Psy1302 Psychology of Language

1. Psy1302 Psychology of Language Bilingualism I Guest Lecturer – Mathieu Le Corre

2. Why study bilingualism? • Multilinguals > Monolinguals • # grow up monolingual = # grow up bilingual • More children educated in 2nd or 3rd language than in 1st • Multilingual countries • US: min 14.3 million spanish/english bilinguals • Eritrea: educated in Tigrigna, Arabic, English • India: 15 official languages, 1,650 spoken • New Guinea: 870 languages, typical person speaks 3 languages

3. Why study bilingualism? • Test limits of human cognition & language faculty • Is language faculty “monolingual” or “multilingual”? • Does learning a second language cause developmental delays?

4. Bilingual first language acquisition • Mish-mash theory: • Unitary LAD initially treats two languages as single language and mashes them up. Differentiate later. • Differentiation theory: • We are all born multilingual! Distinguish languages from the start and keep them separate.

5. Early evidence for unitary: “go the bébite…” • Code-mixing: • Combine lexical items from two input languages • “The free mixing of English and German in many of her sentences was a conspicuous feature of her speech. But the very fact that she mixed lexical items proves that there was no real bilingualism. Words from the two languages did not belong to two different speech systems but to one…” • Léopold concerning his daughter Hildegarde (1939-1949)

6. Stage theory: Volterra & Taeschner (1978) • Theory also motivated (in part) by code-mixing • First stage: one monolingual lexical system • Second stage: two lexicons, one syntactic system • Third stage: differentiated lexicon & syntax

7. Logical problems for mish-mash theory • Uncontroversial: adult bilinguals distinguish their two languages • How do you ever differentiate two languages out of one system??? • Code-mixing: adults do it too! Are they confused?

8. Testing mish-mash further • Phonology: babbling • Lexical/semantic development • Word segmentation • Mutual exclusivity/contrast • Rate of bilingual lexical development • Bilingual grammar development • Pragmatic development • Sensitive to language of interlocutor?

9. Do bilingual babies babble bilingually? • Supra-segmental features (rhythm, stress-timing) of babbling: • English and French have different supra-segmental features • e.g. English: KINGdom (first syllable longer, louder, higher pitched) • e.g French: surprise (syllables same pitch and loudness but last syllable longer) • Do French/English babies distinguish these supra-segmental patterns? (Maneva & Genesee, 2002) • YES!! • Babbling with French father: shows phonological features of French • Babbling with English mother: shows phonological features of French

10. French/English word segmentation (Polka & Sundara, 2003) • French & English have distinct supra-segmental patterns. Do bilingual babies mash ‘em up? • 9 French/English 8-month olds • Use Juscyck Headturn Preference paradigm • Familiarize to bisyllabic word (e.g. kingdom or beret) • Test passages • In French for French fam., in English for English fam. • With familiarized word (beret or kingdom) • Without familiarized word (devis or hamlet) • Test whether headturn times are different

11. Bilingual babies are not confused!

12. Mutual exclusivity: a strong test of mish-mash • Mutual Exclusivity/principle of contrast • Essence: no two words have the same meaning • What should happen if mish-mash? • No translation equivalents!

13. 1-year old bilinguals restrict Mutual Exclusivity to each language! From Petitto, 2001

14. Is bilingual lexical development slower than monolingual? • Standardized tests of vocab in 1 language (MCDI): bilingual infants & children score lower than monolinguals • The poor things are delayed! • Conceptual vocabulary (CV): • combined vocabulary in both languages minus translation equivalents • Bilingual CV = monolingual CV (Pearson et al, 1993)

15. Early stages: bilinguals = monolinguals Monolinguals Bilinguals First word Two-word 1st 50 words Petitto et al, 2001

16. Syntax • How can we tell whether children have distinct grammars or just a mish-mash? • How early do we want to look? • Two-word combinations

17. Syntax • How can we tell whether children have two distinct grammars or just a mish-mash? • Look at lexically unilingual utterances (De Houwer, 2005) • Contrasting structures: • French vs. English: Negation • “I do NOTlike peas” & “J’aimePAS les pois” • Diff: keep negation syntax separate • MM: mix-up systems • “I likeNOT peas” & “Je PASaime les pois” • Same structure: emerge at same or different time? • E.g. conjugated (finite) vs. infinitive (non-finite) • How early do we want to look? • Syntax emerges as soon as babies begin to combine words • So, want two-word stage

18. Review of 15+ longitudinal studies (De Houwer, 2005) • 29 children, ages 1 to 6 • One parent, one language • Spanish/Basque, French/Swedish, French/English Latvian/English, Japanese/Engiish, Italian/English… • Multiple aspects of syntax studied • Gender, pronouns, verb morphology, negation, word order… • ALL children keep syntactic systems separate for all dimensions studied • E.g French/English don’t mix up negation syntax (Paradis & Genesee, 1996)

