Previous research has shown that non-Māori Speaking New Zealanders have extensive latent knowledge of Māori, despite not being able to speak it. This knowledge plausibly derives from a memory store of Māori forms (Oh et al., 2020; Panther et al., 2023). Modelling suggests that this ‘proto-lexicon’ includes not only Māori words, but also word-parts; however, this suggestion has not yet been tested experimentally.

We present the results of a new experiment in which non-Māori speaking New Zealanders and non-New Zealanders were asked to segment a range of Māori words into parts. We show that the degree to which segmentations of non-Māori speakers correlate to the segmentations of two fluent speakers of Māori is stronger among New Zealanders than non-New Zealanders. This research adds to the growing evidence that even in a largely ‘monolingual’ population, there is evidence of latent bilingualism through long-term exposure to a second language.

No studies have investigated the neural correlates of Number and Person agreement processing in bilinguals. Because a previous fMRI study showed difference in L1 and L2 morphosyntactic processing of L1 Turkish–L2 Persian bilinguals, it was of interest whether this difference can be specifically attributed to Number or Person processing. Therefore, we reanalyzed these data at the whole-brain level, revealing a selective response for Number Violations in the pars opercularis (PO), whereas Number and Person Violations activated the posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG). These results support the decomposition of agreement projections and their neuroanatomical substrates in bilinguals and confirm the involvement of systematically different feature-checking and feature-mapping mechanisms in Number and Person agreement but shared mechanisms between L1 and L2. Moreover, at variance with previous reports, Number Violations evoked more effects than Person Violations in pSTG, suggesting qualitatively different processing underlying R-expression and pronominal controllers.

The tension between considering language acquisition to be a process of learning or a process of development is the visible surface of a theoretical iceberg. The difference between learning and development is neither simple nor self-evident, yet the implications that follow from a commitment to one or the other are considerable. Development is usually construed as an unfolding, the impassive evolution of “being.” Children develop physically, cognitively, emotionally almost in spite of themselves; they may not develop to their full potential, and they may require massive environmental support, but even in cases of benign neglect, children will normally become taller, smarter, and more stable. Learning implies a measure of control and responsibility. It depends on experience and on the availability of resources: conceptual, social, intellectual, and so on.

David Green's excellent paper “Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system” raises three fundamental questions. My goal is to suggest elaborations on his answers that might make the arguments stronger and more comprehensive.

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the association between nonword repetition (NWR) and language exposure in bilingual children and explored whether the association is influenced by other variables. We performed a blind literature review on ERIC and Google Scholar, a random-effects model meta-analysis and subgroup analyses to test potential moderators. Out of 822 screened articles, we identified 24 works including 1399 children. Significant associations were found using either cumulative or current exposure, language-like nonwords, phoneme NWR scoring, in children with typical language development. Nonsignificant associations were found in studies either using age of first exposure, on children older than six, with less than 50 participants, using NWR lists containing 16-24 nonwords or with participants having different native languages. Weak associations were found when considering whole-word scoring or gray literature. We highlight the contributions of different variables to NWR, and evidence to optimally design NWR for bilingual language assessment.

This study aims to examine the influence of dialectal experience on logographic visual word recognition. Two groups of Chinese monolectals and three groups of Chinese bi-dialectals performed Stroop color-naming in Standard Chinese (SC), and two of the bi-dialectal groups also in their regional dialects. The participant groups differed in dialectal experiences. The ink-character relation was manipulated in semantics, segments, and tones separately, as congruent, competing, or different, yielding ten Stroop conditions for comparison. All the groups showed Stroop interference for the conditions of segmental competition, as well as evidence for semantic activation by the characters. Bi-dialectal experience, even receptive, could benefit conflict resolution in the Stroop task. Chinese characters can automatically activate words in both dialects. Comparing naming in Standard Chinese and naming in the bi-dialectals’ regional dialects, still, a regional-dialect disadvantage suggests that the activation is biased with literacy and lexico-specific inter-dialectal relations.

Multilingual children are faced with the task of selectively using the linguistic systems of their languages. Previous research has shown that although bilinguals may make more errors in production and comprehension than their monolingual peers, less cognitively demanding processing experiments may reveal target-like performance. This has been attributed to several factors, among which language transfer and processing limitations. In this study we investigate the processing of additive connectives in both languages of German–Russian bilingual children using the Visual World Paradigm. Previous research has shown that bilingual children make many errors in the production of these connectives in Russian. The results show that the processing behaviour in both languages of the bilingual children does not differ from that of their monolingual peers. This finding is compatible with the view that errors in production and in more demanding comprehension tasks are due to processing limitations.

