Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T02:54:15.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

34 - Psycholinguistics and Language Acquisition

from Part 6 - Experimental and Quantitative Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

By
Tanya Ivanova-Sullivan  and
Irina A. Sekerina
Edited by
Danko Šipka  and
Wayles Browne
Danko Šipka
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Wayles Browne
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

Past review articles on the state-of-the-art of Slavic psycholinguistics and language acquisition in monolingual and heritage bilingual Slavic speakers serve as the starting point for this chapter. We discuss the present state of the field regarding methodological advances and current topics (gender, case, pronominal objects, aspect, and relative clauses), then briefly identify emerging trends in psycholinguistic infrastructure, such as conducting experiments remotely and sharing resources in open access repositories. Our survey highlights the increased popularity of investigations of language processing in real-time and large-scale cross-linguistic studies. We conclude that the field of Slavic psycholinguistics and language acquisition is gaining new and exciting momentum.

Keywords

L1 and L2 processing and acquisitionpsycholinguistic methodsverbal domainnominal domainsentence processingopen access repositories
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Slavic Linguistics , pp. 717 - 731
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, S. (1992). A-morphous Morphology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anstatt, T., Gattnar, A., & Clasmeier, C., eds. (2016). Slavic Languages in Psycholinguistics: Chances and Challenges for Empirical and Experimental Research, Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto.Google Scholar
Armon-Lotem, S., Haman, E., Jensen de López, K., Smoczyńska, M., Yatsushiro, K., Szczerbiński, M., van Hout, A., Dabašinskienė, I., Gavarró, A., Hobbs, E., Kamandulytė-Merfeldienė, L., Katsos, N., Kunnari, S., Nitsiou, C., Sundahl Olsen, L., Parramon, X., Sauerland, U., Torn-Leesik, R., & van der Lely, H. (2016). A large-scale cross-linguistic investigation of the acquisition of passive. Language Acquisition, 23(1), 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2015.1047095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avetisyan, S., Lago, S., & Vasishth, S. (2020). Does case marking affect agreement attraction in comprehension? Journal of Memory and Language, 112, 104087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badecker, W. & Kuminiak, F. (2007). Morphology, agreement and working memory retrieval in sentence production: Evidence from gender and case in Slovak. Journal of Memory and Language, 56(1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bailyn, J. (2012). The Syntax of Russian, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baltova, P., Eftimova, A., Lipovska, A., & Petrova, K. (2003). Bălgarski asociativen rečnik. Prav i obraten, Sofia: Sofia University Press.Google Scholar
Błaszczak, J., & Domke, J. (2019). Can tense be subject to grammatical illusion? A design of an ERP study on the processing of tense and aspect mismatches in compound future constructions in Polish. Studies in Polish Linguistics, 14(4), 149–170. https://doi.org/10.4467/23005920SPL.19.018.11336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bott, O. & Gattnar, A. (2015). The cross-linguistic processing of aspect: An eyetracking study on the time course of aspectual interpretation in Russian and German. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(7), 877–898. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1029499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherepovskaia, N., Slioussar, N., & Denissenko Denissenko, A. (2021). Acquisition of the nominal case system in Russian as a second language. Second Language Research, 38(3), 555–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658320988058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, J. & Slabakova, R. (2017). A feature-based contrastive approach to the L2 acquisition of specificity. Applied Linguistics, 38(3), 318–339. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv029.Google Scholar
Corbett, G. (1991). Gender, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dbrowska, E. (2005). Productivity and beyond: Mastering the Polish genitive inflection. Journal of Child Language, 32(1), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000904006609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Da̧browska, E. & Szczerbiński, M. (2006). Polish children’s productivity with case marking: The role of regularity, type frequency, and phonological diversity. Journal of Child Language, 33(3), 559–597. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000906007471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eberhard, K. M., Cutting, J. C., & Bock, K. (2005). Making syntax of sense: Number agreement in sentence production. Psychological Review, 112(3), 531–559. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.3.531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foryś-Nogala, M., Haman, E., Katsos, N., Krajewski, G., & Schulz, P. (2017). Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic correlates of the acquisition of exhaustivity in wh-questions: A study of Polish monolingual children. Language Acquisition, 24(1), 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2016.1179744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, S. (2017). Syntax and Spell-out in Slavic, Bloomington, IN: Slavica.Google Scholar
Franks, S. (2021). Microvariation in the South Slavic Noun Phrase, Bloomington, IN: Slavica.Google Scholar
