Cognition in the Real World: Bilingualism (2 lectures)

BILINGUALISM
Definitions

Bloomfield (1953) = Full fluency in two languages

Grosjean (1989) = Function in each language according to given needs

Types of Bilinguals

Early (< 5 years) - implicit, learnt from parents / Late (> 12 years) - explicit - taught

Balanced (equal proficiency) / unbalanced (better in one language)

L2 proficiency level high / low

Development

Simultaneous bilingualism - sequential / successive

Early bilingualism / bilingual first language acquisition (BFLA) / Simultaneous bilingualism

L2 DOMINANCE - BRAIN PLASTICITY

Pallier et al. (2003)

- Study with adoptees
- Korean children adopted in France (age 3-8)
- No subsequent contact with Korean, French dominant language
- Behavioural measures showed no knowledge of Korean
- No brain imaging differences between adoptees and French natives

CORTICAL REPRESENTATION OF L1 AND L2

 Large number of fMRI studies investigated whether or not processing in L1 or L2 activates the
same brain regions
 Some distinct regions - Chee et al. (2003)
 Some overlapping - Chee et al. (1999)
 fMRI studies conducted by asking them to think in other language - but hard to control - don’t
know if they actually are.
 Role of age of acquisition and language proficiency are often confounded with task demands
 Overall conclusion is that the processing of L1 and L2 occur in similar brain regions
 However, factors such as age of acquisition, language proficiency and language exposure
determine whether brain region differences between L1 and L2 are found
 A limitation of fMRI studies is that the issue of overlapping language regions is not fully
resolved
 In the future, high resolution fMRI (1mm) might provide a more detailed picture

,  However, although languages can be separated at the neuronal level, at higher levels of brain
organisation languages could still be overlapping (Hernandez et al., 2005)

LEARNING A SECOND LANGUAGE

 Successful learners in Bongaerts et al. (1997) received intense training in the perception and
production of speech sounds
 Bongaerts et al. (1997) - perceptual training focusing their attention on subtle phonetic
contrasts
 Improving perception also improves production (e.g. Flege, 1995)
 Intense training to help Japanese adults to hear /r/ and /l/ in English improves their perception
and production (Bradlow et al., 1997; 1999)
 Formal vs. Informal (implicit) L2 learning
- Incidental acquisition of foreign vocabulary through subtitles
- Overhearing a language during childhood (Au et al., 2002)
- Implicit learning has strong benefits

Au et al. (2002):

- Does overhearing (implicit learning) help adults learn to speak that language with a more
nativelike accent?
- English native speakers overheard Spanish regularly during childhood vs. Those with no
exposure to Spanish till age 14
- All adult learners of Spanish
- Focus on voice onset time for /p,t,k/ 30-50 ms longer in English than Spanish
- Accent ratings by native Spanish speakers
- Results – voice onset time shorter for over hearers (good proficiency) - accent more native
like for over hearers
- No difference between over hearers and typically late L2 learning in morphosyntax

LEARNING THE SOUNDS OF L2

 Individuals can differ significantly in the degree to which they can master a non native phonetic
code
 To Japanese speakers, lock and rock are the same word
 Factors such as age of acquisition, amount of exposure and motivational constraints play a role
 However despite early extended exposure to an L2 many learners continue to have difficulties
in the perception and production of foreign sounds
 Diaz et al. (2008):
- Are individual differences in domain-general psychoacoustic processes or from differences
in specific speech perception abilities
- Good perceivers (GP) vs. Poor perceivers (PP)
- Focus on the mismatch negativity effect in ERP
- Oddball paradigm
- Acoustic(non speech) :no differences between groups or interactions
- Speech: significant group effect and interaction