The emergence of competing modules in bilingualism

Hernández, Arturo E.; Li, Ping; MacWhinney, Brian

doi:10.1016/j.tics.2005.03.003

Cited by 306 publications

(227 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

193

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Connectionist models provide computational principles that account for such changes (Elman, 1993;Elman, Bates, Johnson, & Karmiloff-Smith, 1996). Recent results from our selforganizing models clearly demonstrate such changes in mechanistic terms, as discussed earlier (Hernandez et al, 2005;Li & Farkas, 7 The functional organization of the bilingual lexicon in development (as simulated by our model) should not be confused with the issue of neural representation of the two languages (as shown by fMRI work). Indeed, the early distinct representation of the two lexicons, as shown in Figure 3, would appear counterintuitive if it were pitted against the idea of a common neural machinery for both L1 and L2 in early or proficient bilingual individuals.…”

supporting

confidence: 76%

Age of acquisition: Its neural and computational mechanisms.

Hernández

2007

Psychological Bulletin

274

206

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The acquisition of new skills over a life span is a remarkable human ability. This ability, however, is constrained by age of acquisition (AoA); that is, the age at which learning occurs significantly affects the outcome. This is most clearly reflected in domains such as language, music, and athletics. This article provides a perspective on the neural and computational mechanisms underlying AoA in language acquisition. The authors show how AoA modulates both monolingual lexical processing and bilingual language acquisition. They consider the conditions under which syntactic processing and semantic processing may be differentially sensitive to AoA effects in second-language acquisition. The authors conclude that AoA effects are pervasive and that the neural and computational mechanisms underlying learning and sensorimotor integration provide a general account of these effects.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 76%

Age of acquisition: Its neural and computational mechanisms.

Hernández

2007

Psychological Bulletin

274

206

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There has been much discussion of the critical period for learning a second language; as with learning other non-linguistic skills, the learning of an L2 is undeniably affected by the age at which learning begins (Hernandez and Li, 2007). Many alternative hypotheses have emerged concerning these effects in bilingualism (see Hernandez, Li & MacWhinney, 2005;Hernandez & Li, 2007, for an overview). The precise moment that L2 learning begins during development will determine which domains are more sensitive to learning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The neuroanatomy of bilingualism: how to turn a hazy view into the full picture

García-Pentón

García

Costello

et al. 2015

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

141

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The neuroanatomical bases of bilingualism have recently received intensive attention.However, it is still a matter of debate how the brain structure changes due to bilingual experience since current findings are highly variable. The aim of this review is to examine these structural studies from a methodological perspective and to discuss two major methodological problems that could give rise to this variability. The first problem is sample selection, an issue directly related to the heterogeneous nature of bilingualism. The second problem is the inconsistency in the methods used for the analysis of brain imaging data. This review reveals that although structural changes related to bilingualism have been reported in regions comprising language/cognitive control and language processing, these results are not yet sufficiently numerous or consistent to allow important generalizations to be reached. Consequently, current evidence offers ambiguous support for neural models of bilingualism. This shortcoming in the field is exacerbated by critical methodological differences between studies that only further complicate the matter. We conclude by identifying issues that should be taken into consideration so that studies are more comparable and results are easier to aggregate and interpret. We also point out future directions that would allow for progress in the field.

show abstract

“…This extends the increasingly accepted idea of a shared lexical storage system for words in L1 and L2 (for a review, see French and Jacquet, 2004) to a shared lexical access/retrieval system for both systems. Hernandez and colleagues further predict on the basis of a computational model proposed by Li et al (2004) that overlap of L1 and L2 semantic representations will be greatest for late learners of L2 (Hernandez et al, 2005). Although the authors explicitly state that the dissociation between L1 and L2 semantic representations should exist on a local rather than a global level and may therefore not be detectable by neuroimaging methods such as fMRI, the idea is relevant to the current study.…”

Section: L2 Speakersmentioning

confidence: 89%

Native and non-native reading of sentences: An fMRI experiment

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The processing of syntactic and semantic information in written sentences by native (L1) and non-native (L2) speakers was investigated in an fMRI experiment. This was done by means of a violation paradigm, in which participants read sentences containing either a syntactic, a semantic, or no violation. The results of this study were compared to those of a previous fMRI study, in which auditory sentence processing in L1 and L2 was investigated. The results indicate greater activation for L2 speakers as compared to L1 speakers when reading sentences in several language-and motor-related brain regions. The processing of syntactically incorrect sentences elicited no reliably greater activation in language areas in L2 speakers. In L1 speakers, on the other hand, syntactic processing, as compared to semantic processing, was associated with increased activation in left mid to posterior superior temporal gyrus. In response to the processing of semantically incorrect sentences, both L2 and L1 speakers demonstrated increased involvement of left inferior frontal gyrus. The results of this study were compared to a previously conducted fMRI study, which made use of identical sentence stimuli in the auditory modality. Results from the two studies are in general agreement with one another, although some differences in the response of brain areas very proximal to primary perceptual processing areas (i.e. primary auditory and visual cortex) were observed in conjunction with presentation in the different modalities. The combined results provide evidence that L1 and L2 speakers rely on the same cortical network to process language, although with a higher level of activation in some regions for L2 processing. D

show abstract

The emergence of competing modules in bilingualism

Cited by 306 publications

References 40 publications

Age of acquisition: Its neural and computational mechanisms.

Age of acquisition: Its neural and computational mechanisms.

The neuroanatomy of bilingualism: how to turn a hazy view into the full picture

Native and non-native reading of sentences: An fMRI experiment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About