File - Virginia C Mueller Gathercole

Transcription

Advances in the Study of
Bilingualism
Edited by
Enlli Môn Thomas and Ineke Mennen
MULTILINGUAL MATTERS
Bristol • Buffalo • Toronto
2721_FM.indd 3
25-03-2014 13:07:33
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Advances in the Study of Bilingualism/Edited by Enlli Môn Thomas and Ineke Mennen.
English and Welsh.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Bilingualism—Wales—Case studies. 2. Code switching (Linguistics)—Wales—Case
studies. 3. Education, Bilingual—Wales. I. Thomas, Enlli Môn, 1975 – editor of compilation. II. Mennen, Ineke, 1960 – editor of compilation.
P115.5.G7A38 2014
404'.209429–dc23 2013049790
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue entry for this book is available from the British Library.
ISBN-13: 978-1-78309-170-6 (hbk)
Multilingual Matters
UK: St Nicholas House, 31–34 High Street, Bristol BS1 2AW, UK.
USA: UTP, 2250 Military Road, Tonawanda, NY 14150, USA.
Canada: UTP, 5201 Dufferin Street, North York, Ontario M3H 5T8, Canada.
Copyright © 2014 Enlli Môn Thomas, Ineke Mennen and the authors of individual
chapters.
All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means
without permission in writing from the publisher.
The policy of Multilingual Matters/Channel View Publications is to use papers that are
natural, renewable and recyclable products, made from wood grown in sustainable forests. In the manufacturing process of our books, and to further support our policy, preference is given to printers that have FSC and PEFC Chain of Custody certification. The FSC
and/or PEFC logos will appear on those books where full certification has been granted
to the printer concerned.
Typeset by Techset Composition India(P) Ltd., Bangalore and Chennai, India.
Printed and bound in Great Britain by the CPI Group.
2721_FM.indd 4
25-03-2014 13:07:33
4
Bilingual Construction
of Two Systems1
Virginia C. Mueller Gathercole,
Rocío Pérez-Tattam,
Hans Stadthagen-González and
Enlli Môn Thomas
This chapter focuses on bilingual children’s construction of their linguistic
system(s), with attention to the question of where interaction between the
two languages is or is not observed. We examine data concerning the development and relationship of the morphosyntactic systems and the organization
of the semantic systems. With regard to the acquisition of the morphosyntactic system in each language, the role of the input, influences on the timing of
development, and the question of possible acceleration when there are commonalities across the languages are discussed. In relation to semantics, the
influence of linguistic differences across the two languages and the fact that
the construction of the semantic system(s) is grounded in a common cognitive space will be proposed as key. A model of development is presented
according to which predictions regarding interaction revolve around this construction of the two languages linked to a common cognitive base.
One of the key questions concerning the acquisition of language in bilingual children is the extent to which the two languages the child is learning
interact and influence one another in development. Are developments in the
two languages different from corresponding developments in the linguistic
systems of their monolingual peers, and if so, where do the differences lie? A
great deal of research on these questions has focused on grammatical development (see, e.g. Chapter 3). A number of theoretical stances make predictions
concerning the most likely components of the grammar to undergo interaction and concerning the nature of the relationship between the grammars of
the two languages necessary for such interaction to occur. Recent research has
also focused increasingly on semantic knowledge in bilinguals, and has documented a wide variety of cases of interaction (Ameel et al., 2005; Ameel et al.,
2009; Brown & Gullberg, 2008a, 2008b; Jarvis & Pavlenko, 2008; Pavlenko,
63
2721_Ch04.indd 63
25-03-2014 13:40:45
64 Par t 2: Bilingual L anguage Development
2003, 2009; Wolff & Ventura, 2009) between the two systems. This chapter
will explore the question of interaction in these two domains. First, we will
examine whether predictions regarding morphosyntactic systems hold in relation to Welsh-English-speaking children’s acquisition of grammatical forms
in their two languages. The data will suggest that any relationship that is
observed in acquisition is more likely attributable to cognitive, metalinguistic,
and metacognitive advances in the child than it is to specific grammatical
comparisons across the two languages. The chapter will then examine possible interactions in the semantic systems of bilinguals. We will present some
of the work we have been doing to examine this question, and will argue for
a model in which the semantic systems of the bilingual’s languages interact
with that bilingual’s cognitive understanding of the world. Finally, a model
of development that draws on constructivist–emergentist approaches to language learning in children can help to explain the effects documented here –
the low occurrence of interaction in developing morphosyntactic systems,
and the higher incidence of convergence in the bilingual’s semantic systems.
Background
The question of the nature and location of influence between the two
languages of a bilingual has longstanding roots in even the earliest work on
second language acquisition. Researchers in that tradition have long concerned
themselves with the question of when ‘transfer’ occurs, in which direction (L1
to L2, but also L2 to L1?), and under what conditions (Dulay & Burt, 1974a,
1974b; Dulay et al., 1982; Gass, 1980; Krashen, 1982; Lado, 1957; see also
Chapter 2). Early on, researchers recognized that there may need to be some
similarity between the two languages for transfer to occur (e.g. Andersen’s
(1983) ‘Transfer to Somewhere’ principle and Wode’s (1978) ‘Crucial Similarity
Measure’; but see Kellerman’s (1995) ‘transfer to nowhere’ principle) – but it
was also recognized that transfer does not always occur in cases of structural
similarity in the two languages, because of speakers’ expectations about what
might possibly be transferable (Kellerman, 1978, 1983; Krashen, 1983).
In more recent years, such questions addressing L2 acquisition have reemerged in relation to simultaneous bilinguals. In examining the types
of transfer that may or may not occur, researchers working within a
Chomskyan, modular tradition have proposed that language interaction in
bilinguals is not likely to occur within the ‘internal interfaces’ of a grammar
(i.e. within the morphological, syntactic, and semantic modules of the
grammar), but are highly likely to occur within the ‘external interfaces’ of
the grammar – at the points at which, for example, syntax and pragmatics
come together (Hulk & Müller, 2000; Sorace, 2003; Tsimpli & Sorace, 2006;
White, 2009). Thus, one might predict that bilinguals carry over from one
language to the other the syntactic means through which pragmatic
2721_Ch04.indd 64
25-03-2014 13:40:45
Bilingual Construc t ion of Two Systems 65
e lements such as topic-comment relations are expressed, but not, for example, the verbal endings from one language to the other. Some have proposed
in addition that there must be overlap, or similarity, across the surface structures of the two languages in order for the child to carry over aspects from
one language to the other (Döpke, 2000; Hulk & Müller, 2000; Paradis &
Genesee, 1996). (See Gathercole, 2007, for discussion.)
Very recently, as there has been growing recognition that (a) the developmental progression of bilinguals follows much the same route as it does in
monolinguals (Gathercole, 2007; Gathercole & Hoff, 2007; Håkansson et al.,
2003; Kupisch, 2004; Li & Associates, Inc., 2005; Rieckborn, 2005, 2006) and
that (b) the progression of bilinguals may initially be timed slightly behind
that of monolinguals (Gathercole & Hoff, 2007; Gathercole & Thomas, 2005;
Gathercole et al., 2001; Pearson, 2002; Kupisch, 2004; Oller & Eilers, 2002;
Pearson et al., 1993; Rieckborn, 2005, 2006), researchers have been taking a
closer look at potential interactions between the bilingual’s two grammatical
systems as they develop. The clearest evidence for such interaction would be
if the progression for some particular structures in one of the bilingual’s
languages is out of line with the general progression one might expect given
the general level of exposure by the bilingual child to that language. It might
be, for example, that the acquisition of some aspect of one of the languages
can ‘boost’ the development of a comparable form in the child’s other language, resulting in acceleration in the acquisition of that form; or, conversely,
it might be that when there are differences between the structures in the
two languages, this might make their discovery in either language harder,
leading to a greater delay in acquisition than might be expected. Indeed,
some research suggests that similarity of form across languages might help
boost the bilingual child’s acquisition of forms in one of her languages. This
might be particularly true in cases in which the forms in one language are
more complex than they are in the other, so the ease of acquisition in the
latter may help facilitate acquisition in the former.
A nice example can be found in Fernández Fuertes and Liceras’ (2010)
study of the acquisition of copulas in two Spanish-English bilingual children.
These researchers asked whether the more functionally prominent copulas,
ser and estar, in Spanish might help these children to discover and use the
copula be in English earlier than their monolingual counterparts do. These
authors point out that (a) Spanish has two copulas, ser and estar – ser for
individual-level predicates (permanent) and estar for stage-level predication
(temporary state), (b) ser and estar help Spanish-speaking children to establish inflectional categories early, and (c) English-speaking monolingual children show high omission of copula be (Becker, 2000, 2004) (e.g. ‘I in the
kitchen’ (Nina, 2;01; Suppes, 1974, childes). So, they reasoned, perhaps the
early development of inflectional categories in Spanish will help SpanishEnglish (S-E) bilinguals develop inflectional categories in English, and thus
promote the early correct use of overt be. Given that the common progression
2721_Ch04.indd 65
25-03-2014 13:40:45
over covert forms, in such cases. In another study, Serratrice and Sorace discovered that even Italian-Spanish bilinguals (speaking two languages both
of which have null subjects) over-used overt subjects (Serratrice et al., 2009;
Sorace et al., 2009; Sorace & Serratrice, 2009).
It is crucial in examining questions regarding interaction and regarding
any potential facilitation or acceleration in bilinguals that the issues be
viewed within the broader perspective in which other factors, such as normal
processes of acquisition, frequency of exposure, and language-specific complexity, are taken into account. As noted above, all things being equal, bilingual children’s timing of development, but not sequence (Gathercole, 2007),
is generally dependent on relative amount of exposure to the language in
question (Gathercole, 2007; Gathercole & Hoff, 2007). Thus, for example, in
the Welsh-English context, the development of Welsh is in advance in children who come from homes in which only Welsh is spoken relative to those
from homes in which both Welsh and English or only English are spoken, but
the acquisition of English proceeds in advance in children who come from
homes in which only English is spoken relative to those from homes in which
both Welsh and English or only Welsh are spoken, and so forth (Gathercole
et al., 2013; Gathercole & Thomas, 2009). At the same time, all children learn
aspects of Welsh that are less complex earlier, in sequence, than aspects that
are more complex. For example, grammatical gender, which is quite opaque
in Welsh, is learned quite late (and may never be fully mastered) by children
from all home language backgrounds (Gathercole et al., 2005; Gathercole &
Thomas, 2005, 2009; Thomas & Gathercole, 2005, 2007). Keeping these
factors in mind, in the following sections, we examine, first, the grammatical development in Welsh-English bilinguals more closely for potential
interactions, and, second, potential interactions in another realm, that of
linguistic semantics.
Grammatical Abilities
In order to examine the children’s knowledge of grammatical structures
in each language, we developed receptive grammatical tests in each language
that covered roughly comparable structures in the two languages and that
could be expected to develop over a protracted period of development.
Thirteen sets of structures were chosen for inclusion in the tests, namely the
following:
Active Sentences
Negation
Passive (truncated)
Comparative
Superlative
2721_Ch04.indd 67
25-03-2014 13:40:46
Present Perfect
Future
Time Conjunctions (before/after/until)
OS Relative Clauses
SS Relative Clauses
SO Relative Clauses
Quantification, Universal or Exhaustive (every, both)
Quantification, Existential or Non-exhaustive (some, not all)
An example of each type of structure for English and Welsh is shown in
Table 4.3.
These structures are listed in Table 4.3 in an order that we predicted
might correspond to the relative difficulty and timing of acquisition, as
judged by work in the literature. Thus, for example, we can expect simple
Table 4.3 Types of structures tested in receptive grammar tasks
STRUCTURE TYPE
ENGLISH Examples
Active
The elephant smelled the
horse.
The goats aren’t eating.
The clown was pushed.
The tree is taller than the
house.
The apple is lowest.
He has jumped.
The ducks will jump over
the rock.
Before the teacher fell,
she took her hat off.
A circle covers the box
that has a ring in it.
Negation
Passive (Truncated)
Comparative
Superlative
Present Perfect
Future
Time Conjunction (before/
after/until)
Relative Clause, OS
Relative Clause, SS
Relative Clause, SO
Quantifier, Universal/
Exhaustive (every, both)
Quantifier, Existential/Not
Exhaustive (not all, some)
2721_Ch04.indd 68
WELSH Examples
Gwnaeth yr eliffant ogleuo’r
ceffyl.
Tydi’r geifr ddim yn bwyta.
Cafodd y clown ei wthio.
Mae’r goeden yn dalach
na’r tŷ.
Yr afal sydd isaf.
Mae o wedi neidio.
Mi (w)neith y hwyaid neidio
dros y garreg.
Cyn i’r athrawes ddisgyn, mi
dynnodd hi ei het.
Mae’re cylch yn gorchuddio’r
bocs sydd efo modrwy
ynddo.
The donkey that kicked a Roedd yr asyn (w)na’th
cow was wearing socks.
gicio’r fuwch yn gwisgo
sanau.
A dancer that the girl
Roedd y dawnsiwr (w)na’th y
called had a ring.
ferch ffonio efo modrwy.
Every princess is on a
Mae pob tywysoges ar
tractor.
dractor.
Some of the dancers are
Mae rhai o’r dawnswyr yn
wearing dresses.
gwisgo ffrogiau.
25-03-2014 13:40:46
active sentences and simple negatives to be learned fairly early in the two
languages (Bloom, 1973; Borsley & Jones, 2001; Brown, 1973; Crain & LilloMartin, 1999). Passives, Comparatives, Superlatives, Present Perfects, and
Futures are expected to be learned between approximately 3½ and 5 years of
age (Budwig, 2001; Gathercole, 2009; Weist, 2008). Time conjunctions are
expected to be understood perhaps somewhat later (age 5 or 6) (Clark, 2003;
Coker, 1978; Gathercole, 2009), and relative clauses perhaps somewhat later
than that (Hamburger & Crain, 1982; Kidd & Bavin, 2002). Quantifiers take
even longer for children to gain a full understanding (Gathercole, 2009;
Hurewitz et al., 2006; Papafragou, 2003, 2006; Papafragou & Musolino, 2003;
Papafragou & Schwarz, 2006).
The structures chosen were ‘roughly comparable’ in the sense that they
expressed comparable functions, not necessarily in the sense that they
involved any similar formation of the structure itself. In fact, we can divide
the structures into three types – those that share comparable structural properties in the two languages; those that are mixed, sharing some features of
their formation, but differing in other aspects; and those that are clearly
distinct in formation. Those that fall into the first type and the last type can
be the most instructive in examining whether children ‘bootstrap’ from one
language to the other. The prediction would be, if such bootstrapping occurs,
that in the case of comparable structures, bilingual children may have an
advantage, and in the case of distinct structures, they may have a disadvantage. The structures can be grouped as follows
A. Similar structures
Comparative
E: A-er than; W: A-ach na
Superlative
E: A-est; W: A-af
Future:
E: will + V; W: wneith + V
Universal or Exhaustive Quantification (every, both)
E: Q (the) N; W: (yr) Q N
Existential or Non-exhaustive Quantification (some, not all)
E: not all (of the) N; some (of the) N;
W: Neg Aux pob N ddim; rhai (o’r) N
The comparative in both languages involves the use of a suffix on the adjective (-er in English, -ach in Welsh) followed by a standard marker (than in
English, na in Welsh) introducing the standard of comparison; the superlative
is marked by the addition of a suffix on the adjective; (one form of) the
future is constructed using a future auxiliary plus the non-finite form of the
main verb2 and quantifiers in both languages are pre-nominal (every N, pob
N; some of the N, rhai o’r N).
2721_Ch04.indd 69
25-03-2014 13:40:46
Similarly, with OS and SS relatives, English uses a complementizer, as in
(3), whereas Welsh may not, as in (4):
(3) A pig smelled the elephant [that — was eating an orange].
(4)Naeth y mochyn ogleuo’r eliffant [— oedd yn bwyta oren].
did the pig smell-the elephant [— was PRT eat orange]
C. Finally, those constructions that have some structural similarities
and some differences are the following:
Active:
E: SVO, W: VSO, AuxSVO
Negation:
E: S Aux Neg V. . .; W: Neg-Aux S Neg V
English uses SVO as the dominant word order; Welsh uses two word
orders, VSO and (more frequently in colloquial speech) AuxSVO. In negation, English uses single negation, with the negative not occurring between
the auxiliary and the verb, whereas Welsh allows double negation, often
with a negative particle sentence-initially and the negative form dim internally, although this is oversimplifying a lot (see, e.g. Borsley, 2005).
As noted, for the purposes of examining crosslinguistic interaction in
development, the most relevant examinations will entail the structures
shown in (A), where acceleration might be predicted to occur, and those in
(B), where deceleration might be predicted to occur. It should be added as
well that, if interaction is more likely to occur in cases involving the interface between syntax and pragmatics, then we could predict interaction
especially in the case of those structures that involve pragmatics for their
proper use and interpretation. Here, the relevant structures would be the
comparative, the superlative, and the quantifier constructions, as these all
involve the use of conversational implicature for their proper interpretation
(see Gathercole, 2009).
Method
Stimuli
Three sentences were drawn up for each of the 13 sets of structures for
each of two versions of the test in each language. Two versions of the tests,
A and B, were prepared for both languages, so that a given child would not
receive the same pictures or translation-equivalent sentences across the two
languages. The pictures and items for version A in the two languages were
the same, and the pictures and items for version B in the two languages were
the same.
2721_Ch04.indd 71
25-03-2014 13:40:46
In each version, each type of grammatical structure was tested with the
three trials in a forced-choice picture task, with four picture choices for each
trial. The lexical items appearing in versions A and B were the same, but
their occurrence was balanced so that they would be heard on distinct trials
and in distinct structures across the versions. Approximately half the children received version A in English and B in Welsh, and half version B in
English and A in Welsh.