19. A caveat: similar surface structures interfere (not covered in class, this is just for enrichment) • German & English word order (Döpke, 2000) • Main clauses: both S(ubject) V(erb) O(bject) • The dog belongs to me • Der Hund gehört mir • Relative: English is -VO German is -OV • The dog which is looking for the bone belongs to me • Der Hund der nach dem Knochen sucht, gehört mir • The dog [that bone looking] belongs to me • German/English bilingual children overgeneralize SVO to relatives in German

20. Bilingual first language acquisition (review) • Mish-mash theory: • Unitary LAD initially treats two languages as single language and mashes them up. Differentiate later. • Differentiation theory: • We are all born multilingual! Distinguish languages from the start and keep them separate.

21. Testing mish-mash further • Phonology: babbling • Lexical/semantic development • Word segmentation • Mutual exclusivity/contrast • Rate of bilingual lexical development • Bilingual grammar development • Pragmatic development • Sensitive to language of interlocutor?

22. Bimodal 2 year-olds keep grammars separate in real time! • Take children who speak French & sign in Langue des Signes Québécoise • Look at times when sign & speak at same time. What happens? • Simultaneous speak/sign have distinct word order! Petitto et al., 2001

23. Mish-mash is wrong at all levels! • Phonology: babbling • Lexical/semantic development • Word segmentation • Mutual exclusivity/contrast • Rate of bilingual lexical development • Bilingual grammar development

24. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) • Amount of activity of a brain area is correlated with relative amount of blood flowing to it (the hemodynamic response) • fMRI tracks blood flow in the brain over time • Example: Syntax vs. lexical access: same brain area? • Image syntax task (e.g. passivization) • Image lexical task (e.g. synonym generation) • Syntax - lexical = areas specific to syntax • Lexical - syntax = areas specfic to lexical • PAY ATTENTION TO SUBTRACTED TASK!

25. The scanner limits responses that can be recorded

26. Sentence processing: English vs. Mandarin (Chee et al., 1999) • Subjects • 5 English/Mandarin bilinguals (18-22 years old) • Exposed to both languages before age 6 • Fluent in both languages

27. Subjects are balanced bilinguals

28. Left side of brain is on right side of image English: Yellow Mandarin: Blue Overlap: Green English activation = E sentence judgment - tamil reading Mandarin activation = M sentence judgment - tamil reading Areas activated: Broca’s and surrounding tissue (frontal brain) Wernicke’s and surrounding tissue (back of brain), supplementary motor area (dorsal part of frontal brain)

29. Word meaning with (balanced) Spanish/English Bilinguals (Illes et al., 1999)

30. Spanish-English bilinguals • Concrete/abstract judgments • Lowercase/UPPERCASE judgments • e.g. ADVICE, potato, soul, FROG… • All nouns; same in English & Spanish • Predictions? • Semantic - Case for each language? • Semantic Spanish - Semantic English?

31. L1 is activation • for L1 semantic • L1 case; • L2 is activation for • L2 semantic - L2 • case; • L2 - L1 is activation • For L1 semantic - • L2 semantic • Activations • Broca’s: 6 subjects • Wernicke’s: 4 subjects • Supplementary motor • Area: 4 subjects • No effect of language Left side of brain is on left side of image

32. Why the left frontal cortex? • Phonology? • Abstract/concrete engages phonological processing • BUT semantic (abstract/concrete) vs. phonological(e.g. rhyme generation) still activates LIPC • Anterior LIPC: semantic • Posterior LIPC: phonological • Multiple other studies obtained same result

33. Word completion with early & late Chinese/English bilinguals (Chee et al., 1999) • Early bilinguals (n = 15) • Exposed to speech and writing before age 6 • Late Bilinguals • L1 Mandarin • L2 English, exposure after 12

34. Left of the brain is on right of images Task: complete partial visually- presented word either at the end (exp 1) or at the beginning (exp 2) Subtracted task: looking at a cross in the middle of the screen (fixation). Activations (from front to back) Broca’s area & surrounding tissue Supplementary motor area Wernicke’s area & surrouding tissue Occipital/parietal (way at the back of the brain -- an area associated with reading)

35. No difference between English & Mandarin • No difference between Early and Late!

36. Why no effect of age of exposure? • Think about “feral” children…. • What could they learn after critical period? • What aspect of language did task used with early/late test? • Right, it tested lexical processing which is intact in “feral” children • So may not have tested right part of language; e.g. phonology or morphosyntax

37. A conflict between acquisition and brain imaging? • Acquisition data support differentiated language faculty at all levels of language • Brain Imaging: Engage same regions for L1 and L2 regardless of task or age of exposure! • How can these results be reconciled? • Macro vs. Micro? I.e. fMRI not precise enough? • Electrophysio: disrupt naming in-vivo • Some stimulation sites disrupt each language separately