We investigated effects of crosslinguistic phonological and semantic similarity on the bilingual lexicon of late unbalanced bilinguals. Our masked priming paradigm used L1 (Russian) words as masked primes and L2 (English) words as targets. The primes and the targets either overlapped – phonologically, semantically, both phonologically and semantically – or did not overlap. Participants maintained the targets in memory and matched them against occasionally presented catch stimuli. N170 and N400 components of the word-elicited high-density ERPs were identified and analysed in signal and source space. Crosslinguistic semantic similarity shortened the reaction times. The semantics-related N400 amplitude difference correlated with individual L2 proficiency, while phonological similarity suppressed the N400 amplitude in the semantically unrelated condition. ERP source analysis suggests that these ERP dynamics are underpinned by cortical generators in the left IFG and the temporal pole. We conclude that the semantic and phonological interplay between L1 and L2 suggest an integrated bilingual lexicon.

The cognitive architecture of human language processing has been studied for decades, but using computational modeling for such studies is a relatively recent topic. Indeed, computational approaches to language processing have become increasingly popular in our field, mainly due to advances in computational modeling techniques and the availability of large collections of experimental data. Language learning, particularly child language learning, has been the subject of many computational models. By simulating the process of child language learning, computational models may indeed teach us which linguistic representations are learnable from the input that children have access to (and which are not), as well as which mechanisms yield the same patterns of behavior that are found in children's language performance.

This study examined whether L1-Mandarin learners of L2-English use verb bias and complementizer cues to process temporarily ambiguous English sentences the same way native speakers do. SVO word order places verbs early in sentences in both languages, allowing the use of verb-based knowledge to anticipate what could follow. The two languages differ, however, in whether an optional complementizer signals embedded clauses. In a self-paced reading experiment, native English speakers and L1-Mandarin learners of L2-English read sentences containing temporary ambiguity about whether a noun was the direct object of the verb preceding it or the subject of an embedded clause. Native speakers replicated previous work showing an optimally efficient interactive pattern of cue use, while non-native learners showed additive effects of the two cues, consistent with predictions of the Competition Model about learning how to use multiple cues in a second language that sometimes agree and sometimes do not.

The role of dual language exposure in children's cognitive development continues to be debated. The majority of the research with bilingual children in the US has been conducted with children becoming literate in only one of their languages. Dual language learners who are becoming literate in both their languages are acutely understudied. We compared dual language learners (n = 61) in a Spanish–English dual language immersion program to monolingual English speaking children (n = 55) who were in a traditional English only school. Children (kindergarten to 3rd grade) completed standardized vocabulary tasks and two measures of executive functions. Despite having significantly smaller English vocabularies, the dual language learners outperformed the monolingual children on the executive function measures. Implications for our understanding of the relations between oral language development and executive function in bilingual children are discussed.

Previous research with younger adults has revealed differences between native (L1) and non-native late-bilingual (L2) speakers with respect to how morphologically complex words are processed. This study examines whether these L1/L2 differences persist into old age. We tested masked-priming effects for derived and inflected word forms in older L1 and L2 speakers of German and compared them to results from younger L1 and L2 speakers on the same experiment (mean ages: 62 vs. 24). We found longer overall response times paired with better accuracy scores for older (L1 and L2) participants than for younger participants. The priming patterns, however, were not affected by chronological age. While both L1 and L2 speakers showed derivational priming, only the L1 speakers demonstrated inflectional priming. We argue that general performance in both L1 and L2 is affected by aging, but that the more profound differences between native and non-native processing persist into old age.

This study compared working memory ability in multilingual young adults and their monolingual peers on four components of working memory (verbal and visuospatial storage, verbal and visuospatial processing). The sample comprised 39 monolingual English speakers, and 39 multilinguals, who spoke an African language as their first and third languages, and English as their second language, all with high levels of proficiency. The multilingual young adults came from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds and possessed smaller English vocabularies than the monolinguals, features which make this group an under-researched population. Both when SES and verbal ability were and were not statistically controlled, there was evidence of a multilingual advantage in all of the working memory components, which was most pronounced in visuospatial processing. These findings support evidence from bilinguals showing cognitive advantages beyond inhibitory control, and suggest that multilingualism may influence the executive control system generally.