Fuchs, Z., Polinsky, M., & Scontras, G. (2015). The differential representation of number and gender in Spanish. Linguistic Review, 32(4), 703–737. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlr-2015-0008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gatarić, I., Srdanović, S., & Šarić, A. (2019). Do morphological features affect the cognitive processing of deverbal nominals in Serbian? Primenjena Psihologija, 12(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.19090/pp.2019.2.139-156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González Alonso, J., Cunnings, I., Fujita, H., Miller, D., & Rothman, J. (2021). Gender attraction in sentence comprehension. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 6(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gor, K. (2017). The mental lexicon of L2 learners of Russian: Phonology and morphology in lexical storage and access. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 277–302. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gor, K., Chrabaszcz, A., & Cook, S. (2017). Processing of native and nonnative inflected words: Beyond affix stripping. Journal of Memory and Language, 93, 315–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.06.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gor, K., Chrabaszcz, A., & Cook, S. (2019). A case for agreement: Processing of case inflection by early and late learners. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 9(1), 6–41. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.16017.gor.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granlund, S., Kolak, J., Vihman, V., Engelmann, F., Lieven, E. V. M., Pine, J. M., Theakston, A. L., & Ambridge, B. (2019). Language-general and language-specific phenomena in the acquisition of inflectional noun morphology: A cross-linguistic elicited-production study of Polish, Finnish and Estonian. Journal of Memory and Language, 107, 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2019.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grebenyova, L. (2011). Acquisition of multiple questions in English, Russian, and Malayalam. Language Acquisition, 18(3), 139–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2011.580672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harizanov, B. (2014). Clitic doubling at the syntax-morphophonology interface: A-movement and morphological merger in Bulgarian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 32, 1033–1088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9249-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ionin, T. & Radeva-Bork, T. (2017). The state of the art of first language acquisition research on Slavic languages. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 337–366. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, I. (2009). Second Language Acquisition of Bulgarian Object Clitics: A Test Case for the Interface Hypothesis. Doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa. DOI: 10.17077/etd.077u4o4q.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanova-Sullivan, T. & Sekerina, I. A. (2019). Distributional regularity of suffixes facilitates gender acquisition: A contrastive study of two closely related languages. In Brown, M. & Dailey, B., eds., Proceedings of the 43rd Boston University Conference on Language Development, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 311–323.Google Scholar
Ivanova-Sullivan, T., Meir, N., & Sekerina, I.A. (in press). Fine-grained differences in gender-cue strength affect predictive processing in children: Cross-linguistic evidence from Russian and Bulgarian. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.Google Scholar
Janda, L. A. & Reynolds, R. J. (2019). Construal vs. redundancy: Russian aspect in context. Cognitive Linguistics, 30(3), 467–497. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2017-0084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kędzierska, H., Witkowski, W., Błaszczak, J., Klimek-Jankowska, D., & Gulgowski, P. (2018). On the relevance of the syntactic flexibility of an idiom for its recognition: Experimental evidence from Polish. Anglica Wratislaviensia, 56(3836), 179–204. https://doi.org/10.19195/0301-7966.56.13.Google Scholar
Klimek-Jankowska, D. & Błaszczak, J. (2020). How incremental is the processing of perfective and imperfective aspect in Polish? An exploratory Event-Related Potential study. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 28(1), 23–69. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2020.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koring, L., Mak, P., Mulders, I., & Reuland, E. (2018). Processing intransitive verbs: How do children differ from adults? Language Learning and Development, 14(1), 72–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2017.1380528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laleko, O. (2019). Gender agreement in heritage and L2 Russian. Heritage Language Journal, 16(2), 151–182. https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.16.2.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurinavichyute, A., Jäger, L. A., Akinina, Y., Roß, J., & Dragoy, O. (2017). Retrieval and encoding interference: Cross-linguistic evidence from anaphor processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00965.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laurinavichyute, A. K., Sekerina, I. A., Alexeeva, S., Bagdasaryan, K., & Kliegl, R. (2019). Russian sentence corpus: Benchmark measures of eye movements in reading in Russian. Behavior Research Methods, 51(3), 1161–1178. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1051-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leal, T. & Shea, C. (2018). Psycholinguistic approaches to Hispanic linguistics. In Geeslin, K. L., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Spanish Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 95–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316779194.