The keynote article (Goldrick, Putnam & Schwartz, 2016) discusses doubling phenomena occasionally found in code-switching corpora. Their analysis focuses on an English–Tamil sentence in which an SVO sequence in English is followed by a verb in Tamil, resulting in an apparent VOV structure:

1. (1)

Converging evidences from eye movement experiments indicate that linguistic contexts influence reading strategies. However, the question of whether different linguistic contexts modulate eye movements during reading in the same bilingual individuals remains unresolved. We examined reading strategies in a transparent (German) and an opaque (French) language of early, highly proficient French–German bilinguals: participants read aloud isolated French and German words and pseudo-words while the First Fixation Location (FFL), its duration and latency were measured. Since transparent linguistic contexts and pseudo-words would favour a direct grapheme/phoneme conversion, the reading strategy should be more local for German than for French words (FFL closer to the beginning) and no difference is expected in pseudo-words’ FFL between contexts. Our results confirm these hypotheses, providing the first evidence that the same individuals engage different reading strategy depending on language opacity, suggesting that a given brain process can be modulated by a given context.

We investigated trial-by-trial and cumulative cross-language effects of structural priming and verb bias on L1 and L2 dative syntactic choices (e.g., ‘boy-give-ball-to-girl’ [PO structure] vs. ‘boy-give-girl-ball’ [DO structure]). Dutch-dominant Dutch–English bilinguals listened to a prime sentence with a DO or PO structure in one language and then described a picture in the other language, using verbs that varied in their bias towards the PO or DO structure in Dutch and English. We found effects of cross-language structural priming and verb bias on syntactic choice, some of which were influenced by the participants’ language dominance. In addition, we found cumulative forms of structural priming, leading to cross-language priming effects between experimental blocks. We discuss these results in terms of models on the representation of lexical and syntactic information in bilinguals, and point out how the observed effects can be related to experience-based mechanisms of language use and contact-induced language change.

Many bilinguals routinely switch between their languages, yet mixed evidence exists about the transfer of language switching skills to broader domains that require attentional control such as task switching. Monolingual and bilingual young adults performed a nonverbal task-switching paradigm in which they viewed colored pictures of animals and indicated either the animal or its color in response to a cue. Monolinguals and bilinguals performed similarly when switching between tasks (local switch cost) in a mixed-task block, but bilinguals demonstrated a smaller mixing effect (global switch cost) than monolinguals, indicating better ability to reconfigure stimulus–response associations. These results suggest that regular practice using multiple languages confers a broader executive function advantage shown as improved flexibility in task switching.

Recent years have seen increasing research into bimodal bilingualism from a variety of paradigms such as bilingual acquisition, language processing, neural systems, and cognitive skills, with the underlying assumption that successful bimodal bilingualism entails the knowledge representations and processing of two grammars each of which via a distinct modality, auditory-oral versus visual-gestural. As such, it opens up an arena of cutting-edge research enabling comparisons of the linguistic and cognitive effects of monolingualism versus bilingualism, as well as unimodal bilingualism versus bimodal bilingualism.

The paper to which this commentary responds (Goldrick, Putnam & Schwarz, 2016) represents a big step forward in a field which was showing signs of stasis – the study of the grammatical properties of intra-sentential code-switching or code-mixing – and this for two reasons. First of all, it explicitly links the insights from the grammatical study of code-mixing to the rich array of results from psycholinguistic research in the domain of bilingual language processing, making use of the Gradient Symbolic Computation framework (GSC; Smolensky, Goldrick & Mathis, 2014). Second, it provides a set of tools to handle problems in the domain of code-mixing having to do with simultaneous representations in the domain of bilingual complexes.

Language-specific orthography (i.e., letters or bigrams that exist in only one language) is known to facilitate language membership recognition. Yet the contribution of continuous sublexical and lexical statistics to language membership decisions during visual word processing is unknown. Here, we used pseudo-words to investigate whether continuous sublexical and lexical statistics bias explicit language decisions (Experiment 1) and language attribution during naming (Experiment 2). We also asked whether continuous statistics would have an effect in the presence of orthographic markers. Language attribution in both experiments was influenced by lexical neighborhood size differences between languages, even in presence of orthographic markers. Sublexical frequencies of occurrence affected reaction times only for unmarked pseudo-words in both experiments, with greater effects in naming. Our results indicate that bilinguals rely on continuous language-specific statistics at sublexical and lexical levels to infer language membership. Implications are discussed with respect to models of bilingual visual word recognition.