Bilinguals sometimes outperform monolinguals on tasks involving cognitive control – the regulation of mental activity when confronted with information-processing conflict – perhaps stemming from experience monitoring for and resolving conflict between languages. We test the hypothesis that bilingualism affects moment-to-moment cognitive-control recruitment by examining how trial history influences bilinguals’ and monolinguals’ behavioral performance and associated neural activity on a Stroop task. We assessed dynamic effects of preceding trial conflict on current trial performance to separate the ability to proactively detect conflict (performance on new instances of conflict) from the ability to reactively recruit cognitive control (performance on trials following conflict). Across two experiments, monolinguals’ – but not bilinguals’ – accuracy decreased after non-conflict trials, i.e., when detecting initial conflicts. Bilinguals exhibited greater conflict-detection activity in ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (vlPFC/insula; BA 47) within a language-switching network, suggesting that they may monitor for information-conflict more proactively than monolinguals by recruiting brain regions involved in switching languages.

This study investigates how the strength of referential biases associated with implicit vs explicit causality predicates in Korean affects Korean-speaking learners’ reference choices in English. Sentence-completion experiments with Korean (Experiment 1a) and English (1b) native speakers showed that Korean speakers referred to the subject more following predicates with explicit vs implicit causality marking, whereas English speakers showed no difference in referential bias for the English translation correspondents of these predicates, which did not contain explicit causality marking. In Experiment 2, Korean learners of English completed an English sentence-completion task, either preceded or followed by a translation task, to test whether strength of referential bias in Korean would affect their referential choices in English. After factoring in individual differences in cross-linguistic associations, results provided evidence that cross-language activation at the word level affects reference processing at a discourse level, with the predicted effect somewhat enhanced by translation priming.

This study examined electrophysiological correlates of sentence comprehension of native-accented and foreign-accented speech in a second language (L2), for sentences produced in a foreign accent different from that associated with the listeners' L1. Bilingual speaker-listeners process different accents in their L2 conversations, but the effects on real-time L2 sentence comprehension are unknown. Dutch–English bilinguals listened to native American-English accented sentences and foreign (and for them unfamiliarly-accented) Chinese-English accented sentences while EEG was recorded. Behavioral sentence comprehension was highly accurate for both native-accented and foreign-accented sentences. ERPs showed different patterns for L2 grammar and semantic processing of native- and foreign-accented speech. For grammar, only native-accented speech elicited an Nref. For semantics, both native- and foreign-accented speech elicited an N400 effect, but with a delayed onset across both accent conditions. These findings suggest that the way listeners comprehend native- and foreign-accented sentences in their L2 depends on their familiarity with the accent.

The computational BIA+ model (Dijkstra & Van Heuven, 2002) has provided a useful account for bilingual word recognition, while the verbal (pre-quantitative) RHM (Kroll & Stewart, 1994) has often served as a reference framework for bilingual word production and translation. According to Brysbaert and Duyck (2010), a strong need is felt for a unified implemented account of bilingual word comprehension, lexical-semantic processing, and word production. With this goal in mind, we built a localist-connectionist model, called Multilink, which integrates basic assumptions of both BIA+ and RHM. It simulates the recognition and production of cognates (form-similar translation equivalents) and non-cognates of different lengths and frequencies in tasks like monolingual and bilingual lexical decision, word naming, and word translation production. It also considers effects of lexical similarity, cognate status, relative L2-proficiency, and translation direction. Model-to-model comparisons show that Multilink provides higher correlations with empirical data than both IA and BIA+ models.