Procedure
For each trial, a set of four computerised pictures was presented, and the
child was asked to pick the picture that went best with the sentence s/he
heard. All verbal stimuli were presented aurally. Five practice trials unrelated
to the structures of interest were administered initially, in the relevant language, to familiarize the child with the procedure.
Participants
For the English receptive grammar task, 376 children were tested, including monolinguals and bilinguals, and for the Welsh receptive grammar task,
all 278 of the bilinguals were tested. The children came from four distinct
home language groups, according to the language(s) reported by parents to
be the language(s) spoken by them to children in the home: monolingual
English, bilinguals with only English at home (‘OEH’), bilinguals with both
Welsh and English at home (‘WEH’), and bilinguals with only Welsh at home
(‘OWH’).
Children came from four distinct age groups, 2–3 (mean age 3;3, range
2;1–4;0), 4–5 (mean age 5;0, range 4;1–6;8), 7–8 (mean age 8;1, range 7;0–
8;11), and 13–15 (mean age 14;8, range 13;0–15;8). The number of children
tested at each age is shown in Table 4.4 by home language. The breakdown
of ages, with means and median ages for each home language group at each
age, is shown in Table 4.5.
Table 4.4 Participants, English and Welsh receptive grammar measures, by age group
and home language*
Age
MON E
OEH
WEH
OWH
TOT
2–3
4–5
7–8
13–15
23
38
17
20
98
11
25
30
18
84
18
20
22
25
85
22
23
33
31
109
74
106
102
94
376
*MON E = monolingual English (only tested in English); OEH = bilingual with only English at home;
WEH = bilingual with Welsh and English at home; OWH = bilingual with only Welsh at home
2721_Ch04.indd 72
25-03-2014 13:40:46
Table 4.5 Mean (and Median) ages for participants, English and Welsh receptive
grammar measures, by age group and home language*
Age
MON E
OEH
WEH
OWH
TOT
2–3
4–5
7–8
13–15
3;6 (3;7)
5;0 (4;10)
7;9 (7;7)
14;7 (14;10)
3;2 (3;2)
5;0 (5;0)
8;1 (8;2)
14;7 (15;1)
3;1 (3;0)
5;1 (5;3)
8;1 (8;1)
14;8 (14;11)
3;1 (3;1)
4;10 (4;9)
8;2 (8;2)
14;9 (14;9)
3;3 (3;3)
5;0 (4;11)
8;1 (8;1)
14;8 (14;10)
*MON E = monolingual English; OEH = bilingual with only English at home; WEH = bilingual with
Welsh and English at home; OWH = bilingual with only Welsh at home
Results
General findings
The full report of the overall results from the study can be found in
Gathercole et al. (2013). To summarize the general results: children from all
home language groups progressed in the same sequence across structures, but
at the earliest ages, for both languages, those children who had the greatest
amount of input in the given language performed in advance of those from
homes in which less input in that language was available. The general progression by home language group and age is shown in Figures 4.1 and 4.2 (from
Gathercole, 2013).
MON E
OEH
WEH
OWH
39.00
36.00
33.00
30.00
27.00
24.00
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
2-3
4-5
7-8
13-15
MON E
13.66
22.40
32.65
36.90
OEH
10.00
19.16
30.83
35.94
WEH
5.83
19.00
29.91
35.88
OWH
5.91
16.39
29.30
36.26
Figure 4.1 Performance on English receptive grammar by age and home language
2721_Ch04.indd 73
25-03-2014 13:40:48
c omparable in structure, but not where English and Welsh differ in structure.
If, on the other hand, correlations occurred in cases in which the structures
were dissimilar, this would suggest that some other factor – for example
requisite cognitive preparation for use of the structures in question or a more
general linguistic advancement, such as expanded MLU length – might
account for correlations in performance.
Correlational analyses of scores on the two tests, reported in Gathercole
et al. (2013), showed that, indeed, there were significant correlations between
the total scores on the English and Welsh tests at ages 2–3, r = 0.552,
p = 0.000, at ages 7–8, r = .353, p = 0.001, and at ages 13–15, r = 0.384, p = 0.001, but not at age 4–5, r = 0.144, n.s. There were significant correlations
on the following sub-scores:
At age 2–3: Similar structures: comparatives r = 0.405, p = 0.012; future
r = 0.395, p = 0.014; Dissimilar structures: time conjunctions r = 0.481,
p = 0.002; SO relatives: r = 0.480, p = 0.002.
At age 4–5: Similar structures: comparatives r = 0.279 p = 0.022; existential/
non-exhaustive quantification r = 0.319, p = 0.010;
Dissimilar structures: passive r = 0.241, p = .050; OS relatives r = 0.276,
p = 0.024.
At age 7–8: Similar structures: existential/non-exhaustive quantification
r = 0.441, p = 0.000; Dissimilar structures: SO relatives r = 0.241, p = 0.029;
Other: actives: r = 0.296, p = 0.006.
At age 13–15: Similar structures: universal/exhaustive quantification r = .410,
p = 0.000; Dissimilar structures: passive r = 0.297, p = 0.010; present perfect r = 0.299, p = 0.010.
Note that the correlations that hold at the different ages on substructures
of the two languages do so for both comparable structures (e.g. the comparative) and dissimilar structures (e.g. relative clauses, passives). This suggests
that, rather than children bootstrapping from the syntactic structures of one
language to the other, there may be a certain cognitive preparedness or a general linguistic preparedness that allows children to map some cognitive understanding or linguistic advance they have gained with the linguistic means for
expressing that in each language. For example, for proper use of the comparative (in any language), one must come to a certain level of appreciation of
comparison between entities, and of the relative position of two values on a
given scale (see Gathercole, 2009). For the proper use of relative clauses, there
must be, among other things, an ability to hold multiple components of a
sentence in memory and an ability to coordinate multiple grammatical/theta
roles for nominal elements expressed in the sentence, or a meta-linguistic
appreciation that such multiple relations can hold within a single sentence.
Such advances could easily affect advances in both languages at the same time.
2721_Ch04.indd 75
25-03-2014 13:40:49
Acceleration by group?
To examine the question of possible acceleration more closely, one further
set of analyses would be relevant. We can examine the relative performance
across the home language groups at each age on the relevant structures – those
for which similarity might encourage transfer and those for which dissimilarity might lead to depressed performance. But which bilinguals are most likely
to show a boost? There are several possible predictions regarding performance
across home language groups, if interaction does indeed lead to acceleration.
First, it is possible that all bilinguals gain a boost, relative to monolinguals, from a structure in language B in learning language A. If so, their
performance relative to monolinguals on that structure should exceed expectations, in relation to the general level of their performance, and might even
exceed that of the monolinguals (as in, e.g. the data reported by FernándezFuertes & Liceras, 2010). So, for example, let’s say that the OEH children
generally perform across structures with mean scores approximately 20%
lower than the scores obtained by the English monolinguals. With a boost
on a particular structure, the OEH children might perform at only 10%
below the monolinguals, at the same rate, or even higher than the monolinguals. Similar expectations would hold for the WEH and the OWH children
on the same structures, relative to their overall performance.
A second possible prediction regarding which bilinguals might show a
boost in language A might concern only those bilingual children who are
most advanced in language B. These more advanced bilinguals might be the
ones who are best placed for transferring from language B to language A,
given their greater grounding/knowledge of language B. This would mean,
for example, that the greatest boost in English would occur in the OWH
children because of transfer from their dominant language, Welsh, and the
greatest boost in Welsh would occur in the OEH children because of transfer
from their dominant language, English. (These same bilinguals would be
predicted to show some delay as well in the cases of those structures that
differed in the two languages.)
A final possible prediction of which bilinguals might show a boost concerns those bilinguals who are most balanced in their knowledge of the two
languages. These bilinguals may be better able to draw connections between
language A and language B than those who are dominant in one of the languages, and therefore may be more likely to transfer back and forth between
the two languages than either of the other two groups. In this case, the
prediction would be that boosts would occur in our data in the WEH group
for both languages, insofar as these children are the most likely to receive
input in both languages on a consistent basis. (Again, the prediction would
also be that these bilinguals would show the greatest delay in those structures that differed in the two languages.)
These three possibilities are shown in columns 3 and 4 of Table 4.6.
2721_Ch04.indd 76
25-03-2014 13:40:49
2721_Ch04.indd 77
B. Dissimilar structures:
Passive
Present Perfect
Time conjunctions
OS Relative Clauses
SS Relative Clauses
SO Relative Clauses
A. Similar structures:
Comparative
Superlative
Future
Universal/Exhaustive Quantification
Existential/Non-Universal
Quantification
Deceleration
Acceleration
Prediction
ENGLISH
3. BALANCED BILINGUALS
1. ALL BILINGUALS
2. DOMINANT IN OTHER LANGUAGE
BILS < MONS
OWH < OEH,
WEH
WEH < OEH,
WEH
1. ALL BILINGUALS: Bilinguals will exceed
BILS > MONS
monolinguals
2. DOMINANT IN OTHER LANGUAGE: Those
OWH > OEH,
dominant in other language will carry over
WEH
to this language
3. BALANCED BILINGUALS: Balanced
WEH > OEH,
bilinguals will transfer between languages
WEH
In whom?
Table 4.6 Predictions regarding acceleration or delay by home language group
n.a.
OEH < OWH,
WEH
WEH < OEH,
WEH
WEH > OEH,
WEH
OEH > OWH,
WEH
n.a.
WELSH
25-03-2014 13:40:49
In order to examine performance, to determine whether any of the three
types of predictions are substantiated by the data, mean scores [out of three]
for each structure at each age by each home language group were examined.
The mean scores are shown in Table 4.7 for English and Table 4.8 for Welsh.
Scores for structures that are similar in Welsh and English are shown in the
top half of the Tables, those that are dissimilar in the bottom half. The average
mean scores for all 13 structures for each home language group are also shown
for each age at the bottom of each table. Note that the overlapping structures
were included in the calculations of these means, so the means for all 13 structures do not directly correspond to the means of the 11 structures shown.
To assess whether acceleration or deceleration occurred in any given
instance, the following calculations were performed. First, at each age, the
relation between the mean score of each home language group to that of
those who were most proficient in the language – the monolinguals for
English and the OWH group for Welsh – was determined. This relation is
expressed as a percentage at the bottom of Tables 4.7 and 4.8. (e.g. for English,
at age two–three, the OEH children’s scores were generally 21.7% lower than
those of the monolinguals; the WEH children’s were 37.7% lower; and the
OWH children’s were 40.6% lower; for Welsh, at age two–three, the WEH
children’s scores were 25.3% lower than the OWH children’s, and the OEH
children’s scores were 45.6% lower; and so forth.)
Given this overall relative performance at each age for each home language group, each sub-score was then examined to see if it fell within the
normal performance for that home language group. An arbitrary leeway
margin was set at 10% of the monolingual score around the mean range for
the given group. Any scores that did not fall within the given mean range
plus or minus that 10% are shown boxed in bold in the tables. Those above
the expected range are shown boxed with solid bold lines; those below that
range are shown boxed with broken bold lines.
On examination of these data, we can see the following. First, there are
relatively few cases of acceleration, at least as defined here. There are only
two cases for English, five for Welsh – in contrast to 20 cases of depressed
scores for English and 25 for Welsh. Secondly, the cases in which acceleration
is observed fall into both the upper and lower structures in the charts – that
is, in both cases where acceleration could be predicted to occur and cases for
which deceleration might be predicted. The specific cases here where possible
acceleration is shown are, in English, in the two- to three-year-old OWH
children’s performance on the comparative, and the four- to five-year-old
OEH children’s performance on the SO relatives; and in Welsh, in the WEH
children’s performance on the future at age two to three and on partial quantification, the present perfect, SS relatives, and SO relatives at ages four to
five. Note that the cases in which possible deceleration is observed also fall
into both the upper and lower structures. About half fell into the upper
structures (9 of 20 in English and 13 of 25 in Welsh) and half into the lower.
2721_Ch04.indd 78
25-03-2014 13:40:49
2721_Ch04.indd 79
A. Similar:
Comparative
Superlative
Future
Universal/Exhaustive
Quantification
Existential/Nonexhaustive
Quantification
B. Dissimilar:
Passive
Present Perfect
Time conjunctions
OS Relative Clauses
SS Relative Clauses
SO Relative Clauses
AVERAGE, all structures
MON – %
Structures
0.31
0.62
0.54
0.62
0.69
0.46
0.69
0.66
37.7
1.00 0.80
1.13
1.00
1.30
0.87
0.78
0.87
1.06
1.00
0.70
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.50
0.83
21.7
0.69
0.54
0.39
0.54
0.90
0.60
0.80
0.60
0.78
0.83
0.91
0.91
0.81
0.69
0.44
0.44
0.25
0.44
0.63
40.6
0.50
1.13
0.56
0.50
0.44
OWH
1.58
1.04
1.04
1.08
OEH
2.26
2.40
1.71
1.40
0.95
1.08
1.71
1.96
2.13
1.04
1.58
1.08
1.58
1.53
10.5
1.47 1.42
1.79
1.50
1.08
1.68
M
WEH
M
OEH
4–5
2–3
1.59
0.82
0.91
0.91
1.84
1.63
1.37
1.32
1.11
1.26
1.50
12.3
1.86
0.91
1.27
1.18
0.77
1.09
1.25
26.9
1.37 1.18
1.32
1.32
1.26
1.26
WEH OWH
Table 4.7 ENGLISH performance by structure, age, and home language
2.82
2.71
2.47
2.53
2.24
2.53
2.58
2.71
3.00
2.41
2.12
2.41
M
7–8
2.79
2.66
2.03
2.59
2.07
2.38
2.43
5.8
2.55
2.79
2.07
1.66
2.52
OEH
2.55
2.55
1.73
2.41
2.18
2.09
2.32
10.0
2.36
2.64
1.86
2.00
2.32
WEH
2.69
2.31
2.13
2.28
1.91
1.94
2.30
10.9
2.41
2.66
2.09
1.72
2.28
OWH
2.95
2.85
2.70
2.75
2.85
2.75
2.86
3.00
2.95
2.80
2.80
2.85
M
13–15
2.94
2.89
2.89
2.56
2.67
2.56
2.79
2.4
2.89
2.89
2.72
2.50
2.78
OEH
2.96
2.84
2.72
2.72
2.60
2.72
2.79
2.4
2.84
2.92
2.88
2.40
2.80
WEH
2.77
2.71
2.81
2.71
2.65
2.71
2.79
2.4
2.94
2.94
2.94
2.65
2.71
OWH
25-03-2014 13:40:49
2721_Ch04.indd 80
A. Similar:
Comparative
Superlative
Future
Universal/Exhaustive
Quantification
Existential/Non-exhaustive
Quantification
B. Dissimilar:
Passive
Present Perfect
Time conjunctions
OS Relative Clauses
SS Relative Clauses
SO Relative Clauses
AVERAGE, all structures
OWH – %
Structures
0.46
0.77
0.39
0.69
0.46
0.31
0.69
0.69
0.08
0.23
0.54
0.59
25.3
0.60
0.60
0.10
0.20
0.50
0.40
0.70
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.10
0.43
45.6
1.13
1.06
0.81
0.56
0.38
0.63
0.79
0.81
0.94
0.69
0.25
0.88
OWH
–
WEH
–
OEH
4–5
2–3
0.91
1.26
1.04
0.70
0.65
0.61
0.97
33.6
0.91
0.78
0.87
0.48
1.00
OEH
Table 4.8 WELSH performance by structure, age, and home language
1.00
1.63
1.26
1.00
1.16
1.21
1.30
11.0
1.58
1.26
1.05
0.68
1.21
WEH
1.68
1.36
1.32
1.55
0.82
0.86
1.46
1.27
1.55
1.55
0.91
1.55
OWH
–
7–8
2.17
2.41
1.97
1.97
1.48
1.28
2.03
12.5
2.45
2.35
1.76
0.69
2.41
OEH
2.50
2.59
1.91
1.96
1.68
1.55
2.13
8.2
2.27
2.50
2.05
1.05
2.18
WEH
2.77
2.50
2.07
1.93
1.87
1.67
2.32
2.73
2.63
2.23
1.60
2.50
OWH
–
2.83
2.56
2.78
2.28
2.44
2.06
2.61
4.4
3.00
2.89
2.61
1.83
2.89
OEH
13–15
3.00
2.80
2.60
2.32
2.44
2.24
2.64
3.3
2.88
2.92
2.56
1.96
2.72
WEH
2.68
2.65
2.68
2.55
2.77
2.42
2.73
2.87
2.87
2.84
2.68
2.71
OWH
25-03-2014 13:40:49
Such data provide little support for any of the predicted cases under an
acceleration hypothesis. That is, there does not appear to be any strong
evidence in favor of children’s learning how to say X in language A by transferring what they’ve learned about how to say X in language B. Any cases of
relatively advanced performance are few and dispersed, and they do not
show a strong advantage for any one sub-group of bilinguals.
If that is the case, how, then can we best account for those cases in
which acceleration does appear to have occurred? As conjectured above in
relation to correlations occurring across the two languages, one plausible
explanation is that, rather than reflecting children’s bootstrapping from one
structure to the other, the effects observed reflect a cognitive, metalinguistic,
or metacognitive advance that affects performance in both languages. This
would mean, not the transfer of one grammar to the other, but, for example,
gaining the cognitive underpinnings necessary for the processing of the
structures in question and applying that cognitive knowledge or facility to
the acquisition of both languages. Or, alternatively, it could mean gaining a
metalinguistic or metacognitive awareness of a message or meaning that can
be encoded by language and applying that awareness to the acquisition of
both languages. For example, a child may discover (metalinguistically) in one
language that future time or recent past time can be a linguistically relevant
notion to be encoded, and this may make the discovery of the means to
express that in the other language more viable.
