Search

Speaking two or more languages shows bilingual flexibility, but flexible switching requires language control and often incurs performance costs. We examined inhibitory control assessing n − 2 repetition costs when switching three languages (L1 [German], L2 [English], L3 [French]). These costs denote worse performance in n − 2 repetitions (e.g., L2–L3–L2) than in n − 2 nonrepetitions (e.g., L1–L3–L2), indicating persisting inhibition. In two experiments (n = 28 in Experiment 1; n = 44 in Experiment 2), n − 2 repetition costs were observed, but only for L2. Looking into L2 trials specifically, we found n − 2 repetition costs when switching back to L2 from the still weaker L3 but not when returning from the stronger L1, suggesting that L2 is a strong competitor for L3 (requiring L2 inhibition) but less so for L1. Finding n − 2 repetition costs supports an inhibitory account of language control in general, but our study shows only partial evidence for the theoretically assumed more specific relation between language dominance and language inhibition (i.e., only for dominance relations with respect to L1 and L3 when switching back to L2). Taken together, the findings thus suggest the need for further refinement of the concept of language dominance and its relation to inhibition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While research on bilingual language processing is sensitive to different usage contexts, monolinguals are still often treated as a homogeneous control group, despite frequently using multiple varieties that may require engagement of control mechanisms during lexical access. Adapting a language-switching task for speakers of (Scottish) Standard English and Orcadian Scots, we demonstrate switch cost asymmetries with longer naming latencies when switching back into Orcadian. This pattern, which is reminiscent of unbalanced bilinguals, suggests that Orcadian is the dominant variety of these participants – despite the fact they might be regarded as English monolinguals because of sociolinguistic factors. In conjunction with the observed mixing cost and cognate facilitation effect (indicative of proactive language control and parallel language activation, respectively), these findings show that 'monolinguals' need to be scrutinised for routine use of different varieties to gain a better understanding of whether and how mechanisms underlying their lexical access resemble those of bilinguals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate whether similar control processes are used during single and dual language production, we compared register switching (formal and informal speech in the same language) vs. language switching (French and English). The results across two experiments showed a positive correlation of overall register- and language-switch costs and similar formal French switch costs across the two switching tasks. However, whereas increasing the cue-to-stimulus interval resulted in a reduction of language-switch costs, register-switch costs were unaffected by the interval manipulation. This difference in switch-cost pattern indicates that control processes are not entirely identical during single and dual language production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the current study, we investigated bilingual error detection by measuring the repair rate of language intrusions (i.e., involuntary production of nontarget language words) that arose while bilinguals produced sentences in a language switching context. This allowed us to compare two prominent accounts of error detection in a bilingual setting. According to the conflict monitoring account, error detection is initiated by interference. Since language switching increases bilingual language interference, error detection should be better in switch relative to repetition trials. According to the perceptual loop theory, error detection is based on language comprehension. Since language switching is known to impair language comprehension, it follows that error detection should be worse in switch relative to repetition trials. The results showed that the repair rate of language intrusions was higher in switch than repetition trials, thus providing evidence that bilingual language interference instigates error detection, in line with the conflict monitoring account. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Whereas some models claim that language control is part of more general executive control, others have proposed that there is little overlap between these two processes. To shed light on this controversy, we compared switching effects observed in closely matched language switching and task switching tasks. The correlation analyses showed a positive moderate to strong correlation between the two switching variants in all three experiments. The results further showed that language- and task-switch costs differed although the cues, stimuli, response modality, and the number of response alternatives were identical across the two switching variants (Experiments 1), and when additionally the same linguistic tasks (picture naming/category naming) were used in both switching variants (Experiment 3), at least for the error rates. However, similar language- and task-switch costs were obtained when the same non-linguistic tasks (parity/magnitude) were used (Experiment 2). These results point towards overlapping mechanisms for language control and executive control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The most widely discussed observation in the language control literature is the larger cost found when switching into the first than the second language (i.e., asymmetrical switch costs), which has been determined as a marker of persisting, reactive