The Mandarin Ba-construction is one of the most challenging constructions for L2 learners. The present study attributes the difficulty in developing the taxonomic representation of the Ba-construction to the interference of competing constructions. I conducted a syntactic priming experiment to investigate the representational relationship between the Ba-construction and its SVO counterpart in native Mandarin speakers and L2 Mandarin learners with or without the equivalent of the Ba-construction in their L1. It was found that native speakers and L2 learners whose L1 features a structure equivalent to the Ba-construction represented the two constructions distinctly, manifesting as a resistance to priming and a robust syntactic preference for the Ba-construction in the picture description task. Conversely, L2 learners whose L1 does not possess an equivalent of the Ba-construction were sensitive to syntactic priming, which indicates a lack of taxonomic representations of the Ba-construction in relation to its SVO counterpart. Such reduced differentiation between the two target constructions suggests a blocking effect that stems from L1 interference.

We examined the effect of memory instructions on false memory using the Deese/Roediger–McDermott paradigm in second-language learners. Participants studied lists of words in L1 and L2 (e.g., note, sound, piano…) associatively related to a non-presented critical lure (e.g., MUSIC). In a later recognition test, critical lures appeared in the same or the other language of their lists (i.e., within- and between-language conditions). In Experiment 1, participants should only endorse an item when study and test languages matched (i.e., restrictive instructions); that is, they should retrieve language information. In Experiment 2, participants should endorse studied items regardless of the language (i.e., inclusive instructions). With restrictive instructions, false recognition was higher in within- than between-language conditions, whereas with inclusive instructions, this result was replicated only when words were studied in L1, but not L2. Results suggested that second-language learners show false memory in their L2 and that the effect of language shift on false recognition depended on the study language.

The present study investigates current proposals that priming is a mechanism of cross-linguistic influence (CLI) in bilinguals by aiming to boost CLI through priming. In two cross-linguistic structural priming experiments with less-proficient adolescent (Study 1) and more highly proficient adult German-English learners (Study 2), we assess whether structural priming enhances CLI for well-formed, dispreferred, and ungrammatical structures. L2 learners in both studies showed CLI in their production, in particular for structures with word order overlap. They also exhibited short-term cross-linguistic priming of grammatical L1-L2 word orders in L2 English, which extended to longer-term priming among the more highly proficient learners in Study 2. However, there was no evidence that cross-linguistic priming increased the use of dispreferred or ungrammatical L1-based word orders in L2 English in either study. Rather, the overall production of these word orders decreased. Together, these results suggest that, while cross-linguistic priming leads learners to increase the use of shared, grammatical L1-L2 word orders, it leads to the inhibition of non-shared ungrammatical structures in L2 production. We conclude that priming has asymmetrical effects on CLI of grammatical and ungrammatical L1-based structures in the L2.

English monolinguals (Experiment 1) and first language (L1)-dominant, Spanish-English and Chinese-English bilinguals (Experiment 2), who differed in L1 orthographic depth (shallow: Spanish; deep: Chinese) and second language (L2–English) proficiency, decided whether visually presented letter strings were English words, while behavioral and EEG measures were recorded. The spelling-sound regularity and consistency of stimuli were covaried such that words had either regular/consistent (e.g., GATE) or irregular/inconsistent mappings (e.g., PINT). Irregular/inconsistent words elicited more positive P200 and less negative N400 amplitudes than regular/consistent words in monolinguals, yet only a P200 response in bilinguals. English proficiency modulated L2 reading strategies, such that bilinguals employed distinct reading unit sizes in the L2 than the L1 when L2 proficiency was low, but transferred L1 reading units to the L2 when L2 proficiency was high. ERP results suggest that high L2 proficiency may be a prerequisite to the cross-linguistic transfer of reading strategies.

The present longitudinal study aimed to explore the connections between different linguistic profiles at kindergarten and reading achievements at first grade. These profiles are based on the two-dimensional model (Bishop & Snowling, 2004), which associates reading skills with phonological and other language abilities. This model was examined mainly in Indo-European languages but scarcely in Arabic. Arabic-speaking children were assigned to four linguistic profiles in kindergartens: low language (LL; N = 111), low phonology (LPh; N = 120), low language and low phonology (LLLPh; N = 139), and typical language and typical phonology (TLTPh; N = 135). Multivariate analysis was used to compare their reading achievements at first grade, and the overlap between linguistic and reading profiles was estimated. The results revealed significant differences between the different linguistic profiles in all reading measures. LLLPh group gained lower scores in reading tasks compared to the other groups. Significant relationships have been found between linguistic and reading profiles indicating reading difficulties among 14.5% of the children from TLTPh, 63% of LLLPh, 35% of LL, and 35.6% of LPh. The findings support the relationship between low linguistic skills and reading difficulties and emphasize the potential roles of both phonological and language skills for reading.