Bilinguals experience emotions differently depending on which language they are speaking. Emotionally loaded words were expected to be appraised differently in the first versus the second language in Spanish–English bilinguals. Three categories of words (positive, negative, and taboo) were appraised in both languages in the visual and auditory sensory modalities. Positive word ratings were more positive in English than in Spanish. Negative words were judged as more negative in English than in Spanish. Taboo words were rated as more negative in Spanish than in English. Significant regression models were obtained for the visual and auditory positive words and auditory negative words with English and Spanish proficiency as the most significant predictors. Results support the view that there are differences in the appraisal of emotions in the two languages spoken by bilinguals; the direction of the difference depends on the emotion category of words, and it is influenced by language proficiency.

This study investigated Chinese-speaking English learners’ use of implicit causality and consequentiality biases in establishing coreference under a Bayesian view of reference interpretation, which distinguishes between context-based priors about which entity will be re-mentioned and new evidence provided by the referential expression form. In two sentence-completion experiments, participants wrote continuations to sentence fragments with either implicit causality (Experiment 1) or consequentiality (Experiment 2) biases that ended either with or without a pronoun. In both experiments, L2 speakers showed native-like re-mention biases following no-pronoun fragments, indicating native-like predictions about the next-mentioned referent. Following pronoun fragments in NP2-biasing contexts, L2 speakers produced more NP1 continuations than native speakers. We show that this difference lies in different beliefs about pronoun use in the two populations. Specifically, L2 speakers showed a stronger association between pronouns and NP1 referents than native speakers following NP2-biasing verbs.

This study examines brain responses to boundary effects with respect to Mandarin lexical tone continua for three groups of adult listeners: (1) native English speakers who took advanced Mandarin courses; (2) naïve English speakers; and (3) native Mandarin speakers. A cross-boundary tone pair and a within-category tone pair derived from tonal contrasts (Mandarin Tone 1/Tone 4; Tone 2/Tone 3) with equal physical/acoustical distance were used in an auditory oddball paradigm. For native Mandarin speakers, the cross-category deviant elicited a larger MMN over left hemisphere sensors and larger P300 responses over both hemispheres relative to within-category deviants, suggesting categorical perception of tones at both pre-attentive and attentional stages of processing. In contrast, native English speakers and Mandarin learners did not demonstrate categorical effects. However, learners of Mandarin showed larger P300 responses than the other two groups, suggesting heightened sensitivity to tones and possibly greater attentional resource allocation to tone identification.

The contribution that Ton Dijkstra has made to the field of bilingualism, with his colleagues over the years, is beyond measure. He has advanced our field with the thoughtful and thought-provoking models of the bilingual lexicon he has put forward, and with the vast empirical data he and his colleagues have collected from numerous bilinguals, using a variety of experimental methods. This paper by Dijkstra, Wahl, Buytenhuijs, van Halem, Al-jibouri, de Korte, and Rekké (2018) is no exception. It comprises a thoughtful and detailed description of a new model, Multilink, and provides relevant information regarding the context in which the model was developed, its assumptions, its successes and challenges. The model is the first to consider aspects of both word production and word recognition, as well as of word translation, and to explicitly address how translation equivalents that share both form and meaning – cognates – may be processed. Also addressed are word-frequency concerns, including differences in word frequency that are dependent on language proficiency and exposure. The assumptions that are made within the model are clearly laid out, and less-than-ideal decisions that needed to be made are acknowledged. The authors conclude that a model like Multilink could be the basis for a general model of the mental lexicon. In that, they promote the view taken in Libben, Goral, and Libben (2017) that the bilingual – not the monolingual – lexicon should be considered as the default.

Text comprehension relies on high-level cognitive processes as it is the ability to revise an erroneous inference. Recent models of language processing hold that native language processing is proactive in nature (highly predictive), whereas processing seems to be weaker in the second language. However, if a prediction fails because unexpected information is encountered, reactive processing is needed to revise previous information. Twenty-four highly proficient late bilinguals were presented with narratives in L1-English and L2-Spanish. Each text demanded the revision of an initial predictive inference. Reading times and N400 amplitude suggested inferential revision is less efficient in the L2 compared to the L1. Importantly, these effects were modulated by individual differences in cognitive control and L2 proficiency. More efficient L1 comprehension was related to a balance between proactive and reactive control and lower L2 proficiency, whereas more native-like L2 comprehension was associated with a strong proactive control and higher L2 proficiency.

