Prior research suggests that bilinguals show reduced sensitivity to negative content when operating in the second language (L2). The available evidence, however, is limited to language comprehension. We tested the production of emotional words in Polish (L1)–English (L2) bilinguals in two EEG studies that manipulated emotional cueing. In Experiment 1 (neutral context), white or black circles indicated whether participants should read aloud (shadow) or translate a subsequently presented word. N400 amplitudes were selectively reduced for negative L2 words regardless of the task. In Experiment 2 (emotional context), we used black or white emojis, either sad or neutral, as cues. The previous interaction between word valence and language of operation vanished, but late positive potential amplitudes elicited by negative words were larger for translation from L2 to L1 (i.e., production in Polish) than L1 to L2. These results validate and extend to production previous findings of attenuated emotional response in L2 comprehension.

Bilingualism is hard to define, measure, and study. Sparked by the “replication crisis” in the social sciences, a recent discussion on the advantages of open science is gaining momentum. Here, we join this debate to argue that bilingualism research would greatly benefit from embracing open science. We do so in a unique way, by presenting six fictional stories that illustrate how open science practices – sharing preprints, materials, code, and data; pre-registering studies; and joining large-scale collaborations – can strengthen bilingualism research and further improve its quality.

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.

In this behavioral and electrophysiological study, we compare novel word learning, particularly lexical form acquisition, in an immersive virtual reality (VR) context with a picture-word (PW) association context. We also test whether inhibitory control and age of second language acquisition (L2 AoA) have modulating effects. Chinese speakers of L2 English learned two sets of German words, one set in each of the contexts. Behavioral performance from a subsequent recognition task indicated that responses to VR-learned words were faster than PW-leaned words. ERPs revealed that VR-learned words elicited more negative N100 and N200 waveforms than PW-learned words. Moreover, a significant relationship between L2 AoA and N200 amplitude was observed for VR-learned words. Taken together, the results suggest that the multi-sensory, interactive experience simulated by an immersive VR context has a positive effect on early lexical form acquisition of novel words.

A growing body of research suggests that bilingualism may afford benefits to certain aspects of cognitive functioning. Inconsistent findings may arise because of methodological differences within and across studies. One limitation is that studies often compare linguistically similar languages. The present study recorded brain activity (event-related potentials; ERPs) while English monolinguals, English–French bilinguals, and Arabic–English bilinguals completed an n-back task and a delayed matching-to-sample task. Group ERP differences were observed in the absence of behavioral differences. In the delayed matching-to-sample task, monolinguals exhibited smaller N2 amplitude compared to both bilingual groups, and smaller P3b amplitude compared to English–French bilinguals. In the n-back, English–French bilinguals displayed larger P3b amplitudes than monolinguals and Arabic–English bilinguals. P3b amplitude did not differ between Arabic–English bilinguals and monolinguals in either task. These results suggest that conflicting findings across studies may be due in part to the linguistic distance between the languages under study.

Goldrick, Putnam and Schwarz (Goldrick, Putnam & Schwarz) have offered an account that must delight all linguists who have spent an inordinate amount of their professional time working on understanding the grammar of bilingual language use – just how, and why, do bilinguals produce the utterances that they do. The computational approach Goldrick et al. propose blends the grammatical principles (of the optimality kind) with general processing constraints to yield patterns of code-mixing that may be sparse – the emergence of doubled elements in bilinguals’ utterances – but certainly needing an explanation. Their Gradient Symbolic Computation model is, in fact, the first robust account of the presence of doubled elements, i.e., an element of the utterance is doubled, appearing in both languages within a single utterance (see 1 below). Their account, however, does force them to make an important, but vulnerable, theoretical assumption: that grammatical principles can refer to language membership. It recalls, albeit obliquely, Belazi, Rubin and Toribio's much discussed ‘Language’ feature needed to mobilize their Functional Head Constraint (see Bhatt, 1997, for an empirical and theoretical critique of the Functional Head Constraint).

Ouh que c'est laid! “Oh this is ugly!” is one of the comments among the 11,800 hits on Google for the sequence “la fille que je sors avec” [the girl I go out with]. Often the comments include the idea that the whole expression has been taken from English as a direct calque. The authors of the present keynote article, Poplack, Zentz and Dion (Poplack, Zentz & Dion, 2011, this issue), argue convincingly that this type of preposition stranding in Canadian French cannot be ascribed to language contact with English. Using sound and accountable methodology, derived from the research paradigm of variationist sociolinguistics, they manage to disprove the hypothesis of a direct causal link between the expression in Canadian French and its supposed earlier use in English. Thus, an icon of language contact, both in popular perception and in many not-so-well-informed academic sources, has been shattered.

Listeners can adapt to errors in foreign-accented speech, but not all errors are alike. We investigated whether exposure to unsystematic tone errors in second language Mandarin impacts responses to accurately produced words. Native Mandarin speakers completed a cross-modal priming task with words produced by foreign-accented talkers who either produced consistently correct tones, or frequent tone errors. Facilitation from primes bearing correct tones was unaffected by the presence of tone errors elsewhere in the talker's speech. However, primes bearing tone errors inhibited recognition of real words and elicited stronger accentedness ratings. We consider theoretical implications for tone in foreign-accent adaptation.