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemmerth, N. & Hopp, H. (2019). Gender processing in simultaneous and successive bilingual children: Cross-linguistic lexical and syntactic influences. Language Acquisition, 26(1), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2017.1391815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, R., Fedorenko, E., & Gibson, E. (2013). The syntactic complexity of Russian relative clauses. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(4), 461–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.10.005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lew, R., Grzelak, M., & Leszkowicz, M. (2013). How dictionary users choose senses in bilingual dictionary entries: An eye-tracking study. Lexikos, 23, 228–254. https://doi.org/10.5788/23-1-1213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, S. & Phillips, C. (2014). Aligning grammatical theories and language processing models. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 44(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-014-9329-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lohndal, T., Rothman, J., Kupisch, T., & Westergaard, M. (2019). Heritage language acquisition: What it reveals and why it is important for formal linguistic theories. Language and Linguistics Compass, 13(12), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mak, P., Lomako, J., Gagarina, N., Abrosova, E., & Tribushinina, E. (2020). Keeping two languages apart: Connective processing in both languages of Russian-German bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(3), 532–541. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martí, L. & Ionin, T. (2019). Wide scope indefinites in Russian: An experimental investigation. Glossa, 4(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mateu, V. E. (2015). Object clitic omission in child Spanish: Evaluating representational and processing accounts. Language Acquisition, 22(3), 240–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.962232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meir, N., Parshina, O., & Sekerina, I. A. (2020). The interaction of morphological cues in bilingual sentence processing: An eye-tracking study. In Brown, M. & Kohut, A., eds., Proceedings of the 44th Boston University Conference on Language Development, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, pp. 376–389.Google Scholar
Mikhaylova, A. (2019). What we know about the acquisition of Russian aspect as a first, second and heritage language: State of the art. Heritage Language Journal, 16(2), 183–210. https://doi.org/10.46538/hlj.16.2.4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mykhaylyk, R. & Sopata, A. (2016). Object pronouns, clitics, and omissions in child Polish and Ukrainian. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(5), 1051–1082. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716415000351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nedashkivska, A. (2011). The metropolis of Slavic linguistics in North America and its development over the past two decades. Canadian Slavonic Papers, 53(2–4), 485–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/00085006.2011.11092686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paolieri, D., Cubelli, R., Macizo, P., Bajo, T., Lotto, L., & Job, R. (2010). Grammatical gender processing in Italian and Spanish bilinguals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(8), 1631–1645. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210903511210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paolieri, D., Padilla, F., Koreneva, O., Morales, L., & Macizo, P. (2019). Gender congruency effects in Russian-Spanish and Italian-Spanish bilinguals: The role of language proximity and concreteness of words. Bilingualism, 22(1), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728917000591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parshina, O., Laurinavichyute, A. K., & Sekerina, I. A. (2021). Eye-movement benchmarks in heritage language reading. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 24(1), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672892000019X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavlenko, A., Jarvis, S., Melnyk, S., & Sorokina, A. (2017). Communicative relevance: Color references in bilingual and trilingual speakers. Bilingualism, 20(4), 853–866. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728916000535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peeters-Podgaevskaja, A. V., Janssen, B. E., & Baker, A. E. (2020). The acquisition of relative clauses in Russian and Polish in monolingual and bilingual children. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 10(2), 216–248. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.17031.peeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., Pirvulescu, M., & Roberge, Y. (2017). Direct Objects and Language Acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Perovic, A., Vuksanović, J., Petrović, B., & Avramović-Ilić, I. (2014). The acquisition of passives in Serbian. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pertsova, K. & Kuznetsova, J. (2015). Experimental evidence for lexical conservatism in Russian : Defective verbs revisited. In Oseki, Y., Esipova, M., & Harves, S., eds., Proceedings of the 24th meeting of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications, pp. 301–320.Google Scholar
