Previous work indicates that 1) adults with native sign language experience produce more manual co-speech gestures than monolingual non-signers, and 2) one year of ASL instruction increases gesture production in adults, but not enough to differentiate them from non-signers. To elucidate these effects, we asked early ASL–English bilinguals, fluent late second language (L2) signers (≥ 10 years of experience signing), and monolingual non-signers to retell a story depicted in cartoon clips to a monolingual partner. Early and L2 signers produced manual gestures at higher rates compared to non-signers, particularly iconic gestures, and used a greater variety of handshapes. These results indicate susceptibility of the co-speech gesture system to modification by extensive sign language experience, regardless of the age of acquisition. L2 signers produced more ASL signs and more handshape varieties than early signers, suggesting less separation between the ASL lexicon and the co-speech gesture system for L2 signers.

This study investigates Spanish heritage speakers' perception and production of Spanish lexical stress. Stress minimal pairs in various prosodic contexts were used to examine whether heritage speakers successfully identify the stress location despite varying suprasegmental cues (Experiment 1) and whether they use these cues in their production (Experiment 2). Heritage speakers' performance was compared to that of Spanish monolinguals and English L2 learners. In Experiment 1, the heritage speakers showed a clear advantage over the L2 learners and their performance was comparable to that of the monolinguals. In Experiment 2, both the heritage speakers and the L2 learners showed deviating patterns from the monolinguals; they produced a large overlap between paroxytones and oxytones, especially in duration. The discrepancy between heritage speakers' perception and production suggests that, while early exposure to heritage language is beneficial for the perception of heritage language speech sounds, this factor alone does not guarantee target-like production.

In bilinguals, language proficiency has been advanced to influence the involvement of domain-general control networks in language selection. We assessed, in university student translators with moderate- to high-second language (L2) proficiency depending on their translation educational level, the functional activity in the key language and control areas (the caudate nucleus, anterior cingulate, and prefrontal cortex), during task- and language-selection in an oral production context. We found that L2 proficiency influenced the relative involvement of our regions of interest during language selection vs domain-general cognitive control processes. While the left middle frontal and left caudate areas were more involved during linguistic than alphanumeric task selection in the low L2 proficiency group, these regions were similarly involved in both tasks in the high-L2 proficiency group. These findings suggest that language selection relies primarily on a network within domain-general cognitive control system with an increase in resource needs when L2 proficiency is low.

Building on our earlier analysis of the factorial structure of bilingualism for young adults obtained from the Language and Social Background Questionnaire (LSBQ; Anderson, Mak, Keyvani Chahi & Bialystok, 2018), we analyzed responses from 675 children and 125 older adults to a similar questionnaire. Three factors accounting for 74% of the variance emerged in the analysis of children's responses: Adult Language in the Home, Non-English use for Media, Non-English use with Siblings. There were also three factors that explained the responses of older adults that accounted for 79% of the variance: Non-English Use, Non-English Proficiency, and English Proficiency. Therefore, bilingual experience is captured by different factors at different points in the lifespan. These results are discussed in conjunction with the earlier results from young adults and the implications for understanding bilingualism across the lifespan.

The present study compared both linguistic and non-linguistic representations of motion events in Korean–English sequential bilinguals sampled at varying proficiency levels (N = 80) against each other and against those of Korean and English monolinguals (N = 15 each). The bilinguals' L2 descriptions of motion events showed that their encoding patterns were influenced by both the first language (L1) and second language (L2) and also displayed unique behaviors that were not found in either monolingual norm. The non-verbal results on a triads-matching task demonstrated that bilinguals' categorization patterns followed L1-based patterns rather than L2-based patterns. The extent to which these bilinguals employed L2 encoding patterns in their motion event descriptions was largely modulated by L2 proficiency, whereas length of immersion experience in an L2-speaking country emerged as the only predictor of their non-verbal categorization patterns. These findings suggest that the bilinguals' verbal behavior seems more susceptible to change than their non-verbal behavior.

People make comprehension easier by predicting upcoming language. We might therefore expect prediction to occur during the extremely difficult task of simultaneous interpreting. This paper examines the theoretical and empirical foundations of this premise. It reviews accounts of prediction during comprehension in both monolinguals and bilinguals, and discusses these theories in light of experimental data (e.g., using the visual-world paradigm). It considers how these accounts may be applied to the unique and ecologically valid context of simultaneous interpreting, when two languages are used concurrently, one overtly engaging the comprehension system, and the other overtly engaging the production system. It then posits a role for the production system in prediction during comprehension and develops a theoretical framework for prediction-by-production in simultaneous interpreting that has implications for our understanding of prediction during language comprehension.

Interpreting is a complex bilingual task, placing high demands on both language control (i.e., source language not interfering in target language production) and processing control (i.e., multi-tasking carried out in concert under time pressure). On the basis of empirical evidence in the literature, we propose an attentional control model to account for both language control and processing control. Specifically, language control in interpreting is achieved by a structural framework of language-modality connections (established in interpreting training and stored as task schema), and by focused attention that helps build, strengthen and adapt the framework through monitoring, target enhancement, task disengagement, shifting, and working memory. In contrast, processing control in interpreting is achieved by divided attention via coordination and working memory, and by language processing efficiency that includes mastery of both languages and the appropriate use of interpreting strategies. Implications of this model for general bilingual language control are discussed.