Initial studies on the acquisition of two Spanish copulas, ser and estar, emerged from a research agenda exploring whether second language (L2) development was driven by universal mechanisms manifested in stages rather than an accumulation of entities (Rutherford, 1987). Concerning the Spanish copulas, the stages of acquisition through which Spanish L2 learners pass seem – with a few exceptions – to be largely uniform (e.g. estar + locative, ser/estar + adjective; VanPatten, 1987; Ryan & Lafford, 1992; Geeslin, 2000). Cheng, Lu and Giannakouros provide one of the first studies which partially test the assumption of universality, examining Mandarin Chinese speakers' copula behaviors over different levels of development. The work of Geeslin as well as Cheng, Lu and Giannakouros is valuable not so much because it provides insights into copula development but rather because this work is building a model for predicting the interaction in general terms between aspectual, semantic, and pragmatic factors and the acquisition of both grammatical and lexical L2 phenomena.

Predictors and control variables were not distinguished in Tables 4–8 of the paper by Lee, Lu and Garnsey (2013). The corrected tables are provided below. The authors apologize for these errors.

People who were mostly exposed to English with an accent in the early home environment are more native-like when performing various English tasks, compared to those who were mostly exposed to their non-English heritage language (Tao & Taft, 2016). The present study extends from the work of Tao and Taft (2016), further exploring the effects of early home language environment on linguistic and cognitive outcomes later in life. Three groups of young adult participants who differed in their early home language environment were examined on speech comprehension and executive function tasks. Results showed that people who were exposed mostly to non-English heritage languages have disadvantages relative to native monolingual speakers in the comprehension of certain types of stimuli, but show advantages in their executive functioning. Those exposed mostly to nonstandard English showed a less robust advantage in executive functions over native speakers, and showed no apparent disadvantage in speech comprehension.

Jürgen Meisel argues that “grammatical variation. . .can be described. . .in terms of parametric variation”, and – crucially for his arguments in this paper – that “parameter settings do not change across the lifespan”. To this extent he adopts the standard generative view, but he then departs from what he calls “the literature on historical linguistics” (by which he means the generative literature only) in developing the arguments leading to his major claims: that only “transmission failure” resulting from L2 acquisition can produce parametric morphosyntactic change; that any L2 learners, children or adults, may be the agents of change; that such changes “happen less frequently than is commonly assumed”; and that, “in larger and more complex societies, situations in which L2 learners exert a major influence on a language are most likely to emerge in periods of substantial demographic changes” (his example is a plague that kills most members of a speech community). Adult L2 learners, according to Meisel, can only be agents of parametric change if they provide most or all of the input for the next generation's L1 acquisition.

This study investigated the effects of L2 learning experience in relation to L1 background on hemispheric processing of Japanese pitch accent. Native Mandarin Chinese (tonal L1) and English (non-tonal L1) learners of Japanese were tested using dichotic listening. These listener groups were compared with those recruited in Wu, Tu & Wang (2012), including native Mandarin and English listeners without Japanese experience and native Japanese listeners. Results revealed an overall right-hemisphere preference across groups, suggesting acoustically oriented processing. Individual pitch accent patterns also revealed pattern-specific laterality differences, further reflecting acoustic-level processing. However, listener group differences indicated L1 effects, with the Chinese but not English listeners approximating the Japanese patterns. Furthermore, English learners but not naïve listeners exhibited a shift towards the native direction, revealing effects of L2 learning. These findings imply integrated effects of acoustic and linguistic aspects on Japanese pitch accent processing as a function of L1 and L2 experience.

Carroll's critique (Carroll) of the field of bilingualism yields strong directives. Let us not study specific groups of bilinguals, and make big claims about bilingual learning. Let us not study one domain, say vocabulary, and generalize to bilinguals’ language. These are all valid points. She also voices strong skepticism about how current literature deals with language experience:

Contraction of want to to wanna is sometimes possible (e.g., Who do you want to/wanna stay with ___ ?), but sometimes impossible (e.g., Who do you want ___ to/*wanna stay?). This contrast is attributable to the grammatical constraint that a wh-trace blocks the contraction of want and to. Most first language (L1) and second language (L2) acquisition studies testing learner knowledge of this constraint have used elicited production tasks and focused on adult participants, with inconsistent results. Using a child-friendly acceptability judgment task, the current study shows that children as young as 3;11 and both child and adult L2 learners have target-like knowledge of the constraint on wanna contraction. This result is in line with the position that L1 acquisition, child L2 acquisition, and adult L2 acquisition are qualitatively similar.

Bimodal bilingualism refers to a type of bilingualism that employs two different input-output channels, one involving spoken language and the other involving sign language. Until the second half of the twentieth century, sign language was not recognized as a fully-fledged language and there was very little research devoted to bilingual sign language speakers (Grosjean, 1992). In the last two decades, however, interest in the study of bimodal bilingualism, including the cognitive effects of bimodal bilingualism and the neural organization of spoken and sign languages, has increased considerably. Furthermore, the particular significance of studies of bimodal bilingualism for understanding bilingual language representation and processing more generally has been properly recognized. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition has not been silent or inactive on this front. Two years ago we specifically added the study of bimodal bilingualism to the journal's core areas of interest, and we are glad to see an increased number of research articles on bimodal bilingualism (e.g., Giezen & Emmorey, 2016; Rinaldi & Caselli, 2014; Williams & Newman, 2015; Morford et al., in press; Kaufmann & Philipp, in press).