In summary, careful analysis of bilingual children’s abilities in English
and Welsh at four ages failed to provide support for an approach positing
direct interaction between the morphosyntactic systems of these children’s
two languages, much like the findings in Chapter 3. Any evidence we have
seen suggesting that acquisition in the two languages might be ‘informed’
by a common source appear to be better explained as deriving from the
child’s knowledge at some other level – most likely metalinguistic, cognitive,
or metacognitive.
Semantic knowledge
Let us turn to possible interaction in another realm, linguistic semantics.
Our particular focus is on lexical semantics encoded differently in bilinguals’
two languages. Specifically, in order to examine bilinguals’ knowledge of the
semantics of their two languages, we have been carrying out a series of studies to examine bilinguals’ linguistically related categorization, in particular
in cases in which the two languages differ. No two languages cut up the
semantic space in exactly the same ways. Thus, for example, English has one
word for many types of brush, whereas Spanish distinguishes brushes for hair
(cepillo) from brushes for painting (brocha); Spanish categorizes stairs and
ladders as one sort of thing (escalera), whereas English mandatorily differentiates stairs from ladders. English has one word, key, for keys to open doors and
2721_Ch04.indd 81
25-03-2014 13:40:49
keys on a computer keyboard, whereas some dialects of Welsh have two
totally separate categories for these, goriad vs. allwedd; but Welsh has one
word that can be used for both thumbs and big toes, bawd, whereas English
necessarily keeps these separate. English has one word, tree, for all kinds of
trees, whereas Arabic distinguishes deciduous trees, shajarah, from date trees,
nakhla; in contrast, Arabic has one category for clocks and watches, saeah,
whereas English keeps these separated into two categories.
The question is how bilingual speakers handle such differences internal to
the semantics of words in their two languages. We know that one of the tasks
of a word-learning child is to learn what the boundaries of application are for
words. They make frequent errors of underextension and overextension, indicating that this process is far from simple (Anglin, 1977; Bowerman, 1978;
Clark, 1973; Dromi, 1987, 2009; Kay & Anglin, 1979). It is also clear that children are guided by the structure of their specific language in establishing
semantic categories; this is widely attested for a wide range of semantic fields
(Berman & Slobin, 1994; Bowerman, 1996a, 1996b; Bowerman & Choi, 2001;
Choi, 2006; de León, 2009; Gathercole & Min, 1997; Gathercole et al., 2000;
Imai & Gentner, 1997; Li, 2009; Narasimhan & Brown, 2009; Weist, 2008). Yet,
at the same time, the possible semantic organization children entertain is far
from random – it is to some extent informed by the (nonlinguistic) cognitive
knowledge of the child. Thus, for example, children’s overextensions are often
based on similarity of shape and function, seldom by similarity of color or size
(Clark, 1973). That is, children’s semantic hypotheses are affected by their
cognitive knowledge of what is likely to be judged as ‘similar’ on some level.
We hypothesized that bilinguals’ establishment of semantic categories in
their two languages would be influenced by the two languages in question,
in interaction with their growing cognitive understanding of the world. This
would be especially true of early bilinguals, such as simultaneous bilinguals
and early L2 bilinguals, less likely with late L2 bilinguals. In the latter case,
categorization in the L1 has been established by the time the acquisition of
the L2 begins, so the hypothesis was that such bilinguals are more likely to
exemplify L1-to-L2 transfer of semantic categories than L2-to-L1.
We also hypothesized that the level of interaction would depend on the
type of category. In our research, we have grouped semantic, language-specific categories into three major types, based on the semantics of the wider
words (e.g. brush, escalera, key, bawd, tree, and saeah in the examples above).
First, a ‘classical category’ is one that contains items whose membership,
despite the fact that they are objectively, ‘-etically’,3 distinguishable, is specifiable in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions. Thus, for example, among
the categories mentioned above, bawd in Welsh (containing both thumbs and
big toes) can be defined as ‘the largest of five digits extending from any of the
four limbs of a human’, escalera in Spanish (containing both stairs and ladders)
as ‘a multi-runged vertical construction used to ascend by foot to a higher
height’, and saeah in Arabic (clocks and watches) as ‘a timepiece’. A second
2721_Ch04.indd 82
25-03-2014 13:40:50
major type or category is a ‘radial category’ (Lakoff, 1987), in which a central
application of a word has been conventionally extended in a motivated fashion beyond the central use, but for which membership cannot be specified
with necessary and sufficient conditions. Thus, for example, aien in Arabic
has as its central application eyes, but it is also used, by metaphorical, but
conventionalized, extension to stove burners; pintura in Spanish refers centrally to paint, but it also is used for the product of paint, a painting; pen in
Welsh refers to a head, but also to the end or top of something, such as the
top of a list; and glass in English refers centrally to the material, but has been
conventionally extended to drinking receptacles made from this material, and
then also any similar drinking receptacle, even if it is made of plastic.
We might represent such classical and radial types as F1 and F2 in the
hypothetical language A at the top in Figure 4.3 (from Gathercole & Moawad,
2010: 7). F1 represents a lexical form that refers in the cognitive space to
–etically distinguishable referents, x and y, but the language pulls these
together by F1 under a common meaning, m1, with m1 specifiable via necessary
and sufficient conditions. F1 is an example of a classical category in language
A.4 F2 is an example of a radial category. It represents a lexical form that refers
in the cognitive space to distinguishable referents, a and b, that are linked in
some way, by similarity of shape, function, association, or the like, but, crucially, a and b do not share a set of criterially defining features. The language
pulls a and b together by F2 under a (complex) meaning structure m2.
These can be compared with a third type, homophones, represented by
F3 in Figure 4.3. Homophones are words that share the same form (phonological shape), but they refer to items so distant in the cognitive space, p and
q, that no speaker of language A would consider the referents to belong to
the same category, even though the language could be considered to be ‘inviting’ them to do so.
These contrast with the categories in the hypothetical language B, in
Figure 4.3, in which each of the referents shown in the conceptual space – x,
y, a, b, p, and q – all have distinct labels or forms in language B, and, hence,
belong to distinct categories, each of which corresponds to a different semantic meaning.
Our primary question has been how bilinguals process categories such as
those shown in Figure 4.3, when their two languages categorize referents in
distinct fashion. We have focused on cases in which one language has a wider
category than the other and subsumes two distinct categories from that other
language, as in F1 versus f1 and f2 in Figure 4.3. We have been examining this
question with various types of bilinguals from a variety of language pairs,
including Arabic-English (Gathercole & Moawad, 2010; Gathercole et al.,
2009), Welsh-English (Tomos, 2011), and Spanish-English (Gathercole et al.,
2009, 2010, 2011; Gathercole et al., 2008; Stadthagen-González et al., 2009).
Typical data are those reported for Arabic-English bilinguals. In that
case, two sets of bilinguals were studied, early L2 learners of English
2721_Ch04.indd 83
25-03-2014 13:40:50
Figure 4.3 Model of distinct semantic organization in two languages (from Gathercole &
Moawad, 2010)
(beginning E before age 6) and late L2 learners (beginning English after age
12), as well as monolingual speakers of Arabic and English. Speakers were
asked to judge which pictures, out of six, could be labelled by a given word,
either in Arabic or English. Words included half in which English had the
wider category (such as tree), and half in which Arabic had the wider category (such as saeah). When the word was from the wider language, two
pictures were appropriate; when it was from the narrower language, one
2721_Ch04.indd 84
25-03-2014 13:40:56
picture was appropriate. Words came from classical, radial, and homophonic category types.
The results from that study are shown in Figure 4.4 (from Figure 4.2,
Gathercole & Moawad, 2010: 7). Those bilinguals tested in English performed much lower than monolingual English speakers when English had a
wider category than Arabic. When English was narrower, the bilinguals
Figure 4.4 Performance on English and Arabic by bilinguals and monolinguals (from
Gathercole & Moawad, 2010)
2721_Ch04.indd 85
25-03-2014 13:40:58
erformed well on the radial and homophonic categories, but on the classical
p
categories, they performed below the monolinguals, especially the early L2
bilinguals. That is, the early bilinguals carried over the wider classical category from Arabic to their L2, English.
Those bilinguals tested in Arabic, on the whole, performed similarly to
their monolingual Arabic-speaking counterparts. The main exception to this
was in performance on classical categories for which English had the wider
scope. Here, the early L2 bilinguals applied the wider categorization from
English to their L1, Arabic. We have been obtaining similar results in cases of
simultaneous bilinguals (Tomos, 2011; Gathercole & Moawad, 2010; Gathercole
et al., 2009, 2010, 2011; Gathercole et al., 2008; Stadthagen-González et al.,
2009), and have found as well that language dominance in the community also
plays an important role in how all bilingual groups perform.
Our interpretation of such data are that semantic interaction phenomena
in bilinguals are, first, widespread, and, secondly, most apparent in the case
of categories that bring together items in the conceptual space that are close
together – namely, classical categories. Semantic interaction between the
two languages is least likely to occur in cases in which the referents are distant conceptually, that is, in the case of homophones.
Model of constructing a language
How can we account for results such as those above? What model can collectively provide for (1) minimal interaction at the local level (within morphosyntactic constructs); (2) the influence of cognitive, metalinguistic, and
metacognitive abilities; and (3) a higher level of interaction within the
semantic realm than elsewhere? These phenomena seem to fall out naturally
when seen within an emergentist perspective on language development and
given the fact that the two languages are being constructed in a single individual with a single brain and cognition. That is, these effects are natural
consequences of the emergent nature of two languages developing in a single
individual.
First, certain principles have been documented over the last half century
regarding the processes of learning a first language (see Gathercole, 2007).
These include the following:
(1) Piecemeal acquisition. Children initially accumulate bits and pieces of
knowledge in a haphazard fashion. Initially, these pieces may not be
linked, and they become linked later only as more and more connections
between them are accumulated.
(2) Acquisition in context. Children’s initial knowledge is embedded within
context – including both the situational and real-life context and the
linguistic context in which linguistic items are experienced. The latter
includes statistical learning, for which there is wide-ranging evidence in
2721_Ch04.indd 86
25-03-2014 13:40:58
acquisition at all levels of the language (e.g. Croker et al., 2000;
Freudenthal et al., 2002; Jusczyk, 1999; Li, 2003, 2009; Li et al., 2004;
Pelucchi et al., 2009; Saffran, 2003).
(3) Emergence of structure from accumulated knowledge. As the initially
piecemeal knowledge grows and begins to form interconnecting links,
structural properties emerge, leading often to reorganization and higherlevel abstractions of such knowledge (Bowerman, 1982; Elman et al.,
1997; Karmiloff-Smith, 1978, 1979).
(4) Influence of language on timing and sequence of acquisition. Language
is learned in language-specific fashion. Complexity has to do to a large
extent with language-specific properties, including the relative opacity
of structures (Gathercole, 2002c; Gathercole, 2007; Gathercole & Hoff,
2007; Gathercole & Montes, 1997; Gathercole et al., 2001; Lieven, 1994;
Moawad, 2006; Thomas, 2001), cue reliability, and form-function pairings (MacWhinney et al., 1984; McDonald, 1987).
(5) Role of exposure for timing/speed of acquisition. Finally, the speed of
acquisition of a language has partly to do with the level of exposure to
a language (Li & Associates, Inc., 2005).
If we take the first two and the fourth of these and examine their import
for bilingual acquisition, the implication is that initial acquisition will
respect the contexts in which forms are heard. On the nonlinguistic level,
this means we can expect distributed learning–for example, knowing how
to say things in one context in one language, but in another context in the
other language. On the linguistic level, this means associating linguistic
forms – morphemes, affixes, etc. – with the linguistic contexts in which they
have been heard. Children are excellent at picking up the constellations of
constructs that they hear together in the input (e.g. Jusczyk, 1999; Saffran,
2003), even in cases of homonymic forms (Clark & de Marneffe, 2012;
Veneziano & Parisse, 2010). Bilingual children are good at keeping given morphemes, especially bound morphemes, associated with forms with which
they have occurred (Gathercole, 2007; Gathercole, 2002a, 2002b; see Deuchar
& Vihman, 2005, for early mixing involving predicates). It is not surprising,
then, that at a local level, within the morphosyntactic systems of their two
languages, bilingual children keep the two languages fairly separate, since
they have occurred in separate linguistic constellations in the input.
If we take the third principle, whereby some level of abstraction is occurring through multiple linkages, we can expect some interaction between the
child’s two languages to begin occurring in the places where the two languages
might ‘meet’ in such multiple linkages. Where is that likely to occur? Precisely
in the place where the two languages must of necessity meet – one of these is
at the common cognition through which the languages are being learned and
processed. What is included in that common cognition? We can expect it to
include at least the following: (1) the child’s emerging understanding of the
2721_Ch04.indd 87
25-03-2014 13:40:58
world – including judgments of similarity and differences (of shape, of function, of properties, etc.), of social interaction, and the like; (2) the child’s processing abilities – including short term memory span, long term memory,
speed of processing phonological input, and the like; (3) the child’s growing
understanding of the linguistic purposes of language – including what constitutes a proposition, abstraction of what types of meaning can commonly get
encoded (e.g. specification of time in the past; spatial relations; quantities; relative quantities), and the like; (4) the child’s growing understanding of the pragmatic purposes of language – including the pragmatic structure of discourse
into topics and comments, even perhaps the combinatorial potential of oral
and gestural communication.
We have seen evidence of the first of these, a common understanding of
similarity, linked with semantic organization in the bilingual’s two languages in our work and others’ work on semantic interaction in bilinguals in
relation to categorization: the closer in the conceptual space the members of
categories are, the more susceptible crosslinguistically non-isomorphic categories are to convergence. The second, the child’s processing abilities, we
have suggested may be key in relation to the potential acceleration observed
above in the area of some types of relative clauses: potential growth in processing capacity may underlie advances in both languages in such areas.
Effects related to the third, a meta-cognitive understanding of the uses of
language, would include evidence indicating, for example, shared word order
across a bilingual’s two languages for expressing arguments of propositions;
shared use of overt markers for essential elements of propositions, such as
subjects; potential acceleration in the expression of general linguistic encoding such as past or future tense marking; and the like. And the fourth, the
growing understanding of the pragmatic uses of language, would be operative in cases in which the child discovered, for example, a particular word
order for expressing topics. The full range of expectations still needs to be
worked out, but the overriding principle is that it is the unified cognitive and
meaning base with which the two languages connect that leads to shared
associations between the two languages.
This perspective on interactive influences in the languages of bilinguals
is radically different from one in which the modules of language are seen as
distinct and in which interaction occurs at the interface between those modules. That type of model cannot account for the morphosyntactic facts laid
out here, and it lacks power for predicting and explaining interactions of the
semantic type explored here.
Conclusion
We have attempted to examine in detail potential evidence for interaction
between a bilingual speaker’s two systems at two levels, that of morphosyntax
2721_Ch04.indd 88
25-03-2014 13:40:58
and of semantics. Careful analysis of bilingual children’s abilities in English
and Welsh at four ages failed to provide support for an approach positing
direct interaction between the morphosyntactic systems of these children’s
two languages. Any evidence we have seen suggesting that acquisition in the
two languages might be ‘informed’ by a common source appear to be better
explained as deriving from the child’s knowledge at some other level – most
likely metalinguistic, cognitive, or metacognitive.
At the same time, evidence on speakers’ processing of linguistically
encoded categories that differ in their two languages suggests very prolific
interactions between the bilingual’s two semantic systems. This appears
especially true in cases where the semantics encoded have to do with closely
related cognitive spaces, and especially in those bilinguals whose linguistic
and cognitive development take place contemporaneously, as in simultaneous bilinguals or early L2 learners.
Such phenomena can be explained through an emergentist perspective
on language development. Principles that appear operative in language acquisition in both monolinguals and bilinguals can help provide insight into the
reasons why interaction is observed in some areas and not in others. Such a
view leads to further predictions for linguistic phenomena in bilinguals
beyond those explored here; future research can help to test the extent to
which such predictions are borne out.
Another type of interaction is explored in the next section of the book,
the interaction of the bilingual’s two languages in discourse. Specifically, it
addresses bilinguals’ choice of language in code-switched utterances.
Notes
(1) This work is supported in part by WAG grants on ‘Standardised measures for the
assessment of Welsh’ and on ‘Continued development of standardised measures for
the assessment of Welsh’ (Gathercole PI, Thomas co-investigator), ESRC grant RES062-23-0175 (Gathercole PI, Thomas co-investigator), and ESRC/WAG/HEFCW
grant RES-535-30-0061 (Deuchar, Gathercole, Baker, & Thierry). Many thanks to
the schools, teachers, parents, children, and adults who participated in these studies.
Without their generous cooperation, this work could not be accomplished.
(2) Welsh has another future form, in which the verb takes a finite inflection. That form
was not tested here.
(3) This term is taken from the phonetics/phonemic distinction – the former has to do
with the raw, objective nature of sounds, the latter with the structuring and functioning of the sound system and contrasts in it in the particular language.
(4) This type of category is most similar to phonemic categories in phonology – we can
specify the phoneme on the basis of shared phonetic features, and the phones brought
together by that phoneme are often treated as indistinguishable by native speakers
of the language.
2721_Ch04.indd 89
25-03-2014 13:40:58
References
Abrahamsson, N. and Hyltenstam, K. (2009) Age of onset and nativelikeness in a second
language: Listener perception versus linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning 59 (2),
249–306.
Abrams, D. and Hogg, M. (eds) (1990) Social Identity and Social Cognition. Social Identity
Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Ameel, E., Malt, B.C., Storms, G. and Van Assche, F. (2009) Semantic convergence in the
bilingual lexicon. Journal of Memory and Language 60, 270–290.