Polinsky, M. (2018). Heritage Languages and Their Speakers, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107252349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polinsky, M. & Scontras, G. (2020). Understanding heritage languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(1), 4–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potsdam, E. & Polinsky, M. (2011). Against covert a-movement in Russian unaccusatives. Linguistic Inquiry, 42(2), 345–355. https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, I. K. & Witzel, J. (2017). Sources of relative clause processing difficulty: Evidence from Russian. Journal of Memory and Language, 97, 208–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.07.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, M. T., Carlson, M., & Reitter, D. (2018). Integrated, not isolated: Defining typological proximity in an integrated multilingual architecture. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radeva-Bork, T. (2012). Single and Double Clitics in Adult and Child Grammar, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodina, Y. (2008). Semantics and Morphology : The Acquisition of Grammatical Gender in Russian. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tromsø. https://hdl.handle.net/10037/2247.Google Scholar
Roettger, T. (2019). Preregistration in linguistic research : Applications, challenges, and limitations. Linguistics, 59(5), 1227–1249. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2019-0048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rojczyk, A. (2019). Nonnative perception of allophonic cues to word boundaries: Lou spills versus loose pills for speakers of Polish. Language Acquisition, 26(1), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2018.1433672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J., González Alonso, J., & Miller, D. (2018). The acquisition of second language Spanish morphosyntax. In Geeslin, K. L., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Spanish Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 689–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekerina, I. A. (2017). Slavic psycholinguistics in the 21st century. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 25(2), 463–487. https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2017.0018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sims, A. (2015). Inflectional Defectiveness, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2016). Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R., Leal, T., Dudley, A., & Stack, M. (2020). Generative Second Language Acquisition [Elements in Second Language Acquisition], Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108762380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slavkov, N. (2015). Long-distance wh-movement and long-distance wh-movement avoidance in L2 English: Evidence from French and Bulgarian speakers. Second Language Research, 31(2), 179–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658314554939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slioussar, N. (2018). Forms and features: The role of syncretism in number agreement attraction. Journal of Memory and Language, 101, 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.03.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slioussar, N. & Malko, A. (2016). Gender agreement attraction in Russian: Production and comprehension evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steriopolo, O. (2008). Form and Function of Expressive Morphology: A Case Study of Russian. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia. https://dx.doi.org/10.14288/1.0066282.Google Scholar
Tomas, E., Van De Vijver, R., Demuth, K., & Petocz, P. (2017). Acquisition of nominal morphophonological alternations in Russian. First Language, 37(5), 453–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723717698839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ufimceva, N., Cherkasova, G., Karaulov, J., & Tarasov, E. (2004). Slavjanskij asociativnyj slovar‘, Moscow: Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Varlokosta, S., Belletti, A., Costa, J., Friedmann, N., Gavarró, A., Grohmann, K. K., Guasti, M. T., Tuller, L., Lobo, M., Anđelković, D., Argemí, N., Avram, L., Berends, S., Brunetto, V., Delage, H., Ezeizabarrena, M. J., Fattal, I., Haman, E., van Hout, A., … Yatsushiro, K. (2016). A cross-linguistic study of the acquisition of clitic and pronoun production. Language Acquisition, 23(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2015.1028628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velnić, M. (2020). Acquisition of a transparent gender system: A comparison of Italian and Croatian. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.571674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willer-Gold, J., Arsenijević, B., Batinić, M., Becker, M., Čordalija, N., Kresić, M., Leko, N., Marušič, F. L., Milićev, T., Milićević, N., Mitíc, I., Peti-Stantić, A., Stanković, B., Šuligoj, T., Tušek, J., & Nevins, A. (2018). When linearity prevails over hierarchy in syntax. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(3), 495–500. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1712729115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woodman, G. F. (2010). A brief introduction to the use of event-related potentials in studies of perception and attention. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 72(8), 2031–2046. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, C. (2016). The Price of Linguistic Productivity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yurchenko, A., Lopukhina, A., & Dragoy, O. (2020). Metaphor is between metonymy and homonymy: Evidence from event-related potentials. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zeller, J. P. & Clasmeier, C. (2020). Každyj den’ turist *otdoxnul na pljaže. An event-related potentials study on the processing of aspectual violation in Russian iterative sentences. Russian Linguistics, 44(3), 297–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-020-09230-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×