In language contact studies, specific features of the contact languages are often seen to be the result of transfer (interference), but it remains difficult to disentangle the role of intra-systemic and inter-systemic factors. We propose to unravel these factors in the analysis of a feature of Brussels French which many researchers attribute to transfer from (Brussels) Dutch: the adverbial use of une fois. We compare the use of this particle in Brussels French with its occurrence in corpora of other varieties of French, including several that have not been influenced by a Germanic substrate or adstrate. A detailed analysis of the frequency of occurrence, the functions and the distribution of the particle over different syntactic positions shows that some uses of une fois can be traced back to sixteenth-century French, but that there is also ample evidence for overt and covert transfer (Mougeon and Beniak, 1991) from Brussels Dutch.

Bilinguals activate both of their languages as they process written words, regardless of modality (spoken or signed); these effects have primarily been documented in single word reading paradigms. We used eye-tracking to determine whether deaf bilingual readers (n = 23) activate American Sign Language (ASL) translations as they read English sentences. Sentences contained a target word and one of the two possible prime words: a related prime which shared phonological parameters (location, handshape or movement) with the target when translated into ASL or an unrelated prime. The results revealed that first fixation durations and gaze durations (early processing measures) were shorter when target words were preceded by ASL-related primes, but prime condition did not impact later processing measures (e.g., regressions). Further, less-skilled readers showed a larger ASL co-activation effect. Together, the results indicate that ASL co-activation impacts early lexical access and can facilitate reading, particularly for less-skilled deaf readers.

L1 lexical attrition is the decline of L1 lexical-semantic abilities due to reduced L1 exposure and/or L2 interference. Semantic fluency tasks are central in this research, but traditional analyses are often inconclusive.

To address this, we employed an innovative network science approach to investigate the bilingual lexicon's structural properties. Semantic fluency data were collected from immersed/non-immersed late bilinguals with comparable L2 proficiencies.

Our results indicate that L2 immersion led to more integrated and efficient L2 networks. Crucially, immersion also resulted in L1 attrition (only evident in the network analysis). Immersed participants exhibited less densely connected and sparser L1 networks. Furthermore, network measures suggest that L1 lexical attrition occurs gradually, initially impacting network interconnectivity, while information flow and community structure remain more stable.

Drawing from these insights, we introduce the Lexical Attrition Foundation (LeAF) framework, offering a network-based perspective on lexical attrition development and laying the groundwork for future research.

Recalling future intentions (i.e., prospective memory, PM) plays an essential role in everyday life, but sometimes, if the person is involved in a demanding ongoing task, PM is unsuccessful. This is especially relevant for bilinguals who, in many situations, have to recall intentions while performing a task in their second language (L2). Our aim was to explore whether PM is modulated by the linguistic context in which PM takes place. In this study, bilinguals performed a PM task in their first (L1) or second language (L2). We also manipulated the demands of the ongoing task (early/late updating) and the PM cue (focal/non-focal). In general, results showed an overall impairment in the recall of future intentions when the task was performed in L2. This impairment was especially evident in the more demanding conditions, suggesting that increments in attentional demands due to L2 processing hinder the processes required for prospective remembering.

In their keynote article, Goldrick, Putnam and Schwarz (2016) present a computational account of code-mixing. Although they review literature on the co-activation of lexical representations and cognate facilitation effects in bilingual language processing, their model remains silent on how it interfaces with lexical factors, and how lexical factors impact code-switching. One such lexical factor is cognate status, which has been found to affect code-switching, as demonstrated in corpus analyses (e.g., Broersma & De Bot, 2006) and psycholinguistic experiments (Kootstra, Van Hell & Dijkstra, 2012). For example, using the structural priming technique to examine the role of lexical factors in code-switching, Kootstra et al. asked Dutch–English bilinguals to repeat a code-switched prime sentence (starting in Dutch and ending in English) and then describe a target picture by means of a code-switched sentence (also from Dutch into English). They observed that bilinguals' tendency to switch at the same position as in the prime sentence was increased when the prime sentence and target picture contained cognates.