Ameel, E., Storms, G., Malt, B.C. and Sloman, S.A. (2005) How bilinguals solve the
naming problem. Journal of Memory and Language 53, 60–80.
Andersen, R.W. (1983) Transfer to somewhere. In S. Gass and L. Selinker (eds) Language
Transfer in Language Learning (pp. 177–201). Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Anderson, J. (2008) Towards integrated second language teaching pedagogy for foreign
and heritage languages in multilingual Britain. Language Learning Journal 36, 79–89.
Anglin, J.M. (1977) Word, Object, and Conceptual Development. New York: Norton.
Athanasopoulos, P., Dering, B., Wiggett, A., Kuipers, J.R. and Thierry, G. (2010) Perceptual
shift in bilingualism: Brain potentials reveal plasticity reveal plasticity in pre-
attentive colour perception. Cognition 116, 437–443.
Athanasopoulos, P., Wiggett, A., Dering, B., Kuipers, J.R. and Thierry, G. (2009) The
Whorfian mind: Electrophysiological evidence that language shapes perception.
Communicative and Integrative Biology 2, 1–3.
Atterer, M. and Ladd, D.R. (2004) On the phonetics and phonology of “segmental anchoring”
of F0: Evidence from German. Journal of Phonetics 32 (2), 177–197.
Auer, P. (2005) A postscript: Code-switching and social identity. Journal of Pragmatics 3,
403–410.
Awbery, G.M. (1984) Phonotactic constraints in Welsh. In M.J. Ball and G.E. Jones (eds)
Welsh Phonology: Selected Readings (pp. 65–104). Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Baker, C. (1988) Normative testing and bilingual populations. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development 9, 399–409.
Baker, C. (1993) Bilingual education in Wales. In H. Baetens Beardsmore (ed.) European
Models of Bilingual Education (pp. 7–29). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Baker, C. (2006) Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (4th edn). Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Baker, C. (2008) Postlude. In J. Cenoz and D. Gorter (eds) Multilingualism and Minority
Languages: Achievements and Challenges in Education (p. 106). AILA Review, 21.
Baker, C. (2010) Increasing bilingualism in bilingual education. In D. Morris (ed.) Welsh
in the 21st Century (pp. 61–79). Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Baker, C. (2011) Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (5th edn). Bristol:
233
2721_References.indd 233
25-03-2014 13:31:49
234 Advances in the Study of Bilingualism
Baker, C. and Prys Jones, S. (1997) Encyclopaedia of Bilingualism and Bilingual Education.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Ball, M.J. and Jones, G.E. (eds) (1984) Welsh Phonology: Selected Readings. Cardiff: University
of Wales Press.
Ball, M.J. and Müller, N. (1992) Mutation in Welsh. London: Routledge.
Ball, M.J., Müller, N. and Munro, S. (2001) The acquisition of the rhotic consonants by
Welsh-English bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingualism 5, 71–86.
Ball, M.J., Müller, N. (1992) Mutation in Welsh. London: Routledge.
Ball, M.J. and Williams, B. (2001) Welsh Phonetics. Lampeter: the Edwin Mellen Press.
Bangor University (2008) Bangor University Welsh Language Scheme. See http://www.
bangor.ac.uk/ar/cb/pdf/language_scheme_08.pdf (accessed on 18/02/2011).
Barlow, J.A. (2003) Asymmetries in the acquisition of consonant clusters in Spanish.
Canadian Journal of Linguistics 48, 179–210.
Barnett, R., Codó, E., Eppler, E., Forcadell, M., Gardner-Chloros, P., Vand Hout, R.,
Moyer, M., Torras, M.C., Turell, M.T., Sebba, M., Starren, M. and Wensing, S. (2000)
The LIDES Coding Manual: A document for preparing and analyzing language interaction data. International Journal of Bilingualism 4 (2), 131–271.
Becker, M. (2000) The development of the copula in child English: The lightness of Be. PhD diss.,
University of California, Los Angeles.
Becker, M. (2004) Copula omission is a grammatical reflex. Language Acquisition 12 (2),
157–167.
Berman, R.A. and Slobin, D.I. (1994) Narrative structure. In R.A. Berman and D.I. Slobin
(eds) Relating Events in Narrative: A Crosslinguistic Developmental Study (pp. 39–84).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Klein, R. and Viswanathan, M. (2004) Bilingualism, aging,
and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging 19,
290–303.
Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M., Green, D.W. and Gollan, T.H. (2009) Bilingual minds.
Psychological Science in the Public Interest 10 (3), 89–129. doi:10.1177/1529100610387084
Bialystok, E., Craik, F.I.M. and Ryan, J. (2006) Executive control in modified anti-saccade
task: Effects of aging and bilingualism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition 32, 1341–1354.
Bloom, L.M. (1973) One Word at a Time: The Use of Single Word Utterances before Syntax. The
Hague: Mouton.
Bloomfield, L. (1984) Language. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Bock, K. and Levelt, W. (1994) Language production: Grammatical encoding. In M.A.
Gernsbacher (ed.) Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 945–984). San Diego: Academic
Press, Inc.
Bokura, H., Yamaguchi, S. and Kobayashi, S. (2001) Electrophysiological correlates for
response inhibition in a Go/NoGo task. Clinical Neurophysiology 112, 2224–2232.
Bongaerts, T., van Summeren, C., Planken, B. and Schils, E. (1997) Age and Ultimate
Attainment in the Pronunciation of a Foreign Language. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition 19 (04), 447–465. doi:10.1017/S0272263197004026
Borsley, R.D. (2005) A new approach to Welsh negation. Paper presented at Twelfth Welsh
Syntax Seminar at Gregynog, 4–5 July, 2005.
Borsley, R.D. and Jones, B.M. (2001) Negation in colloquial Welsh. In R. Cann, C.
Grover and P. Miller (eds) Grammatical Interfaces (pp. 33–50). Stanford: CSLI
Publications.
Borsley, R., Tallerman, M. and Willis, D. (2007) The Syntax of Welsh. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bourguignon, N., Kasparian, K., Drury, J.E. and Steinhauer, K. (2010) L1 grammar influences L2 processing: ERP evidence of transfer effects. Oral presentation at the 11th
International Science of Aphasia Conference, Potsdam, Germany.
25-03-2014 13:31:49
References 235
Bowerman, M. (1978) Systematizing semantic knowledge: Changes over time in the
child’s organization of word meaning. Child Development 49, 977–987.
Bowerman, M. (1982) Starting to talk worse: Clues to language acquisition from children’s late speech errors. In S. Strauss (ed.) U Shaped Behavioral Growth (pp. 101–145).
New York: Academic Press.
Bowerman, M. (1996a) Learning how to structure space for language: A crosslinguistic
perspective. In P. Bloom, M.A. Peterson, L. Nadel and M.F. Garrett (eds) Language and
Space (pp. 385–436). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Bowerman, M. (1996b) The origins of children’s spatial semantic categories: Cognitive
versus linguistic determinants. In J.J. Gumperz and S.C. Levinson (eds) Rethinking
linguistic Relativity (pp. 27–63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bowerman, M. and Choi, S. (2001) Shaping meanings for language: Universal and languagespecific in the acquisition of spatial semantic categories. In M. Bowerman and S.C.
Levinson (eds) Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development (pp. 475–511).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, A. and Gullberg, M. (2008a) Bidirectional crosslinguistic influence in L1-L2 encoding
of manner in speech and gesture.Studies in Second Language Acquisition 30, 225–251.
Brown, A. and Gullberg, M. (2008b) L1-L2 convergence in speech and gesture: Manner of
motion in Japanese and English. Paper presented at International Conference on
Models of Interaction in Bilinguals, Bangor, Wales, 24–26 October, 2008.
Brown, R. (1973) A First Language: The Early Stages. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. (1983) Child’s Talk. New York: Norton.
Budwig, N. (2001) An exploration into children’s use of passives. In M. Tomasello and
E. Bates (eds) Language Development: The Essential Readings (pp. 227–247).Oxford:
Blackwell.
Bullock, B. and Gerfen, C. (2005) The non-transfer of schwa in a converging phonological
system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 8, 117–130. http://bangortalk.org.uk/
publications/Carter2010_Corpus-based_Analysis.pdf (accessed 2 April 2014).
Camilleri, A. (1996) Language values and identities: Code switching in secondary classrooms in Malta. Linguistics and Education 8(1), 85–103.
Cantone, K. F. (1999) Das Genus im Italienischen und Deutschen: Empirische Untersuchung
zum bilingualen Spracherwerb. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of Hamburg.
Cantone, K. F. (2007) Code-Switching in Bilingual Children. Dordrecht: Springer.
Carter, D., Parafita, M.C., Davies, P. and Deuchar, M. (2010) A corpus-based analysis of
codeswitching patterns in bilingual communities. In P. Cano Lopez, S., Cortinas
Ansoar, B. Dieste Quiroga, I. Fernandez Lopez and L. Zas Varela (eds) Proceedings:
XXIX Simposio Internacional de la Sociedad Española de Lingüística, 1 February 2010.
Santiago de Compostela, Spain: Editorial Arco. http://bangortalk.org.uk/publications/
Carter2010_Corpus-based_Analysis.pdf (accessed 26 February 2014).
Carter, D., Deuchar, M., Davies, P. and Parafita Couto, M.C. (2011) A systematic comparison of factors affecting the choice of matrix language in three bilingual communities. Journal of Language Contact 4 (2), 153–183.
Carter, D., Deuchar, M., Davies, P. and Parafita, M.C. (under review) The effect of community norms on the choice of matrix language by bilinguals. Journal of Language Contact.
Centre for Welsh Medium Higher Education (2009) Adroddiad Grŵp Gorchwyl a Gorffen
Data. Cardiff: Centre for Welsh Medium Higher Education.
Centre for Welsh Medium Higher Education (2010) Adroddiad Data Cyfrwng Cymraeg
2008/09. Adroddiad mewnol wedi ei baratoi ar gyfer defnydd mewnol y sector addysg
uwch yng Nghymru. [Internal report prepared for internal use within the higher
education sector in Wales.]
Chambers, J.K. (2002) Patterns of Variation including Change. In J.K. Chambers,
P. Trudgill and N. Schilling-Estes (eds) The Handbook of Language Variation and Change
(pp. 349–372). Blackwell.
25-03-2014 13:31:49
Chan, B. (2009) Code-switching between typologically distinct languages. In D. Bullock
and A.J. Toribio (eds) The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Code (pp. 182–198).
Chauncey, K., Holcomb, P.J. and Grainger, J. (2009) Primed picture naming within and
across languages: An ERP investigation. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience
9, 286–303.
Chierchia, G., Guasti, M.T. and Gualmini, A. (1999) Nouns and articles in child grammar
and the syntax/semantics map, Presentation at GALA 1999, Potsdam.
Chin, S.B. and Dinnsen, D.A. (1992) Consonant clusters in disordered speech: constraints
and correspondence patterns. Journal of Child Language 19, 259–285.
Choi, S. (2006) Influence of language-specific input on spatial cognition: Categories of
containment. First Language 26 (2), 207–232.
Chomsky, N. (1981) Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Christoffels, I.K., De Groot, A.M.B. and Kroll, J.F. (2006) Memory and language skills in
simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency. Journal of
Memory and Language 54, 324–345.
Christoffels, I.K., Firk, C. and Schiller, N. (2007) Bilingual language control: An eventrelated brain potential study. Brain Research 1147, 192–208.
Clahsen, H. (1982) Spracherwerb in der Kindheit. Tübingen: Narr.
Clahsen, H. (1984) Der Erwerb von Kasusmarkierungen in der deutschen Kindersprache.
Linguistische Berichte 89, 1–31.
Clahsen, H. (1986) Die Profilanalyse. Ein linguistisches Verfahren für die Sprachdiagnose im
Vorschulalter. Berlin: Marhold.
Clark, E.V. (1973) What’s in a word? On the child’s acquisition of semantics in his first
language. In T.E. Moore (ed.) Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language (pp.
65–110). New York: Academic Press.
Clark, E.V. (2003) First Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clark, E.V. and de Marneffe, M.C. (2012) Constructing verb paradigms in French: Adult
construals and emerging grammatical contrasts. Morphology 22, 89–120.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K. (2000) Research Methods in Education (5th edn).
London: Routledge/Falmer.
Coker, P.L. (1978) Syntactic and semantic factors in the acquisition of before and after.
Journal of Child Language 5, 261–277.
Colomé, À. (2001) Lexical activation in bilinguals’ speech production: Language-specific
or language-independent? Journal of Memory and Language 45, 721–736.
Colomé, À. and Miozzo, M. (2010) Which words are activated during bilingual word production? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 36, 96–109.
Cook, V. (2003) The changing L1 in the L2 user’s mind. In V. Cook (ed.) Effects of the
Second Language on the First (pp. 1–19). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Coppieters, R. (1987) Competence differences between near and near-native speakers.
Language 63, 544–573.
Costa, A. (2005) Lexical access in bilingual production. In J.F. Kroll and A.M.B. DeGroot
(eds) Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches (pp. 308–325). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Costa, A. and Caramazza, A. (1999) Is lexical selection in bilingual speech production
language-specific? Further evidence from Spanish-English and English-Spanish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2, 231–244.
Costa, A. and Santesteban, M. (2004) Lexical access in bilingual speech production:
Evidence from language switching in highly proficient bilinguals and L2 learners.
Journal of Memory and Language 50, 491–511.
Costa, A., Caramazza, A. and Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2000) The cognate facilitation effect:
Implications for models of lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition 26, 1283–1296.
25-03-2014 13:31:49
References 237
Costa, A., Colomé, A. and Gómez, O. and Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2003) Another look at
cross-language competition in bilingual speech production: Lexical and phonological
factors. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 6, 167–179.
Costa, A., Miozzo, M. and Caramazza, A. (1999) Lexical selection in bilinguals: Do words
in the bilingual’s two lexicons compete for selection? Journal of Memory and Language
41, 365–397.
Costa, A., Hernandez, A.E. and Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2008) Bilingualism aids conflict
resolution: evidence from the ANT task. Cognition 106, 59–86.
Costa, A., Santesteban, M. and Ivanova, I. (2006) How do highly proficient bilinguals
control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition 32, 1057–1074.
Costa, S., Strijkers, K., Martin, C. and Thierry, G. (2009) The time course of word
retrieval revealed by event-related brain potentials during overt speech. Proceedings of
National Academy of Sciences 106, 21442–21446.
Crain, S. and Lillo-Martin, D. (1999) An Introduction to Linguistic Theory and Language
Acquisition. Malden: Blackwell Publishers.
Creese, A. and Blackledge, A. (2010) Translanguaging in the Bilingual classroom: A
Pedagogy for Learning and Teaching? The Modern Language Journal 94, 103–115.
Creese, A. and Blackledge, A. (2011) Ideologies and interactions in multilingual education:
what can an ecological approach tell us about bilingual pedagogy? In C. Hélot and
M. Ó Laoire (eds) Language Policy for the Multilingual Classroom (pp. 3–21). Bristol:
Croker, S., Pine, J.M. and Gobet, F. (2000) Modelling optional infinitive phenomena.
Paper presented at 3rd International Conference on Cognitive Modelling, Groningen,
Netherlands.
Cummins, J. (2000) Language, Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire.
Cummins, J. (2008) Foreword. In J. Cenoz and D. Gorter (eds) Multilingualism and
Minority Languages: Achievements and Challenges in Education (pp. 1–3). AILA Review,
21.
Davies. P. (2010) Identifying Word-order Convergence in the Speech of Welsh-ENGLISH bilinguals. PhD thesis, Bangor University.
Davies, P. and Deuchar, M. (2010) Using the matrix language frame model to identify
word order convergence in Welsh-English bilingual speech. In A. Breitbarth, C. Lucas,
S. Watts and D. Willis (eds) Continuity and Change in Grammar (pp. 77–96).
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Davies, P. and Deuchar, M. (under review) ‘Ti mynd off y point rwan’: A corpus-based
analysis of auxiliary deletion in Welsh. Journal of Celtic Linguistics.
De Groot, A.M.B., Delmaar, P. and Lupker, S.J. (2000) The processing of interlexical homographs in translation recognition and lexical decision: Support for non-selective access
to bilingual memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 53, 397–428.
DeHouwer, A. (1990 ) The Acquisition of Two Languages from Birth: A Case Study. Cambridge:
CUP.
de Leeuw, E. (2008) When your Native Language Sounds Foreign: A Phonetic Investigation
into First Language Attrition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Queen Margaret
University, Edinburgh.
de Leeuw, E., Mennen, I. and Scobbie, J.M. (2013) Dynamic systems, maturational constraints, and phonetic attrition. International Journal of Bilingualism 17,
683–700.
de Leeuw, E., Mennen, I. and Scobbie, J.M. (2011) Singing a different tune in your native
language: First language attrition of prosody. International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (1),
101–116.
25-03-2014 13:31:49
de Leeuw, E., Schmid, Monika S. and Mennen, I. (2010) The effects of contact on native
language pronunciation in an L2 migrant setting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
13 (Special Issue 01), 33–40. doi:10.1017/S1366728909990289
de León, L. (2009) Mayan semantics in early lexical development: The case of the Tzotzil
verbs for ‘eating’ and ‘falling down’. In V.C.M. Gathercole (ed.) Routes to Language:
Studies in Honor of Melissa Bowerman (pp. 69–94). New York: Psychology Press.
Deuchar M. (to appear) Code-switching. Invited article In Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics,
Blackwell.
Deuchar, M. (2005) Minority language survival: Code-mixing in Welsh. In J. Cohen, K.T.
McAlister and J. MacSwan (eds) Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on
Bilingualism (pp. 621–624). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
Deuchar, M. (2006) Welsh-English codeswitching and the matrix language frame model.
Lingua 116, 1986–2011.
