“…A vast body of evidence shows that the exogenous requirement to switch languages during word naming or when reading has consequences for language processing, notably in the form of language switching costs (e.g., Altarriba, Kroll, Sholl, & Rayner, 1996;Bultena, Dijkstra, & Van Hell, 2015a;2015b;Costa & Santesteban, 2006;Declerck & Philipp, 2015;Gollan & Ferreira, 2009;Litcofsky & Van Hell, 2017;Meuter & Allport, 1999;Wang, 2015; for a review, see Bobb & Wodniecka, 2013). Switch costs in language production, particularly asymmetric switch costs that are larger into the dominant language, are the hallmark evidence for control accounts and are frequently interpreted as evidence for the inhibition of a previously activated non-target language, typically the L1 (e.g., Abutalebi & Green, 2008;Bobb & Wodniecka, 2013;Green, 1998;Gollan, Schotter, Gomez, Murillo, & Rayner, 2014;Meuter & Allport, 1999).…”