Search

ObjectiveThe present study asked if bilinguals who are immersed in their nondominant language are more likely to know some words only in their nondominant language.MethodThe either-language scoring benefit (ELSB) reflects how many more points bilinguals get when credited for pictures named regardless of which language is used. We asked if the ELSB varies with self-rated proficiency level of the nondominant language in young English-dominant (n = 68) compared to Spanish-dominant (n = 33) bilinguals, and in older English-dominant (n = 36) compared to Spanish-dominant (n = 32) bilinguals. All bilinguals were immersed in English (in the USA) at the time of testing.ResultsSpanish-dominant bilinguals showed a larger ELSB than English-dominant bilinguals (in both young and older groups), but simple correlations showed that the degree of Spanish dominance was associated with a higher ELSB only in young bilinguals. Additionally, the ELSB was larger for bilinguals with more years of immersion and for more balanced bilinguals, whether measured by naming scores or self-rated balance (in both age groups). Nearly half (n = 14/33) of the young bilinguals who said they were Spanish-dominant scored higher in English than in Spanish, and on average these participants had similar naming scores in English and Spanish.ConclusionsEither-language scoring benefits bilinguals with higher proficiency level in the nondominant language, which is more likely in bilinguals with extended immersion in the nondominant language, who also tend to be more balanced bilinguals, and for young adult bilinguals who may be in the process of a switch in which language is dominant.

Abstract: Language proficiency is a critically important factor in research on bilingualism, but researchers disagree on its measurement. Validated objective measures exist, but investigators often rely exclusively on subjective measures. We investigated if combining multiple self-report measures improves prediction of objective naming test scores in 36 English-dominant versus 32 Spanish-dominant older bilinguals (Experiment 1), and in 41 older Spanish–English bilinguals versus 41 proficiency-matched young bilinguals (Experiment 2). Self-rated proficiency was a powerful but sometimes inaccurate predictor and better predicted naming accuracy when combined with years of immersion, while percent use explained little or no unique variance. Spanish-dominant bilinguals rated themselves more strictly than English-dominant bilinguals at the same objectively measured proficiency level. Immersion affected young more than older bilinguals, and non-immersed (English-dominant) more than immersed (Spanish-dominant) bilinguals. Self-reported proficiency ratings can produce spurious results, but predictive power improves when combined with self-report questions that might be less affected by subjective judgements.

Listeners utilize speech disfluencies to anticipate novelty in spoken language, but little is known about how speech disfluencies impact novel word learning. We investigated how monolingual and bilingual adults learn novel words under disfluent speech conditions, focusing on fillers such as uh and um. If fillers highlight novelty, they might be an especially potent cue during word learning; however, because fillers also signal uncertainty, listeners may be less willing to learn in a disfluent condition. We also tested whether an effect of fillers on word learning would be moderated by bilingual experience, expecting that bilinguals would be affected differently because their exposure to distributional information within each language is reduced relative to monolinguals. In Experiments 1 and 2, where participants were exposed only to novel words, we found that participants learned words equally well in fluent and disfluent conditions, and that this effect was not moderated by bilingual experience. In Experiment 3, when novel words were embedded within a larger set of known words, we observed a bilingualism by condition interaction, wherein bilinguals benefited from fluency, but monolinguals performed equally well across conditions. These findings suggest that monolinguals' word learning-unlike word processing-may be robust to variations in speaker fluency, but that language experience may moderate the effect of fluency on learning.

Triggered switching is the theory that code-switching happens more often with words connected to both languages, such as cognates. Corpus analyses have supported this theory; however, they do not allow testing for directional causality. Here, we test the triggering hypothesis through a picture-naming task, and examine whether cognates trigger code-switches, as well as more subtle interference effects resulting in disfluencies. Forty English-Spanish bilinguals completed a picture-cued sentence production task in three conditions: English-only, Spanish-only, and mixed. Half of the pictures represented Spanish-English cognates. Unsurprisingly, participants were more likely to code-switch when asked to use both their languages compared to only their dominant or non-dominant language. However, participants were not more likely to switch languages for cognate than for non-cognate trials. Participants tended to be more fluent on cognate trials in the dominant and the non-dominant condition, and on non-cognate trials in the mixed-language condition, although these effects were not significant. These findings suggest that both language context and cognate status are important to consider when testing both overt switches and disfluencies in bilingual speech production.

Code-switching occurs regularly in the input to bilingual children. Yet, the effect of code-switched input on language development is unclear. To test whether word learning would be affected by code-switching, Spanish-English bilingual children (N = 45, 19 boys, Mean[subscript Age] = 5.05 years; ethnicity: 37 Hispanic/Latino, six Non-Hispanic/Latino, two unreported) were taught English-like novel words in two conditions. In the English-only condition, definitions for novel words were provided entirely in English. In the code-switch condition, definitions for novel words were provided in English and Spanish, incorporating code-switches. Children required fewer exposures to retain novel words in the code-switch than the English-only condition and this effect was not moderated by children's language ability or exposure to code-switching, suggesting that code-switched input does not pose word-learning risks to bilingual children, including children with lower levels of language ability.

In adulthood, novel words are commonly encountered in the context of sequential language learning, and to a lesser extent, when learning a new word in one's native language. Paired-associate (PAL) and cross-situational word learning (CSWL) paradigms have been studied separately, under distinct theoretical umbrellas, limiting the understanding of the mechanisms underlying the learning process in each. We tested 126 monolinguals and 111 bilinguals on PAL and CSWL, manipulating familiarity and measuring verbal working memory. Results revealed highly similar learning performance across groups, both demonstrating better performance in PAL than in CSWL, similar sensitivity to familiarity, and similar reliance on phonological working memory. We observed a trend such that bilinguals outperformed monolinguals in PAL but not in CSWL, but this trend was weak. Findings indicate limited effects of bilingualism on word learning in adulthood and suggest highly similar word learning mechanisms in learners with different linguistic experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and Objectives: The benefits of dual-language immersion (DLI) versus English-only classrooms for minority-language speakers' acquisition of English have been well documented. However, less is known about the effect(s) of DLI on majority-language speakers' native English skills. Prior studies largely used accuracy-focused measures to index children's language skills; it is possible that processing-based tasks are more sensitive to the effects of DLI experience. Methodology: Thirty-three monolingual native English-speaking children attending English-only classrooms and thirty-three English-speaking children attending English-Spanish DLI matched in age, gender, nonverbal IQ, and socio-economic status were tested twice, 1 year apart, on standardized and processing-based measures of English vocabulary and morphosyntax. Analysis: We ran linear mixed-effects models to examine the extent to which group and time would predict scores on knowledge-based measures of vocabulary and morphosyntactic knowledge, as well as accuracy and reaction times on processing-based measures of English vocabulary and morphosyntax. Findings: Results revealed comparable levels of growth in English for both groups. A subtle effect of DLI was observed on a lexical-decision task: bilinguals were slower in Year 1 but both groups were equally efficient in Year 2. These results indicate that DLI programs have minimal impact on majority-language speakers' native-language skills in the age-range tested. Originality: This study is the first to longitudinally examine processing-based native language outcomes in bilingual children in DLI classrooms. Significance: We do not find evidence that DLI exposure carries a cost to native language development, even when indexed by processing measures. This should reassure parents, educators, and policymakers in that there are no downsides to DLI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]