Deuchar, M. and Davies, P. (2009) Code-switching and the future of Welsh. International
Journal of the Sociology of Language 195, 15–38.
Deuchar, M. and Vihman, M.M. (2005) A radical approach to early mixed utterances.
International Journal of Bilingualism 9, 137–157.
Deuchar, D., Muysken, P. and Wang, S. (2007) Structured variation in codeswitching:
towards an empirically based typology of bilingual speech patterns. The International
Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 10, 298–340.
Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J. and van Heuven, W.J.B. (1999) Recognition of cognates and
interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology. Journal of Memory and
Language 41, 496–518.
Dijkstra, T. and van Heuven, W.J.B. (2002) The architecture of the bilingual word recognition
system: from identification to decision. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 5, 175–197.
Dodd, B. (1995) Children’s acquisition of phonology. In B. Dodd (ed.) Differential Diagnosis
and Treatment of Speech Disordered Children (pp. 21–48). London: Whurr.
Dodd, B., So, L. and Li, W. (1996) Symptoms of disorder without impairment: the written
and spoken errors of bilinguals. In B. Dodd, R. Campbell and L. Worrall (eds)
Evaluating Theories of Language: Evidence from Disorder (pp. 119–136). London: Whurr.
Donchin, E. and Coles, M.G. (1988) Is the P300 component a manifestation of context
updating? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11, 357–427.
Döpke, S. (1992) One Parent one Language. An Interactional Approach. Amsterdam/
Döpke, S. (1998) Competing language structures: The acquisition of verb placement in
bilingual German-English children. Journal of Child language 25, 555–584.
Döpke, S. (2000a) Generation of and retraction from cross-linguistically motivated structures in bilingual first language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3 (3),
209–226.
Döpke, S. (2000b) The interplay between language-specific development and crosslinguistic influence. In S. Döpke (ed.) Cross-linguistic Structures in Simultaneous Bilingualism
(pp. 79–103). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Dorian, N.C. (1976) Gender in a terminal Gaelic dialect. Scottish Gaelic Studies 12, 279–82.
Dromi, E. (1987) Early Lexical Development. London: Cambridge University Press.
Dromi, E. (2009) Old data, new eyes: Theories of word meaning acquisition. In V.C.
Mueller Gathercole (ed.) Routes to Language: Studies in Honor of Melissa Bowerman (pp.
39–59). New York: Psychology Press, Taylor and Francis.
Dulay, H. and Burt, M. (1974a) Natural sequences in child second language acquisition.
Language Learning 24, 37–43.
Dulay, H. and Burt, M. (1974b) A new perspective on the creative construction process
and child second language acquisition. Language Learning 24, 253–278.
Dulay, H., Burt, M. and Krashen, S.D. (1982) Language Two. New York: Oxford University
Press.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 239
Dyson, A.T. (1988) Phonetic inventories of 2- and 3-year-old children. Journal of Speech and
Hearing Disorders 53, 89–93.
Eimer, M. (1993) Effects of attention and stimulus probability on ERPs in a Go/Nogo
Task. Biological Psychology 35, 123–138.
Elman, J.L., Bates, E.A., Johnson, M.H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D. and Plunkett, K.
(1997) Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development. Cambridge:
MIT Press.
ELWa (2000) A Study of Welsh-medium provision within the Further Education sector in Wales: a
report of the study carried out by Professor Colin Baker, Mr Gareth Davies-Jones, Dr Geraint
Wyn Jones and Dr Cen Williams. Cardiff: ELWa.
Endres, W., Bamback, W. and Flössler, G. (1971) Voice spectrograms as a function of age, voice
disguise, and voice imitation. Journal of the Acoustic Society of America 49, 1842–1847.
ESCalate (2002) ESCalate Project: Bilingual Teaching in ITET Courses. Bangor: University of
Wales.
Estyn (2002) Developing dual literacy: An Estyn discussion paper. Cardiff: Estyn. See http://
www.estyn.org.uk/publications/Dual_literacy.pdf (accessed on 03/02/2011).
Estyn (2008). Welsh-medium and Bilingual Provision for 14-19 learners. Cardiff: Estyn. See http://
www.estyn.gov.uk/publications/welsh_medium_and_bilingual_provision_for_14_19_
learners.pdf (accessed on 18/01/2011).
Evans, H.M. and Thomas, W.O. (2008) Y Geiriadur Mawr. Welsh-English English-Welsh
Dictionary (25th edn). Llandybie: Gwasg Gomer.
Fabbro, F. (2001) The bilingual brain: Bilingual aphasia. Brain and Language 79,
201–210.
Fabiano-Smith, L. and Barlow, J. (2010) Interaction in bilingual phonological acquisition:
evidence from phonetic inventories. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism 13, 81–97.
Fabiano-Smith, L. and Goldstein, B.A. (2010) Phonological acquisition in bilingual SpanishEnglish speaking children. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 53,
160–178.
Falkenstein, M., Hoormann, J. and Hohnsbein, J. (1999) ERP components in Go/Nogo
tasks and their relation to inhibition. Acta Psychologica 101, 267–291.
Faltis, C. (1990) New directions in bilingual research design: The study of interactive
decision making. In R. Jacobson and C. Faltis (eds) Language Distribution Issues in
Bilingual Schooling (pp. 45–57). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Ferguson, G. (2003) Classroom code-switching in post-colonial contexts: Functions, attitudes and policies. In S. Makoni and U.H. Meinhof (eds) Africa and Applied Linguistics
(pp. 38–51). AILA Review Volume 16. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fernández Fuertes, R. and Liceras, J.M. (2010) Copula omission in the English developing
grammar of English/Spanish bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingual
Education and Bilingualism. Models of Interaction in Bilinguals 13, 525–551.
Finkbeiner, M., Almeida, J., Janssen, N. and Caramazza, A. (2006) Asymmetrical costs
of language switching: Is this evidence of language suppression? Journal of Experi
mental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 32, 1075–1089.
Finkbeiner, M., Gollan, T. H. and Caramazza, A. (2006) Lexical access in bilingual speakers: What’s the (hard) problem? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9, 153–166.
Finlayson, R. Calteaux, K. and Myers-Scotton C. (1998) Orderly mixing and accommodation in South African codeswitching. Journal of Sociolinguistics 2, 395–420.
Flege, J.E. and Eefting, W. (1987) Cross-language switching in stop consonant perception and production by Dutch speakers of English. Speech Communication 6,
185–202.
Flege, J.E. and Hillenbrand, J. (1984) Limits on phonetic accuracy in foreign language
speech production (French and English). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 76,
708–721.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Flege, J.E. (1987) The production of “new” and “similar” phones in a foreign language:
evidence for the effect of equivalence classification. Journal of Phonetics 15, 47–65.
Flege, J.E., Munro, M. and MacKay, I.R.A. (1995) Effects of age of second-language learning on the production of English consonants. Speech Communication 16, 1–26.
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005) Ambiguities and anomalies: What can eye movements and
Event-Related Potentials reveal about second language sentence processing? In J.F.
Kroll and A.M.B. de Groot (eds) Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches
(pp. 268–284). New York: Oxford University Press.
Freudenthal, D., Pine, J. and Gobet, F. (2002) Subject omission in children’s language: The
case for performance limitations in learning. In W.D. Gray and C.D. Schunn (eds)
Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Fairfax, VA.
Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Friederici, A.D., Hahne, A. and Mecklinger, A. (1996) Temporal structure of syntactic
parsing: Early and late event-related brain potential effects. Journal of Experimental
Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition 22, 1219–1248.
Gal, S. (1978) Peasant men can’t get wives: language change and sex roles in a bilingual
community. Language in Society 7, 1–16.
Ganushchak, L.Y. and Schiller, N.O. (2009) Speaking one’s second language under time
pressure: An ERP study on verbal self-monitoring in German-Dutch bilinguals.
Psychophysiology 46, 410–419.
García, O. and Othegy, R. (1985) The masters of survival send their children to school:
Bilingual education in the ethnic schools of Miami. Bilingual Review/Revista Bilingüe
12, 3–19.
García, O. (1993) Understanding the societal role of the teacher in transitional bilingual
education classrooms: Lessons from sociology of language. In K. Zondag (ed.)
Bilingual Education in Friesland: Facts and Prospects (pp. 25–37). Gemeenschappelijk
Centrum voor Onderwijsbegeleiding, Leeuwarden.
García, O. (2009a) Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective. Oxford:
Wiley-Blackwell.
García, O. (2009b) Reimagining Bilingualism in Education for the 21st century. See
http://www.naldic.org.uk/docs/events/documents/NQ7.2.3.pdf (accessed on
03/02/2011).
García, O. (2009c) Education, multilingualism and translanguaging in the 21st Century.
In A.K. Mohanty, M. Panda, R. Phillipson and T. Skutnabb-Kangas (eds) Multilingual
Education for Social Justice: Globalising the Local (pp. 140–158). New Delhi: Orient
Blackswan.
Garcia, O. (2009d) El uso del español en la enseñanza. La educación bilingüe. In H. López
Morales (ed.) Enciclopedia del español en los Estados Unidos (pp. 417–422). Instituto
Cervantes, Santillana.
García, O. and Kleifgen, J. (2010) Educating Emergent Bilinguals. Policies, Programs, and
Practices for English language Learners. New York: Teachers College Press.
García, O. (2011) Educating New York’s bilingual children; constructing a future
from the past. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 14 (2),
133–153.
Gardner-Chloros, P. (2009) Code-Switching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gass, S. (1980) An investigation of syntactic transfer in adult second language learners.
In S.D. Krashen and R.C. Scarcella (eds) Research in Second Language Acquisition (pp.
132–141). Rowley: Newbury House.
Gathercole, V. (2002a) Command of the mass/count distinction in bilingual and monolingual children: An English morphosyntactic distinction. In D.K. Oller and R. Eilers
(eds) Language and Literacy in Bilingual Children (pp. 175–206). Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 241
Gathercole, V. (2002b) Grammatical gender in bilingual and monolingual children: A
Spanish morphosyntactic distinction. In D.K. Oller and R. Eilers (eds) Language and
Literacy in Bilingual Children (pp. 207–219). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Gathercole, V. (2002c) Monolingual and bilingual acquisition: Learning different treatments of that -trace phenomena in English and Spanish. In D.K. Oller and R. Eilers
(eds) Language and Literacy in Bilingual Children (pp. 220–254). Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
Gathercole, V.C.M. (2007) Miami and North Wales, so far and yet so near: Constructivist
account of morpho-syntactic development in bilingual children. International Journal
of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 10 (3), 224–247.
Gathercole, V.C.M. (2009) ‘It was so much fun. It was 20 fun!’ Cognitive and linguistic
invitations to the development of scalar predicates. In V.C.M. Gathercole (ed.) Routes
to Language: Studies in Honor of Melissa Bowerman (pp. 319–443). New York: Psychology
Press, Taylor and Francis.
Gathercole, V.C.M. (2013) Assessment of multi-tasking wonders: Music, Olympics and
language. In V.C. Mueller Gathercole (ed.) Issues in the Assessment of Bilinguals (pp.
1–19). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Gathercole, V.C.M. and Hoff, E. (2007) Input and the acquisition of language: Three
questions. In E. Hoff and M. Shatz (eds) The Handbook of Language Development (pp.
107–127). Oxford: Blackwell.
Gathercole, V.C.M., Laporte, N. and Thomas, E.M. (2005) Differentiation, carry-over,
and the distributed characteristic in bilinguals: Structural ‘mixing’ of the two languages? In J. Cohen, K. McAlister, K. Rolstad and J. MacSwan (eds) ISB4: Proceedings
of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism (pp. 838–851). Somerville: Cascadilla
Press.
Gathercole, V.C.M. and Min, H. (1997) Word meaning biases or language-specific effects?
Evidence from English, Spanish, and Korean. First Language 17, 31–56.
Gathercole, V.C.M. and Moawad, R. (2010) Semantic interaction in early and late bilinguals: All words are not created equally. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 13 (4),
1–22.
Gathercole, V.C.M., Moawad, R.A., Stadthagen-González, H., Thomas, E.M., Pérez-Tattam,
R., Yavas, F., Campusano, G., Morrish, H. and Tomos, H. (2009) The s emantics-cognition
interface in bilingual systems: Not all words are created equally. Paper presented at
Mind-Context Divide: Language Acquisition and Interfaces of Cognitive-Linguistic
Modules, Iowa City, Iowa, USA, Apr 30–May 2, 2009.
Gathercole, V.C.M. and Montes, C. (1997) That-trace effects in Spanish-and Englishspeaking monolinguals and bilinguals. In A. Perez-Leroux and W. Glass (eds)
Contemporary Perspectives on the Acquisition of Spanish, Vol. 1: Developing Grammars (pp.
75–95). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
Gathercole, V.C.M., Stadthagen-González, H., Pérez-Tattam, R., Thomas, E.M., Yavas,
F., Campusano, G. and Miller, J. (2010) Semantics-cognition synergies in bilinguals:
Interaction in Spanish-English bilinguals. Poster presented at the Donostia Workshop
on Neurobilingualism, San Sebastian, Sept. 30–Oct. 2, 2010.
Gathercole, V.C.M., Stadthagen-González, H., Pérez-Tattam, R. and Yavas, F. (2011).
Semantic organization in bilinguals: Impact of co-construction of semantic and cognitive systems in simultaneous and early L2 bilinguals. Paper presented at the 8th
International Symposium on Bilingualism, Oslo, Norway, June 15–18, 2011.
Gathercole, V.C.M., Stadthagen-González, H., Pérez-Tattam, R., Yavas, F., Viñas Guasch,
N., Moawad, R.A., Campusano, G., Morrish, H., Tomos, H. and Hermans, L. (2009)
Not all categories are created equally: Semantics and cognition in the emergence of
categories in bilinguals. Poster presented at the International Conference on
Neurobilingualism, Bangor, Wales, Sept. 19–20, 2009.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Gathercole, V.C.M. and Thomas, E.M. (2005) Minority language survival: Input factors
influencing the acquisition of Welsh. In J. Cohen, K. McAlister, K. Rolstad and J.
MacSwan (eds) ISB4: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism (pp.
852–874). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
Gathercole, V. and Thomas, E.M. (2007) A closer look at parent language ability: Welsh
and English vocabulary. In V. Gathercole (ed.) Language Transmission in Bilingual
Families in Wales (pp. 59–181). Cardiff: Welsh Language Board.
Gathercole, V.C.M. and Thomas, E.M. (2009) Bilingual first-language development:
Dominant language takeover, threatened minority language take-up. Bilingualism:
Language and Cognition 12 (2), 213–237.
Gathercole, V.C.M, Thomas, E.M. and Evans, D. (2000) What’s in a noun? Welsh-,
English-, and Spanish-speaking children see it differently. First Language 20, 55–90.
Gathercole, V.C., Thomas, E.M. and Hughes, E. (2008) Designing a normed receptive
vocabulary test for bilingual populations: A model from Welsh. International Journal
of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 11, 678–720.
Gathercole, V.C.M., Thomas, E.M. and Laporte, N. (2001) The acquisition of grammatical
gender in Welsh. Journal of Celtic Language Learning 6, 53–87.
Gathercole, V.C. Mueller, Laporte, N.I. and Thomas, E.M. (2005) Differentiation, carryover, and the distributed characteristic in bilinguals: structural “mixing” of the two
languages? In J. Cohen, K. McAlister, K. Rolstad and J. MacSwan (eds) Proceedings of
the 4th International Symposium on Bilingualism (pp. 838–851). Somerville: Cascadilla
Press.
Gathercole, V.C.M., Thomas, E.M., Roberts, E.M., Hughes, C.O. and Hughes, E.K. (2013).
Why assessment needs to take exposure into account. Vocabulary and grammatical
abilities in bilingual children. In V. C. Mueller Gathercole (ed.) Issues in the Assessment
of Bilinguals (pp. 20–55). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Gathercole, V.C.M., Thomas, E.M., Stadthagen-González, H., Pérez-Tattam, R. and
Yavas, F. (2008) Crosslinguistic categorization and effect of category type in bilingual processing. Poster presented at the International Conference on Models of
Interaction in Bilinguals, Bangor, Wales, October 24–26, 2008.
Gawlitzek-Maiwald, I. and Tracy, R. (1996) Bilingual bootstrapping. In N. Muller (ed.)
Two languages: Studies in bilingual first and second language development. Special
Issue of Linguistics 34 (5), 901–926.
Genesee, F. (1989) Early bilingual development: One language or two? Journal of Child
Language 16, 161–179.
Gierut, J.A. (1999) Syllable onsets: clusters and adjuncts in acquisition. Journal of Speech,
Language and Hearing Research 42, 708–726.
Gildersleeve-Neumann, C., Kester, E., Davis, B. and Peña, E. (2008) English speech sound
development in preschool-aged children from bilingual Spanish-English environments. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools 39, 314–328.
Gillon-Dowens, M., Vergara, M., Barber, H. and Carreiras, M. (2009) Morpho-syntactic
processing in late L2 learners. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 22, 1870–1887.
Gimson, A.C. (1989) An Introduction to the Pronunciation of English. London: Edward
Arnold.
Goldrick, M., Dell, G.S., Kroll, J. F. and Rapp, B. (2010) Sequential information processing
and limited interaction in language production. Science E-letter response to Sahin
et al. 2009 and Hagoort and Levelt 2009.
Goldstein, B.A., Fabiano, L. and Washington, P.S. (2005) Phonological skills in predominantly English-speaking, predominantly Spanish-speaking, and SpanishEnglish bilingual children. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools 36,
201–218.
Goral, M. (2004) First language decline in healthy aging: Implications for attrition in
bilingualism. Journal of Neurolinguistics 17, 31–52.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 243
Grech, H. and Dodd, B. (2008) Phonological acquisition in Malta: A bilingual language
learning context. International Journal of Bilingualism 12, 155–171.