We investigate here the contribution of code-switching and structural priming to variable expression of the Spanish first person singular subject pronoun in the New Mexican bilingual community. Comparisons with both Spanish and English benchmarks indicate no convergence of Spanish toward English grammar, including in the presence of code-switching, where the linguistic conditioning of variant selection remains unaltered. We find a language-internal and cross-language priming effect, albeit of differing strength, such that speakers’ preceding coreferential (Spanish and English) subject pronouns favor subsequent pronouns, whereas unexpressed subjects tend to be followed by unexpressed subjects. Given the rarity of unexpressed subjects in English, in the presence of code-switching fewer tokens occur with unexpressed primes. Thus, code-switching has no intrinsic effect. Instead, it results in associated shifts in the distribution of contextual features relevant to priming, contrary to the convergence-via-code-switching hypothesis and in accordance with the contextual distribution-via-code-switching hypothesis, which we put forward here.

The commentaries on our Keynote article “Psycholinguistic, cognitive, and neural implications of bimodal bilingualism” were enthusiastic about what can be learned by studying bilinguals who acquire two languages that are understood via distinct perceptual systems (vision vs. audition) and that are produced with distinct linguistic articulators (the hands vs. the vocal tract). The authors also brought out several new ideas, extensions, and issues related to bimodal bilingualism, which we discuss in this reply.

This study investigated the extent to which cognitive abilities that involve explicit cognitive processes (i.e., explicit language aptitude) are related to second language (L2) learning outcomes under two corrective feedback conditions. The study followed a pretest-posttest-delayed posttest experimental design. Forty-eight L2 learners of English carried out three oral production tasks, in which their errors on the indefinite article were treated according to their group assignment (i.e., explicit, implicit, and no-feedback). A set of controlled oral production tests was administered as pretest and posttest. Explicit language aptitude was measured using three subtests from the LLAMA Language Aptitude Test battery (Meara, 2005). Results showed that explicit language aptitude predicted immediate posttest performance only under the explicit feedback condition, suggesting that this type of feedback requires mental processes that are facilitated by explicit cognitive abilities and that its short-term effectiveness is not the same for learners with different aptitude levels.

Although the extant literature provides robust evidence of the influence of language exposure and socioeconomic status (SES) on language acquisition, it is unknown how sensitive the early receptive vocabulary system is to these factors. The current study investigates effects of minimal second language exposure and SES on the comprehension vocabulary of 16-month-old children in the language in which they receive the greatest exposure. Study 1 revealed minimal second language exposure and SES exert significant and independent effects on a direct measure of vocabulary comprehension in English-dominant and English monolingual children (N = 72). In Study 2, we replicated the effect of minimal second language exposure in Spanish-dominant and Spanish monolingual children (N = 86), however no effect of SES on vocabulary was obtained. Our results emphasize the sensitivity of the language system to minimal changes in the environment in early development.

We used picture–word interference (PWI) to discover a) whether cross-language activation at the lexical level can yield phonological priming effects when languages do not share phonological representations, and b) whether semantic interference effects occur without articulatory competition. Bimodal bilinguals fluent in American Sign Language (ASL) and English named pictures in ASL while listening to distractor words that were 1) translation equivalents, 2) phonologically related to the target sign through translation, 3) semantically related, or 4) unrelated. Monolingual speakers named pictures in English. Production of ASL signs was facilitated by words that were phonologically related through translation and by translation equivalents, indicating that cross-language activation spreads from lexical to phonological levels for production. Semantic interference effects were not observed for bimodal bilinguals, providing some support for a post-lexical locus of semantic interference, but which we suggest may instead reflect time course differences in spoken and signed production in the PWI task.

New theories are a constant of the now vast literature on code-mixing (CM). The Gradient Symbolic Computation model proposed by Goldrick, Putnam and Schwartz (Goldrick, Putnam & Schwartz) will appeal to many, especially those who already espouse constraint-based approaches to grammar. As variationist sociolinguists, we particularly welcome the model's incorporation of “relative probabilities of certain structures”, a feature we believe can enhance our chances of capturing actual CM behavior. We also applaud Goldrick et al.’s efforts to integrate experimental findings on co-activation with grammatical principles. Our questions concern the utility of “doubling constructions” to showcase the model, and by extension, the degree to which it can account for bilinguals’ spontaneous production of CM. A historical perspective on the field shows that none of the myriad theories of CM, often inspired by competing sets of grammatical principles, has yet achieved broad acceptance. In the absence of any widely endorsed evaluation metric – still sadly lacking -– how are we to decide amongst them?

The current project investigated the extent to which several lexical aspects of second language (L2) speech – appropriateness, fluency, variation, sophistication, abstractness, sense relations – interact to influence native speakers’ judgements of comprehensibility (ease of understanding) and accentedness (linguistic nativelikeness). Extemporaneous speech elicited from 40 French speakers of English with varied L2 proficiency levels was first evaluated by 10 native-speaking raters for comprehensibility and accentedness. Subsequently, the dataset was transcribed and analyzed for 12 lexical factors. Various lexical properties of L2 speech were found to be associated with L2 comprehensibility, and especially lexical accuracy (lemma appropriateness) and complexity (polysemy), indicating that these lexical variables are associated with successful L2 communication. In contrast, native speakers’ accent judgements seemed to be linked to surface-level details of lexical content (abstractness) and form (variation, morphological accuracy) rather than to its conceptual and contextual details (e.g., lemma appropriateness, polysemy).

