetric shift cost). In Experiment 2, we assessed inhibition of response sets as reflected in n-2 repetition cost (i.e., the difference between ABA and CBA language sequences). We discuss both effects with respect to inhibitory processes in language switching. The results suggest different functional characteristics of the processes underlying asymmetric shift cost and n-2 repetition cost.
In the current study, the authors used an immediate repetition paradigm with pictures to observe whether repetition enhances word production in bilinguals. In Experiment 1, participants were asked to name pictures that were named previously in the same language (Spanish-Spanish or English-English) or in the opposite language (Spanish-English or English-Spanish). Results revealed a repetition effect both within languages and between languages. Furthermore, there was an asymmetry within language, with repetition priming being larger in Spanish than in English. Experiments 2 and 3 revealed that lag interacted with language for both within- and between-language priming. However, lag resulted in a decrease in the asymmetry for within- but not between-language priming. The results are consistent with the view that within- and between-language repetition priming are mediated by different mechanisms.
Psycholinguistics has traditionally focused on language processing in monolingual speakers. In the past two decades, there has been a dramatic increase of research on bilingual speakers, recognizing that bilingualism is not an unusual or problematic circumstance but one that characterizes more language speakers in the world than monolingualism. Most critically, cognitive scientists and neuroscientists have come to see that understanding the way that bilinguals negotiate the presence of two languages in the mind and brain may reveal processes that are otherwise obscured in monolingual speakers. In this chapter, we review the new research on language processing in bilinguals. Our starting point is the observation that both languages are active when bilinguals intend to use one language alone. The parallel activation of the two languages creates competition across the two languages, which renders the bilingual a mental juggler. Surprisingly, the resolution of cross-language competition imposes relatively few processing costs to bilinguals because they appear to develop a high level of cognitive control that permits them to switch between the two languages and, at the same time, effectively select the intended language with few errors. The expertise that bilinguals develop in juggling the two languages has consequences for language processing, because both the native and second languages change as bilingual skill is acquired, and also for domain general cognitive processes, with the result that executive function is enhanced in bilinguals relative to monolinguals. We suggest that recent research on language and cognitive processing in bilinguals requires important revisions to models of language processing based on monolingual speakers alone. In this way, bilingualism is not only an interesting phenomenon in its own right, but an important tool for cognitive and language scientists.
Repeated exposure to objects improves our ability to identify and name them, even after a long delay. Previous brain imaging studies have demonstrated that this experience-related facilitation of object naming is associated with neural changes in distinct brain regions. We used event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine the modulation of neural activity in the object naming system as a function of experience and time. Pictures of common objects were presented repeatedly for naming at different time intervals (1 h, 6 h and 3 days) before scanning, or at 30 s intervals during scanning. The results revealed that as objects became more familiar with experience, activity in occipitotemporal and left inferior frontal regions decreased while activity in the left insula and basal ganglia increased. In posterior regions, reductions in activity as a result of multiple repetitions did not interact with time, whereas in left inferior frontal cortex larger decreases were observed when repetitions were spaced out over time. This differential modulation of activity in distinct brain regions provides support for the idea that long-lasting object priming is mediated by two neural mechanisms. The first mechanism may involve changes in object-specific representations in occipitotemporal cortices, the second may be a form of procedural learning involving a reorganization in brain circuitry that leads to more efficient name retrieval.
Psycholinguistics–the field of science that examines the mental processes and knowledge structures involved in the acquisition, comprehension, and production of language–had a strong monolingual orientation during the first four decades following its emergence around 1950. The awareness that a large part of mankind speaks more than one language–that this may impact both on the way each individual language is used and on the thought processes of bilinguals and multilinguals, and that, consequently, our theories on human linguistic ability and its role in non-linguistic cognition are incomplete and, perhaps, false–has led to a steep growth of studies on bilingualism and multilingualism since around 1995.
An improved PCNN model-PCNN with Positive and Negative Firing, PCNNPNF-is proposed, and also put forward a de-noising algorithm based on the time matrix of PCNNPNF. The biggest improvement is that the neuron's output of improved PCNN has three states: positive firing, negative firing and no firing, while PCNN only has two states: firing and no firing. Experimental results show that the de-noising algorithm based on PCNNPNF can quickly find the two kinds of pulse noises, remove these noises, and reserve more information than PCNN.
A transfer paradigm was used to investigate the relationship between picture naming and translation English-Spanish bilniguals first named pictures and subsequently translated words in both their first (LI) and second (L2) languages Some words in the translation task were repetitions of concepts that had previously been named as pictures Whereas picture naming produced reliable transfer to translation from L1 to L2, it produced no transfer to translation from L2 to L1 The results support the claim that connections in bilingual memory are asymmetric Translation is conceptually mediated from L1 to L2 but lexically mediated from L2 to L1