Green, D.W. (1998) Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism:
Language and Cognition 1, 67–81.
Grosjean, F. (1982) Life with Two Languages: An Introduction to Bilingualism. Cambridge, MA:
University Press.
Grosjean, F. (1995) A psycholinguistic approach to code-switching: The recognition of
guest words by bilinguals. In L. Milroy and P. Muysken (eds) One Speaker, Two
Languages: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Code-Switching (pp. 259–275).Cambridge:
Grosjean, F. (1998) Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual issues.
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1, 131–149.
Grosjean, F. (2001a) Life with Two Languages: An Introduction to Bilingualism. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Grosjean, F. (2001b) The bilingual’s language modes. In J. Nicol (ed.) One Mind, Two
Languages: Bilingual Language Processing. Oxford: Blackwell.
Grunwell, P. (1987) Clinical Phonology (2nd edn). London: Croom Helm.
Guasti, M.T., De Lange, J., Gavarró, A. and Caprin, C. (2004) Article omission: across
child languages and across special registers. In J. Van Kampen and S. Baauw (eds)
Proceedings of Gala 2003, Volume 1 (pp. 199–210). Utrecht: Lot Occasional Series.
Gumperz, J. (1982) Language and Social Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gunter, T.C., Friederici, A.D. and Hahne, A. (1999) Brain responses during sentence reading: visual input affects central processes. Neuroreport 10, 3175–3178.
Guo, T. and Peng, D. (2006) Event-related potential evidence for parallel activation of two
languages in bilingual speech production. Neuro Report 17, 1757–1760.
Guo, T. and Peng, D. (2007) Speaking words in the second language: from semantics to
phonology in 170 milliseconds. Neuroscience Research 57, 387–392.
Hahne, A. (2001) What’s different in second-language processing? Evidence from eventrelated brain potentials. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 30, 251–266.
Hahne, A. and Friederici, A.D. (2001) Processing a second language: late learners’ comprehension mechanisms as revealed by event-related brain potentials. Bilingualism:
Haiman, J. (1980) The iconicity of grammar: Isomorphism and variation. Language 59 (4),
781–819.
Håkansson, G., Salameh, E-K. and Nettelbladt, U. (2003) Measuring language development in bilingual children: Swedish–Arabic children with and without language
impairment. Linguistics 41 (2), 255–288.
Hamburger, H. and Crain, S. (1982) Relative acquisition. In S. Kuczaj (ed.) Language
Development: Vol. 1. Syntax and Semantics (pp. 245–274). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Hermans, D. (2000) Word production in a foreign language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Hermans, D., Bongaerts, T., De Bot, K. and Schreuder, R. (1998) Producing words in a
foreign language: Can speakers prevent interference from their first language?
Herring, J., Deuchar, M., Parafita Couto, M.C. and Moro Quintanilla, M. (2010) ‘I saw
the madre’: Evaluating predictions about codeswitched determiner-noun sequences
using Spanish-English and Welsh-English data. International Journal of Bilingual
Education and Bilingualism 13 (5), 553–573.
Heselwood, B. (2008) Simultaneous phonemes in English. Linguistica Online 7, See http://
www.phil.muni.cz/linguistica/art/heselwood/hes-001.pdf (accessed on 18 February
2008).
Holm, A. and Dodd, B. (1999) A longitudinal study of the phonological development of
two Cantonese-English bilingual children. Applied Psycholinguistics 20, 349–376.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Honikman, B. (1964) Articulatory settings. In D. Abercrombie, D.B. Fry, P.A.D.
MacCarthy, N.C. Scott and J.L.M. Trim (eds) In Honour of Daniel Jones: Papers contributed on the occasion of his eightieth birthday (pp. 73–84). London: Longman.
Hoshino, N. and Kroll, J.F. (2008) Cognate effects in picture naming: Does cross-language
activation survive a change of script? Cognition 106, 501–511.
Hoshino, N. and Thierry, G. (2011) Language selection in bilingual word production:
Electrophysiological evidence for cross-language competition. Brain Research 1371,
100–109.
Hoshino, N. and Thierry, G. (2012) Do Spanish-English bilinguals have their fingers in
two pies – or is it their toes? An electrophysiological investigation of semantic access
in bilinguals. Frontiers in Cognition 3 (9), 1–6.
Hua, Z.and Dodd, B. (eds) (2006) Phonological Development and Disorders in Children: A
Multilingual Perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Hulk, A. and Müller, N. (2000) Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface
between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3 (3), 227–244.
Hurewitz, F., Papafragou, A., Gleitman, L. and Gelman, R. (2006) Asymmetries in the
acquisition of numbers and quantifiers. Language Learning and Development 2 (2),
77–96.
Imai, M. and Gentner, D. (1997) A crosslinguistic study of early word meaning: Universal
ontology and linguistic influence. Cognition 62, 169–200.
Indefrey, P. and Levelt, W.J.M. (2004) The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components. Cognition 92, 101–144.
Ingram, D. (1989) First Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jackson, G.M., Swainson, R., Cunnington, R. and Jackson, S.R. (2001) ERP correlates of
executive control during repeated language switching. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition 4, 169–178.
Jacobs, A.L. (2007) Segmental production in bilingual speech: A psycholinguistic approach.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, University
Park, PA.
Jacobson, R. (1981) The Implementation of a Bilingual Instructional Model: The New
Concurrent Approach. In R. Padilla (ed.) Ethnoperspectives in Bilingual Education Research.
Vol. III: Bilingual Education Technology (pp. 14–29). Ypsilanti: Eastern Michigan University.
Jacobson, R. (1983) Can two languages be acquired concurrently? Recent developments
in bilingual methodology. In H.B. Altman and M.McClure (eds) Dimensions: Language
1982 (pp. 110–131). Louisville: University of Louisville Press.
Jacobson, R. and Faltis, C. (eds) (1990) Language Distribution Issues in Bilingual Schooling.
Jake, J. Myers-Scotton, C. and Gross, S. (2002) Making a minimalist approach to
codeswitching work: Adding the Matrix Language. Bilingualism, Language and
Jarvis, S. and Pavlenko, A. (2008) Crosslinguistic Influence in Language and Cognition. New
York: Routledge.
Johnstone, R. (2002) Immersion in a Second or Additional language at School: A Review of the
International Research. Stirling: Scottish Centre for Information on Language Teaching.
See http://www.strath.ac.uk/scilt/researchandstatistics/sciltpublications/immersioninasecondoradditionallanguageatschoolevidencefrominternationalresearch/ (accessed
on 07/07/2011).
Jones, B.M. (1993) Ar lafar ac ar Bapur: cyflwyniad i’r berthynas rhwng yr iaith lafar a’r iaith
ysgrifennedig. Aberystwyth: y Ganolfan Astudiaethau Addysg.
Jones, B.M. (2004) http://childes.psy.cmu.edu/data/Celtic/Welsh/
Jones, B. (2010) ‘Amrywiaeth Caleidosgopig’: addysg ddwyieithog yng Nghymru heddiw.
Gwerddon, Rhifyn 5. See http://www.gwerddon.org/5_amrywiaeth_caleidosgopig-90.aspx (accessed on 03/02/2011).
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 245
Jones, G. (1984) The distinctive vowels and consonants of Welsh. In M.J. Ball and G.E.
Jones (eds) Welsh Phonology: Selected Readings. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Jones, H.M. (2010) Welsh speakers: age profile and out-migration. In D. Morris (ed.) Welsh
in the Twenty-first Century (pp. 118–147). Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Jones, K. (1995) Code-switching, intertextuality and hegemony: exploring change in
bilingual discourse. In Proceedings of the Summer School, Code-Switching and Language
Contact, Fryske Akademy, Ljouwert, Leeuwarden, 108–118.
Jones, Mari C. (1998) Language Obsolescence and Revitalization: Linguistic Change in two
Sociolinguistically Contrasting Welsh Communities. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Jonietz, P.L. (2003) Trans-language learners: a new terminology for international schools.
In E. Murphy (ed.) ESL: Educating Non-native Speakers of English in an English-medium
International School. The International Schools Journal Compendium (pp. 52–56).
Woodbridge: John Catt Educational Ltd.
Jusczyk, P. (1999) How infants begin to extract words from speech. Trends in Cognitive
Science 3 (9), 323–328.
Karlsson, F., Voutilainen, A., Heikkilä, J. and Anttila, A. (eds) (1995) Constraint Grammar:
A Language-Independent System for Parsing Unrestricted Text. Berlin, New York: Mouton
de Gruyter.
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1978) The interplay between syntax, semantics and phonology in
language acquisition processes. In R.N. Campbell and P.T. Smith (eds) Recent Advances
in the Psychology of Language (pp. 1–23). New York: Plenum.
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1979) A Functional Approach to Child Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Kay, D. A. and Anglin, J.M. (1979) Overextension and Underextension in the Child’s Receptive
and Expressive Speech. SRCD, San Francisco, California March.
Kehoe, M. (2002) Developing vowel systems as a window to bilingual phonology.
Kellerman, E. (1978) Giving learners a break: Native language intuitions as a source of
predictions about transferability. Working Papers in Bilingualism 15, 59–92.
Kellerman, E. (1983) Now you see it, now you don’t. In S. Gass and L. Selinker (eds)
Language Transfer in Language Learning (pp. 112–134). Rowley, Mass: Newbury
House.
Kellerman, E. (1995) Crosslinguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere? Annual Review of
Applied Linguistic 15, 125–150.
Keshavarz, M. and Ingram, D. (2002) The early phonological development of a FarsiEnglish bilingual child. International Journal of Bilingualism 6, 265–300.
Kidd, E. and Bavin, E.L. (2002) English-speaking children’s comprehension of relative
clauses: Evidence for general-cognitive and language-specific constraints on development. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 31 (6), 599–617.
Kim, M. and Stoel-Gammon, C. (2011) Phonological development of word-initial Korean
obstruents in young Korean children. Journal of Child Language 38, 316–340.
Kirk, C. and Demuth, K. (2005) Asymmetries in the acquisition of word-initial and wordfinal consonant clusters. Journal of Child Language 32, 709–734.
Knupsky, A.C. and Amrhein, P.C. (2007) Phonological facilitation through translation in
a bilingual picture-naming task. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 10, 211–223.
Koehn, C. (1994)The acquisition of gender and number morphology within NP. In J.M.
Meisel (ed.) Bilingual First Language Acquisition: French and German Grammatical
Development, Vol. 7 of Language Acquisition and Language Disorders (pp. 29–51).
Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Koester, D. and Schiller, N.O. (2008) Morphological priming in overt language production: Electrophysiological evidence from Dutch. NeuroImage 42, 1622–1630.
Köpcke, K.M. (1982) Untersuchungen zum Genussystem der deutschen Gegenwartssprache.
Tübingen: Niemeyer.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Köpcke, K.-M. and Zubin, D. (1984) Sechs Prinzipien für die Genuszuweisung im
Deutschen: Ein Beitrag zur natürlichen Klassifikation. Linguistische Berichte 93, 26–50.
Köpke, B. (2004) Neurolinguistic aspects of attrition. Journal of Neurolinguistics 17, 3–30.
Köpke, B. and Schmid, M. (2004) Language attrition: The next phase. In M.S. Schmid, B.
Köpke, M. Keijzer and L. Weilemar (eds) First Language Attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues (pp. 1–46). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
Kotz, S.A. (2009) A critical review of ERP and fMRI evidence on L2 syntactic processing.
Brain and Language 109, 68–74.
Krashen, S.D. (1982) Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon
Press.
Krashen, S.D. (1983) Newmark’s ‘Ignorance Hypothesis’ and current second language
acquisition theory. In S. Gass and L. Selinker (eds) Language Transfer in Language
Learning (pp. 135–153). Rowley: Newbury House.
Kroll, J.F., Bobb, S.C. and Wodniekca, Z. (2006) Language selectivity is the exception, not
the rule: Arguments against a fixed locus of language selection in bilingual speech.
Kroll, J.F., Bobb, S.C., Misra, M. and Guo, T. (2008) Language selection in bilingual
speech: Evidence for inhibitory processes. Acta Psychologica 128, 416–430.
Kroll, J.F., Dijkstra, A., Janssen, N. and Schriefers, H. (in preparation) Selecting the language in which to speak: Cued-picture naming experiments on lexical access in bilingual
production. Unpublished manuscript, The Pennsylvania State University, University
Park, PA.
Kroll, J.F. and Dussias, P. (2005) The comprehension of words and sentences in twolanguages. In T. Bhatia and W. Ritchie (eds) Handbook of Bilingualism (pp. 169–200).
Malden: Blackwell Publishers.
Kroll, J.F. and Stewart, E. (1994) Category interference in translation and picture naming:
evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations.
Journal of Memory and Language 33, 149–174.
Kroll, J.F. and Tokowicz, N. (2005) Models of bilingual representation and processing:
Looking back and to the future. In J.F. Kroll and A.M.B. de Groot (eds) Handbook of
Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches (pp. 531–553). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Kuchenbrandt, I. (2008) Crosslinguistic influences in the acquisition of gender? Working
Papers in Multilingualism 86, 5–28.
Kufner, H.L. (1970) Kontrastive Phonologie. Deutsch-Englisch. Stuttgart: Klett Verlag.
Kuipers, J.R. and Thierry, G. (2012) Event-related potential correlates of language change
detection in bilingual toddlers. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience 2, 97–102.
Kupisch, T. (2004) On the relation between input frequency and acquisition patterns
from a cross-linguistic perspective. In J. van Kampen and S. Baauw (eds) Proceedings
of GALA 2003 (pp. 199–210). Utrecht: LOT Occasional Series 3.
Kupisch, T. (2006) The Acquisition of Determiners in Bilingual German-Italian and GermanFrench Children. München: Lingcom Europa.
Kupisch, T. and Bernardini, P. (2007) Determiner use in Italian-Swedish and ItalianGerman bilinguals: A challenge for parameter setting models. In M. Anderssen and
M. Westergaard (eds) Nordlyd. Tromsø University Working Papers on Language and
Linguistics 34 (3).
Kupisch, T., Müller, N. and Cantone, K.F. (2002) Gender in Monolingual and Bilingual
First Language Acquisition: Comparing Italian and French. Lingue e Linguaggio 1 (1),
107–149.
Kutas, M. and Hillyard, S.A. (1980) Reading senseless sentences: Brian potentials reflect
semantic incongruity. Science 207, 203–205.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 247
Labov, W. (1972) Sociolinguistic Patterns. Oxford: Blackwell.
Labov, W. (1972) Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society 1, 97–120.
Ladd, D.R. (1996) Intonational Phonology. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics (1st edn).
Ladefoged, P. (1975) A Course in Phonetics. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
Lado, R. (1957) Linguistics Across Cultures: Applied Linguistics For Language Teachers. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
La Heij, W. (2005) Selection processes in monolingual and bilingual lexical access. In J.F.
Kroll and A.M.B. De Groot (eds) Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches
(pp. 289–307). New York: Oxford University Press.
Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Law, N.C.W. and So, L.K.H. (2006) The relationship of phonological development and
language dominance in bilingual Cantonese-Putonghua children. International Journal
of Bilingualism 10, 405–428.
Lee, M.W. and Williams, J.N. (2001) Lexical access in spoken word production by bilinguals: evidence from the semantic competitor priming paradigm. Bilingualism:
Lewis, W.G. (2006) Welsh-medium Primary Education: The Challenges and Opportunities
of the Twenty-first Century. In H.G.F. Roberts and W. Gwyn Lewis (eds) Education
Transactions: Welsh-Medium and Bilingual Education (pp. 21–35). Bangor: College of
Education and Lifelong Learning.
Lewis, W.G. (2008a) Immersion Education in Wales: Methodologies and Challenges. In
Creating a Bilingual Wales: the Role of Welsh in Education (pp. 7–16). Cardiff: Institute of
Welsh Affairs.
Lewis, W.G. (2008b) Current challenges in bilingual education in Wales. In J. Cenoz and
D. Gorter (eds) Multilingualism and Minority Languages: Achievements and Challenges in
Education (pp. 69–86). AILA Review 21.
Lewis, G., Jones, B. and Baker, C. (2013) 100 bilingual lessons: Distributing two languages
in classrooms. In C. Abello-Contesse, P. M. Chandler, M.D. López-Jiménez and R.
ChacónBeltrán (eds) Bilingual and Multilingual Education in the 21st Century. Bristol:
Li, P. (2003) Language acquisition in a self-organising neural network model. In P.
Quinlan (ed.) Connectionist Models of Development: Developmental Processes in Real and
Artificial Neural Networks (pp. 115–149). Hove, UK and New York: Psychology Press.
Li, P. (2009) Meaning in acquisition: Semantic structure, lexical organization, and crosslinguistic variation. In V.C.M. Gathercole (ed.) Routes to language: Studies in honor of
Melissa Bowerman. New York: Psychology Press, Taylor and Francis.
Li, P., Farkas, I. and MacWhinney, B. (2004) Early lexical development in a self-organizing
neural network. Neural Networks 17, 1345–1362.
Li, R. and Associates, Inc. (2005) Childhood bilingualism: Current status and future
directions, April 22–23, 2004: Workshop summary. Workshop held in Washington, D.C.,
funded by US Department of Education and US Department of Health and Human Services.
Lieven, E. (1994) Cross-linguistic and cross-cultural aspects of language addressed to children. In C. Gallaway and B. Richards (eds) Input and interaction in language acquisition
(pp. 56–73).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lin, A.M.Y. and Martin, P. (2005) (eds) Decolonisation, Globalisation: Language-in-Education
Policy and Practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Linville, S.E. (1996) The sound of senescence. Journal of Voice 10 (2), 190–200.
Linville, S. E. and Rens, J. (2001) Vocal tract resonance analysis of aging voice using longterm average spectra. Journal of Voice 15 (3), 323 – 330.
