Search

Bilingual children with reduced exposure to one or both languages may have language profiles that are apparently similar to those of children with developmental language disorder (DLD). Children with DLD receive enough input, but have difficulty using this input for acquisition due to processing deficits. The present investigation aims to determine aspects of adjective production that are differentially affected by reduced input (in bilingualism) and reduced intake (in DLD). Adjectives were elicited from Dutch–Russian simultaneous bilinguals with limited exposure to Russian and Russian-speaking monolinguals with and without DLD. An antonym elicitation task was used to assess the size of adjective vocabularies, and a degree task was employed to compare the preferences of the three groups in the use of morphological, lexical, and syntactic degree markers. The results revealed that adjective–noun agreement is affected to the same extent by both reduced input and reduced intake. The size of adjective lexicons is also negatively affected by both, but more so by reduced exposure. However, production of morphological degree markers and learning of semantic paradigms are areas of relative strength in which bilinguals outperform monolingual children with DLD. We suggest that reduced input might be counterbalanced by linguistic and cognitive advantages of bilingualism.

For bilinguals, it is argued that a cognitive advantage can be linked to the constant management and need for conflict resolution that occurs when the two languages are co-activated (Bialystok, 2015). Language mode (Grosjean, 1998, 2001) is a significant variable that defines and shapes the language experiences of bilinguals and consequently, the cognitive advantages of bilingualism. Previous work, however, has not sufficiently tested the effects of language mode on the bilingual experience. In this brief conceptual analysis, we discuss the significance of language mode in bilingual work on speech perception, production, and reading. We offer possible explanations for conflicting findings and ways in which future work should control for its modulating effects.

In response to the review article written by Paap et al. [1], we will examine the reasons why one would expect some behavioral and cognitive advantages of bilingualism. Then we will explain why such advantages may not be apparent in certain experiments. We will conclude that bilingualism is a skill that can entail neuroplastic changes, thus improving cognitive load processing abilities. However, the extent to which bilingualism may or may not lead to cognitive advantages or disadvantages relates to several factors. Finally, we argue that the optimal approach in studying the potential cognitive advantages of bilingualism is to link behavior to brain function, as a given behavior may be subserved by different neural mechanisms in bilingual and monolingual populations, reflecting distinct processing strategies.

Very few studies have examined the cognitive advantages of bilingualism during the first two years of development, and a majority of the studies examining bilingualism throughout the lifespan have focused on the relationship between multiple languages and cognitive control. Early experience with multiple language systems may influence domain-general processes, such as memory, that may increase a bilingual child's capacity for learning. In the current study, we found that bilingual, but not monolingual, infants were able to generalize across cues at 18 months. This is the first study to show a clear bilingual advantage in memory generalization, with more equal or balanced exposure to each language significantly predicting ability to generalize.

101 ISSN 1479-6708 10.2217/FNL.14.8 © 2014 Future Medicine Ltd Future Neurol. (2014) 9(2), 101–103 The dramatic increase in the proportion of elderly people in the world population has led to a growing importance of age-related diseases, in particular dementia. Importantly, this development is not confined to the western world. Dementia is recognized as a major health issue in India, China and many other countries across all continents. It has been described as a “public health priority” by the WHO [1] and became the topic of the last meeting of the G8 economic superpowers in London (UK) in December 2013. Given the rather limited success of the currently available drug therapies for dementia, much interest has been directed towards potential risk factors, but also towards potential protective factors against it. An influential concept in this respect is that of cognitive reserve, assuming that a better level of premorbid functioning may delay the onset or alleviate the manifestations of cognitive decline. Many studies have documented an association between physical, mental and social activity and better cognitive function in old age [2]. From scientific journals to popular press, broad claims have been made regarding ‘brain boosting’ effects of crossword puzzles, training programs or video games. However, one type of mental activity seems to generate more controversy than others: bilingualism. The research on the relationship between bilingualism and dementia started explicitly with the seminal observation by Bialystok et al. that bilinguals develop dementia 4 years later than monolinguals [3]; a finding later confirmed by another study from the same Toronto-based research group [4]. However, these findings do not come out of the blue, but are a logical extension of the emerging field of bilingualism and cognition research. Cognitive advantages of bilingualism have been detected in infants as young as 7 months [5] and have been extensively documented in children [6]. At the other end of the life spectrum, the number of languages spoken has been associated with cognitive function in a large study of healthy elderly [7]. The results of another Canadian study from Montreal paint a slightly more complex picture, with a bilingualism effect detectable in the immigrant group

Bilingualism has been associated with successful aging. In particular, research on the cognitive advantages of bilingualism suggests that it can enhance control over interference and help delay the onset of dementia signs. However, the evidence on the so-called cognitive advantage is not unanimous; furthermore, little is known about the neural basis of this supposed cognitive advantage in bilingual as opposed to monolingual elderly populations. In this study, elderly bilingual and monolingual participants performed a visuospatial interference control task during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanning. Response times and accuracy rates were calculated for congruent and incongruent conditions of the Simon task, and the neurofunctional correlates of performance on the Simon task were examined. The results showed equivalent performance on the Simon task across groups but different underlying neural substrates in the two groups. With incongruent trials, monolinguals activated the right middle frontal gyrus, whereas bilinguals relied upon the left inferior parietal lobule. These results show that elderly bilinguals and monolinguals have equivalent interference control abilities, but relay on different neural substrates. Thus, while monolinguals show a classical PASA (posterior-anterior shift in aging) effect, recruiting frontal areas, bilinguals activate visuospatial processing alone and thus do not show this posterior-anterior shift. Moreover, a modulation of frontal activity with task-dynamic control of interference, observed in the elderly bilingual group alone, suggests that elderly bilinguals deal with interference control without recruiting a circuit that is particularly vulnerable to aging.

The chapter suggests that privileged bilingual children whose parents create experiences for them in which they hear and use language appropriate for different contexts and different uses have a richer access to the language. In bilingual communities, minority children have limited access to standard monolingual dialects and registers. The chapter uses the term translation/interpretation to refer to both and interpretation to refer exclusively to oral transmission. It centers on the notion of register and on the functional differentiation of languages as well as on the effect of such differentiation on children who grow up in immigrant communities. The chapter shows some researchers have argued that much of the research on the cognitive advantages of bilingualism is also methodologically flawed and that it has left many important questions unanswered. The class-based language differences, it conjecture that the linguistic repertoires of most ordinary Mexicans who emigrate to the United States are generally made up of mid to low registers of Spanish.