With a growing interest in heritage languages from researchers of bilingualism and linguistic theory, the field of heritage-language studies has begun to build on its empirical foundations, moving toward a deeper understanding of the nature of language competence under unbalanced bilingualism. In furtherance of this trend, the current work synthesizes pertinent empirical observations and theoretical claims about vulnerable and robust areas of heritage language competence into early steps toward a model of heritage-language grammar. We highlight two key triggers for deviation from the relevant baseline: the quantity and quality of the input from which the heritage grammar is acquired, and the economy of online resources when operating in a less dominant language. In response to these triggers, we identify three outcomes of deviation in the heritage grammar: an avoidance of ambiguity, a resistance to irregularity, and a shrinking of structure. While we are still a ways away from a level of understanding that allows us to predict those aspects of heritage grammar that will be robust and those that will deviate from the relevant baselines, our hope is that the current work will spur the continued development of a predictive model of heritage language competence.

The language history questionnaire (LHQ) is an important tool for assessing the linguistic background and language proficiency of multilinguals or second language learners. Previously we developed a generic LHQ based on the most commonly asked questions in published studies (Li, Sepanski & Zhao, 2006) and provided a web-based interface (LHQ 2.0) that has flexibility in functionality, accuracy in data recording, and privacy for users and data (Li, Zhang, Tsai & Puls, 2014). LHQ3 (version 3) introduces new functions, developed in response to many comments/requests from users. One important improvement is the addition of an automatic scoring system, in that the new interface automatically calculates aggregated scores for language proficiency, language dominance, and language immersion levels. Finally, LHQ3 allows researchers to assign different weights to the modules when calculating the aggregated scores, addressing the issue of different focuses that different researchers put on multilingual speakers’ language usage and background.

Although there is a body of work investigating code-switching (alternation between two languages in production) in the preschool period, it largely relies on case studies or very small samples. The current work seeks to extend extant research by exploring the development of code-switching longitudinally from 31 to 39 months of age in two distinct groups of bilingual children: Spanish–English children in San Diego and French–English children in Montréal. In two studies, consistent with previous research, children code-switched more often between than within utterances and code-switched more content than function words. Additionally, children code-switched more from Spanish or French to English than the reverse. Importantly, the factors driving the rate of code-switching differed across samples such that exposure was the most important predictor of code-switching in Spanish–English children whereas proficiency was the more important predictor in French–English children.

When bilinguals name pictures while in ‘monolingual mode’, we expect that under conditions of language-constraint and no cognate facilitation, factors influencing lexical retrieval in monolinguals ought to exert similar effects on bilinguals. To this end, we carried out a L1-only naming task on early Hindi–English bilinguals. Results of linear mixed effects analysis reveal AoA, Familiarity, Image Agreement and Codability (availability of alternate names) to be the most significant predictors of lexical retrieval speed for early bilinguals, confirming our expectations. However, we report, for the first time, a by-subject variation in Codability for bilinguals. Implications of the results are discussed in the context of current theories of bilingual lexical access and competition. In preparation for this study, Hindi norms from bilinguals for items in the Snodgrass and Vanderwart set have been established, which will be of use for stimuli selection in experimental studies involving bilinguals.

This paper reviews the neurocognitive particularities of subjects with sustained experience in simultaneous interpreting, a highly demanding form of bilingual processing. The literature converges into three broad empirical patterns. First, significant neurocognitive differences, including behavioral enhancements in verbal and executive domains, are observable after only one or two years of training. Second, such effects, both in interpreting students and/or professional interpreters, seem robust for crucial linguistic (e.g., translation) and executive (e.g., working memory) aspects of the activity, but not for more marginally relevant ones (e.g., conflict resolution) – suggesting that they are non-generalizable beyond directly taxed functions. Third, though more tentatively, some of the observed verbal and executive effects seem to be mutually independent and uninfluenced by other bilingual-experience-related factors (e.g., L2 competence), which could highlight their distinctive relation with interpreting practice. In sum, this particular model of expertise sheds novel light on the adaptive capacity of cognitive systems in bilinguals.

Juggling with structurally and semantically different language systems leads to constructions that differ from the typical patterns in a language. Typical patterns in the domain of motion are characterized by more verbs encoding path in French; and more verbs encoding the manner of motion in German. An increase of manner verbs in French, for instance, can be ascribed to an influence from German. The extent of typical or reversed patterns depends on interrelated factors such as speaker-related idiosyncrasies, language dominance configurations, and – arguably – the degree of language activation. Drawing on data from 154 French–German bilinguals who described motion events in different language modes, this paper combines interrelated questions on the role of language dominance, language mode manipulation and how these factors interact. Quantitative analyses on the use of motion verbs do not show the expected effects. The null results are discussed by comparing preceding studies showing contradictory findings.

The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q) is a validated questionnaire tool for collecting self-reported proficiency and experience data from bilingual and multilingual speakers ages 14 to 80. It is available in over 20 languages, and can be administered in a digital, paper-and-pencil, and oral interview format. The LEAP-Q is used by researchers across various disciplines (Psychology, Neuroscience, Linguistics, Education, Communication Sciences & Disorders, etc.) to provide a comprehensive description of their bilingual participants, to substantiate a division of bilinguals into groups (e.g., early vs. late bilinguals), and to screen participants for adequate or threshold levels of language proficiency. Best practices for using the LEAP-Q include administration of the full questionnaire, consideration of acquisition and history of language use together with self-ratings of proficiency, and supplementation of self-reported data with objective language measures whenever possible. The LEAP-Q can be downloaded at no cost at https://bilingualism.northwestern.edu/leapq/.

Heritage Spanish speakers and adult immigrant bilinguals listened to wh-questions with the differential object marker a (quién/a quién ‘who/whoACC’) while their eye movements across four referent pictures were tracked. The heritage speakers were less accurate than the adult immigrants in their verbal responses to the questions, leaving objects unmarked for case at a rate of 18%, but eye movement data suggested that the two groups were similar in their comprehension, with both starting to look at the target picture at the same point in the question and identifying the target sooner with a quién ‘whoACC’ than with quién ‘who’ questions.