We examined how L2 exposure early in life modulates toddler word recognition by comparing German–English bilingual and German monolingual toddlers’ recognition of words that overlapped to differing degrees, measured by number of phonological features changed, between English and German (e.g., identical, 1-feature change, 2-feature change, 3-feature change, no overlap). Recognition in English was modulated by language background (bilinguals vs. monolinguals) and by the amount of phonological overlap that English words shared with their L1 German translations. L1 word recognition remained unchanged across conditions between monolingual and bilingual toddlers, showing no effect of learning an L2 on L1 word recognition in bilingual toddlers. Furthermore, bilingual toddlers who had a later age of L2 acquisition had better recognition of words in English than those toddlers who acquired English at an earlier age. The results suggest an important role for L1 phonological experience on L2 word recognition in early bilingual word recognition.

The Multilink model that Dijkstra, Wahl, Buytenhuijs, van Halem, Al-jibouri, de Korte, and Rekké (2018) present is an excellent example that connects empirical patterns obtained from behavioral studies with mechanisms that can be implemented in computational models. We have previously argued that implementation of computational models is important because it forces the researchers to be explicit about assumptions and to specify parameters and variables that may be absent in verbal models. The Multilink model, along with BIA/BIA+ and many other models, provides concrete hypotheses regarding the role of variables such as word frequency, word length, orthographic similarity, and phonological neighborhood for researchers to test and verify against empirical data (see examples in the special issue on computational modeling published in this journal; Li, 2013).

Previous studies revealed language-switching costs (LSC) in bilingual learning settings, consisting of performance decreases when problems are solved in a language different from that of instruction. Strong costs have been found for arithmetic fact knowledge. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether LSC in arithmetic also emerge in an auditory learning task and in pure fact learning. Furthermore, we tested whether LSC are influenced by the direction of language-switching. Thirty-three university students learned arithmetic facts of three different operations (i.e., multiplication, subtraction, artificial facts) over a period of four days. The training was either in German or English. On day five, participants solved problems in both languages. Results revealed LSC in response latencies for all three types of problems, independent of the direction of language-switching. These findings suggest that LSC are modality-unspecific and occur independent of the type of arithmetic fact knowledge.

Assessing language in sequential bilinguals (L2 children) for the identification of language impairment suffers from lack of appropriate standardized tools and from limited understanding of the developmental trajectories of these learners. This longitudinal study compares L2 children to children with SLI in order to better understand where these groups have overlapping performance and where they differ. An analysis of standardized test scores as well as frequency of clausal embedding and morphosyntactic errors in spontaneous speech was conducted with 22 English-speaking children (aged 6;9-12;7) acquiring French as an L2 in France and 19 monolingual French-speaking children with SLI (aged 6;5–12;11). The results revealed that L2 children used clausal embedding more often than the children with SLI, but both groups had similar rates of morphosyntactic accuracy. Facility with clausal embedding from early stages of development and continuing difficulty with morphosyntactic accuracy are argued to be characteristic of typical development in L2 children.

In this study we examined linguistic and non-linguistic control mechanisms in 20 Spanish–English neurologically healthy bilingual adults and 13 Spanish–English bilingual adults with aphasia. Participants completed two linguistic and two non-linguistic control tasks accounting for low and high complexity. Healthy bilingual results were indicative of domain general cognitive control, whereas patient results were indicative of domain specific cognitive control. The magnitude of conflict required to complete the tasks was also examined. Healthy bilinguals exhibited significant amounts of conflict on all tasks and linguistic and non-linguistic conflict ratios were correlated; whereas patient results revealed significant conflict only on non-linguistic tasks and those conflict ratios were not correlated with linguistic conflict ratios, indicating a dissociation between how patients are controlling information in these two domains. Finally, a relationship between language impairment and language control was identified and brain damage was associated with linguistic and non-linguistic task performance.