In this paper, I argue that current approaches to modeling of concepts in bilingual memory privilege word representation at the expense of concept representation. I identify four problems with the study of concepts in bilingual memory: conflation of semantic and conceptual levels of representation; scarcity of methods targeting conceptual representation; assumption of the static nature of the conceptual store; and insufficient acknowledgment of linguistic and cultural specificity of concepts. Basing my arguments on recent developments in the fields of neurolinguistics, linguistics, psychology, linguistic anthropology, and second language acquisition, I suggest new approaches to the study of concepts in bilingualism, based on notions of concept comparability and concept encoding. Subsequently, I discuss various ways in which concepts could develop and interact with each other in bilingual memory and address possible individual, psycholinguistic, and sociolinguistic constraints on conceptual representation and interaction in bilingual memory.

This study investigates the acquisition of verb movement phenomena in the interlanguage of English native speakers learning French as a second language. Participants (n=83), who were enrolled in three different classes, were given a grammaticality judgment task and a production task. The French native speakers' results (n=85) go against certain theoretical predictions for negation and adverb placement in nonfinite contexts, as well as for quantification at a distance. The production task results, but not the grammaticality judgment results, support the hypothesis that the effects of parameter resetting successfully appear in the interlanguage of adult L2 learners.

In this study we address the question of how lexical selection is achieved by bilingual speakers during speech production. Specifically, we test whether there is competition between the two lexicons of a bilingual during lexical access. In two picture–word interference experiments we explore the performance of two groups of bilinguals, English–Spanish and Spanish–English proficient bilinguals while naming pictures either in their L1 (Spanish) or in their L2 (Spanish). Picture naming was facilitated when the name of the picture and the distracter word were the “same”, regardless of the language in which the distracter was printed: same-language (e.g., mesa–mesa [table in Spanish]) or different-language pairs (e.g., mesa–table). The magnitude of this facilitatory effect was similar when naming in L1 (Experiment 1) and in L2 (Experiment 2). We also found that naming latencies were slower when the distracter word was semantically related to the picture's name (e.g., mesa–chair), regardless of the language in which the distracter was printed. The results suggest that there is no competition between the two lexicons of a bilingual during lexical access for production. This interpretation favors a model of lexical access in which lexical selection is language-specific both when speaking in L1 and in L2.

Three groups of participants were given a grammaticality judgement test based on five structures of English grammar in both an oral and written form. The first group consisted of native speakers of Chinese, the second, native speakers of Spanish, and the third, native English speakers. The two learner groups were divided into those who had begun learning English at a younger (less than 15 years) or older (more than 15 years) age. Performance was measured for both accuracy of judgement and time taken to respond. The results showed that performance patterns were different for the two learner groups, that the linguistic structure tested in the item affected participants' ability to respond correctly, and that task modality produced reliable response differences for the two learner groups. Although there were proficiency differences in the grammaticality judgement task between the younger and older Spanish learners, there were no such differences for the Chinese group. Furthermore, age of learning influenced achieved proficiency through all ages tested rather than defining a point of critical period. The results are interpreted as failing to provide sufficient evidence to accept the hypothesis that there is a critical period for second language acquisition.

This study had two purposes: (i) to see if bilingual children can differentiate their languages with respect to the ability to form compound nouns and (ii) to test the validity of previous explanations of the acquisition of compounds. Compound nouns are right-headed in English and left-headed in French. If the French–English bilingual child in this study could differentiate between the two compounding rules, his compounds should show differential order based on the language of the semantic head. The analysis was based on the child's spontaneous compound productions from 2;9 to 3;3. The results showed that the language choice of the semantic head noun predicted the order of his compounds, suggesting that he had two distinct compounding rules. The pattern of errors made by the child cannot be accounted for by any previous explanation alone. It is suggested that children use various cues to learn compound structure.

This paper examines the bilingual language development of young Korean–American children with respect to their acquisition of English grammatical morphemes and the different plural marking systems of Korean and English. We address two specific issues: (1) “do L1 and L2 learners acquire the grammatical features of a given language in the same sequence?” and (2) “do L2 learners of different L1 backgrounds learn the grammatical features of a given second language in the same sequence?” Comparison of our results with those of other morpheme acquisition studies suggests that L1 and L2 learners of English do not acquire English grammatical features in the same sequence. Furthermore, there is evidence that first language influences the course of second language acquisition. Results of an experimental study of plural marking suggest that the bilingual children in most, but not all, respects follow similar, but delayed patterns of first language acquisition of Korean and successive acquisition of English.