In his article, Parsing and working memory in bilingual sentence processing, Cunnings invites us to consider the hypothesis that important differences in how L1 and L2 populations process sentences stem from differences in how these speakers store and retrieve linguistic encodings in memory during the course of sentence comprehension (Cunnings, 2016). Specifically, he proposes that L2 speakers are more susceptible to similarity-based retrieval interference than their L1 counterparts, and L2 speakers weight discourse cues more heavily than syntactic cues when resolving open linguistic dependencies via memory retrieval. I find these to be interesting hypotheses that merit further investigation, especially in light of the prominence that these issues currently enjoy in L1 processing research. Nonetheless, I sound a note of caution: these claims go quite a bit beyond what is currently known, either theoretically or empirically. This makes support for these claims weak at present, but happily, this state of affairs offers clear directions for future research.

In their review, Emmorey, Giezen and Gollan (Emmorey, Giezen & Gollan) contrast bimodal bilinguals (individuals who are fluent in a signed and a spoken language) and unimodal bilinguals (individuals fluent in two spoken languages) to highlight the implications of bimodal bilingualism for language processing, the cognitive effects of bilingualism, and the neural organization of languages. For this purpose, the authors focus on the evidence for language mixing in bimodal bilinguals (so-called ‘code-blends’) by hearing children of deaf parents and explore how language co-activation and control differentially impacts the processing of languages compared to unimodal bilinguals. The sustained controlling of two languages from differing modalities in bimodal bilinguals, according to the authors, may lead to modality-specific cognitive advantages in contrast to unimodal bilinguals.

Natascha Müller presents a very interesting analysis of the structure of the German subordinate clause in bilingual first language acquisition. The main issue in this paper is to explain the fact that some bilingual children – but not all of them – display non-target language structures in German subordinate clauses. That is, the finite verb does not appear in the final position of the subordinate clause. These non-target structures can in part be explained by transfer, but this cannot be the whole story, because some monolingual children produce these structures as well. Bilingual children, though, appear to have problems with the German subordinate clause more frequently than monolingual children. Interestingly, acquiring the target structures is a slow process for children who produce non-target structures. Ivar, the French-German child Müller discusses in most detail, for example, needs two years to acquire the correct position of the finite verb in German subordinate clauses. Müller argues that the problems arise because the input children receive is ambiguous: the finite verb does not always appear in the finite position in German subordinate clauses in adult speech. The ambiguity of this situation opens the way to transfer. In their uncertainty, the children turn to their other language as a relief strategy.

Liliana Sánchez' paper is a welcome contribution to the growing body of literature on Andean Spanish (cf. a recent survey in Muysken, 2004a), welcome both because a well-motivated and clearly described methodology is used and because it is embedded in an explicit theoretical framework. I do not have reservations about the overall conclusions of the study, but would like to draw attention to three issues: grammatical encoding versus pragmatic inference, the completeness of the analysis, and the issue of form learning versus meaning construction.

We investigate the role of awareness in learning non-salient grammar features in a second language during oral interaction. We conducted a learning experiment during which forty-eight adult Dutch-speaking advanced learners of German and a native German-speaking experimenter engaged in a scripted oral dialogue game. The experimenter and learner in turn produced sentences based on pictures eliciting German strong verbs with stem-vowel alternations, a morphosyntactic feature that represents a persistent learning difficulty. While learners in the implicit condition were merely instructed to focus on sentence meaning, learners in the explicit condition were encouraged to also pay attention to and learn from the target structure in the experimenter's input. Although the explicit group achieved higher accuracy scores overall, both groups had similar (absolute) learning gains, showing that oral input provided during interactive exchanges can lead to substantial learning not only under explicit, learning-targeted conditions, but also without an explicit directive to learn.

While research in heritage language phonology has found that transfer from the majority language can lead to divergent attainment in adult heritage language grammars, the extent to which language transfer develops during a heritage speaker's lifespan is understudied. To explore such cross-linguistic transfer, I examine the rate of glottalization between consonant-to-vowel sequences at word junctures produced by child and adult Spanish heritage speakers (i.e., HSs) in both languages. My results show that, in Spanish, child HSs produce greater rates of vowel-initial glottal phonation than their age-matched monolingually-raised Spanish counterparts, suggesting that the Spanish child HSs’ grammars are more permeable to transfer than those of the adult HSs. In English, child and adult HSs show similarly low rates of glottal phonation when compared to their age-matched monolingually-raised English speakers’ counterparts. The findings for English can be explained by either an account of transfer at the individual level or the community level.