inhibition. While this is a common effect in bilingual language production, it generally does not occur in bilingual language comprehension. In this bilingual language comprehension study, we manipulated the relative activation of languages by letting participants practice in pure language blocks prior to a mixed language block. While no effect was found of practicing second-language words, asymmetrical switch costs were observed when practicing the same (Experiments 1 and 2) or different first-language words (Experiment 3) as in the following mixed language block. These findings indicate that, similar to bilingual production, bilingual comprehension relies on persisting, reactive language control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several models have proposed that language control occurs between language representations, such as language tags, and between lemmas. Yet, most research has solely focused on language-control processes between language representations. In the present study, we investigated whether language control can also occur between lemmas by allowing bilinguals to practice a language or language-specific items prior to a language-switching task, and thus change the relative activation of the language representations and/or lemmas. By changing the activation levels, relatively more language control should occur for this language representation and/or lemma relative to their translation-equivalent due to the reactive nature of language control. The results showed that this was all the more so when language-specific items were practiced than when merely a language was practiced. Hence, the current study provides evidence that language control is not restricted to language representations, but could also occur between lemmas. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Cued language switching is used to examine language-control processes by comparing performance in language-switch trials with performance in repetition trials. In 1:1 cue-to-language mappings, language repetitions involve cue repetitions and language switches involve cue switches. Hence, the observed switch costs might reflect cue-switch costs rather than language-related control processes. By introducing a 2:1 cue-to-language mapping, we dissociated language switches (cue and language switched vs. cue switched, but language repeated) and cue switches (repeated language, with vs. without switched cue). We found cue-switch costs, but language-related switch costs were substantial, too, presumably reflecting language-control processes in cued language switching. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Several, but not all, models of language control assume that highly proficient bilinguals implement little to no inhibition during bilingual language production. In the current study, we tested this assumption with a less equivocal marker of inhibition (i.e., n-2 language repetition costs) than previous language switching studies have. N-2 language repetition costs denote worse performance when switching back to a recently abandoned language (i.e., worse performance in ABT language sequences than CB/1 sequences, where A, B, and C refer to different languages). Whereas this marker has solely been used to investigate second-language learners in prior studies, we examined highly proficient bilinguals. The results showed that substantial n-2 language repetition costs can be observed with highly proficient bilinguals. Moreover, this inhibition effect was substantial for all 3 languages, but larger for the 2 dominant languages (Turkish and German) relative to the less proficient language (English). These findings indicate that even highly proficient bilinguals implement inhibition to restrict language production to the target language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study examined the influence of phonology on language switching. Unlike previous studies that investigated this influence by comparing words that are phonologically similar vs. dissimilar in two languages, the current language switching study focused on the role of phonological characteristics across words. Specifically, words with the first two phonemes being identical to those of the word in the previous trial were contrasted against words without such phonological overlap. The results revealed that the switch cost asymmetry was influenced by phonological overlap. Further investigation revealed that this influence was mainly due to persisting after-effects of phonological overlap, which caused a reversal of the asymmetrical switch cost pattern in the following trial. These results clearly indicate that manipulations on the level of phonology can have an effect on language switching. Therefore, we propose that, in contrast with the claims of most models, phonological characteristics of words play an important role in language control. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In the current study, we set out to investigate the influence of a sentence context on language switching. The task required German-English bilinguals to produce responses based on an alternating language sequence (L1–L1–L2–L2- …) and concepts in a specific sequential order. The concept sequence was either a sentence which was syntactically correct in both languages (language-unspecific sentence), a sentence which was correct in just one language (language-specific sentence) or a sentence which was syntactically incorrect in both languages (scrambled sentence). No switch costs were observed in language-unspecific sentences. Consequently, switch costs were smaller in those sentences than in the language-specific or scrambled sentences. The language-specific and scrambled sentence did not differ with respect