In analyzing code-switching in spoken languages, Chan (2003, 2008) proposes that only functional heads with their associated language determine the order of the complement. In this paper, we examine whether Chan's analysis can account for code-blending in Hong Kong Sign Language (HKSL) and Cantonese by a deaf child (2;0.26–6;6.26) and three deaf adult native signers. HKSL and Cantonese differ in head directionality so far as the functional elements of modals, negators, and auxiliaries are concerned. They are head-final in HKSL but head-initial in Cantonese. The HKSL–Cantonese code-blending data in this study largely conform to Chan's analysis, where the order of the complement is determined by which language the functional head appears in. However, code-blending the functional heads of a similar category in both languages leads to either order of the complement. Also, the deaf child's apparent violations of adult HKSL grammar reveal crosslinguistic influence from Cantonese to HKSL during code-blending.

To examine how task demands influence bilingual advantage in executive control over monolinguals, we tested 32 Chinese monolinguals and 32 Chinese–English bilinguals with four versions of a color-shape switching task. During switching trials, the task required participants to suppress one set of conflicting (or non-conflicting) responses and simultaneously to activate another set of conflicting (or non-conflicting) responses. The results showed that compared to monolinguals, (i) when suppressing conflicting responses or (ii) activating non-conflicting responses, bilinguals had significantly smaller switching costs though similar mixing costs; (iii) when suppressing one set of conflicting responses and simultaneously activating another set of conflicting responses, bilinguals had significantly smaller switching costs though larger mixing costs; and (iv) when suppressing one set of non-conflicting responses and simultaneously activating another set of non-conflicting responses, bilinguals had similar switching costs and mixing costs. These findings indicate that task demands affect bilingual advantage in executive control.

Goldrick, Putnam and Schwarz (Goldrick, Putnam & Schwarz) argue that code-mixing in bilingual production involves not only combining forms from both languages but also – crucially – integrating grammatical principles with gradient mental representations. They further propose an analysis of a particular case of intrasentential code mixing – doubling constructions – framed within the formalism of Gradient Symbolic Computation. This formalism, in their view, is better suited to accounting for code mixing than other generative language models because it allows the weighting of constraints both in the choice of particular structures within a single language and in blends of structures in code-mixed productions.

In an ongoing debate, bilingual research currently discusses whether bilingualism enhances non-linguistic executive control. The goal of this study was to investigate the influence of language-switching experience, rather than language proficiency, on this bilingual executive control advantage. We compared the performance of unbalanced bilinguals, balanced non-switching, and balanced switching bilinguals on two executive control tasks, i.e. a flanker and a Simon task. We found that the balanced switching bilinguals outperformed both other groups in terms of executive control performance, whereas the unbalanced and balanced non-switching bilinguals did not differ. These findings indicate that language-switching experience, rather than high second-language proficiency, is the key determinant of the bilingual advantage in cognitive control processes related to interference resolution.

Languages differ in how they encode events. Some languages (e.g., English) encode manner of motion (e.g., hop) in verbs while others (e.g., Spanish) encode the path of motion (e.g., descender-descend) (Talmy, 1985). This study examines verb construal in Japanese bilingual adults (L1-Japanese, L2-English). Maguire, Hirsh-Pasek, Golinkoff, Imai, Haryu, Vanegas, Okada, Pulverman and Sanchez-Davis (2010) suggest that although Japanese is traditionally considered a path language, manner plays an important role in Japanese verbs. Bilinguals completed two verb construal tasks (one in English; one in Japanese). Results showed that the Japanese bilinguals construed a novel verb as encoding manner for English and chose path for Japanese. This differs from Maguire et al. (2010) who found that Japanese monolinguals construed a novel verb as encoding manner. Bilinguals may find it useful to highlight differences between Japanese and English to keep the two languages distinct. Bilingual verb construal may be influenced by the linguistic typology of bilinguals’ L1 and L2.

We used mouse tracking to compare the performance of bilinguals and monolinguals in a Stroop task. Participants were instructed to respond to the color of the words (e.g., blue in yellow font) by clicking on response options on the screen. We recorded participants’ movements of a computer mouse: when participants started moving (initiation times), and how fast they moved towards the correct response (x-coordinates over time). Interestingly, initiation times were longer for bilinguals than monolinguals. Nevertheless, when comparing mouse trajectories, bilinguals moved faster towards the correct response. Taken together, these results indicate that bilinguals behave qualitatively differently from monolinguals; bilinguals are “experts” at managing conflicting information. Experts across many different domains take longer to initiate a response, but then they outperform novices. These qualitative differences in performance could be at the root of apparently contradictory findings in the bilingual literature.