The LIPPS group (2000) The LIDES Coding Manual: A document for preparing and analyzing language interaction data. International Journal of Bilingualism 4 (2), 131–270.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Lléo, C., Kuchenbrandt, I., Kehoe, M. and Trujillo, C. (2003) Syllable final consonants in
Spanish and German monolingual and bilingual acquisition. In N. Müller (ed.)
(In)vulnerable Domains in Multilingualism (pp. 191–220). Amsterdam, Philadelphia:
John Benjamins.
Lléo, C. and Prinz, M. (1996) Consonant clusters in child phonology and the directionality of syllable structure assignment. Journal of Child Language 23, 31–56.
Locke, J.L. (1983) Phonological Acquisition and Change. New York: Academic Press.
MacDonald, M.C. (1994) Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity. Language and
Cognitive Processes 9, 157–201.
MacSwan, J. (2000) The architecture of the bilingual language faculty: Evidence from
codeswitching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3 (1), 37–54.
MacSwan, J. (2005) Remarks on Jake, Myers-Scotton and Gross’s response: There is no
“Matrix Language”. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 8 (3), 277–284.
MacWhinney, B. (1978) The acquisition of morphophonology. Monographs of the Society for
Research in Child Development 43 (1/2), 1–123.
MacWhinney, B. (2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (3rd edn). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
MacWhinney, B., Bates, E. and Kliegl, R. (1984) Cue validity and sentence interpretation
in English, German, and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23,
127–150.
MacWhinney, B., Leinbach, J., Taraban, R. and McDonald, J. (1989) Language learning:
cues or rules? Journal of Memory and Language 28, 255–277.
MacWhinney, B. (2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Major, R.C. (1987) English voiceless stop production by Brazilian speakers of English.
Journal of Phonetics 15, 197–222.
Major, Roy C. (1992) Losing English as a first language. The Modern Language Journal 76,
190–208.
Maratsos, M. (1982) The child’s construction of grammatical categories. In E. Wanner
and L. Gleitman (eds) Language Acquisition: The State of the Art (pp. 240–266).
Cambridge: CUP.
Marian, V. (2009) Language interaction as a window into bilingual cognitive architecture.
In L. Isurin, D. Winford and K. De Bot (eds) Multidisciplinary Approaches to Code
Switching (pp. 161–185). Amsterdam, Netherlands: JohnBenjamins.
Mayr, R. (2005) The Perception and Production of German Monophthongs by British
Learners of German. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield.
Mayr, R. and Escudero, P. (2010) Explaining individual variation in L2 perception:
rounded vowels in English learners of German. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
13, 279–297.
Mayr, R., Price, S. and Mennen, I. (2011) L1 attrition in the speech of Dutch-English bilinguals: The case of monozygotic twin sisters. Paper presented at the 8th International
Symposium on Bilingualism, University of Oslo, Norway, 15–18 June 2011.
Mayr, R., Price, S. and Mennen, I. (2012) First language attrition in the speech of DutchEnglish bilinguals: The case of monozygotic twin sisters. Bilingualism: Language and
Mayr, R., Howells, G. and Lewis, R. (2014) Asymmetries in phonological development:
The case of word-final cluster acquisition in Welsh-English bilingual children. Journal
of Child Language, doi: 10.1017/S0305000913000603. First published online on 14
February 2014.
Mayr, R., Howells, D. and Lewis, R. (in press) Asymmetries in phonological development:
The case of word-final cluster acquisition in Welsh-English bilingual children. Journal
of Child Language.
EdQ1
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 249
McDonald, J. (1987) Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Dutch.
Applied Psycholinguistics 8, 379–413.
McLaughlin, B. (1978) Second Language Acquisition in Childhood: Volume 1: Preschool Children.
Hillsdale, NJ, LEA.
McLeod, S., van Doorn, J. and Reed, V.A. (2001) Normal acquisition of consonant clusters. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 10, 99–110.
Meisel, J.M. (1989) Early differentiation of languages in bilingual children. In K.
Hyltenstam and L. (eds) Bilingualism Across the Lifespan: Aspects of Acquisition, Maturity,
and Loss (pp. 13–40). Cambridge: CUP.
Meisel, J.M. (1990) Two First Languages: Early Grammatical Development in Bilingual Children.
Dordrecht: Foris.
Meisel, J.M. (1994) (ed.) Bilingual First Language Acquisition: French and German Grammatical
Development, Vol. 7 of Language Acquisition and Language Disorders. Amsterdam/
Mennen, I. (2004) Bi-directional interference in the intonation of Dutch speakers of
Greek. Journal of Phonetics 32 (4), 543 – 563.
Menken, K. and García, O. (2010) (eds) Negotiating Language Policies in Schools: Educators as
Policymakers. New York: Routledge.
Mennen, I. and Okalidou, A. (2007) Greek speech acquisition. In McLeod, S. (ed.) The
International Guide to Speech Acquisition (pp. 398–411). Delmar Thomson.
Mennen, I., Chen, A. and Karlsson, F. (2010) Characterising the internal structure of
learner intonation and its development over time. Proceedings of New Sounds 2010: The
Sixth International Symposium on the Acquisition of Second Language Speech. University of
Poznan.
Mennen, I., De Leeuw, E., Scobbie, J.M., Schaeffler, F. and Schaeffler, S. (2010) Measuring
language-specific phonetic settings. Second Language Research 26, 13–41.
Mennen, I., Schaeffler, F. and Docherty, G. (2012) Cross-language difference in f0 range:
A comparative study of English and German. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America
131 (3), 2749–2760.
Mennen, I., Schaeffler, F. and Dickie, C. (in press) Second language acquisition of pitch
range in German learners of English. To appear (June 2014) in Studies of Second Language
Acquisition.
Meuter, R.F.I. and Allport, A. (1999) Bilingual language switching in naming:
Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language 40,
25–40.
Milk, R. (1981) An analysis of the functional allocation of Spanish and English in a bilingual classroom. CABE Research Journal 2 (2), 11–26.
Mills, A.E. (1978) Linguistic and Psychological Aspects of Gender in English and German. Paper
presented to the Linguistic Association of Great Britain.
Mills, A.E. (1985) The acquisition of German. In D. Slobin (ed.) The Cross-Linguistic Study
of Language Acquisition (pp. 141–254). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
Mills, A.E. (1986) Acquisition of the natural gender rule in English and German. Linguistics
24, 31–45.
Milroy, L. (1987) Language and Social Networks. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd.
Milroy, L. and Wei, L. (1995) A social network approach to code-switching. In L. Milroy
and P. Muysken (eds) One speaker, Two Languages (pp. 136–157). Cambridge:
Misra, M., Guo, T., Bobb, S.C. and Kroll, J.F. (2012) When bilinguals choose a single word
to speak: Electrophysiological evidence for inhibition of the native language. Journal
of Memory and Language 67, 224–237.
Moawad, R. (2006) The acquisition of the Arabic gender and number systems. PhD thesis,
University of Wales Bangor.
EdQ1
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Montanari, S. (2009) Multi-word combinations and the emergence of differentiated
ordering patterns in early trilingual development. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
12 (4), 503–519.
Montanari, S. (2009) Pragmatic differentiation in early trilingual development. Journal of
Child Language 36, 597–627.
Moreno, E.M., Federmeier, K.D. and Kutas, M. (2002) Switching languages, switching
Palabras (Words): An electrophysiological study of code switching. Brain and Language
80, 188–207.
Moulton, W.G. (1970) The Sounds of English and German. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Müller, N. (1990) Developing two gender assignment systems simultaneously. In J.M.
Meisel (ed.) Two First Languages. Early Grammatical Development in Bilingual Children,
Vol. 10 of Studies on Language Acquisition (pp. 193–234). Foris, Dordrecht.
Müller, N. (1993) Komplexe Sätze. Der Erwerb von COMP und von Wortstellungsmustern bei
bilingualen Kindern (Französisch/Deutsch). Tübingen: Narr.
Müller, N. (1994) Gender and number agreement within DP. In J.M. Meisel (ed.) Bilingual
First Language Acquisition: French and German Grammatical Development, Vol. 7 of
Language Acquisition and Language Disorders (pp. 53–88). Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins.
Müller, N. (1998) Die Abfolge OV/VO und Nebensätze im Zweit- und Erstspracherwerb.
In H. Wegener (ed.) Eine zweite Sprache lernen. Empirische Untersuchungen zum
Zweitspracherwerb (pp. 89–116). Tübingen: Narr.
Müller, N. and Hulk, A. (2000) Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual children: Object
omissions and root infinitives. In C. Howell, S.A. Fish and T. Keith-Lucas (eds)
Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on Child Language Development
(pp. 546–557). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
Müller, N., Cantone, K.F., Kupisch, T. and Schmitz, K. (2002) Zum Spracheneinfluss im
bilingualen Erstsprachenerwerb: Italienisch-Deutsch. Linguistische Berichte 190,
157–206.
Müller, N., Kupisch, T., Schmitz, T. and Cantone, K. (2011) Einführung in die
Mehrsprachigkeitsforschung (3rd edn). Tübingen: Narr.
Muñoz, C. and Singleton, D. (2007) Foreign accent in advanced learners: Two successful
profiles. In L. Roberts, A. Gürel, S. Tatar and L. Marti (eds) EUROSLA Yearbook
Volume 7 (pp. 171–190). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company,
Amsterdam.
Munro, S., Ball, M.J., Müller, N., Duckworth, M. and Lyddy, F. (2005) Phonological acquisition in Welsh-English bilingual children. Journal of Multilingual Communication
Disorders 3, 24–49.
Munte, T.F., Heinze, H.J. and Mangun, G.R. (1993) Dissociation of brain activity related
to syntactic and semantic aspects of language. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 5,
335–344.
Muysken, P. (2000) Bilingual Speech: A Typology of Code-Mixing. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Myers-Scotton, C. (1993) Social Motivations for Codeswitching: Evidence from Africa. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Myers-Scotton, C. (2002) Contact Linguistics: Bilingual Encounters and Grammatical Outcomes.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Näätänen, R. (1992) Attention and Brain Function. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Inc. Publishers.
Narasimhan, B. and Brown, P. (2009) Getting the INSIDE story: Learning to express
containment in Tzeltal and Hindi. In V.C.M. Gathercole (ed.) Routes to language:
Studies in honor of Melissa Bowerman (pp. 97–132). New York: Psychology Press.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 251
Neville, H., Nicol, J.L., Barss, A., Forster, K.I. and Garrett, M.F. (1991) Syntactically based
sentence processing classes: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of
Cognitive Neuroscience 3, 151–165.
Newport, E.L. (1990) Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science 14,
11–28.
Nicoladis, E. (2002) What’s the difference between ‘toilet paper’ and ‘paper toilet’?
French-English bilingual children’s crosslinguistic transfer in compound nouns.
Journal of Child Language 29, 843–863.
Ohala, D.K. (1999) The influence of sonority on children’s cluster reductions. Journal of
Communication Disorders 32, 397–422.
Olive, J.P., Greenwood, A. and Coleman, J. (1993) Acoustics of American English Speech: A
Dynamic Approach. New York: Springer.
Oller, K. and Eilers, R. (eds) (2002) Language and Literacy in Bilingual Children. Child
Language and Child Development No. 2. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Osterhout, L. and Holcomb, P.J. (1992) Event-related potentials elicited by syntactic
anomaly. Journal of Memory and Language 31, 785–806.
Papafragou A. (2003) Scalar implicatures in language acquisition: Some evidence from
Modern Greek. Proceedings from the 38th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Papafragou, A. (2006) From scalar semantics to implicature: Children’s interpretation of
aspectuals. Journal of Child Language 33, 721–757.
Papafragou, A. and Musolino, J. (2003) Scalar implicatures: Experiments at the semanticspragmatics interface. Cognition 86, 253–282.
Papafragou, A. and Schwarz, N. (2006) Most wanted. Language Acquisition 13, 207–251.
Paradis, J. and Genesee, F. (1996) Syntactic acquisition: Autonomous or interdependent?
Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18, 1–25.
Paradis, J. (2001) Do bilingual two-year–olds have separate phonological systems?
Paradis, J. and Genesee, F. (1996) Syntactic acquisition in bilingual children: autonomous
or independent? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18, 1–25.
Paradis, J. and Navarro, S. (2003) Subject realization and crosslinguistic interference in
the bilingual acquisition of Spanish and English: what is the role of input? Journal of
Child Language 30, 371–393.
Parafita Couto, M.C. and Moro Quintanilla, M. (2010) “When I went to Canada, I saw
the madre”: evaluating two theories’ predictions about codeswitching between determiners and nouns using Spanish-English and Welsh-English bilingual corpora.
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 13 (5), 553–573.
Paterson, N. and Goldrick, M. (2009) Does the cognate effect reflect the letter or spirit of
cross-language relationships? Paper presented at the 50th annual meeting of the
Psychonomic Society, Boston, MA.
Pavlenko, A. (2003) Eyewitness memory in late bilinguals: Evidence for discursive relativity. International Journal of Bilingualism 7 (3), 257–281.
Pavlenko, A. (2009) Conceptual representation in the bilingual lexicon and second language vocabulary learning. In A. Pavlenko (ed.) The Bilingual Mental Lexicon:
Interdisciplinary Approaches (pp. 125–160). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Pearson, B. (2002) Narrative competence among monolingual and bilingual school children in Miami. In D.K. Oller and R. Eilers (eds) Language and Literacy in Bilingual
Children (pp. 135–174). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Pearson, B., Fernández, S. and Oller, D.K. (1993) Lexical development in bilingual infants
and toddlers: Comparison to monolingual norms. Language Learning 43, 93–120.
Pelucchi, B., Hay, J.F. and Saffran, J.R. (2009) Statistical learning in a natural language by
8-month-old infants. Child Development 80, 674–685.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Pfaff, C.W. (1979) Constraints on language mixing. Language 55, 291–318.
Pfefferbaum, A., Ford, J.M., Weller, B.J. and Kopell, B.S. (1985) ERPs to response production and inhibition. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 60, 423–434.
Philipp, A.M. and Koch, I. (2009) Inhibition in language switching: What is inhibited
when switching between languages in naming tasks? Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Leaning, Memory, and Cognition 35, 1187–1195.
Poeppel, D. and Wexler, K. (1993) The full competence hypothesis of clause structure in
early German. Language 69, 1–33.
Poplack, S. (1980) Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en español: toward a
typology of code-switching. Linguistics 18, 581–618.
Poplack, S. (1988) Contrasting patterns of codeswitching in two communities. In M. Heller
(ed.) Codeswitching: anthropological and sociolinguistic perspectives. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Potowski, K. (2007) Language and Identity in Dual Immersion School. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
Poulisse, N. and Bongaerts, T. (1994) Title first language use in second language production. Applied Linguistics 15, 36–57.
Proverbio, A.M., Leoni, G. and Zani, A. (2004) Language switching mechanisms in simultaneous interpreters: An ERP study. Neuropsychologia 42, 1636–1656.
Redknap, C. (2006) Welsh-medium Education and Training: Steps towards a holistic
strategy. In H.G.F. Roberts and W. Gwyn Lewis (eds) Education Transactions: WelshMedium and Bilingual Education (pp. 1–19). Bangor: College of Education and Lifelong
Learning.
Redlinger, W. and Park, T.Z. (1980) Language mixing in young bilingual children. Journal
of Child Language 7, 337–352.
Rieckborn, S. (2005) The development of tense and aspect in balanced and unbalanced bilingual
children. Paper presented at ISB5, Barcelona, March, 2005.
Rieckborn, S. (2006) The development of forms and functions in the acquisition of tense
and aspect in German-French bilingual children. In C. Lleó (ed.) Interfaces in multilingualism: Acquisition and representation (pp. 61–89). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rizzi, L. (1997) The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (ed.) Elements of
Grammar: Handbook of Generative Syntax (pp. 281–337). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Van Der Lugt, A., Rotte, M., Britti, B., Heinze, H-J. and Münte,
T.F. (2005) Second language interferences with word production in fluent bilinguals:
Brain potential and functional imaging evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 17,
422–433.
Romaine, S. (1995) Bilingualism (2nd edn). Oxford: Blackwell.
Rothweiler, M. (1993) Der Erwerb von Nebensätzen im Deutschen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Sachdev, I. and Bourhis, R. (1990) Language and social identification. In D. Abrams and
M. Hogg (eds) Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances (pp. 211–229).
New York: Harvester-Wheatsheat.
Saffran, J.R. (2003) Statistical language learning: Mechanisms and constraints. Current
Directions in Psychological Science 12 (4), 110–114.
Sánchez, L. (2003) Quechua-Spanish Bilingualism. Interference and Convergence in Functional
Categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sánchez, L. (2004) Functional convergence in the tense, evidentiality and aspectual systems
of Quechua-Spanish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7 (2), 147–162.
Sánchez, L. (2006) Kechwa and Spanish bilingual grammars: testing hypotheses on functional interference and convergence. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism 9 (5), 535–554.
Sancier, M.L. and Fowler, C.A. (1997) Gestural drift in a bilingual speaker of Brazilian
Portuguese and English. Journal of Phonetics 25, 421–436.
Sander, E.K. (1972) When are speech sounds learned? Journal of Speech and Hearing
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 253
Sankoff, D., Poplack, S. and Vanniarajan, S. (1990) The case of the nonce loan in Tamil.
Language Variation and Change 2, 71–101.
Sankoff, S., Tagliamonte, S. and Smith, E. (2005) Goldvarb X. Toronto, Canada:
Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto.
Sayahi, L. (2004) Social identity and code-switching in bilingual contexts: A comparative
approach. In L. Ashley and W. Finke (eds) Language and Identity: Selected Papers of the
International Conference, October 2–5, 2002 (pp. 373–381). East Rockaway: Cummings
and Hathaway Publishers.