to switch costs. These results demonstrate an important role of sentence context for language switch costs and were interpreted in terms of language interference and preparation processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study systematically examined the influence of sequential predictability of languages and concepts on language switching. To this end, 2 language switching paradigms were combined. To measure language switching with a random sequence of languages and/or concepts, we used a language switching paradigm that implements visual cues and stimuli. The other paradigm implements a fixed sequence of languages and/or concepts to measure predictable language switching. Four experiments that used these 2 paradigms showed that switch costs were smaller when both the language and concept were predictably known, whereas no overall switch cost reduction was found when just the language or concept was predictable. These results indicate that knowing both language and concept (i.e., response) can resolve language interference. However, interference resolution does not start solely based on the knowledge of which concept or language one has to produce. We discuss how existent models should be revised to accommodate these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate bilingual language control, prior language switching studies presented visual objects, which had to be named in different languages, typically indicated by a visual cue. The present study examined language switching of predictable responses by introducing a novel sequence-based language switching paradigm. In 4 experiments, sequential responses (i.e., weekdays, numbers or new sequences) and an alternating language sequence (e.g., L1-L1-L2-L2) were implemented, both of which were memory based. Our data revealed switch costs, showing that a language switch is associated with worse performance compared with a language repetition, and mixing costs, which constitutes the performance difference between pure and mixed language blocks, even while producing entirely predictable responses (i.e., language and concept). Additionally, we found these switch costs with overlearned and new sequences and found that switch costs were reduced with longer preparation time. The obtained data are consistent with a proactive interference account, such as the inhibitory control model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Stimuli used in cued language switching studies typically consist of digits or pictures. However, the comparability between both stimulus types remains unclear. In the present study, we directly compared digit and picture naming in a German–English language switching experiment. Because digits represent a semantic group and contain many cognates, the experiment consisted of four conditions with different stimulus sets in each condition: digits, standard language switching pictures, pictures depicting cognates, and semantically-related pictures. Digit naming caused smaller switch costs than picture naming. The data suggest that this difference can be attributed to phonology. Both methodological and theoretical implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

It is currently unclear to what degree language control, which minimizes non-target language interference and increases the probability of selecting target-language words, is similar for sign-speech (bimodal) bilinguals and spoken language (unimodal) bilinguals. To further investigate the nature of language control processes in bimodal bilinguals, we conducted the first event-related potential (ERP) language switching study with hearing American Sign Language (ASL)-English bilinguals. The results showed a pattern that has not been observed in any unimodal language switching study: a switch-related positivity over anterior sites and a switch-related negativity over posterior sites during ASL production in both early and late time windows. No such pattern was found during English production. We interpret these results as evidence that bimodal bilinguals uniquely engage language control at the level of output modalities. • It is unclear whether bimodal and unimodal language control is similar or different. • To investigate this, we conducted the first ERP study on bimodal language switching. • We found an anterior switch-related positivity and the opposite over posterior sites. • This pattern has not been observed in unimodal language switching studies. • Hence, this study indicates that unimodal and bimodal language control is different. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bilinguals rely on cognitive control mechanisms like selective activation and inhibition of lexical entries to prevent intrusions from the non-target language. We present cross-linguistic evidence that these mechanisms also operate in bidialectals. Thirty-two native German speakers who sometimes use the Öcher Platt dialect, and thirty-two native English speakers who sometimes use the Dundonian Scots dialect completed a dialect-switching task. Naming latencies were higher for switch than for non-switch trials, and lower for cognate compared to non-cognate nouns. Switch costs were symmetrical, regardless of whether participants actively used the dialect or not. In contrast, sixteen monodialectal English speakers, who performed the dialect-switching task after being trained on the Dundonian words, showed asymmetrical switch costs with longer latencies when switching back into Standard English. These results are reminiscent of findings for balanced vs. unbalanced bilinguals, and suggest that monolingual dialect speakers can recruit control mechanisms in similar ways as bilinguals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]