Schaeffler, S., Scobbie, J. and Mennen, I. (2008) An evaluation of inter-speech postures
for the study of language-specific articulatory settings. In: Proceedings of the 8th
International Speech Production Seminar, Strasbourg, France.
Schneiderman, E.I. and Desmarais, C. (1988) The talented language learner: some preliminary findings. Second Language Research 4 (2), 91–109.
Scobbie, J., Schaeffler, S., and Mennen, I. (2011) Audible aspects of speech preparation. In:
Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhS 2011),
Hong Kong, China.
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., Filiaci, F. and Baldo, M. (2009) Bilingual children’s sensitivity to
specificity and genericity: Evidence from metalinguistic awareness. Bilingualism:
Siegel, G.M., Winitz, H. and Conkey, H. (1963) The influence of testing instruments
on articulatory responses of children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 28,
67–76.
Silva-Corvalán, C. (2005) La adquisición del sujeto en el proceso de desarrollo simultáneo
del inglés y el español. Memorias, Vol. I (pp. 321–329). XIV Congreso Internacional
ALFAL, Monterrey: Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León.
Silva-Corvalán, C. (2009) La adquisición bilingüe (y trilingüe): Aspectos sintácticos,
morfo-sintácticos y léxicos. In R.M. Ortiz Ciscomani (ed.) IX Encuentro Internacional
de Lingüística en el Noroeste (pp. 13–14). Hermosillo: Unison.
Smit, A.B., Hand, L., Freilinger, J.J., Bernthal, J.E. and Bird, A. (1990) The Iowa articulation norms project and its Nebraska replication. Journal of Speech and Hearing
Smith, D. (2006) Thresholds leading to shift: Spanish/English codeswitching and convergence in Georgia, U.S.A. International Journal of Bilingualism 10, 207–240.
So, L.K.H. and Dodd, B. (1995) The acquisition of phonology by Cantonese speaking
children. Journal of Child Language 22, 473–495.
So, L.K.H. and Leung, C.S.S. (2006) Phonological development of Cantonese Putonghua
bilingual children. In Z. Hua and B. Dodd (eds) Phonological Development and
Disorders in Children: A Multilingual Perspective (pp. 413–428). Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
Sorace, A. (2003) Near-nativeness. In M. Long and C. Doughty (eds) Handbook of Second
Language Acquisition (pp. 130–152). Oxford: Blackwell.
Sorace, A. and Serratrice, L. (2009) Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language
development: Beyond structural overlap. International Journal of Bilingualism 13,
195–210.
Sorace, A., Serratrice, L. Filiaci, F. and Baldo, M. (2009) Discourse conditions on subject
pronoun realization: Testing the linguistic intuitions of older bilingual children.
Lingua 119, 460–477.
Spalek, K., Hoshino, N., Damian, M.F. and Thierry, G. (in preparation). Speaking two lang
uages at once: Unconscious native word form access in second language production.
Stadthagen-González, H., Pérez-Tattam, R., Yavas, F. and Campusano, G. (2009)
Language dominance and interaction of L A and L B in Spanish-English adults in
Miami. Paper presented at the 7th International Symposium on Bilingualism, Utrecht,
The Netherlands, July 8–11, 2009.
EdQ1
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Stammers, J. (2010) The Integration of English-origin Verbs into Welsh: A contribution to the debate
over distinguishing between code-switching and lexical borrowing. VDM Verlag Dr. Müller e.K.
Stammers, J. and Deuchar, M. (forthcoming) Testing the nonce borrowing hypothesis:
counter-evidence from English verbs in Welsh. Bilingualism Language and Cognition.
Stell, G. (2009) Codeswitching and ethnicity: grammatical types of codeswitching in the
Afrikaans speech community. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 199,
103–128.
Stow, C. and Pert, S. (2006) Phonological acquisition in bilingual Pakistani heritage
children in England. In Z. Hua and B. Dodd (eds) Phonological Development and
Disorders in Children: A Multilingual Perspective (pp. 326–345). Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
Strijkers, K., Costa, A. and Thierry, G. (2010) Tracking lexical access in speech production: Electrophysiological correlates of word frequency and cognate effects. Cerebral
Cortex 20, 912–928.
Sundara, M., Polka, L. and Baum, S. (2006) Production of coronal stops by simultaneous
bilingual adults. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9 (1), 97–114.
Suppes, P. (1974) The semantics of children’s language. American Psychologist 29,
103–114.
Surridge, M. (1989) Factors in the assignment of grammatical gender in Welsh. Etudes
Celtiques 26, 187–209.
Szagun, G. (2004) Learning by ear: on the acquisition of case and gender marking by
German-speaking children with cochlear implant and with normal hearing. Journal
of Child Language 31, 1–30.
Szagun, G., Stumper, B., Sondag, N. and Franik, M. (2007) The acquisition of gender
marking by young German-speaking children: Evidence for learning guided by phonological regularities. Journal of Child Language 34, 445–471.
Tagliamonte, S. (2009) Variation in the English definite article: socio-historical linguistics
in the speech community. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13, 435–471.
Templin, M. (1957) Certain Language Skills in Children (Monograph Series No. 26).
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, The Institute of Child Welfare.
Thierry, G. and Wu, Y.J. (2007) Brain potentials reveal unconscious translation during
foreign language comprehension. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
USA 104, 12530–12535.
Thierry, G., Athanasopoulos, P., Wiggett, A., Dering, B. and Kuipers, J.R. (2009)
Unconscious effects of language-specific terminology on preattentive color perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 106, 4567–4570.
Thomas, A. (1997) Language policy and nationalism in Wales: A comparative analysis.
Nations and Nationalism 3, 323–344.
Thomas, E.M. (2001) Aspects of gender mutation in Welsh. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wales.
Thomas, E.M. (2004) Addysgu trwy gyfrwng y Gymraeg mewn seicoleg/Welsh-medium
teaching in psychology. Psychology Learning and Teaching 4 (1), 11–14.
Thomas, E.M. (2006) Teaching and assessing psychology through a minority language:
lessons from Wales. In R. Wilkinson, V. Zegers and C. van Leeuwen (eds) Bridging the
Assessment Gap in English-Medium Higher Education (pp. 179–194). Bochum:
AKS-Verlag.
Thomas, E.M. and Gathercole, V.C.M. (2005) Minority language survival: Obsolescence
or survival for Welsh in the face of English dominance? In J. Cohen, K. McAlister, K.
Rolstad and J. MacSwan (eds) ISB4: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on
Bilingualism (pp. 2233–2257) Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
Thomas, E.M. and Gathercole, V.C. (2007) Children’s productive command of grammatical gender and mutation in Welsh: An alternative to rule-based learning. First Language
27, 251–278.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 255
Thomas, E.M. and Roberts, D.B. (2011) Exploring bilinguals’ social use of language
inside and out of the minority language classroom. Language and Education 25 (2),
89–108.
Thomas, E.M., Schiemenz, S. and Cantone, K.F. (2009) Bilingual first language acquisition: German-Welsh case studies. Talk presented at the International Symposium on
Bilingualism (ISB7), Utrecht University.
Thorne, D. (1993) A Comprehensive Welsh Grammar. Oxford Press: Blackwell.
Thorpe, S., Fize, D. and Marlot, C. (1996) Speed of processing in the human visual
system. Nature 381, 520–522.
Timm, L.A. (1975) Spanish-English codeswitching: El porqué y how-not-to. Romance
Philology 28, 473–482.
Tokowicz, N. and MacWhinney, B. (2005) Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity
to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27, 173–204.
Tomos, H. (2011) Semantic categorisation of actions and objects in monolingual and
bilingual children. PhD Thesis, Bangor University.
Tracy, R. (1991) Sprachliche Strukturentwicklung, Linguistische und kognitionspsychologischeAspekte einer Theorie des Erstspracherwerbs. Tübingen: Narr.
Tracy, R. (1995) Child language in contact: bilingual language acquisition (English/German) in
early childhood. Habilitationsschrift, University of Tübingen.
Tracy, R. (2007) Wie Kinder Sprachen lernen. Und wie wir sie dabei unterstützen können.
Tübingen: Francke.
Tsimpli, I.M. and Sorace, A. (2006) Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax
semantics and syntax discourse phenomena. In D. Bamman, T. Magnitskaia and C.
Zaller (eds) Proceedings of the 30th annual Boston University Conference on Language
Development, BUCLD 30 (pp. 653–664). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
Van der Walt, C. (2006) University Students’ Attitudes Towards and Experiences of
Bilingual Classrooms. Current Issues in Language Planning 7 (2/3), 359–376.
Van Heuven, W.J.B., Dijkstra, T. and Grainger, J. (1998) Orthographic neighborhood
effects in bilingual word recognition. Journal of Memory and Language 39, 458–483.
Van Heuven, W.J.B. and Dijkstra, T. (2010) Language comprehension in the bilingual
brain: fMRI and ERP support for psycholinguistic models. Brain Research Reviews 64,
104–122.
Van Hell, J.G. and Dijkstra, T. (2002) Foreign language knowledge can influence native
language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review
9, 780–789.
van Lier, L. (2004) The Ecology and Semiotics of Language learning. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic.
Veneziano, E. and Parisse, C. (2010) The acquisition of early verbs in French: Assessing
the role of conversation and of child-directed speech. First Language 30, 287–311.
Verhoef, K.M.W., Roelofs, A. and Chwilla, D.J. (2009a) Electrophysiological evidence for
endogenous control of attention in switching between languages in overt picture
naming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 22, 1832–1843.
Verhoef, K.M.W., Roelofs, A. and Chwilla, D.J. (2009b) Role of inhibition in language
switching: Evidence from event-related brain potentials in overt picture naming.
Vihman, M.M. (1985) Language differentiation by the bilingual infant. Journal of Child
Language 12, 297–324.
Vihman, M.M., Thierry, G., Lum, J., Keren-Portnoy, T. and Martin, P. (2007) Onset of
word form recognition in English, Welsh and English-Welsh bilingual infants. Applied
Psycholinguistics 28, 475–493.
Volterra, V. and Taeschner, T. (1978) The acquisition and development of language by
bilingual children. Journal of Child Language 5, 311–326.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
Vygotzky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walqui, A. (2006) Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual
framework. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 9 (2),
159–180.
Watkins, T. Arwyn (1993) Welsh. In M.J. Ball and J. Fife (eds) The Celtic languages (pp.
289–348). London: Routledge.
Watson, I. (1991) Phonological processing in two languages. In E. Bialystok (ed.) Language
Processing in Bilingual Children (pp. 25–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weber-Fox, C.M. and Neville, H.J. (1996) Maturational constraints on functional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilingual speakers.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 8, 231–256.
Weist, R.M. (2008) One-to-one mapping of temporal and spatial relations. In J. Guo, E.
Lieven, S. Ervin-Tripp, N. Budwig, S. Özçalişkan and K. Nakamura (eds) Crosslinguistic
Approaches to the Psychology of Language: Research in the Tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp.
69–80). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wells, J.C. (1982) Accents of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Welsh Assembly Government (2003) Iaith Pawb: A National Action Plan for a Bilingual Wales.
Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.
Welsh Assembly Government (2007) Defining schools according to Welsh-medium provision.
Information document No. 023/2007. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government. See
http://wales.gov.uk/docrepos/40382/4038232/403829/4038293/1080190/definingschools-welsh-medi2.pdf?lang=en (accessed on 18/01/2011).
Welsh Assembly Government (2008) Iaith Pawb and Welsh Language Scheme Annual Report
2007–2008. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government. See http://wales.gov.uk/depc/publications/welshlanguage/iaithannual0708/e.pdf?lang=en (accessed on 18/01/2011).
Welsh Assembly Government (2009a) Schools in Wales: General Statisitcs 2009. Statistics in
Wales See http://wales.gov.uk/docs/statistics/2009/091029schoolsgen09ency.pdf
(accessed on 18/01/2011).
Welsh Assembly Government (2009b) Welsh-medium Education Strategy. Consultation
document No. 067/2009. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.
Welsh Assembly Government (2009c) Welsh in Higher Education Institutions, 2007/08.
Statistical Bulletin 40/2009. Cardiff: Statistical Directorate, Welsh Assembly
Government. See http://wales.gov.uk/docs/statistics/2009/090630sb402009en.pdf
Welsh Assembly Government (2010) Welsh-medium Education Strategy. Information document No: 083/2010. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government. See http://wales.gov.uk/
docs/dcells/publications/100420welshmediumstrategyen.pdf (accessed on 18/01/2011).
Welsh Language Board (1999) The Welsh Language: A Vision and Mission for 2000–2005.
Cardiff: Welsh Language Board. See http://www.byig-wlb.org.uk/Cymraeg/
cyhoeddiadau/Cyhoeddiadau/73.pdf (accessed on 18/01/2011).
Welsh Language Board (2003) European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages: Welsh
Language Board’s additional comments to the committee of experts. National Assembly for
Wales, Cardiff Bay, January 23, 2003.
Welsh Language Board (2004) Education and Training Strategy: Welsh Medium and Bilingual.
Cardiff: Welsh Language Board.
Welsh Language Board (2009) The Vitality of Welsh: A Statistical Balance Sheet. Cardiff:
Welsh Language Board.
White, L. (2009) Grammatical theory: Interfaces and L2 knowledge. Paper presented at
Mind-Context Divide: Language Acquisition and Interfaces of Cognitive-Linguistic Modules,
Iowa City, Iowa, USA, Apr 30–May 2, 2009.
Wilkinson, R., Zegers, V. and van Leeuwen, C. (2006) Bridging the Assessment Gap in
English-Medium Higher Education. Fremdsprachen in Lehre und Forschung 40. Bochum,
AKS-Verlag.
25-03-2014 13:31:50
References 257
Williams, C. (1994) Arfarniad o Ddulliau Dysgu ac Addysgu yng Nghyd-destun Addysg
Uwchradd Ddwyieithog. Unpublished PhD thesis. Bangor: University of Wales.
Williams, C. (1994–95) Cyfres Datblygu Dulliau Addysgu: Dysgu yn y sefyllfa ddwyieithog
[Developing Teaching Methodologies Series: Teaching in the bilingual situation.] Bangor:
Coleg Normal.
Williams, C. (1996) Secondary education: Teaching in the Bilingual Situation. In C.
Williams, G. Lewis and C. Baker (eds) The Language Policy: Taking Stock (pp. 63–78).
Llangefni (Wales): Canolfan Astudiaethau Iaith.
Williams, C. (1997) Bilingual Teaching in Further Education: Taking Stock. Bangor: Canolfan
Bedwyr, University of Wales, Bangor.
Williams, C. (2002) Ennill Iaith: Astudiaeth o Sefyllfa Drochi yn 11–16 oed. Bangor: Trafodion
Addysg, Bangor: Ysgol Addysg. See http://www.bangor.ac.uk/addysg/publications/
Ennill_Iaith.pdf (accessed on 03/02/2011).
Williams, C. (2003b) Learning in Two Languages: Professional Development for Bilingual
Provision in Health Care Education. Bangor: University of Wales Bangor.
Williams, R. (2009) Y Coleg Ffederal: Report to the Minister for Children, Education, Lifelong
Learning and Skills. Adroddiad i’r Gweinidog dros Blant, Addysg, Dysgu Gydol Oes a
Sgiliau.Professor Robin Williams, CBE, FRS. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.
See http://wales.gov.uk/docs/dcells/publications/090622ColegFfederalReportcy.pdf
Wode, H. (1978) Developmental sequences in naturalistic L2 acquisition. In E. Hatch (ed.)
Second Language Acquisition (pp. 101–117). Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Wolff, P. and Ventura, T. (2009) When Russians learn English: How the semantics of
causation may change. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12, 153–176.
Wu, Y.J. and Thierry, G. (2012) How reading in a second language protects your heart.
Journal of Neuroscience 32, 6485–6489.
Wu, Y.J. and Thierry, G. (2010) Chinese-English bilinguals reading English hear Chinese.
Journal of Neuroscience 30, 7646–7651.
Yang, H-Y. and Hua, Z. (2010) The phonological development of a trilingual child: facts
and factors. International Journal of Bilingualism 14, 105–126.
Yavaş, M. (2006) Applied English Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Yavaş, M. and Barlow, J.A. (2006) Acquisition of #sC clusters in Spanish-English bilingual children. Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders 4, 182–193.
Yavaş, M. and Beauburn, C. (2006) Acquisition of #sC clusters in Haitian Creole-English
bilingual children. Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders 4, 194–204.
Yavaş, M. and Someillan, M. (2005) Patterns of acquisition of /s/-clusters in SpanishEnglish bilinguals. Journal of Multilingual Communication Disorders 3, 50–55.
Zagona, K. (2002) The syntax of Spanish. Cambridge Syntax Guides. Cambridge University
Press.
Zawiszewski, A. (2007) Basque bilinguals process syntax: case and agreement as revealed
by ERPs. PhD Thesis, University of the Basque Country.
Zentella, A.C. (1990) Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods in the study of
bilingual code switching. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 583, 75–92.
Zubin, D. A. and Kopcke, K.M. (1986) Gender and folk taxonomy: The indexical relation
between grammatical and lexical categorization. In C. Craig (ed.) Noun Classes and
Categorization: Proceedings of a Symposium on Categorization and Noun Classification,
Eugene Oregon, October 1983 (pp. 139–180). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
25-03-2014 13:31:50

File - Virginia C Mueller Gathercole

Transcription

Similar documents

New Endearing Title for Father`s Day

Así se dice - Literacy Squared

2Way CABE Overview - California Association for Bilingual Education

CLIC – 2014

Télécharger

the ESL/Bilingual newsletter.

© Bilingual Education Survival Tips (Edelvives)

Bilingual Language Assessment in Early Intervention